TC4 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Yeah, Kerry will raise the taxes of the rich, except maybe his own wife that is: http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm Heinz Kerry Paid Lower Tax Rate Than Most Taxpayers Mon Oct 18 2004 10:20:34 ET The Kerry campaign finally released Teresa Heinz Kerry's 2003 tax return, or rather two pages of it, late last Friday, the WALL STREET JOURNAL details. "We think she ought to release the rest of her return, since her wealth was crucial to salvaging her husband's struggling campaign during the Democratic primaries in 2003." "But even this minimal disclosure deserves more attention in light of John Kerry's pledge to raise tax rates. In 2003, Mrs. Kerry -- or Teresa Heinz, as she declared herself on her IRS 1040 form -- earned $5.07 million, hardly a surprising income for someone estimated to be worth nearly $1 billion. "The news is that $2.78 million of that income came in the form of tax- exempt interest from what the Kerry campaign's press release attributed to investments in 'state, municipal and public entity bonds.' What the campaign didn't say is that these are the kind of investments that rich people can afford to hire lawyers and accountants to steer their money into." On her "remaining 'taxable' income of $2.29 million, Mrs. Kerry paid $627,150 in taxes, for an overall average federal tax rate of only 12.4% on her $5.07 million in total income." This "puts Mrs. Kerry's tax rate at well below that of other filers in her super-rich neighborhood. But it also means she is paying a lower average rate than nearly all middle- class taxpayers paid in 2001, the last year for which the IRS has published the data. The top 50% of all federal filers contributed 96.1% of all federal income taxes in 2001, and they paid an average income-tax rate of 15.9%. That's 3.5-percentage points more than Mrs. Kerry paid in 2003." At the "very least, Mrs. Kerry's tax returns are a screaming illustration of the need for reform to make the tax code simpler and fairer. But they also show that Senator Kerry's proposed tax increases are much more about a revenue grab than they are about tax justice." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I thought Mrs. Kerry couldn't use her wealth to help her husband with campaign finance and that's why Kerry had to take out another mortgage for his home. Anyway i guess other rich folk aren't also using the loop hole in our tax code. This article is just trash, it doesn't even go into the Kerry or Bush tax plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Not surprised. Not sure how true the story is seeing that it came from Drudge, but I believe it based on my personal belief that the rich, regardless of party, take advantage of the system to the point that it's stupid. Our tax system sucks big time. It's too complicated for the average person to figure it out and the rich can afford to pay professionals to help them cheat the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Good for Druge!!! He really knows how to highlight the stories that really effect America and the election. Who needs actual stories about the candidates position on issues when we can just stick to weird pictures of Kerry and bad stories on his wife. Go Druge!!!:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troyster Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Duckus Good for Druge!!! He really knows how to highlight the stories that really effect America and the election. Who needs actual stories about the candidates position on issues when we can just stick to weird pictures of Kerry and bad stories on his wife. Go Druge!!!:doh: Give me a break. If it was a story about Bush or Cheney using tax loopholes, you'd be all over it. That being said, most wealthy people, regardless or political affiliation are able to shelter money and that type of thing. I'm sure that Heinz-Kerry is not unique in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte51Coleman Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Any of us would do the exact same thing if we had her money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 I guess the concept of "progressivness" escapes the Kerry's when it comes to their money. So predictible and hypocritical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 This is just another example of why the rich don't tax breaks. The rich can shelter their money, use the money to make more money, or utilize the many loopholes to pay less in taxes than everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpskins Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by TC4 Yeah, Kerry will raise the taxes of the rich, except maybe his own wife that is: http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm Heinz Kerry Paid Lower Tax Rate Than Most Taxpayers Mon Oct 18 2004 10:20:34 ET The Kerry campaign finally released Teresa Heinz Kerry's 2003 tax return, or rather two pages of it, late last Friday, the WALL STREET JOURNAL details. "We think she ought to release the rest of her return, since her wealth was crucial to salvaging her husband's struggling campaign during the Democratic primaries in 2003." "But even this minimal disclosure deserves more attention in light of John Kerry's pledge to raise tax rates. In 2003, Mrs. Kerry -- or Teresa Heinz, as she declared herself on her IRS 1040 form -- earned $5.07 million, hardly a surprising income for someone estimated to be worth nearly $1 billion. "The news is that $2.78 million of that income came in the form of tax- exempt interest from what the Kerry campaign's press release attributed to investments in 'state, municipal and public entity bonds.' What the campaign didn't say is that these are the kind of investments that rich people can afford to hire lawyers and accountants to steer their money into." On her "remaining 'taxable' income of $2.29 million, Mrs. Kerry paid $627,150 in taxes, for an overall average federal tax rate of only 12.4% on her $5.07 million in total income." This "puts Mrs. Kerry's tax rate at well below that of other filers in her super-rich neighborhood. But it also means she is paying a lower average rate than nearly all middle- class taxpayers paid in 2001, the last year for which the IRS has published the data. The top 50% of all federal filers contributed 96.1% of all federal income taxes in 2001, and they paid an average income-tax rate of 15.9%. That's 3.5-percentage points more than Mrs. Kerry paid in 2003." At the "very least, Mrs. Kerry's tax returns are a screaming illustration of the need for reform to make the tax code simpler and fairer. But they also show that Senator Kerry's proposed tax increases are much more about a revenue grab than they are about tax justice." I hate stuff like this. It is a common practice employed by conservatives. How does this prove anything about Kerry's tax program (which, admittedly, I'm still learning about). These are for her 2003 tax returns. If we were going to blame an administration for the 2003 tax returns, shouldn't we blame the one that is actually in office. This article is stupid and reactionary and belies the fact that Kerry would actually want his wife to be taxed more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Although Kerry is hypocritical (Teresa would just say: Yeah! So What!) its no big deal.. She still paid 600+k in taxes.. basically the same amount as my neighborhood... No class warfare no matter what the side.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Why does she get blaimed for paying the tax rate determined by law? Is somebody saying she should be audited? I think it goes right to what Kerry has said all along. The tax cuts have dispropportionately favored the rich. You mean Kerry's wife is rich? I'm surprised you find this news. It goes right to what Kerry has been saying. The rich pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes. Our progressive tax system is in fact regressive once you make enough. How is this hypocritical? Is she supposed to pay more than required by law? If anything this story highlights what the Kerry campaign and Dems have been saying for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troyster Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Fred Jones This is just another example of why the rich don't tax breaks. The rich can shelter their money, use the money to make more money, or utilize the many loopholes to pay less in taxes than everyone else. I agree to an extent, but there is the rich, and there is the "rich." To Kerry, rich is income over 200K per year. Heinz Kerry (and Cheney, and Bush, and Edwards) is way way way above that income. I just don't agree with Kerry in terms of who he calls rich. Making 200K in today's economy is not rich, its upper middle class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Sick Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Does it say in this article how much she gives to Charity? Also, doesn't it say more about the person that would be willing to give this all up for the good of the country? Tell me: why would a rich person vote for a tax repeal? Could it be they have a conscience or just want what is best for the country? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Smart on her part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Doesn't matter. The more money they have, the more they can afford give to charity, thus the more they can write off. People with money do all sorts of things to have write-offs... start corporations, businesses, charities... all in the name of having write-offs, but they look all warm and fuzzy on the exterior. That goes for anyone, conservative or liberal. They're all just as skeezy. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Thiebear Although Kerry is hypocritical (Teresa would just say: Yeah! So What!) its no big deal.. She still paid 600+k in taxes.. basically the same amount as my neighborhood... No class warfare no matter what the side.... $600,000 paid in taxes?!? Wow. America is great. I wonder how many government programs are paid for, in large part, by the rich? Dems should enbrace all rick people like they have embraced Mrs. Kerry. I think it is great that a person can make so much money that they had a $600,000 tax bill. What more could a liberal ask of these people? Destino, I am waiting for your comment...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFunky1 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 From what I understand she didn't "earn" any money like you and I would earn money from a job. She is taxed at a different rate due to her gains coming from investments. Again I am not positive about this, but If she had earned that money through a traditional type job she would have been subjected, barring massive loop holes, to the highest tax bracket. I like the idea of a flat tax, no loop holes. Or possibly a consumption based tax, with exemptions, at the cash register, for things people have to have (food, health items, some consumable and durable goods). I like having those who don't pay any taxes for various reasons to pay tax. I would think you liberals defending her would be bashing her for not paying her "fair share". Another double standard by our liberal friends. Kerry rolling back the tax code implemented by Bush won't affect the Kerry's or Edward's or any of the other mega-rich people out there. Personally it is her money and she should keep as much as she can. I hate income taxes, I know the government has been ruined by them, and they hurt those of us trying to get ahead because the government keeps taking what doesn't belong to it. BTW if Kerry puts taxes back at the Clinton administration levels people making under $200K would be getting taxed. Singles at over $89K and married couples around $173K would get taxed more than they are now. So his pledge, if he uses Clinton's tax brackets, would raise taxes for the middle class. Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 If Kerry get's elected, and somehow get's to enact his proposed tax plan. I will without hesitation have to let go one of my employees to cover the cost of my tax increase. That's the real world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Kilmer17 If Kerry get's elected, and somehow get's to enact his proposed tax plan. I will without hesitation have to let go one of my employees to cover the cost of my tax increase. That's the real world. Sad but true. In the end, higher taxes and greater regulation hurt the people who the government is trying to "protect". If for once a liberal would consider the effects of additional taxation and regulation on its constiuency, life would be much better in these United States of America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Sad but true. In the end, higher taxes and greater regulation hurt the people who the government is trying to "protect". Ding! Ding! We have a winner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Kilmer17 If Kerry get's elected, and somehow get's to enact his proposed tax plan. I will without hesitation have to let go one of my employees to cover the cost of my tax increase. That's the real world. Now, why doesn't it surprise me that you're one of the evil rich who's so heartless that you'd make some working-class guy unemployeed rather than just pay your taxes? I should've known because of your well-publicised links to certain, unnamed, organizations of world controll. (Yes, this was a joke.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Could somebody tell me how we are going to keep our government/military/social services afloat with all these tax cuts? There's have been no mention of scaling back government spending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by Larry Now, why doesn't it surprise me that you're one of the evil rich who's so heartless that you'd make some working-class guy unemployeed rather than just pay your taxes? I should've known because of your well-publicised links to certain, unnamed, organizations of world controll. (Yes, this was a joke.) You just made the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by SkinInsite Could somebody tell me how we are going to keep our government/military/social services afloat with all these tax cuts? There's have been no mention of scaling back government spending. Cut the social services to the bare minimum. Can you site in the constitution where we are supposed to be the crutch for the masses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted October 18, 2004 Share Posted October 18, 2004 Originally posted by portisbowwow Cut the social services to the bare minimum. Can you site in the constitution where we are supposed to be the crutch for the masses? What do you consider minimum? Roads? Police? School? Health Care? Charities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.