Quantcast

"Obama's Dividend Assault - A plan to triple the tax rate would hurt all shareholders" ALL? --- I know MANY shareholders who do not qualify for Obama & company's idea of "rich"...Is Obama really out to preserve UN-rich "middle"?

Howler 2012/02/22 15:43:18
You!
Add Photos & Videos

"Seldom has there been a clearer example of a policy that is supposed to soak the rich but will drench almost all American families."


Mr. Obama is proposing to raise the dividend tax rate to the higher personal income tax rate of 39.6% that will kick in next year. Add in the planned phase-out of deductions and exemptions, and the rate hits 41%. Then add the 3.8% investment tax surcharge in ObamaCare, and the new dividend tax rate in 2013 would be 44.8%—nearly three times today's 15% rate.

Keep in mind that dividends are paid to shareholders only after the corporation pays taxes on its profits. So assuming a maximum 35% corporate tax rate and a 44.8% dividend tax, the total tax on corporate earnings passed through as dividends would be 64.1%.







Read More: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529702048...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • HOMBRE 2012/02/22 15:49:19
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    HOMBRE
    +6
    Many retired people use the dividends as a supplementary pay for their life style so they can afford their medicines and food on the table. Obama figures stick a knife in them they are done.This is a total screw over for people that did the right thing growing up and planing a retirement

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • commissioner 2012/03/17 05:23:04
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS NOT a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class...
    commissioner
    What a phony article. Once again the wealthy, who derive much more benefit from the 15% capital gains tax rate, are working hard to convince you they are on your side.


    since it would appear that the 'hike' for dividends would only apply to those with taxable income of over $100,000 most of us will not be affected. Certainly my grandmother never had that kind of money, nor do I expect that I will. Does no one here remember when qualified dividends didn't exist for anyone? It was not THAT long ago. I worked (and continue to work) a lot harder for the money that is taxed at my 'ordinary' rate than I ever did for the money that is the result of my investments. The money I have in ordinary CD's is taxed at my regular rate as are un-qualified dividends. Yes, it would be a minor hardship to pay taxes on those dividends, but I did it before and survived. But it appears to be money that our Country needs to survive, so why are we so reluctant to support the country that has been so good to us?

    It really wasn't that long ago that qualified dividends didn't exist and everyone paid tax at their normal rate on all dividends, just like on ordinary interest and distributions from pension plans as well at their earned income. I think the plan to remove that tax break for wea...
    What a phony article. Once again the wealthy, who derive much more benefit from the 15% capital gains tax rate, are working hard to convince you they are on your side.


    since it would appear that the 'hike' for dividends would only apply to those with taxable income of over $100,000 most of us will not be affected. Certainly my grandmother never had that kind of money, nor do I expect that I will. Does no one here remember when qualified dividends didn't exist for anyone? It was not THAT long ago. I worked (and continue to work) a lot harder for the money that is taxed at my 'ordinary' rate than I ever did for the money that is the result of my investments. The money I have in ordinary CD's is taxed at my regular rate as are un-qualified dividends. Yes, it would be a minor hardship to pay taxes on those dividends, but I did it before and survived. But it appears to be money that our Country needs to survive, so why are we so reluctant to support the country that has been so good to us?

    It really wasn't that long ago that qualified dividends didn't exist and everyone paid tax at their normal rate on all dividends, just like on ordinary interest and distributions from pension plans as well at their earned income. I think the plan to remove that tax break for wealthier people is not a bad idea. I work a lot harder for my 'earned' income than I do for my 'unearned' income (and I worked just as hard for the money I saved in my retirement plan). Nobody wants to give me a break on that. Why should I get a break because I chose to invest it in the stock market instead of in a CD?
    (more)
  • Howler commiss... 2012/03/17 15:23:51
    Howler
    Disagree as you wish, since it is obvious you are a left-leaner from as I can see from your other answers in your sodafeed.

    But, I don't see the article as phony just because you disagree with it.


    I especially noticed the line -
    "But it appears to be money that our Country needs to survive, so why are we so reluctant to support the country that has been so good to us?"

    Oh, please...needs to survive?

    More like needs to continue the Obama left-wing, progressive visionary spending spree.

    We won't ever agree folks like you and I.

    And we will most likely continue to use the words "phony" for those issues and things that do not appear to play to our political or ideological side.
  • commiss... Howler 2012/03/17 17:40:15
    commissioner
    I disagree with the GOP's bias stance because they are as usual wrong. And you ramble like a brain-dead canary all you'd like. I am sure many of the people who are complaining about the tax on dividends are benefiting from the dividend tax rules. F Far too many people do not have any understanding of taxes and are happy to accept anything the news media puts out. It makes more sense to lower the income tax rates for average Americans and raise the capital gains tax rates for the wealthy; then maybe we can get back to a meritocracy where people are rewarded for their hard work rather than for lazy politicking of congress for special tax rates for the wealthy. This country survived just fine for decades with much higher income and capital gains tax rates for the wealthy.
  • Howler commiss... 2012/03/17 17:51:32 (edited)
    Howler
    A big problem with your comment is that the Dems and the left-leaning tend to want to change what "average" or "middle" actually describes regarding an American.

    More problems, but that is one.

    Here is another --

    You say - "I disagree with the GOP's bias stance because they are as usual wrong. And you ramble like a brain-dead canary all you'd like."

    As usual, cannot have a discussion with a left-winger without that kind of talk.

    Too bad...Discussion done.

    You are welcome to comment to your heart's content in the comment boxes you have already started...But, that is it.
  • tdterry1999 2012/02/24 19:14:20
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    tdterry1999
    +1
    Stupid Obama
  • BUCKY-- SKYNYRD 2012/02/24 05:54:47
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    BUCKY-- SKYNYRD
    +1
    don't forget all the bond holders that got screwed when the obama administrator took over GM, Chrysler...

    obama is a total ass whip, even Russia has a flat tax
  • H H 2012/02/23 02:53:55
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    H H
    +1
    Obama has consistently said one thing and done another. He is true to his Marxist agenda of destroying America, esp. white America.
  • Dogzebra~PWCM~JLA 2012/02/22 20:29:09
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Dogzebra~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    Fee, Tax, Fine, whatever! Barry's the Smoke & Mirrors President. He proposes a little cut here, then he sticks it in yer rear. What else is new?

    t5ft
  • Rore73 2012/02/22 19:39:49
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Rore73
    +1
    If Obama gets any more of our money, regardless of what he calls it, it's either by tax increases, or stolen, and there's very little difference between the two!
  • Tin Man 2012/02/22 18:25:49
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Tin Man
    +1
    Rich, middle class and poor, this is just one example of the many layers of taxes Obama would have our countrymen crippled by. It is an inevitable result of his policies.
  • JoeBlo 2012/02/22 17:57:12
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    JoeBlo
    +1
    There are many Wal-Mart employees who have opted into the stock purchase plans the company offers. Other companies offer the same.
    This will affect people from all income levels and they will simply cash-out which only lowers the value of the stock's worth per share.

    How is this a good thing?
  • earl 2012/02/22 17:36:58
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    earl
    +2
    What others see plainly, we often are blind to or just ignore.

    When I was about 9 years old, I remember asking my dad about Castro. I asked, "Is Castro a good guy or bad?"

    Dad said...he couldn't tell!! This was about 1955. We were living in Louisiana at the time. Dad was in the Army and stationed there.

    Cuba was fairly close and in the news a lot. The Cubans were asking the same question! Ike was president.

    This past July 4th, we had the pleasure of sharing a summer barbecue with a refugee from Cuba . Our dinner conversation was starkly different from most.

    This refugee came to the United States as a young boy in the early 1960's. His family was more fortunate than most, as they were able to bring a suitcase and $100 when they fled Castro's newly formed revolutionary paradise.

    Our dinner consisted of all-American fare: hamburgers, potato salad, fresh ears of sweet corn and watermelon. This is a menu shared with family and friends nationwide...while celebrating the birth of our beloved America ...on the Fourth of July.

    We began with a simple discussion about our country, and the direction it has taken since Barack Obama came to power. We shared the usual complaints about the sour economy and liberal social engineering emanating from the rulers in Washington .

    ...






















    What others see plainly, we often are blind to or just ignore.

    When I was about 9 years old, I remember asking my dad about Castro. I asked, "Is Castro a good guy or bad?"

    Dad said...he couldn't tell!! This was about 1955. We were living in Louisiana at the time. Dad was in the Army and stationed there.

    Cuba was fairly close and in the news a lot. The Cubans were asking the same question! Ike was president.

    This past July 4th, we had the pleasure of sharing a summer barbecue with a refugee from Cuba . Our dinner conversation was starkly different from most.

    This refugee came to the United States as a young boy in the early 1960's. His family was more fortunate than most, as they were able to bring a suitcase and $100 when they fled Castro's newly formed revolutionary paradise.

    Our dinner consisted of all-American fare: hamburgers, potato salad, fresh ears of sweet corn and watermelon. This is a menu shared with family and friends nationwide...while celebrating the birth of our beloved America ...on the Fourth of July.

    We began with a simple discussion about our country, and the direction it has taken since Barack Obama came to power. We shared the usual complaints about the sour economy and liberal social engineering emanating from the rulers in Washington .

    But then he said it. The sentence flowed naturally from our refugee guest. I assume it was unplanned. But it carried the weight of a freight train. "You know when Castro took power, none of us knew he was a Communist."

    We sat stunned. He continued, "Yes, we all thought he was a patriot, a nationalist. Before the revolution, he didn't sound like a radical."

    The comparison at this point was easy, and I interjected, "You mean just like Barack Obama?"

    He responded; "Yes, just like Barack Obama." He continued, "We were all shocked as the government just continued to grab more power. First they said the revolution is over, so please turn in your guns. We all complied."

    I also remember my uncle saying; “ Castro will only nationalize some of the big industries. He will never come and take our family hardware store!!” But that is exactly what happened. Castro started with the sugar mills and the large industries, but they eventually came and knocked on the door of our family hardware store. My family had run this store for generations. They said we now own the hardware store, you work for us. And that four-bedroom home you own...it is now our property, too. You have to move yourself and the five children into those two rooms of the house, because others are moving in here
    with you."

    The lesson learned from this discussion is a lesson most Americans refuse to hear. Political leaders can lie about their agenda and, once in office, they can take totally unexpected turns.

    If you had asked us three years ago if we thought General Motors or Chrysler would be nationalized, we would have never believed it. We could never contemplate a country where the rule of law, the most fundamental building block of a justice society...would be evaporating, just like it did in Castro's Cuba in the early 1960's.

    But the news of injustice keeps increasing; Black Panthers are not charged with wrong doing by the U.S. Department of Justice, because their crimes are against whites; the bond holders of GM are stripped of their assets, without being given due process by the government; car dealerships are closed without due process; governmental leaders are bribed in full daylight, only to have all investigation of the crimes stifled ... by the Attorney General; the U.S. borders are overrun with crime and illegal activity, and the leaders in D.C. act as if it is important to protect the lawbreakers, while the innocent are killed and overrun; when local communities attempt to enforce the law, they are ridiculed, and threatened as racists and bigots. They are sued by the very administration entrusted with enforcing the law .

    Without the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution is a sham!! Without the rule of law, our beloved America is swiftly becoming a country where only the well-connected and politically powerful will be safe. As an author recently and so eloquently explained in her most recent book... "a culture of corruption has replaced honest government" (Michelle Malkin) .

    The only way this problem will be fixed is by massive citizen action. All honest citizens that want to be treated equally must come together and demand that the favoritism, the bribes, the uneven enforcement of law end now!! And yes, it can happen if we all pull together.

    PLEASE SEND THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW!! And...may God save the United States of America ! *

    *...the very least you can do is forward this email. Six million plus Jews didn't believe it could happen in Germany either!!! If you're a Christian in these United States of America , you're probably next on the list. History bears that out. The real problem here is, the boy from Cuba did manage to make it to the U.S. Today he and we will not have any place to escape to...except death! And, for the most part...even though I'm forwarding this to you, probably less then 10 will even read it completely, let alone forward on to others. AS A COUNTRY, HAVE WE BECOME THIS COMPLACENT? WILL YOU JUST TURN YOUR BACK AND LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES? I HOPE NOT... YOU KNOW I DIDN'T, BECAUSE YOU'RE READING THIS, AND NOW I HOPE AND PRAY YOU DO FORWARD IT.
    (more)
  • tommyg - POTL- PWCM-JLA 2012/02/22 17:25:18
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    tommyg - POTL- PWCM-JLA
    +3
    How can it be anything else?

    He may get burned on this one. The retired won't be happy at all.
  • Mike 2012/02/22 17:21:38
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Mike
  • chgo 2012/02/22 17:16:00 (edited)
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS NOT a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class...
    chgo
    +1
    lol Will a plan to so-called "triple" the tax rate would hurt all shareholders? No. Only a of TOTAL of 12.2% of the bottom 90 percent of Americans have investment assets. However, a 49.7% of TOTAL investment assets is in the top 1 percent and about 38.1% of total TOTAL investment assets is in the Next 9 percent. Income inequality in the US is a problem.

    In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.
    the average income of the top 400 tripled during the Clinton Administration and doubled during the first seven years of the Bush Administration. So by 2007, the top 400 averaged $344.8 million per person, up 31% from an average of $263.3 million just one year earlier.

    How are these huge gains possible for the top 400? It's due to cuts in the tax rates on capital gains and dividends, which were down to a mere 15% in 2007 thanks to the tax cuts proposed by the Bush Administration ...



    lol Will a plan to so-called "triple" the tax rate would hurt all shareholders? No. Only a of TOTAL of 12.2% of the bottom 90 percent of Americans have investment assets. However, a 49.7% of TOTAL investment assets is in the top 1 percent and about 38.1% of total TOTAL investment assets is in the Next 9 percent. Income inequality in the US is a problem.

    In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.
    the average income of the top 400 tripled during the Clinton Administration and doubled during the first seven years of the Bush Administration. So by 2007, the top 400 averaged $344.8 million per person, up 31% from an average of $263.3 million just one year earlier.

    How are these huge gains possible for the top 400? It's due to cuts in the tax rates on capital gains and dividends, which were down to a mere 15% in 2007 thanks to the tax cuts proposed by the Bush Administration and passed by Congress in 2003. Since almost 75% of the income for the top 400 comes from capital gains and dividends, it's not hard to see why tax cuts on income sources available to only a tiny percent of Americans mattered greatly for the high-earning few. Overall, the effective tax rate on high incomes fell by 7% during the Clinton presidency and 6% in the Bush era, so the top 400 had a tax rate of 20% or less in 2007, far lower than the marginal tax rate of 35% that the highest income earners (over $372,650) supposedly pay. It's also worth noting that only the first $106,800 of a person's income is taxed for Social Security purposes (as of 2010), so it would clearly be a boon to the Social Security Fund if everyone -- not just those making less than $106,800 -- paid the Social Security tax on their full incomes.



    Will a plan to so-called "triple" the tax rate would hurt all shareholders? No. And Too bad for them because Thanks to this do-nothing Congress, ALL the Bush tax cuts will expire January 2013.
    (more)
  • Howler chgo 2012/02/22 17:31:39 (edited)
    Howler
    +2
    So, which article is telling the truth?

    The one with no link from which you copy & pasted your material, or the one by the WSJ from which I copied mine and gave a link?
  • chgo Howler 2012/02/22 18:07:57
    chgo
    "So, which article is telling the truth?"

    Nope, nor do you have credible proof it does.

    "The one with no link from which you copy & pasted your material..."

    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorules...
  • Howler chgo 2012/02/22 18:24:24
    Howler
    I asked you - "So, which article is telling the truth?"

    You answer - "Nope, nor do you have credible proof it does. "

    Your answer doesn't even fit the style of the question, nor answer it.

    So, I ask again, WHICH article is telling the truth?...Yours?...Mine?...Nei... of them?

    If you pick yours, do you have credible evidence that it is?
  • chgo Howler 2012/02/22 19:11:21
    chgo
    Everything I've typed is pretty straight forward. I Start with the data and evidence and go forward from there- you however don't provide anything credible but conjecture, lies, and pandering. I use objective reality, you however don't. You still managed to remain blissfully data free, while I am not. you seem to not be able to prove what you are alleging with actual facts,Rather than produce evidence, they create story lines unsupported by facts. Keep on steadfastly ignoring all calls for proof.




    "If you pick yours, do you have credible evidence that it is?"

    Yes. How many times do I have to link this http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorules... before start reading what is in it?
  • Howler chgo 2012/02/22 19:46:44 (edited)
    Howler
    You still refuse to directly answer my question.

    You use the the words "objective reality" to infer that your copy & paste is something more than an opinion of the left-wing, Progressive, professor William Domhoff.

    I know about Domhoff...He is no one from whom to get "objective reality".

    But, if you opine otherwise, that is of course your prerogative.

    I simply posted a piece from the WSJ that practically tells how the tripling of the tax on dividends will be financially costly to a wide group of people.

    And it is easy to understand.

    You state I am posting lies...I have not been so rude to you.

    How do you know Prof Domhoff is honest in his writing - free from ideological bias?...I don't think you do know that.

    I gave you a chance, you didn't come through...Sorry.
  • JoeBlo chgo 2012/02/22 17:50:21 (edited)
    JoeBlo
    +3
    Do you even understand a bit of the word-salad you just copy-pasted with your own BS added at the beginning & end?
    You really should cite sources and at least give them credit.

    So,........ if one makes too much money or their pension will prohibit them from ever collecting Social Security.... WHY should they be required to pay a dime into the program?

    Why should the Federal govt. get a dime in inheritance taxes? Did the govt take the risks of building a business or purchasing real estate in an ever changing environment?

    What right does the govt have to rob 55% of one's lifetime accomplishments?
  • chgo JoeBlo 2012/02/22 18:28:03
    chgo
    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorules...

    A person's pension or 40lk has nothing to do with dividends, Sherlock.

    "...if one makes too much money or their pension will prohibit them from ever collecting Social Security..."

    what the hell are talking about? lol.

    "Why should the Federal govt. get a dime in inheritance taxes?"

    'cause it's the fair thing to do. It's not earned income. . You pay tax at the ordinary income rate when you make withdrawals from your 401k...even if you are 95 years old.
    Why not levy an inheritance tax too? Its just too bad we peasants can't get the 15% tax rate on the capital gains portion of our 401k withdrawals. instead we are taxed at 35 percent.I the taxes on 401K withdrawals is designed to screw us into leaving our money in "for the long run" so when the rich and powerful manipulate the markets, our 401K money is there for them to have their profit taking sessions.


    I fail to understand why investment income should be taxes at a lower rate than wages. You can make all the failed economic arguments you want, but there is something morally and econmically wrong with millionaires paying less than 15% taxes while my effective rate is 20% or higher as a school teacher. People who WORK for a living ought to pay less than people who INVEST for a living. Please don't te...



    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorules...

    A person's pension or 40lk has nothing to do with dividends, Sherlock.

    "...if one makes too much money or their pension will prohibit them from ever collecting Social Security..."

    what the hell are talking about? lol.

    "Why should the Federal govt. get a dime in inheritance taxes?"

    'cause it's the fair thing to do. It's not earned income. . You pay tax at the ordinary income rate when you make withdrawals from your 401k...even if you are 95 years old.
    Why not levy an inheritance tax too? Its just too bad we peasants can't get the 15% tax rate on the capital gains portion of our 401k withdrawals. instead we are taxed at 35 percent.I the taxes on 401K withdrawals is designed to screw us into leaving our money in "for the long run" so when the rich and powerful manipulate the markets, our 401K money is there for them to have their profit taking sessions.


    I fail to understand why investment income should be taxes at a lower rate than wages. You can make all the failed economic arguments you want, but there is something morally and econmically wrong with millionaires paying less than 15% taxes while my effective rate is 20% or higher as a school teacher. People who WORK for a living ought to pay less than people who INVEST for a living. Please don't tell me this is just an issue of "class envy." It is a MORAL issue, a PRACTICAL issue, and a FAIRNESS issue. Romney

    "What right does the govt have to 55% of one's lifetime accomplishments?"

    Citations? When you make up numbers out of thin air make sure you cite the lies, ok? I see NONE. yet you want to point out that I didn't cite my info.
    (more)
  • JoeBlo chgo 2012/02/22 19:49:08
    JoeBlo
    +1
    Well let's see.... do you comprehend what happens when a govt increases taxes on those who are providing the vast majority of the taxes collected?
    They take their businesses over-seas and those who make their profits through investments alone, move abroad (maintaining their residence here) and cease paying taxes in the U.S. period.

    Where do you expect to collect enough to pay the 70% of Federal dollars going out to various forms of social programs & welfare every year? You do understand that if the top contributors can keep their investments and merely change their address that every single one of those programs collapse ..... correct?

    How is their paying taxes to a foreign country instead of sending them to Uncle Sam going to benefit anyone? They don't care where they make their money, only that they will send their tax dollars to wherever they get the best deal.
    You think that Richard Branson is paying a dime in taxes here, yet makes a fortune from all the various Virgin companies that operate within the U.S.?

    How did we possibly survive as a nation before 1933? Must have been a lot of starving dead bodies lying in the streets and people just dropping like flies because they weren't receiving those gubmint checks. Funny, I can't find any of that in any history books. Ya know.......








    Well let's see.... do you comprehend what happens when a govt increases taxes on those who are providing the vast majority of the taxes collected?
    They take their businesses over-seas and those who make their profits through investments alone, move abroad (maintaining their residence here) and cease paying taxes in the U.S. period.

    Where do you expect to collect enough to pay the 70% of Federal dollars going out to various forms of social programs & welfare every year? You do understand that if the top contributors can keep their investments and merely change their address that every single one of those programs collapse ..... correct?

    How is their paying taxes to a foreign country instead of sending them to Uncle Sam going to benefit anyone? They don't care where they make their money, only that they will send their tax dollars to wherever they get the best deal.
    You think that Richard Branson is paying a dime in taxes here, yet makes a fortune from all the various Virgin companies that operate within the U.S.?

    How did we possibly survive as a nation before 1933? Must have been a lot of starving dead bodies lying in the streets and people just dropping like flies because they weren't receiving those gubmint checks. Funny, I can't find any of that in any history books. Ya know.... the :"bring out your dead wagons".

    We have 48% of people paying not one cent in Federal taxes, many are actually getting checks for free, and they can live better off of $32,000 in govt subsidies, than someone who works for a living and is under the average median income.

    WTF is wrong with that picture? Take your fairness and kindly shove it.
    Yeah, people who have paid into SS all their lives don't see a dime back when their pension exceeds what their FAIR SHARE should have been. They still paid the money in.... capice?

    And yes, under current law, the estate (inheritance/death) tax is scheduled to go to 55% on Jan. 1, 2013. I'll bet Steinbrenner's family is ecstatic that he kicked the bucket when he did.

    http://wills.about.com/od/und...
    (more)
  • Howler JoeBlo 2012/02/22 19:52:30
    Howler
    +2
    I blocked this guy/gal...Sorry, but I have grown tired of left-wing, Progressive rudeness, condescension, and self-righteousness.
  • JoeBlo Howler 2012/02/22 19:59:33
    JoeBlo
    +2
    I'm blocked by most of the progressive Leaderboard brigade on this site.
    The crew on Huffington Post make better counterparts than these fools do.
  • Howler JoeBlo 2012/02/22 20:06:31
    Howler
    +2
    The author of the material he copied is nothing more than the ideas of the admitted, left-wing Progressive "Professor William Domhoff" who is somewhat of a Marxist sympathizer.
  • JoeBlo Howler 2012/02/22 20:12:38
    JoeBlo
    +1
    That's all they have left, regurgitating what the so-called experts scribble but none of them will acknowledge what happens to our society if they get their way, because that would be admitting their agenda.
  • Howler JoeBlo 2012/02/22 20:16:38
    Howler
    +1
    They are their own worst enemy for the long haul.

    Sad.
  • Brian Tristan MacQuillan 2012/02/22 16:58:56
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Brian Tristan MacQuillan
    +3
    The only people that get screwed in the "soak the rich" taxation schemes are the everyday people. 70% of people who make over 250K a year are small business owners, and when they get hit with a tax increase typically they end up having to lay off an employee or employees. Many everyday people have their savings invested in the market, and they do not have tax accountants, tax attorneys, and so on to shelter their savings from higher capital gains taxes, but the people with a great amount of money do. Who do you think get soaked for capital gains taxes? The everyday people of course. Never mind that higher capital gains taxes stifle investment, which thereby stifles the economy, which comes back an bites the everyday people in the butt the hardest. The whole "soak the rich" scheme is nonsense.
  • BrianD3 2012/02/22 16:58:07
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    BrianD3
    +4
    anyone with an IRA, a 401K, or any sort of pension will suffer as well as those who are retired and rely upon dividend income for their expenses.
  • dispatcher 2012/02/22 16:55:01
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    dispatcher
    +4
    This tax hike will put more people out of work and kill more of the elderly. He has NO RESPECT for any HARD WORKING AMERICANS. Those who have worked hard over their life time & planned their retirement will be at a loss. This is nothing more than a SOCIALIST COMMUNIST agenda being put forth to destroy our economy even more. This NO GOOD SOCIALIST PIG DICTATOR HAS TO GO !!! HOPE & CHANGE WILL COME , NOV 6, 2012 !!!
  • Ken 2012/02/22 16:36:16 (edited)
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Ken
    +5
    How will anyone be able to save for their retirement?
  • Howler Ken 2012/02/22 16:38:16
    Howler
    +2
    Few will.

    And fewer will ever retire.
  • Bear 2012/02/22 16:29:35
    Obama's proposed taxation on dividends IS a TAX INCREASE on "middle-class" sh...
    Bear
    +2
    Of course a tax increase is a tax increase. But isn't this supposed to apply only to those above a certain income level eg., $250k. It implies a stock portfolio of approx $12.5million to generate $250k in income. I for one don't think anyone with a portfolio of at least $12.5 million needs a dividend tax incentive.
  • Howler Bear 2012/02/22 16:36:47
    Howler
    +2
    This article is focusing in on the "collateral damage" to many who do not fall into Obama's "rich" category.

    "Who would get hurt? IRS data show that retirees and near-retirees who depend on dividend income would be hit especially hard. Almost three of four dividend payments go to those over the age of 55, and more than half go to those older than 65, according to IRS data.

    But all American shareholders would lose. Higher dividend and capital gains taxes make stocks less valuable. A share of stock is worth the discounted present value of the future earnings stream after taxes. Stock prices would fall over time to adjust to the new after-tax rate of return. And if investors become convinced later this year that dividend and capital gains taxes are going way up on January 1, some investors are likely to sell shares ahead of paying these higher rates."
  • Bear Howler 2012/02/22 16:56:59
    Bear
    +1
    I've read the article and would suggest that the author is making an attempt to justify low div rates by diverting attention away from the big beneficiaries (editors and readers of the WSJ for example) to those who would in fact be minimally impacted. Why do you think dividend income should be taxed at a lower rate than regular earned income....what is the economic basis for separating incomes that way?
  • Howler Bear 2012/02/22 17:36:40
    Howler
    +1
    Good question...Also good IMO - Why should regular earned income be taxed at a higher rate than dividend/capital gains income?
  • Bear Howler 2012/02/22 20:22:32
    Bear
    +1
    hard to understand why they shouldn't be taxed the same....but of course the answer is that lobbyists for the financiers of our country worked to change the tax laws in favor of lower rates for divs and cap gains... wage earners don't hire the expensive special interests to push for special interest exceptions.......
  • DS in O... Bear 2012/02/22 20:37:40
    DS in Oak Ridge NC
    +1
    Those Dividends are paid after Income Taxes have already been paid on the earnings that made them possible. There is an incentive to encourage those who can to invest for a year or longer to do that so business can fund growth, expansion, or upgrades. Saying they should be taxed the same rate the second time around is like you lending me $10 and me paying back $6.50 and sending the difference to the IRS for taxes. But if I paid you $12, you'd owe $5 on the extra $2 you 'earned'...
  • Bear DS in O... 2012/02/22 21:19:51
    Bear
    You are right that the payout of dividends comes after corporate income taxes...the use of dividends is at the discretion of the company earning the income....it has a choice to pay out dividends or not, and how much and how often.....those choices are undoubtedly influenced by many factors including the size of the profit, its predictability, cash flow management, life-phase of the enterprise, etc etc and including how dividends are distributed and taxed to shareholders.....shareholders can fall into many categories.......the shareholders who are able to propagandize that this will hurt retirement accounts and the small individual shareholder are playing a self-serving game of bs.....the financial services industry is perfectly capable of and thrives on adjusting investment tools to fit the tax and regulatory regimes.....the amounts in question are only meaningful for those shareholders with double-digit million$ portfolios......

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/11/27 06:54:07

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals