Morning Mix: Obama To Propose "Buffett Rule"

The ultra-rich are about to be asked to shoulder a greater share of the economic burden in our country, and the Republican Party couldn’t be more adamantly opposed.

This morning, President Barack Obama will propose what is being referred to as “The Buffett Rule,” a new tax bracket for those who earn more than one million dollars a year. The rule is drawing its name from billionaire Warren Buffett, the investment tycoon who recently made headlines with an op-ed claiming the rich often end up paying a lesser percentage of their income in taxes than the middle class does. It would create a new tax bracket that would ensure that those who make more than one million dollars a year would pay a higher minimum tax. In essence, it would likely be a retooling of the alternative minimum tax already in place, which hasn’t been adjusted in order to reflect the increase in wages and has increasingly been hitting the middle class instead. But it would include investment income in the mix, which is generally taxed at a lower rate than actual wages are.

Needless to say, the GOP is not a big fan. Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan is calling the idea of raising taxes on capital gains “class warfare,” despite the fact that he himself proposed gutting programs like Medicare and Social Security, which the lower and middle class rely on in order to protect the rich.

Democrats, on the other hand, like it a great deal. Former President Bill Clinton called it a good idea, and for the many in the party who were worried that entitlements might be cut in order to keep taxes for millionaires at their already low rate, the news is being met with glee — or at least as much glee as one can have for an idea that may have little shot at being passed in both chambers of Congress.

So how many would be effected by this new tax? Approximately 0.3 percent, or one in every 333 taxpayers. Unfortunately, that tiny fraction of taxpayers also tend to be the ones with the most influence over Congress, so it will be interesting to see if the rule ever turns into a real law.

Photo credit: Pete Sousa

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Glen P.

11:13AM PDT on Sep 25, 2011

Who are WE to deny the wealthy their 10th vacation home, 5th yacht or 3rd private jet?

They work HARD to get dressed for 5-star restaurants or slave over hitting a ball into a little hole in fancy private clubs and using the security, resources, infrastructure, and the compounding labors and ingenuity of America's people to make their money, they should be able to keep every last dime of it.

send a green star

Patrick F.

1:06PM PDT on Sep 21, 2011

Now Obama is after the Republican vote by acting like a Republican....pandering to the ultra wealthy....

4:59PM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

Warren Buffet is a clown, he set out to get more recognition and it worked! Obama fell for it hook,line, and sinker. The "Buffet rule" IS the whole goal of Warren Buffet's posing, when are you people going to wake up and realize that billionaires aren't the benevolent angels they claim to be.

Ronald E.

3:47PM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

Buffett HAS made statements in the past that were frankly suspect. That is NOT the case now, T-Bauchers. You're so friggin ignorant it astonishes imbeciles! "Imbecile" - people with an IQ of 26-50, between "moron" (IQ of 51-70) and "idiot" (IQ of 0-25).

Debbie B.

3:39PM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

Percentage of millionaires in the US, less than 1%
Percentage of millonaires in Congress, 60%
I wonder how far this proposal will go on Capitol Hill.

David A.

2:10PM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

It seems that my earlier comment never did post. The problem with buffett shilling for a tax increase, aside from the fact that he refuses to pay teh $1B+ in back taxes he already owes, is that this tax does not tax people like Buffett, which is probably why he likes it. The purpose for this tax is not to tax the extremely rich but the next-higher group of income earners who still have a little green left in their jeans, who are alos the ones most likely to contribute to ouir economy through small business-driven employment rather than their richer neighbors who have the means to receive much of their income in capital gains, like Buffett, at a meager 15%, and can send the jobs they create to some third-world hell-hole where they can attract labor by the incentive of starving slowly rather than quickly. By Buffett's own admission, his effective tax rate is that charged to those who make as little as $8500 per year. So now Buffett is playing populist shilling for a tax on people who are living well, but are worse off than him by by a huge margin. How about my solution: Eliminate the chicanery from the tax code, settle out on workable rates,which should go down if the code is cleaned up, and tax capital gains at the normal rate minus payroll tax in order to protect those who do not hit the limit on the payroll tax.

Margaret C.

2:07PM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

Nancy L., you said your friend has been receiving benefits for several years, how is that possible? From what I've seen, your employment benefits only last for 2 years, then no matter what, you are done. He must be lying about his address and his identity to still be getting benefits longer than 2 years, and the word "several" means more than two or three years.

Don't blame this on Obama ("Obama-sponsored early retirement"), he might had made it law, but he isn't the one who does the paperwork, or check on claimant's status, or send out the check, etc., that's the bureaucracy of the employment division of your state government. If you have ever worked in any government agency (either state or federal), you would know that you have some really good people who do their jobs and beyond, then you have those bums that are just like your friend - taking a free ride on the taxpayers back.

But this is about the rich. They got their money by working hard or inherited it, and as a society, we idolize them and wish to be like them. But I wouldn't want to be rich and not take care of the house I live in. In other words, stop pissing where you eat and take care of your country, Yeah, they may donate to their favorite charity, but it would sure be nice when tax time comes and their lawyers have find all those loopholes and use them, that they take the money they made from the loopholes and pay off a few mortgages that the bank had foreclosed on or if they would take that mo

12:32PM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

Warren Buffet again? This guy is just desperate for attention, if he wanted to pay more taxes he would just pay the back taxes he owes instead of using lawyers to fight it. Even if this went through, he would still find ways around it, he even admits he pays less taxes than his secretary. DUHHHHH, people will believe anything......

William G.

11:20AM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

Jeff Immelt CEO of GE and Obama's "Jobs Czar" says nothing on this matter of taxes while GE pays no tax. Shouldn't Barack be asking his top people to lead by example? The only example I have noticed is all the tax cheats he has working for him (Timmy Geithner and others). When Obama's "Jobs Czar" starts paying a full tax then he can ask others to also.

Nancy L.

11:10AM PDT on Sep 20, 2011

The govt. would have a lot more money if the democrats would quit giving away so much money to people who don't need it. And quit extending unemployment benefits. My friend was laid off several years ago, - he could easily get a job, but instead he flaunts his "Obama-sponsored early retirement". He kicks back travelling having a good time on his endless unemployment extensions. He has no motivation to get a job.