Our Liar In Chief, Our Divider In Chief

What a bizarre world he must live in … twitter users, you listening now? Divorced from reality.

And here’s the weekly address transcript:

Hi, everybody. Over the past year, as I traveled across the country campaigning for this office, I told you that if I was fortunate enough to be re-elected, I’d work to change a tax code that too often benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

This week, we did that. For the first time in two decades, we raised taxes on the wealthiest 2% of Americans in a bipartisan way, while preventing a middle-class tax hike that could have thrown our economy back into recession.

Under this law, more than 98% of Americans and 97% of small business will not see their income taxes go up one dime…

Now here’s the truth:

** Under the new fiscal cliff plan workers making less than $30,000 a year will take a bigger hit than those making $500,000 a year.

** The fiscal cliff bill that passed the US Senate and the US House will raise payroll taxes from 4.2% to 6.2%. In other words those making $100,000 a year will see their taxes increase by $2,000.

** The bill raised taxes on 77% of American households.

It would be nice if the liberal media would hold this man’s feet to the fire.

Just once.

Tax the Millionaires And Billionaires

Get em … MYTHS FROM D.C. PART 2: ‘THE RICH NEED TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE’

Bomerang — Workers making $30,000 will take a bigger hit on their pay than those earning $500,000 under new fiscal deal. That’s not fair… Tell it to Barack a Claus.

Moochers and looters hardest hit … who is going to be OK, hedge funds, millionaires and billionaires … run the numbers for yourselves. Youve been duped noron voters. ROFLMAO

Middle-class workers will take a bigger hit to their income proportionately than those earning between $200,000 and $500,000 under the new fiscal cliff deal, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

Earners in the latter group will pay an average 1.3 percent more – or an additional $2,711 – in taxes this year, while workers making between $30,000 and $200,000 will see their paychecks shrink by as much as 1.7 percent – or up to $1,784 – the D.C.-based think tank reported.

Overall, nearly 80 percent of households will pay more money to the federal government as a result of the fiscal cliff deal.

Hah, next time pay attention, you moron Obama voters. Who do you think will pay the mountain of debt now???

No wonder he went surfing to Hawaii on your dime!!!

Read more: 

ROFLMAO …. Just Do the math yourself…

Romney Hood, Obama Latest Try With Sliming Romney

You buying? ‘Romney Hood’ … it’s just trickle down they pulled on Reagan with what they think is a new linguistic twist. I don’t do teleprompter any more, the speeches are just those of a man with no economic sense, like the Chi-Coms try to sell to their enslaved people.

It’s not working for them either. They don’t even make enough money to buy the very same iPads they are building.

No sale, sir, take it to the stupid people.

… I can see Obama economic destruction all around me. And it’s most disturbing, crime is going up. People need to eat. So they turn to crime, to get money. Jobs are few and far between, shuttered projects are all around, as is shuttered small businesses.

So I don’t need the latest Obama spin, Romney Hood, when the Obama Robin Hood approach is a total failure.

Obama just has no economic sense whatsoever … None. He thinks all money belongs to government, like the Chi-Coms do.

Sorry Robin Hood, your rob the rich to pay the poor, no sale. I do not work for government.

But if memory serves, the “rich” people Robin Hood took from were public officials who were wealthy because they were corrupt and stole from the people they were supposed to be serving. To say Robin Hood “took from the rich and gave to the poor” is about as accurate as Kevin Coster’s accent in the 1991 movie of the same name. Brave Sir Robin didn’t redistribute the wealth, but rather returned to people what government had stolen from them. “Robin Hood in reverse” would be the Sheriff of Nottingham, and apparently right now there’s only room for one sheriff in this town.

Robin robbed the corrupt government officials, you have plenty of those sir… Most go under the “green rubic” …

US Corporate Tax Rate Is Now The Highest

We finally reached the goal. How to chase investment in your country and the jobs away …

Japan’s cut in corporate tax rate, set to take effect April 1, will leave the U.S. corporate tax rate the highest in the world. Look at the chart above and see if you can spot the problem, as we strive to outdo Europe.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — On Sunday, the United States gets a distinction no nation wants — the world’s highest corporate tax rate.

Japan, which currently has the highest rate in the world — a 39.8% rate on business income between national and local taxes — cuts its rate to 36.8% as of April 1. The U.S. rate stands at 39.2% when both federal and state rates are included.

“The change in and of itself is not that important, but there’s some symbolism involved in being the highest in the world,” said Eric Toder, co-director of the Tax Policy Center, a non-partisan think tank…

 

You see, it is just symbolism. It doesn’t really matter if the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world. What’s wrong with that, and think of all the taxes the government gets.

Still, both Democrats and Republicans argue that the corporate tax rate should be lowered as a way of promoting greater economic growth, so that multinational companies have incentive to invest more in their U.S. operations than overseas. President Obama has proposed cutting the corporate rate to 28%, Republican challenger Mitt Romney proposes a 25% rate.

The only difference being that Republicans actually want to lower the corporate tax rate, while the Democrats don’t. In fact, the Democrats want to raise the taxes on corporations still higher by doing away with deductions and creating a new ‘minimal tax.’

Both sides are in agreement for the need to reduce the loopholes and other exemptions that shield companies from paying taxes on all their income. That kind of reform could increase corporate tax collections, or at least leave them unchanged, even with a lower rate…

The Democrats want to do away with the very “loopholes and exemptions” that were put in place to encourage US companies to do business in the first place. And, yes, it is just another way to raise taxes.

Mitt’s taxes …….

GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney paid a 14% effective income tax rate in 2010 after making $3 million in tax-deductible charitable donations and drawing most of his income from investments. Brody Mullins discusses on Campaign Journal.

How did they do it?

That is the question many Americans are asking of Mitt and Ann Romney’s 2010 tax bill, disclosed on Monday evening. While the couple paid almost $3 million in taxes, that amounted to less than 14% of their $21.6 million income.

The Romneys’ rate was far lower than the average of 24% paid by the top 1% of U.S. earners, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

The couple’s 2010 filing presents a rare glimpse into how the ultrawealthy can use the tax code to their benefit, and offers important lessons for others.

The biggest: the powerful tax benefits of capital gains, which are taxed at a top rate of just 15% if the underlying investment is held for more than a year.

“There’s a saying in Texas: If you don’t have an oil well, get one,” says Janet Hagy , a certified public accountant practicing in Austin, Texas. “I tell my clients, ‘If you don’t have capital gains, get some.’”

Another lesson: Get good tax help. The Romneys’ 1040 return is 203 pages long, with different “schedules” and 20 different forms attached, some of them multiple times—not the sort of work typically done by a neighborhood Joe.

Says David Kautter of the Kogod Tax Center at American University in Washington: “The only schedules missing [from the Romneys' return] are the ones for fishermen, farmers and the elderly. Maybe Mitt should get some cows so he can have a ‘full house’ of schedules.”

Some have suggested that, despite their low tax rate, the Romneys might have paid a few thousand extra dollars in tax. Among other things, they take no mortgage-interest deduction—a write-off claimed by 80% of taxpayers who itemize—or deductions for a home office, a car or travel expenses.

Saunders:

[Mitt Romney's tax returns] lift the veil on how the wealthy can use the tax code to their advantage. Here are some lessons the experts have gleaned:

• Avoid salary, wages and tips to the extent possible
• Muni-bond interest isn’t the be-all and end-all
• Strive for “qualified” dividends
• If you have a “Schedule C” business, think twice before claiming a home-office deduction
• Generate income from long-term capital gains
• Know the score on itemized deductions
• Capital gains and dividends can help trigger the AMT
• Beware of small benefits requiring large tax-prep efforts
• Offshore investments can save onshore taxes

You’ll Never Guess How Much The Gingrich Tax Plan Would Add To The Deficit

Not much attention was paid to former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich’s flat tax proposal when he first introduced it — owing to his formerly left-for-dead status in the polls. But as Gingrich surged to the top, the Tax Policy Center took a look at his flat tax plan, and found a massive tax cut for the wealthy.

Gingrich’s plan calls for a federal flat tax at 15 percent, that would be optional, so as not to penalize those better off under the current system — meaning those earning in the highest brackets end up saving the most money. That said, every tax bracket would see lower effective rates under the Gingrich plan.

Overall, federal revenues would drop by $1.28 trillion — or 35 percent — through 2015 compared to current government policy, a massive shortfall that would have to be made up with deficit spending, or painful spending spending cuts.

Families and individuals earning more than $1 million a year would see their effective federal tax rate drop almost 20 percent — saving on average $607,221. The millionaires average rate of 11.9 percent would be lower than the average rate paid by a family earning between $40,000-50,000 a year. In fact, it would be lower than the average rate paid by any taxpayer earning between $40,000 and $1,000,000.

As Gingrich takes on a the mantle of the front-runner, expect more of these analyses on Gingrich’s many policy positions — and don’t be surprised if Democrats start aiming some attacks in his direction as well.

Read more at the Tax Policy Center