Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on August 25, 2011, 05:19:23 AM
-
The Sage of Omaha Speaks, But His Actions Speak Louder
Townhall.com ^ | August 24, 2011 | Jeff Jacoby
WARREN BUFFETT is the billionaire CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, a friend and political supporter of Barack Obama, and a well-known advocate of higher taxes on the rich. He is also a hypocrite, whose actions belie his words.
For several years now, Buffett has been calling for significant tax hikes on extremely wealthy Americans like himself. Last week, in a New York Times column headlined "Stop Coddling the Super-Rich," Buffett lamented that the $6,938,744 he forked over in federal income and payroll taxes in 2010 amounted to just 17.4 percent of his taxable income. "What I paid," the world's most famous investor observed, "was . . . actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent, and averaged 36 percent."
Buffett has not made his employees' tax returns public, but the federal tax burdens he ascribes to them appear to be highly atypical. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the overall federal tax load shouldered by Americans -- comprising income, payroll, corporate, and excise taxes -- is quite progressive. CBO reported last summer that "households in the bottom fifth of the income distribution paid 4.0 percent of their income in federal taxes, the middle quintile paid 14.3 percent, and the highest quintile paid 25.1 percent. Average rates continued to rise within the top quintile: The top 1 percent faced an average rate of 29.5 percent." If Buffett's numbers are right, his employees must be among the highest-taxed workers in America.
Yet Buffett doesn't argue that his workers' federal taxes should be cut. He demands that his own be raised.
As many critics have noted, Buffett can voluntarily send Washington more money than he owes in taxes. Anyone can. Since 1843, the Treasury Department notes on its website, the government has maintained an account "to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States." Deposits to that account are added to the government's general fund, but the feds also accept contributions -- by credit card, electronic payment, or check -- specifically earmarked for paying down federal debt.
It would be nice to think that those who insist so vehemently that Washington's debt crisis cannot be resolved without higher revenues are taking the lead and freely reaching into their own pockets. Alas, no. Donations to the Bureau of the Public Debt, The New York Times reported last year, only trickle in at an annual rate of about $2 million to $3 million.
What makes Buffett a hypocrite isn't that he champions an immediate tax increase on the wealthy, yet donates nothing extra to Washington himself. Merely favoring a change in the law doesn't oblige anyone to act as if the change has been enacted.
But Buffett doesn't just propose higher taxes on millionaires and billionaires as a matter of abstract policy. He argues that he personally (along with what he calls "my mega-rich friends") has been "spared" any shared sacrifice, that he personally has "been coddled long enough," that he personally shouldn't get "extraordinary tax breaks" when so many Americans are struggling. He frames his call for higher taxes as an avowal of his own moral obligations. Were he to put his money where his mouth is and voluntarily send the Treasury a big check, his call for higher taxes would carry greater moral authority. His failure to do so is not just intellectually inconsistent, but hypocritical.
Buffett isn't greedy. He is an extraordinary philanthropist who has undertaken to give 99 percent of his immense fortune to charity, and who, with Bill Gates, actively encourages other billionaires to spend down half or more of their wealth in charitable donations.
And why is he giving all that money to charity instead of to Uncle Sam? Because, as he has said in interviews, he knows it will do more good that way and be used more effectively. Who would disagree? For all Buffett's talk of being undertaxed, he believes what nearly everyone believes -- that he can allocate his money more wisely than the government. And not just that he can, but that he should.
When the Sage of Omaha calls for higher taxes, his words get plenty of attention. But his actions speak louder, and convey a markedly different message.
-
Buffett’s Obama pigout
Last Updated: 3:26 AM, August 25, 2011
Following reports that President Obama phoned Warren Buffett from vacation in Martha’s Vineyard to discuss the economy, The “Oracle of Omaha” is hosting a fund-raiser for Obama’s re-election, billed as an “economic forum,” Page Six has learned.
Tickets for the event at New York’s Four Seasons restaurant on Sept. 30 start at $10,000 a head, with VIP tickets a budget-boosting $35,800. Guests get an hour of “Q&A moderated by one of President Obama’s closest economic advisors, Austan Goolsbee.” VIP ticket-holders get a “private reception for about 20 minutes prior to the dinner.”
A blurb with the invite adds, “As all guests are seated for dinner, Buffett will go around to all tables and shake hands, then he and Austan will sit for the program and discussion.” What will be discussed is Buffett’s recent highly publicized claim that the wealthy should pay higher taxes. But as one invitee sniffed, “Nothing like advocating tax equality when you are charging $35,800 a ticket.”
NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc.
nypost.com , nypostonline.com , and newyorkpost.com are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc.
Copyright 2011 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy | Terms of Use
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/buffett_obama_pigout_rCcS4YvtrzA10ytZBUDUoM#ixzz1W3ePsDSP
-
Buffett to Host Obama Fundraiser in New York
Jonathan D. Salant - Aug 25, 2011 11:41 AM ET .
Billionaire Warren Buffett plans to hold a Sept. 30 fundraiser in New York City to benefit President Barack Obama’s re-election bid, according to two Democratic officials not authorized to speak publicly about the event.
The fundraiser, reported earlier by the New York Post, will also feature former Obama economic adviser Austan Goolsbee.
Obama, who is preparing for a post-Labor Day speech about his plans for stimulating the economy, spoke with Buffett Aug. 22 by phone from his vacation on Martha’s Vineyard as he works to gather ideas on how to boost job creation and spur growth.
The chairman and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A) has been a longtime Obama supporter. He hosted an August 2007 fundraiser in Omaha, Nebraska, for Obama and has served as an informal economic adviser.
Obama has cited Buffett to counter critics of his policies, particularly on raising taxes for the nation’s wealthiest individuals and families. Buffett has called for higher taxes for wealthy Americans including himself.
During his bus tour last week through rural areas of Minnesota, Iowa and Illinois, Obama quoted from a New York Times opinion article in which Buffett wrote that the nation’s richest individuals have been “coddled long enough by a billionaire- friendly Congress.” Buffett argued for raising taxes for the “mega-rich” in the U.S.
Buffett has primarily supported Democratic candidates, including giving the maximum allowed by law during the 2008 campaign to both Obama and the Democratic National Committee.
-- Editor: Mark Silva, Ann Hughey.
To contact the reporters on this story: John McCormick in Chicago at jmccormick16@bloomberg.net; Jonathan D. Salant in Washington at jsalant@bloomberg.net;
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Silva at msilva34@bloomberg.net
-
You're pretty lonely, huh?
-
You're pretty lonely, huh?
No - just sick of this Potemkin Village situation we have.
-
No - just sick of this Potemkin Village situation we have.
I feel for you, bro.
Not saying that to be mean, either.
Happens to everyone. Some more than others, but it happens to everyone.
-
Warren Buffett makes $280m profit on Bank of America stake in just 24 hoursWarren Buffett's $5bn (£3.1bn) lifeline for Bank of America has earned the Sage of Omaha a paper profit of $280m in just 24 hours.
Warren Buffett said he was impressed by Bank of America's 'profit-generating' capabilities Photo: APBy Helia Ebrahimi, and Harry Wilson
9:15PM BST 25 Aug 2011
The billionaire investor bought $5bn of preferred stock with 700m warrants that convert into 7pc of the bank's shares, sending them up an initial 25pc to $8.80. They fell back to $7.67 in mid-afternoon trading, up almost 10pc on Wednesday's close.
Mr Buffett's move put some market confidence behind the bank after the hammering given to the shares in recent weeks on talk that it was short of $50bn to $200bn of capital. The bank has been hit by rumours that it may be forced to make massive writedowns on its housing debts and government bonds as well as the possibility it could haemorrhage even bigger legal bills for its mortgage liabilities.
But Mr Buffett, who made $4.5bn in profit from a similar move investing in Goldman Sachs at the height of the financial crisis, said he was impressed by Bank of America's "profit-generating" capabilities. He added he had contacted the bank's beleaguered chief executive Brian Moynihan on Wednesday morning proposing the deal, saying: "Bank of America is a strong, well-led company Brian... I wanted to invest in it." The shares closed up 11pc on Wednesday.
As well as the preference shares that will pay $300m - or 6pc - interest every year, Mr Buffett's investment firm Berkshire Hathaway will receive 700m warrants that convert into ordinary shares at an exercise price of $7.142857 per share. The cash injection raises the bank's total equity by 2pc to $223bn. If the warrants are exercised, core Tier 1 capital will rise 4pc to $120bn, according to brokers' estimates.
Analysts questioned how much Mr Buffett's investment would calm speculation about Bank of America's need for additional capital.
Mike Mayo, a New York-based analyst at CLSA, called the deal a "vote of confidence", but said it would not "alleviate concerns about the stock".
"The possibility of a common raise [ordinary share sale] is not eliminated, and the investment reinforces the status quo despite recent failures by the company to put behind it issues related to expenses, legal, management and guidance," Mr Mayo said.
One analyst who asked not to be named called the deal an "expensive public relations disaster" for the bank, seeing that it proved it needed fresh capital but left questions over whether it was enough.
Mr Moynihan said: "I remain confident we have the capital and liquidity we need. I also recognise that a large investment by Warren Buffett is a strong endorsement."
The investment recalled September 2008, when just a week after Lehman Brothers collapsed Mr Buffett pumped $5bn into Goldman Sachs. While the 6pc coupon being paid by Bank of America is lower than the juicy 10pc interest rate then extracted from Goldman, it will still represent a significant drain on the lender's financial resources.
Mr Mayo estimates the coupon alone will cost the bank's shareholders five cents per share a year in lost earnings. At the end of September the bank will make its first quarterly dividend payment of $75m to Berkshire plus $25m of "accretion expenses", taking the total quarterly bill to $100m. To buy out the preferred stock the bank will have to pay a hefty 5pc premium to the value of Mr Buffett's investment, which would cost it a further $250m.
-
Trying to instill some "confidence" in BAC....
Earth to investors, BAC will need much, much more than 5 billion.
Also, why would Warren need to dump 5 billion into BAC if BAC as been screaming about not needing capital?
This is a bad sign.
-
The best part about the whole BAC thing is that they admitted they're locked out of the capital markets when they claimed Buffett was able to give them better terms. HAHAHAHAHA. They need about $180 billion in cash, not the $5 billion Uncle Warren dumped into them.
-
Something about Buffet makes me think of a ponzi operator. If you read his history you'll see how it all started: getting wealthy doctors, lawyers etc. to each invest $10,000 in his operations.
i can see Steve Jobs or Bill Gates as billionaires, given the products they have created. But with Buffet it is more vague.
-
Trying to instill some "confidence" in BAC....
Earth to investors, BAC will need much, much more than 5 billion.
Also, why would Warren need to dump 5 billion into BAC if BAC as been screaming about not needing capital?
This is a bad sign.
What a fucking joke.
-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/25/warren-buffett-bank-america-too-big-to-fail_n_937118.html
No wonder Obama called him. Disgraceful.
-
Buffet, the crony capitalist.
-
Updated: Sun., Aug. 28, 2011, 11:51 PM
Warren Buffett, hypocrite
Last Updated: 11:51 PM, August 28, 2011
This one’s truly, uh ... rich: Billionaire Warren Buffett says folks like him should have to pay more taxes -- but it turns out his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, hasn’t paid what it’s already owed for years.
That’s right: As Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson notes, the company openly admits that it owes back taxes since as long ago as 2002.
“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years ... within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says.
It also cites outstanding tax issues for 2005 through 2009.
Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his “mega-rich friends” should pay higher taxes, why doesn’t his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates?
Likely answer: He cares more about shilling for President Obama -- who’s practically made socking “millionaires and billionaires” his re-election theme song -- than about kicking in more himself.
Buffett’s free to back Obama, of course.
And if his firm wants to keep its tax bill low, well, that’s its right, too.
But it would be nice if this “pro-tax-hike” tycoon were a bit more honest about it.
Start, for example, with his grossly disingenuous recent claim that, as he wrote in The New York Times, he paid only 17 percent of his income last year to the government -- even as many working stiffs who make far less than him coughed up higher percentages.
Fact is, unlike most other folks, Warren Buffett gets most of his income from dividends and capital gains, which are nominally taxed at 15 percent.
Left unsaid is that much of that is taxed at 35 percent (via the corporate income tax) before he even gets his hands on it. So in effect, he’s paying taxes twice (that is, when his companies actually pay, anyway).
Counting both taxes, his effective rate would really be well north of 40 percent for a big chunk of his income.
There’s more. Obama, and co-conspirators like Buffett, claim to want to slap only “millionaires and billionaires.”
But in 2009, for instance, fewer than a quarter-million taxpayers (less than two tenths of 1 percent) reported income over $1 million -- and their combined bill was less than $200 billion.
Raise the top tax rate on them by 13 percent, as Obama wants (from 35 percent to 39.6 percent) and you bring in only another $26 billion, tops -- and that’s if your tax hike doesn’t stifle the economy and kill jobs (which it surely would). Yet what’s $26 billion in a world of $4 trillion federal budgets with trillion-dollar-plus deficits?
No wonder Obama’s hikes on “millionaires and billionaires” actually start with folks earning as little as $200,000.
Looks like Buffett’s not the only disingenuous one here. But again, that’s clear from their individual behavior: Obama, Buffett and Democrats like Bill Clinton keep saying they want to pay more taxes.
Fine. They can always write checks.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/warren_buffett_hypocrite_E3BsmJmeQVE38q2Woq9yjJ#ixzz1WRMFjcUc
-
Is Barack buddy Buffett betting on bank bailout?
by
Timothy P. Carney Senior Political Columnist
President Barack Obama presents the 2010 Medal of Freedom to Warren Buffett during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House in in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2011. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
If you're looking for proof that Too Big to Fail is still alive, and that Washington won't leave large financial institutions to the mercies of capitalism, consider billionaire Obama fundraiser Warren Buffett's $5 billion bet on struggling Bank of America.
Buffett, who recently won plaudits for advocating higher taxes, has spent four years betting on bailouts and big government -- and tilting the playing field in that direction by putting his money and prestige at the service of Barack Obama.
Buffett gave the maximum donation to Obama in 2007 -- $4,600 to his campaign, and $28,500 to the Democratic National Committee -- and also hosted a fundraiser for Obama in Omaha. By mid-2008, Obama had tapped Buffett as an official economic adviser to the campaign.
When Wall Street nearly collapsed in September 2008, Buffett rallied behind the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and bet big on its passage. He put $5 billion into failing investment bank Goldman Sachs. "If I didn't think the government was going to act, I would not be doing anything this week," Buffett said on CNBC at the time.
Obama had campaigned against policies that mainly serve wealthy Americans, belittling the notion that "somehow prosperity will trickle down." Obama was the only man in position to block the bailout, but he voted aye and took much of his party with him.
As Congress was passing TARP and Republicans were falling in the polls, Buffett made another investment in Obamanomics, taking a $3 billion stake in General Electric.
Goldman got $10 billion in TARP funds, and by late 2009 was reporting record profits. Buffett made more than $3.6 billion in profit off the investment.
GE never got TARP money, but a month after the Buffett investment, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation gave GE a $139 billion guarantee on its debt, and GE was a regular recipient of other Federal Reserve bailouts besides TARP. Then GE forged an intimate alliance with the Obama administration, boosting investments in greenhouse-gas credits, embryonic stem cells, wind power, battery technology, and trains -- all technologies subsidized by Obama. GE Chief Executive Officer Jeff Immelt, who lauded Obama's "reset capitalism" in which government would be an "industry champion," became Obama's "job czar."
More recently, Buffett said he's considering investments in ethanol pioneer Archer Daniels Midland, nuclear-power king Exelon, and government contracting giant General Dynamics. ADM was built on close ties to politicians, as was Exelon. ADM relies on ethanol subsidies for profits, while Exelon lobbies for greenhouse-gas restrictions that will profit the company's nuclear-power holdings. And General Dynamics, with $139 billion in federal contracts since 2000, is also cozy with government.
In this light, and recalling his Goldman-bailout profit, consider Buffett's investment last week in Bank of America.
Investors had been dumping Bank of America shares, presumably over worries about the mortgages it holds. But B of A holds ugly mortgages mostly because it bought Countrywide in 2008 -- a move government officials encouraged because they thought it would stabilize the financial sector. Similarly, B of A bought up Merrill Lynch with some nudging from the Treasury Department.
Finally, the Obama administration is simultaneously siding with struggling mortgage-holders against their banks while also trying to promote more lending. You could say Uncle Sam owes Bank of America.
At least Moody's, the credit-ratings agency, seems to think so. In a June 2 announcement, Moody's (owned by Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, by the way) wrote that Bank of America's credit rating "currently incorporates an unusual amount of 'uplift' from Moody's systemic support assumptions that were increased during the financial crisis." In other words, Moody's -- and thus most creditors -- assumes the government will not let Bank of America fail.
By putting $5 billion in B of A, Buffett seems to be following his mantra: "Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful." But does the Oracle of Omaha, as he did in 2008, find his courage in the promise of a bailout? And does he have good reason to expect one?
Last week, when Buffett spoke with Obama and decided to invest in Bank of America, we learned that he is hosting another Obama fundraiser. This all sounds familiar.
It's beginning to look a lot like 2008, which is bad news economically -- unless you know how to profit off bailouts.
---
CORRECTION: This column originally understated the size of Buffett's investment in Bank of America. The correct figure is $5 billion, not $3 billion.
Timothy P.Carney, The Examiner's senior political columnist, can be contacted at tcarney@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Monday and Thursday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.
-
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---warren-buffett-vs--wealthy-conservatives
-
Warren 'Raise My Taxes' Buffett's Company May Owe IRS $1 Billion
Newsbusters ^
Posted on August 30, 2011 7:45:07 PM EDT by Sub-Driver
Warren 'Raise My Taxes' Buffett's Company May Owe IRS $1 Billion By Noel Sheppard Created 08/30/2011 - 5:29pm
As NewsBusters reported Monday, American media almost completely ignored a report that Warren "Raise My Taxes" Buffett's company Berkshire Hathaway has been fighting with the IRS for almost a decade over taxes it owes.
On Tuesday, the organization digging into Berkshire Hathaway's numbers, Americans for Limited Government, estimated the total could be as much as $1 billion:
Using only publicly-available documents, a certified public accountant (CPA) detailed Berkshire Hathaway’s tax problems to ALG researcher Richard McCarty. Now, the American people have a better idea of how much in back taxes the company could owe Uncle Sam.
According to page 56 of the company report, “At December 31, 2010… net unrecognized tax benefits were $1,005 million”, or about $1 billion. McCarty explained, “Unrecognized tax benefits represent the company’s potential future obligation to the IRS and other taxing authorities. They have to be recorded in the company’s financial statements.”
He added, “The notation means that Berkshire Hathaway’s own auditors have probably said that $1 billion is more likely than not owed to the government.” Google News and LexisNexis searches have uncovered only the New York Post as a major outlet reporting ALG's previous revelations.
Now that the money involved is 10 figures, will anyone in the Obama-loving media address the hypocrisy of one of the President's wealthiest supporters?
Stay tuned.
-
Obama Supporter Warren Buffett’s Co. Hasn’t Paid Some Taxes Since 2002
The Blaze ^ | 08-29-11 | Jonathon M. Seidl
Posted on August 30, 2011 12:00:35 PM EDT by Lazlo in PA
Remember when Warren Buffett — a staunch Obama supporter — said that rich people like him would be willing to pay more taxes to help out? If you do, it will probably shock you that his company, Berkshire Hathaway, has back taxes dating back to 2002.
The New York Post explains:
That’s right: As Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson notes, the company openly admits that it owes back taxes since as long ago as 2002.
“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years … within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says.
It also cites outstanding tax issues for 2005 through 2009.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
-
He's getting old, that point of old where they don't shut up. They say everything that is on their mind. He's speaking the truth, but that's after years of cheating the system and pocketing the billions.
-
Look, a bunch of rich hypocrites in Germany too.
Tax Me More, Europe’s Wealthy Say
By JULIA WERDIGIER
Published: August 30, 2011
LONDON — Echoing a call by Warren E. Buffett, members of the European wealthy elite are urging their governments to raise their taxes or enact special levies to help reduce growing budget deficits.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/31/business/global/as-austerity-bites-europes-rich-speak-up-to-be-taxed.html
-------------------------------
The wealthy argue FOR this, and you are not wealthy. You're like a spoiled child throwing a tantrum in a supermarket.
Even when people are trying to make things more fair for YOU, you resist it.
Grow up already and quit putting your party before your country.
It's not 'economic freedom' for the wealth to not have to pull their weight.
It's hard to respect a brainwashed specimen like you.
-
Warren 'Raise My Taxes' Buffett's Company May Owe IRS $1 Billion
Newsbusters ^
Posted on August 30, 2011 7:45:07 PM EDT by Sub-Driver
Warren 'Raise My Taxes' Buffett's Company May Owe IRS $1 Billion By Noel Sheppard Created 08/30/2011 - 5:29pm
As NewsBusters reported Monday, American media almost completely ignored a report that Warren "Raise My Taxes" Buffett's company Berkshire Hathaway has been fighting with the IRS for almost a decade over taxes it owes.
On Tuesday, the organization digging into Berkshire Hathaway's numbers, Americans for Limited Government, estimated the total could be as much as $1 billion:
Using only publicly-available documents, a certified public accountant (CPA) detailed Berkshire Hathaway’s tax problems to ALG researcher Richard McCarty. Now, the American people have a better idea of how much in back taxes the company could owe Uncle Sam.
According to page 56 of the company report, “At December 31, 2010… net unrecognized tax benefits were $1,005 million”, or about $1 billion. McCarty explained, “Unrecognized tax benefits represent the company’s potential future obligation to the IRS and other taxing authorities. They have to be recorded in the company’s financial statements.”
He added, “The notation means that Berkshire Hathaway’s own auditors have probably said that $1 billion is more likely than not owed to the government.” Google News and LexisNexis searches have uncovered only the New York Post as a major outlet reporting ALG's previous revelations.
Now that the money involved is 10 figures, will anyone in the Obama-loving media address the hypocrisy of one of the President's wealthiest supporters?
Stay tuned.
Surprise, surprise, ol' Uncle Warren is a giant tax cheat. Who didn't see that coming?
This guy has made a career out of tax dodging and now he has the gall to demand that others pay more (while he dumps all his money into charities because he KNOWS the govt. will just waste it). Sounds like someone in the twilight of their life trying to secure their legacy.
-
Warren Buffett’s taxing hypocrisy
By Bill Wilson — The Obama Administration has turned to billionaire Warren Buffett, chairman and chief executive of financial giant Berkshire Hathaway, to make the case for raising taxes on the rich because, says Buffett, he can afford it.
On Aug. 22, the White House reportedly chatted with Wall Street’s most famous investor to get his thoughts about the sputtering economy.
What likely got the Administration’s attention was Buffett’s oped in The New York Times. Buffett proposed that “It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.” He implied he would like to see the capital gains be treated equally as income.
To wit, he wrote of the so-called “super-rich,” which he apparently defines as households earning $1 million or more a year: “Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.” Isn’t that nice of Mr. Buffett?
But if he were truly sincere, perhaps he might simply try paying the taxes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) says his company owes? According to Berkshire Hathaway’s own annual report — see Note 15 on pp. 54-56 — the company has been in a years-long dispute over its federal tax bills.
According to the report, “We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (‘IRS’) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years at the IRS Appeals Division within the next 12 months. The IRS has completed its examination of our consolidated U.S. federal income tax returns for the 2005 and 2006 tax years and the proposed adjustments are currently being reviewed by the IRS Appeals Division process. The IRS is currently auditing our consolidated U.S. federal income tax returns for the 2007 through 2009 tax years.”
Americans for Limited Government researcher Richard McCarty, who was alerted to the controversy by a federal government lawyer, said, “The company has been short-changing the tax collection agency for much of the past decade. Mr. Buffett’s company has not fully settled its tax bills from 2002-2009. Yet he says he’d happily pay more. Except the IRS has apparently been asking him to pay more going on nine years.”
Apparently, not paying taxes in full is an annual occurrence under Buffett’s watch. Considering the size of the company, the amount of unsettled taxes could total in the tens of millions.
McCarty explained, “The rough translation of the report is that Berkshire Hathaway did not pay all the federal taxes that it was required to for 2002 through 2004. The IRS examination team caught Berkshire Hathaway on at least some issues. Instead of paying up, Berkshire Hathaway is threatening the IRS with protracted litigation and is in the process of cutting a deal with the IRS Appeals office.”
He continued, “For 2005 and 2006, Berkshire Hathaway again did not pay all the federal taxes that it was required to. Again, the IRS examination team caught Berkshire Hathaway on at least some issues. Now, Berkshire Hathaway is again threatening the IRS with protracted litigation and is trying to cut a deal with the IRS Appeals office.”
McCarty concluded, “And, finally, the IRS has opened another examination of Berkshire Hathaway’s tax returns for 2007 through 2009, but has not officially sent Berkshire Hathaway the bill yet for taxes that Berkshire Hathaway failed to pay for those years. One would expect they will find yet more issues.”
Now, most Americans, when they receive a tax bill from the government, they pay it. They don’t get an attorney. They don’t appeal the bill. They pay it — on time and in full. But not Buffett’s company, which apparently takes years to settle its liabilities.
Since this appears to be an ongoing pattern at the company, it becomes reasonable to ask: Is this some sort of internal company policy to delay paying taxes on time? If so, could this be construed as a form of tax evasion?
Interesting questions for the man who professes to want to pay more to Uncle Sam, and who sees fit to raise the burden on all job creators — except for perhaps his company — despite the longest period of sustained high unemployment since the Great Depression.
As Mr. Buffett has seen fit to enter the political arena, in the interests of full disclosure, the American people should be alerted to his own taxing hypocrisy. Reporters should ask him, “If you’re so interested in paying more in taxes, why doesn’t your company settle its tax bills from the past decade now?”
Then they might ask him about the pot and the kettle as a follow-up.
Bill Wilson is the President of Americans for Limited Government. You can follow Bill on Twitter at @BillWilsonALG.
Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2011/08/warren-buffett%e2%80%99s-taxing-hypocrisy/#ixzz1YQLCz6Pr
-
Translation:
When 33 agreed with Buffett, then Buffetr should be seen as a wise man.
When 33 disagrees with Buffett, suddenly Buffet is a lib SOB.
I love it how people can be credible with 33 "some" of the time.
-
Translation:
When 33 agreed with Buffett, then Buffetr should be seen as a wise man.
When 33 disagrees with Buffett, suddenly Buffet is a lib SOB.
I love it how people can be credible with 33 "some" of the time.
Aint about me asswipe - its about the lies your messiah, the object of your lust and devotion, is telling and the stooges he is putting forward to sell his bogus plan.
Buffett is gaming the system w your messiah and you are perfectly happy with it. Chalk it up to Issue No. 354,676 you and Ron Paul differ on.
-
33,
If Buffet a credible person when it comes to economic policy.
Yes or no?
-
33,
If Buffet a credible person when it comes to economic policy.
Yes or no?
Not any more - he is conflicted beyond repair now with his BOA, GS, and other nonsense of the last year.
-
Not any more - he is conflicted beyond repair now with his BOA, GS, and other nonsense of the last year.
So all those threads you posted where Buffet was trashing Obama -
Buffet, someone you admit as not credible...
WHy did you post from a thread you don't consider credible?
-
So all those threads you posted where Buffet was trashing Obama -
Buffet, someone you admit as not credible...
WHy did you post from a thread you don't consider credible?
To show the idiocy of your messiah and the lack of leadership, message, program, etc.
-
To show the idiocy of your messiah and the lack of leadership, message, program, etc.
Do you often choose to post articles from sources (that you consider to be not credible), just as long as they make obama look bad?
-
Additionally -
LOL @ message board warriors and lifetime GOP legislators - telling americans they know MORE about creating jobs and succeeding in business than WARREN BUFFET.
He's the second richest man in the world and expels more business knowledge taking a shit than Paul Ryan delivers in a year.
-
The US has a much greater SPENDING problem than it does a taxing problem. Due to tax loopholes and the various ways in which the very wealthy accumulate their wealth, higher taxes would mean very little to them in the long run. Buffet's plea sounds more pluralistic than an actual solution to the US debt problem.
Then again, more tax income just means another endowment to some company to create electric batteries for electric cars that don't exist.
-
Additionally -
LOL @ message board warriors and lifetime GOP legislators - telling americans they know MORE about creating jobs and succeeding in business than WARREN BUFFET.
He's the second richest man in the world and expels more business knowledge taking a shit than Paul Ryan delivers in a year.
::)
-
Surprise, surprise, ol' Uncle Warren is a giant tax cheat. Who didn't see that coming?
This guy has made a career out of tax dodging and now he has the gall to demand that others pay more (while he dumps all his money into charities because he KNOWS the govt. will just waste it). Sounds like someone in the twilight of their life trying to secure their legacy.
thats exactly what he'd doing. and it's working. I am a CPA and tax practitioner and it's amazing the shit i see on the news regarding taxes that is just flat out wrong. The average American doesn't understand what they're reading and are lied to on a continuous basis by biased reporters whose sole job it is to spoon feed mindless lemmings what they want to hear. disgusting.
-
33,
If Buffet a credible person when it comes to economic policy.
Yes or no?
he may be. i don't know. i do know that he obviously doesn't understand tax. just because someone is wealthy doesn't mean that they know how to fix our current deficit.
-
::)
Now you're just dialing it in.
-
thats exactly what he'd doing. and it's working. I am a CPA and tax practitioner and it's amazing the shit i see on the news regarding taxes that is just flat out wrong. The average American doesn't understand what they're reading and are lied to on a continuous basis by biased reporters whose sole job it is to spoon feed mindless lemmings what they want to hear. disgusting.
Thank you. I've been saying the same thing. It's alarming how much blatant misinformation the media lets Obama get away with.
-
thats exactly what he'd doing. and it's working. I am a CPA and tax practitioner and it's amazing the shit i see on the news regarding taxes that is just flat out wrong. The average American doesn't understand what they're reading and are lied to on a continuous basis by biased reporters whose sole job it is to spoon feed mindless lemmings what they want to hear. disgusting.
Well said. This is just class warfare and political posturing by Obama. He knows it's going to get shot down but he doesn't care. It's all about securing another 4 years.
Everyone should be paying the same rate. We're all American citizens and if I'm not mistaken, we're all supposed to be equal. Since when did equality entail paying more than someone else? ::)
-
33,
If Buffet a credible person when it comes to economic policy.
Yes or no?
Yes. Why wouldn't he be? He has proved that he can run an extremely profitable holding company, evidenced by Berkshire Hathaway's 20% annual return in the past 40 years. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkshire_Hathaway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkshire_Hathaway)) Buffet is fiscally conservative and frugal (he still lives in the Omaha home that he bought for $31,500 back in the 50's or 60's - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Buffett)) and while he knows how to make money, he isn't afraid to give money to others in need. (Buffet has pledged to give away the majority of his wealth and has already committed a big chunk of his billions to charity.) Buffet is old enough to have seen the years back when the top tax rate was 50%, and he still made great money after paying his taxes.
There is no reason for our country to have a wealth disparity equal to Rwanda and other 3rd world countries. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/18/bronx-manhattan-us-wealth-divide (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/18/bronx-manhattan-us-wealth-divide)) When the top 400 richest Americans have the same amount of wealth as the bottom 50% of all Americans, there is something wrong.
I don't think we need to redistribute wealth from the top to the bottom, but if that top tier is benefiting the most from the prosperity, health and stability of American society, they need to pay a commensurate share of taxes to keep it that way. Buffet knows that and is just as intelligent and capable of commenting on economic policy as the idiots in our government that have been trying to do it for the past decade.
-
Well said. This is just class warfare and political posturing by Obama. He knows it's going to get shot down but he doesn't care. It's all about securing another 4 years.
Everyone should be paying the same rate. We're all American citizens and if I'm not mistaken, we're all supposed to be equal. Since when did equality entail paying more than someone else? ::)
OK. Let's make it equal. The super-rich pay what their secretaries do.
Or is that class warfare?
-
OK. Let's make it equal. The super-rich pay what their secretaries do.
Or is that class warfare?
the problem is you're flat out wrong that the super rich pay less than their secretaries. The super rich pay a larger majority of their tax on investment income. This IS taxed at a lower rate. However the majority of investment income is coming in the form of capital gains and dividends. These dividends are taxed once at the corporate level (35%), and then taxed again at the shareholder level (15%). This is the part of tax that Mr. Buffett doesn't understand. Just because he's super rich doesn't mean he knows anything about taxes. He doesn't prepare his own tax returns you guys. Now some writer with an agenda is misleading you to believe something that is absolutely not true and now you are diseminating this bullshit information to more people on this board. and I don't expect the average person to understand our tax code. But let's leave articles like this to CPA's or IRS agents. Not young liberal writers who don't know their ass from the IRC. like i said before. disgusting.
-
i'd love him as a client though. As his tax preparer I could do no wrong. Anything I screw up, I can just tell him that i thought he wanted to forgo the deduction so that he could help the country. :)
-
the problem is you're flat out wrong that the super rich pay less than their secretaries. The super rich pay a larger majority of their tax on investment income. This IS taxed at a lower rate. However the majority of investment income is coming in the form of capital gains and dividends. These dividends are taxed once at the corporate level (35%), and then taxed again at the shareholder level (15%). This is the part of tax that Mr. Buffett doesn't understand. Just because he's super rich doesn't mean he knows anything about taxes. He doesn't prepare his own tax returns you guys. Now some writer with an agenda is misleading you to believe something that is absolutely not true and now you are diseminating this bullshit information to more people on this board. and I don't expect the average person to understand our tax code. But let's leave articles like this to CPA's or IRS agents. Not young liberal writers who don't know their ass from the IRC. like i said before. disgusting.
Do you consider this article factually inaccurate then?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/capital-gains-tax-rates-benefiting-wealthy-are-protected-by-both-parties/2011/09/06/gIQAdJmSLK_story.html
Steven Mufson is no spring chicken.
Most Americans depend on wages and salaries for their income, which is subject to a graduated tax so the big earners pay higher percentages. The capital gains tax turns that idea on its head, capping the rate at 15 percent for long-term investments. As a result, anyone making more than $34,500 a year in wages and salary is taxed at a higher rate than a billionaire is taxed on untold millions in capital gains.
-
Do you consider this article factually inaccurate then?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/capital-gains-tax-rates-benefiting-wealthy-are-protected-by-both-parties/2011/09/06/gIQAdJmSLK_story.html
Steven Mufson is no spring chicken.
Most Americans depend on wages and salaries for their income, which is subject to a graduated tax so the big earners pay higher percentages. The capital gains tax turns that idea on its head, capping the rate at 15 percent for long-term investments. As a result, anyone making more than $34,500 a year in wages and salary is taxed at a higher rate than a billionaire is taxed on untold millions in capital gains.
and there you go again. taking a snippet of information and making a horribly misleading assumtion about it. Is there an advantage for capital gains for the wealthy? Yes there is. Is this their entire income? No. Why is the author conveniently leaving out a discussion on the dividends these same people receive? Why? I'll tell you why. Because then the term "double tax" would have to be discussed. And thats when he would lose his liberal readers like yourself. You don't wanna hear that shit.
With regards to raising the rates on capital gains, this is an issue that is tossed around every 4 years. You act like this is a new issue. We are in a recession. Is this the time to give people less incentive to invest in our companies? In my opinion, No.
And you can post as many articles as you want but you're still being lied to. The wealthy pay more tax than the middle class and the poor. Period. WE HAVE A PROGRESSIVE TAX SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY. The top 10% pay close to 60% of the tax bill every year for this country. As much as you don't want to believe it thats the truth. Sorry. The sad fact is that you don't want to hear the truth. And there are plenty of young writers that are ready, willing, and able to give you exactly what you want to hear. disgusting.
-
the worst part of this whole discussion is that the tax system is not our problem. We can't raise the rates high enough to keep up with our spending. Some of you are simply fighting the wrong battle.
-
What does Michelle say about this?
-
AP fact check: Secretaries don’t pay more taxes than their bosses (Paging Warren Buffet)
Hotair ^ | 09/19/2011 | Ed Morrisey
Let's hope that Warren Buffet is better at managing funds than he is at tax policy. After Buffett complained that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does, Barack Obama decided to call his new class-warfare taxes “the Buffett Rule” and emphasize that he wants to make taxes more “fair.” But was Buffett right? According to an AP fact check — and just about every ounce of common sense that exists outside of the class-warfare fever swamps of the White House these days — not at all:
“Middle-class families shouldn’t pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires,” Obama said Monday. “That’s pretty straightforward. It’s hard to argue against that.”
The data tell a different story. On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.
There may be individual millionaires who pay taxes at rates lower than middle-income workers. In 2009, 1,470 households filed tax returns with incomes above $1 million yet paid no federal income tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service. That, however, was less than 1 percent of the nearly 237,000 returns with incomes above $1 million.
Even when talking rates rather than aggregate payments, the claims made by Buffett and Obama are nothing more than an urban legend:
This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes and payroll taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.
Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.
That has been true ever since the US went to a progressive income tax. It was true decades ago, it was true a few years ago, and it remains true today. Those with higher incomes pay more taxes at higher rates that those with lower incomes. So unless Buffett’s paying his secretary a million dollars a year, the notion that we’re burying secretaries in higher taxes while letting millionaires and billionaires off the hook is flat-out false.
Buffett should know better than to make that kind of claim without checking his facts first, but no one elected Buffett to be in charge of anything, either. The President of the United States has vast resources at his command to get the facts straight before speaking to the American people, especially before pushing a divisive and destructive policy like his tax plan with class-warfare rhetoric designed to gin up demand for government to start seizing more from the successful than they already do. Either Obama doesn’t bother to do his homework, or he doesn’t care whether he’s passing along myths rather than facts.
-
and there you go again. taking a snippet of information and making a horribly misleading assumtion about it. Is there an advantage for capital gains for the wealthy? Yes there is. Is this their entire income? No. Why is the author conveniently leaving out a discussion on the dividends these same people receive? Why? I'll tell you why. Because then the term "double tax" would have to be discussed. And thats when he would lose his liberal readers like yourself. You don't wanna hear that shit.
With regards to raising the rates on capital gains, this is an issue that is tossed around every 4 years. You act like this is a new issue. We are in a recession. Is this the time to give people less incentive to invest in our companies? In my opinion, No.
And you can post as many articles as you want but you're still being lied to. The wealthy pay more tax than the middle class and the poor. Period. WE HAVE A PROGRESSIVE TAX SYSTEM IN THIS COUNTRY. The top 10% pay close to 60% of the tax bill every year for this country. As much as you don't want to believe it thats the truth. Sorry. The sad fact is that you don't want to hear the truth. And there are plenty of young writers that are ready, willing, and able to give you exactly what you want to hear. disgusting.
Thank you posting your comments on this subject bears. This issue just drives me crazy. I wish you could get on the news show circuit and tell the truth about Obama's tax lies.
-
Buffett’s math is a bit off
NEW YORK POST ^ | September 20, 2011 | S.A. MILLER
WASHINGTON -- Billionaire investor Warren Buffett isn’t as undertaxed as he and President Obama seem to think.
***
Buffett actually was taxed twice on his investment income.
First, Buffett had to make the money he invested. Those earnings were taxed as corporate income, at about a 35-percent rate.
Then, Uncle Sam took another cut when Buffett invested the money and earned a profit. That’s when Buffett paid the 15 percent capital-gains tax rate.
All told, after combining corporate taxes and capital gains taxes, Buffett forked over about 45 percent of his earnings.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Thank you posting your comments on this subject bears. This issue just drives me crazy. I wish you could get on the news show circuit and tell the truth about Obama's tax lies.
His fact checkers aren't doing him any favors. That Buffett comment should be getting them fired. They're blatantly trying to spread the lie that we don't have a progressive tax system. It's just plain infuriating. There are thousands of people out there who think that the poor pay more income tax than the rich. It nothing short of insanity. And how the FUCKING PRESIDENT OF THE FUCKING UNITED FUCKING STATES OF FUCKING AMERICA thinks that this is true just makes me want to puke.
-
His fact checkers aren't doing him any favors. That Buffett comment should be getting them fired. They're blatantly trying to spread the lie that we don't have a progressive tax system. It's just plain infuriating. There are thousands of people out there who think that the poor pay more income tax than the rich. It nothing short of insanity. And how the FUCKING PRESIDENT OF THE FUCKING UNITED FUCKING STATES OF FUCKING AMERICA thinks that this is true just makes me want to puke.
I feel exactly the same way. Infuriating.
-
Buffett’s math is a bit off
NEW YORK POST ^ | September 20, 2011 | S.A. MILLER
WASHINGTON -- Billionaire investor Warren Buffett isn’t as undertaxed as he and President Obama seem to think.
***
Buffett actually was taxed twice on his investment income.
First, Buffett had to make the money he invested. Those earnings were taxed as corporate income, at about a 35-percent rate.
Then, Uncle Sam took another cut when Buffett invested the money and earned a profit. That’s when Buffett paid the 15 percent capital-gains tax rate.
All told, after combining corporate taxes and capital gains taxes, Buffett forked over about 45 percent of his earnings.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
let's put our country's tax policy in the hands of someone who doesn't know even look at his own tax returns and has no idea what is on them. Again. Just because he's a brilliant man who makes a lot of money does not mean he knows the first thing about tax policy.
-
Republicans Cry "Class Warfare" All the Way to the Bank
It's been a tough week for Republicans, and they are crying. President Obama has decided to get tough and go after millionaires, nailing them to the financial cross by having them pay taxes at the rate that everyone else has to. And what exactly are the Republicans crying? "Class Warfare!" The term is being wailed from every Sunday morning television station to every press conference. Stick a microphone in front of a Republican and you'll hear the term accompanied by the tears of outrage that job creation will come to a halt under the grinding oppression of over taxation.
For anyone following political rhetoric, this cry from Republicans is nothing new. George Herbert Walker Bush used it in 1990 when he spoke at the Cowboy Hall of Fame, earning his spurs as a defender of the working-class man when he decried what he called this "class warfare garbage" being slung at high noon by them darned, dandified Democrats. Coincidentally, he was speaking about a stalled budget in which conservatives wouldn't raise taxes and progressives wanted to preserve social programs.
It is ironic that Republicans, who always deny that class exists in the US ("We're all middle-class, right?), should cry "class warfare" in every election. If you don't believe in class -- how could there be class warfare?
More - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lennard-davis/republicans-cry-class-war_b_968757.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lennard-davis/republicans-cry-class-war_b_968757.html)
-
Buffets investment record puts Schiff to shame.
-
Buffett, the Blowhard
www.Townhall.com ^ | September 21, 2011 | Jeff Carter
Much is being made of Warren Buffett and the Obama “Buffett Tax” proposal. Buffett said he pays his taxes at a lower marginal rate than his secretary. Roughly half. His secretary supposedly pays 33%, and Warren pays close to 18%.
That means that Mr. Buffett’s secretary makes at least $174,400, and no more than $379,150. I don’t want to get bogged down in all that; and if I were Buffett’s secretary I suppose I would rather be paid in stock like Ray Kroc did for his secretary. The secretary would be money ahead, and when they soldthe stock she'd pay only long term capital gains of 15%, just like her boss.
I think though now is a good time to have a philosophical debate about capital and taxes.
What is a tax after all? It’s what we voluntarily pay the government. If a majority of us simply stopped paying taxes, or avoided most of them like they do in Europe, our government would go broke faster. But, Americans assume they have a legal contract with the government to “provide for the general welfare”, so most of us don’t mind paying some taxes. Truth be told, 47% of Americans paid no income tax last year except what was deducted from their paycheck. Many of them got that back when they filed a tax return. From the citizens perspective, a tax is an amount of income they are willing to part with to keep a civilized society.
On the other hand, what is government’s perspective on taxes? REVENUE. Plain and simple. It’s as folksy as I can put it since we are talking about a Buffett tax.
The government needs revenue to operate. Without it, it goes bankrupt and defaults.
Economically, no matter what, the nature of the firm or the nature of government is to try and expand. In the private sector a firm has incentive to expand because of profits. The government's incentive to expand isn’t based on profit at all. It’s based on power. The more it can expand, the more power it has. The more power government has, the less freedom individuals have. Government always will want more revenue.
There are better ways to give the government what it wants, more revenue, and give the people what they want, more freedom and less tax burden.
Unfortunately we have followed an economic path of trying to stimulate demand. Stimulating demand is stupid. It’s a money loser. Instead, what you have to do is let private industry create supply. Then demand will be created to access that supply.
Let me give you and example. Suppose an individual owns a small business. They file taxes at the individual rate, because it’s cheaper for them to operate their business as an individual rather than incorporate and file as a corporation. Today assume that the business files returns at 35%, same as the corporate rate.
What would the business do if the government eliminated all deductions and dropped the marginal rate to 15%?
What would happen to revenue? Changing the marginal rate will change the supply line for the small business. This will have an effect on demand, theoretically increasing it.
If you say that the company will pay less in taxes, you are incorrect. They will pay less in taxes based on their past performance. Even if you redid the accounting to reflect the changes, the company would still pay less. But, they were making business decisions based on the old tax law, not the new one. Change the tax laws you change the internal cost/benefit decisions that companies make. If they expand enough, they will wind up paying more dollars in taxes than they did previously, even though they do it at a lower rate. The key is they will be keeping more of their total income.
By lowering the marginal tax rate, companies will have incentive to expand. When they expand, they become more productive. More production equals higher revenues, and will more than make up for the drop in marginal rates.
At the same time that we lower rates, we need to trim the size of government. In the short run, the government will receive some windfall profits from lower marginal rates and from the economic boomlet that follows. However, that cannot go on forever.
The size and scope of government must be cut at the same time that marginal rates are cut. That means more freedom for the constituents, and returns government to its rightful place as simply a background manager of a civil society-not a behemoth that tries to force society where it wants society to go.
Raising rates is a disincentive to invest. Lowering rates is incentive to expand. It’s as simple as that.
-
Warren Buffett to host fundraiser for Obama in Chicago
President Barack Obama presents Warren Buffett with the 2010 Medal of Freedom in February. (Olivier Douliery/Abaca Press/MCT)
Reuters
11:29 a.m. CDT, September 21, 2011
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-warrent-buffett-to-host-fundraiser-for-obama-in-chicago-20110921,0,2294.story
Billionaire U.S. investor Warren Buffett will help raise money for President Barack Obama's re-election effort at a $35,800-a-ticket fundraiser next month in Chicago, an Obama campaign official said on Wednesday.
Buffett will attend the Oct. 27 event at a private home on Chicago's North Shore that is expected to include major donors to Obama's 2008 presidential run. The Democratic president, who is not expected to attend, is running for re-election in 2012.
Buffett, the legendary chairman of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., has landed in the center of a growing political battle over Obama's proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy by inspiring the so-called "Buffett Rule."
Buffett wrote a column for The New York Times in August saying rich people like him often pay less in taxes than those who work for them because of loopholes in the tax code, and can afford to pay more.
Obama cited Buffett on Monday in proposing a minimum tax rate for people earning more than $1 million a year. Republicans have condemned the plan as class warfare.
-
A Lousy Way to Soak the Rich: Obama Proposes Capital Gains Rate Hike to 25%, 28%, or 39.6%
ATR ^ | 2011-09-19 | Ryan Ellis
Posted on Thursday, September 22, 2011 12:00:16 PM by 92nina
President Obama today called on raising the capital gains tax rate: “…Explain why somebody who’s making $50 million a year in the financial markets should be paying 15 percent on their taxes, when a teacher making $50,000 a year is paying more than that — paying a higher rate.”
25% capital gains tax rate? Under one interpretation, President Obama is calling for the marginal tax rate on capital gains to be the same as the marginal tax rate on someone earning $50,000 per year. This would imply a 25% capital gains tax
28% capital gains tax rate? According to theladders.com, a Fortune 500 CEO’s executive assistant commands a starting salary of about $100,000. The marginal tax rate on this salary level is 28%. So, President Obama might be calling for the capital gains tax rate to get back to its pre-1997 level of 28%
39.6% capital gains tax rate? President Obama laid out the principal that capital gains should not be taxed any lower than any other tax rate. If Warren Buffett’s secretary gets a big raise that puts her in a higher tax bracket, President Obama and Mr. Buffett would have the same complaint. If President Obama means that he wants to tax capital gains as ordinary income (as seems most likely), he would have to raise the rate all the way to 39.6 percent, the level it will be in 2013 and which he has said is the best top rate.
President Obama has already raised the capital gains tax rate. President Obama has endorsed a 20% capital gains marginal rate in his budget. In addition, Obamacare contains a 3.8% “surtax” on capital gains and other investments starting in 2014...
Read more: http://www.atr.org/lousy-way-soak-rich-obama-proposes-a6462#ixzz1YhH1LDWE
(Excerpt) Read more at atr.org ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disgusting!!!!!
rot in hell obama!
-
Buffett to headline blockbuster Obama Chicago fundraiser
Chicago Business ^ | Steven R. Strahler
Buffett to headline blockbuster Obama Chicago fundraiser
By: Steven R. Strahler September 21, 2011
(Crain's) — Billionaire investor Warren Buffett is coming to Chicago to help raise money for President Barack Obama's re-election campaign at a $35,800-per-ticket fundraiser next month at the North Shore home of investment banker Byron Trott, according to a draft invitation.
The Oct. 27 event will be co-hosted by James Crown, Penny Pritzker, John Rogers Jr. and other major local donors who fueled Mr. Obama's first presidential campaign and are lining up to back him again. Mr. Obama is not expected to attend, according to Mr. Rogers, chairman of Ariel Investments LLC. Neither the Obama campaign nor Mr. Trott's spokeswoman had any immediate comment.
Mr. Buffett is doing the same honors for the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee later this month in New York, where he is the draw for a reception and dinner with tickets ranging from $10,000 to $35,800. Each event is expected to be moderated by Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago law professor and former chairman of the White House's Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama administration.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagobusiness.com ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Whats the problem? If he wants to pay more taxes its up to him its his money
-
Whats the problem? If he wants to pay more taxes its up to him its his money
??? Wondering if you did read this thread?
Also, for the rest of the "rich" does your above statement still apply in that it's their money?
-
??? Wondering if you did read this thread?
Also, for the rest of the "rich" does your above statement still apply in that it's their money?
Of course its their money who else should it belong to?
-
Of course its their money who else should it belong to?
According to Elizaberth Warren - everyone in our collectivist commune.
-
We could argue back and forth the fairness in some people having so much and others so little
But to the answer regarding who's money it is you cant argue that it belongs to the people who earned/made them
-
Buffett lives in a modest home in Omaha.....but his house in California is another story.
I admire the man big time.....but he is tighter than 3 coats of paint.
He doesn't lease or even own a plane.....he uses his good friend Walter Scott's plane.
He is very good at what he does.....maybe the best.....but he is a bit of a hypocrite.
-
Buffett lives in a modest home in Omaha.....but his house in California is another story.
I admire the man big time.....but he is tighter than 3 coats of paint.
He doesn't lease or even own a plane.....he uses his good friend Walter Scott's plane.
He is very good at what he does.....maybe the best.....but he is a bit of a hypocrite.
agreed on all things except that "he is a bit of a hypocrite", he is a big hypocrite
-
Mayor Bloomberg slams Warren Buffett's tax claims; 'The Buffett thing is just theatrics'
DAILY NEWS ^ | September 25th 2011 | Reuven Blau
Posted on September 25, 2011 11:41:53 PM EDT by george76
Mayor Bloomberg Sunday slammed billionaire investor Warren Buffett's call for higher taxes on the super-rich, dismissing it as political theater.
"The Buffett thing is just theatrics," Hizzoner said speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press."
In August, Buffett - known as "The Oracle from Omaha" - said he forked over a little less than $7 million in taxes last year, which added up to roughly 17% of his income.
That percentage was lower than the secretaries in his office, he pointed out.
Bloomberg said Buffett's use of the figures was a bit of a smoke and mirrors game.
"If Warren Buffett made his money from ordinary income rather than capital gains his tax rate would be a lot higher than his secretaries. And in fact a very small percentage of people in this country pay a big chunk of the taxes," the billionaire mayor argued.
A following Associated Press review revealed that millionaires on average pay 29.1% of their income in taxes.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
-
'Buffett Tax' Based On Fallacy That Rich Don't Pay Fair Share
IBD Editorial ^ | September 26, 2011 | RALPH R. REILAND
'Middle-class families shouldn't pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires," repeatedly proclaims President Obama, arguing for his proposed $1.5 trillion tax increase over the next 10 years. "That's pretty straightforward. It's hard to argue against that."
In fact, Mr. Obama's statement is anything but straightforward and not hard to argue against.
Seeking to reverse his declining poll numbers, especially among his increasingly disillusioned base, Obama is attempting to give the impression that America's millionaires and billionaires are paying lower taxes than their secretaries.
IRS data for 2008, however, the latest year for which the numbers are available, show that those who earned more than $1 million in adjusted gross income paid an average federal income tax rate of 23.3%.
For those earning $100,000 to $200,000 in 2008, the average federal income tax rate paid was just about half as much, 12.7%.
For those with adjusted gross incomes from $30,000 to $50,000 — a millionaire's secretary, for instance — the average federal income tax rate paid was 7.2%, less than a third of the rate paid by those earning $1 million and over.
Obama is echoing a recent column in the New York Times by billionaire Warren Buffett in which wrote that the federal income tax rate he paid was lower than the rate paid by employees in his office.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
-
http://online.wsj.com/articles/warren-buffett-to-help-finance-burger-kings-takeover-of-tim-hortons-1409012196
unreal but typical for buffett
-
http://online.wsj.com/articles/warren-buffett-to-help-finance-burger-kings-takeover-of-tim-hortons-1409012196
unreal but typical for buffett
HEHEHEEH!
Cue (my bad) the liberal dolts to respond with this comment: "Corporations are not people!"
-
HEHEHEEH!
Que the liberal dolts to respond with this comment: "Corporations are not people!"
Yo, ESL-dude, it's "cue". No such thing as "que", I don't think.
-
Que pasa?
-
YoHey, ESL dude, it's "cue". There is no such thing as "que", I don't thinkbelieve.
Fixed.
You are correct. You never think.
-
I feel for you, bro.
Not saying that to be mean, either.
Happens to everyone. Some more than others, but it happens to everyone.
lol
-
Fixed.
You are correct. You never think.
Sometimes I don't, lol.
No worries, though. At least you didn't write "queue".
(And, honestly, for being a 2nd language, your English is super good.)
-
the whole Warren Buffett interview was very simple. it's someone trying to paint the picture that a very odd tax return is the norm all the while knowing that the reader for whom the author is writing doesn't understand tax. that's why so many authors throw the term "tax loophole" around without actually knowing what it means. it's pandering to a base who patronizes the author for the sole purpose of gathering ammunition, not gathering information for the purpose of making an informed decision. that's US politics in a nutshell. very sad. very disturbing.
-
the problem is you're flat out wrong that the super rich pay less than their secretaries. The super rich pay a larger majority of their tax on investment income. This IS taxed at a lower rate. However the majority of investment income is coming in the form of capital gains and dividends. These dividends are taxed once at the corporate level (35%), and then taxed again at the shareholder level (15%). This is the part of tax that Mr. Buffett doesn't understand. Just because he's super rich doesn't mean he knows anything about taxes. He doesn't prepare his own tax returns you guys. Now some writer with an agenda is misleading you to believe something that is absolutely not true and now you are diseminating this bullshit information to more people on this board. and I don't expect the average person to understand our tax code. But let's leave articles like this to CPA's or IRS agents. Not young liberal writers who don't know their ass from the IRC. like i said before. disgusting.
Buffett understands taxes perfectly - he's just being disingenuous. He's the chairman and CEO of one of the world's largest and most profitable companies, and he's arguably the best investor ever. 20% over a half a century with minimal volatility, Ivy League Econ / Finance Masters Degree, the whole nine yards.
That guy is an incredible genius - he knows more about money, finance, investing, and even taxes than just about anyone, and can compute compound interest in his head. He claims to do his own taxes, which may or may not actually be true. But he knows what he's saying and what he actually can do.