Eventually, the presidential campaign will get back to issues (I hope!) instead of personalities. That means that taxes and the candidates’ fiscal policy positions will get more attention.
Here’s a head start from the Tax Policy Center, the joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. The Center has updated its analysis of Barack Obama’s and John McCain’s tax plans.
Some quick highlights:
- Although both candidates have at times stressed fiscal
responsibility, their specific non-health tax proposals would reduce
tax revenues by an estimated $4.2 trillion (McCain) and $2.9 trillion
(Obama) over the next 10 years.
- The two candidates’ tax plans would have sharply different
distributional effects. McCain’s tax cuts would primarily
benefit those with very high incomes; Obama offers much larger tax breaks to low- and
middle-income taxpayers and would increase taxes on high-income
taxpayers.
Additional reports on and analysis of the Obama and McCain tax plans have been collected by TaxProf.
Biden releases tax returns: In keeping with the electoral tax sharing, Democratic vice presidential candidate Joseph Biden has released his tax returns, jointly filed with his wife, Jill, for the last 10 years.
Previously, Obama and his wife Michele released their 2000 through 2007 returns (blogged about here). John and Cindy McCain file separately; he released his 2006 and 2007 tax documents (blogged here) in April and she revealed her 2006 personal filing (blogged here) about six weeks later.
No word yet on if or when McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, will release any of her tax data.
Presidential taxes through history: You can peruse tax filings of former U.S. presidents, and aspiring presidents, at the Tax Analysts‘ Tax History Project.
All tax data at that special Web page is there voluntarily, since politicians and presidents are afforded the same tax privacy protections as any taxpayers.
Meg
Quotes like “McCain’s tax cuts would primarily benefit those with very high incomes” are so misleading. Any tax cut that isn’t totally a social welfare program in disguise is going to primarily benefit those with high incomes. They pay the vast majority of taxes, so doesn’t it stand to reason that they should receive the majority benefit of any tax cuts, too?
I’m not saying we should even be having tax cuts or that the tax code shouldn’t be progressive at all (where rich are taxed more than poor), but consider this drastically over-simplified parable:
Five people each eat a $10 lunch; the waitress comes and hands the $50 tab to the richest guy who gives her $40. After all, he can afford it. The three “middle class” folks each pay $5 and the poorest person doesn’t pay anything; in fact he gets $5 just for showing up to lunch.
If that’s our tax code now, then Obama’s proposals have the rich guy paying $48, the middle class folks paying $3, and the poor person getting back $7. Personally, I’m tired of being pitied by Mr. Obama. I earn a “middle class” income, and I’m more than OK. I’d benefit more under his proposal, but that doesn’t mean I’m voting for him.
Kay
Meg,
First, thanks for acknowledging that that lunch check story is oversimplified.
And the great thing about our system is we can vote for or against the folks who help or hurt us personally.
In our situation, we’d do better with McCain, especially since he wants to keep dividends and interest rates low.
But, like you, I won’t be voting for the guy who’ll do me the most tax good.
Go figure!
Kay