美国该不该向1%巨富增税?2012-02-03
眼下，罗姆尼似乎一时难以摆脱巨额财富给他带来的负面“标签效应”。
美国总统竞选人罗姆尼的财富=从尼克松起,一直到奥巴马为止的8个美国总统的财产总和×2，他的纳税比例,远低于中产阶级
1月24日，美国共和党热门总统竞选人米特·罗姆尼,在党内初选对手叫阵的强大压力下，公开了过去两年的纳税单，结果显示:他的纳税比例不到14%，远低于一般中产阶级的水平,引发美国民众一片哗然。
与此同时，谋求连任的民主党总统奥巴马再次提出了要向富人加税的主张，俨然将自己塑造成中产阶级的卫士。一时间，贫富差距,以及社会公平,成为今年美国大选的中心话题。
他不是美国的1%，而是0.1%
美国的大政客中,富豪云集,罗姆尼属于“巨富”的行列。
按照罗姆尼竞选团队公布的数据，这位前马萨诸塞州州长、私募基金贝恩资本公司的创始人,2010年,收入为2160万美元;2011年的预计收入,为2090万元。这些收入,是在罗姆尼退休从政以后得到的;罗姆尼可以什么也不干，只管收钱。
美国国内税务署(IRS)的统计，2008年,美国人年均收入,调整后,大约3.3万美元;
罗姆尼一天的收入,将近有6万美元。
那些成为抗议者靶子、收入在全国,属于前“1%”的美国富豪，调整后的年人均收入,仅为38万美元，不如罗姆尼一周的进账。
罗姆尼到底有多富?美国的《 福布斯》杂志有一个形象的比喻：差不多,就是:从前总统尼克松开始，一直到奥巴马为止,8个总统的财产,加起来，再乘以二。
也许,罗姆尼不是美国的1%，而是0.1%。看到罗姆尼公布的账单后，与他竞争的另一位共和党总统竞选人桑托勒姆惊呼：“他真是非常非常有钱！”
有钱人似乎也有着有钱人的烦恼。
罗姆尼每年向国家缴纳的税款,高达300万美元,他那不到15%的低纳税比例,让选民们感觉很不爽,一般美国中产阶级家庭的纳税比例,通常在15%-25%之间，随着工资的增加，这一比例,甚至会达到35%以上。
对此，罗姆尼显得很委屈：“我不应该因为我的成功而受到惩罚。”罗姆尼的竞选团队忙不迭地召开新闻发布会，解释他的税单和海外帐务情况，称,他无论在外国,还是在美国的纳税,都完全合法。
的确，根据美国的法律，个人所得税,分为“收入税”和“薪资税”两种。对于“钱生钱”的投资类收入，最高税率不超过15%
罗姆尼的收入,几乎全部来自投资性收入。加上一系列的减税项目，罗姆尼最终税率,不足15%,并不稀奇。
面对国家接近9%的高失业率以及贫富差距已经分化到历史最高水平的残酷现实，像罗姆尼这样的有钱人，说话一不小心,就会触动正在经济危机中挣扎的选民的神经。
在解释自己的收入来源时，罗姆尼表示:他也从发表演讲中获得了一些收入，“但,数额不大”。于是，立刻有媒体给他算了一笔账：罗姆尼每场演讲,平均收费是4.1592万美元;2010年,美国家庭年平均收入是4.9445万美元。
显然，罗姆尼有钱、低税,虽不犯法，但,在多数中产选民眼中，能说出这样话的人,显然和他们不是“同类”，高高在上的“有钱人”如果当选,是否能够真正理解“民间疾苦”,成了选民们自然想到的问题。
大选中,富人被“贴上标签”
罗姆尼的税务问题,在共和党党内初选中,被“自己人”抓住不放，更是让一直把罗姆尼锁定为“最大竞选对手”的奥巴马阵营,找到了一个好机会。
在最近的一系列讲话中，奥巴马反复告诉他的支持者，美国政府的角色,是确保人尽其才，每个人,都享有公平的机会,人人按相同的游戏规则竞争，促成一个公平而繁荣的社会。
奥巴马说：“我们的方向,有两个。一是,机会更少、更不公平；或者，我们可以努力争取-我认为我们必须做的，打造一个让人人得利,而非仅少数有钱人得利的经济。”
借助一年一度向全国民众发表《 国情咨文》的机会，奥巴马,1月24日,再次扮演中产阶级保护者的角色，提出为中产阶级争取经济上的公平正义，并呼吁改革税收机制，让富人承担相应责任。
他建议取消百万富翁在住房、医疗、退休和儿童看护方面的税收减免。“如果一年赚100万美元，你不需要特殊的纳税补贴和减免。”
对于奥巴马阵营的“口诛笔伐”，罗姆尼回应：“一位总统竟然利用国情咨文来分化民众，这是多么的可耻！”
的确，从历史上看，美国大选的话题,关乎内政、关乎外交、关乎种族平等,真的很少关乎贫富分化。因为,对于相信“美国梦”的美国人来讲，财富是值得向往和奋斗的，而不是妒忌和仇恨的。
然而，这次大选,并不一般。经济危机已经过去了三年多，但,美国经济仍然深陷泥潭。美国老百姓被迫勒紧裤腰带过生活，却发现:那些以华尔街大银行家为首的富豪们仍然拿着高额的奖金和分红，交着比老百姓(自己)比例还低的税额。
与此同时，美国的财富出现了越来越向金字塔顶端“1%极富人群”集中的趋势。有统计显示，美国最富有的1%,每年所得收入,接近全体美国人总收入的1/4;他们掌握的财富,占据全国财富的40%。形成鲜明对比的是，“塔底”50%的美国人掌握的财富,仅有区区3%。
面对沉重的经济压力,以及不断增大的贫富差距，美国普通民众对那些巨富的抵触心理,有加剧的趋势。因此，尽管罗姆尼很不情愿，一张税单,仍让他的“富人”标签,变得异常清晰，也让有关是否应该对富人加税的争论烽烟再起。那么，罗姆尼到底应不应该交纳更多的税？向富人加税,能不能帮助美国的经济走向复苏？
正方：税制漏洞,亟需弥补
极力主张为富人加税的“股神”巴菲特,在接受电视访问的时候说：“罗姆尼自己并不需要付出比法律要求更高的税率，所以,我不会为此指责他。应该指责的,是法律本身，是法律给了他、以及我本人，在获得巨大收入的同时，享受仅有我办公室同事一半税率的好处。”
美国首富、微软公司联合创始人比尔·盖茨也公开表示，富裕的美国人,应该为解决赤字问题,做出更大的贡献，向富人多征税,是社会公平的体现。与此同时，盖茨不忘自我检讨，说自己做的还不够好，税交的不够多。
实际上，两党目前有关税制本身的争论,有着很大的政治成分,如果能因此最终促使美国的税制,向更为高效、更为公平的方向迈进,不失为一次有意义的探讨。
从美国的税法本身来看，本次争论的焦点,集中在一个被称为“附带权益”的条款上，即,指的是:私募基金将其所获利润的一定百分比,分给基金经理人的收益。
按照目前美国的税法，这部分收入,与一般“投资收益”一样，按照不高于15%的税率征收，而并非按照薪金收入的高税率征收。这就使得罗姆尼,每年可以从他早已退休的贝恩资本公司的盈利中,继续享受15%以下的低税率，进而得到高额收益。
奥巴马认为，这种税制是“不公平的”
还有一些人称,其为一种“不易被人察觉的，面向富裕人群的贿赂”。
民主党提出，现有税法规定,只要美国跨国公司在开曼群岛、爱尔兰、维京群岛等国际避税天堂缴税，便无须在美国缴税，正是这样的漏洞,能让很多大富豪们千方百计地利用自己的海外资产避税。罗姆尼的贝恩资本公司正是在卢森堡和开曼群岛缴税。
反方：给富人增税,只为选战
“向富人加税”的建议,得到了很多人的支持,共和党一如既往地反对这项政策，并指责奥巴马为拉选票,不惜“挑起斗争”。
共和党的理由是，向富人加税,将损害美国的投资和就业,将在美国人内部之间,挑起矛盾，损害已经脆弱的经济。不仅如此，在经济危机的时候，向任何人加税,都是错误的。
有观点认为，为富人加税,并不能解决美国目前债台高筑、赤字高企的问题。
罗姆尼在参加竞选活动时,回应奥巴马的演说,指出：“他的说法,与事实脱节，美国花太多,也借太多，债务问题不解决美国经济,将如泰坦尼克一般下沉。虽然,我们现在还看不到冰山，但,我们仍然在全速向冰山驶近。”
有一些税务问题专家,为很多富人享受的15%资产利得税辩护，指出:这一税种,原本就是一种“双重征税”，原因是,产生收益的公司,已经以公司税的形式交纳过税金，因此,不应该再对投资者的增值课税。虽然,很多美国富人的税率,表面上只有15%左右，但,如果加上之前公司已经交过的税费，很多富人实际的缴税税率,达到了45%。
与此同时，专家警告，由于这种资产增值税与股票市场交易直接相关，如果税率过高，将影响到股票投资市场的活力，进而影响到公司资金来源和融资成本。
其实，无论正反两方的观点哪一方更有道理，可以预见的是，在本次美国总统大选中，“贫富差距”、“富人加税”等话题,都将一次次被提起，并将随着选战的深入,变得越来越炙手可热。人们对这些建议是否能被国会通过,不敢乐观,有一点可以肯定：如果这所有的争论,真的只限于一场政治秀,没有付诸财富公平分配的实质性变革，那,将成为所有人的悲哀。
陈总经理
我的Qzone 网址:1779642876@qzone.qq.com; QQ:1779642876 ;E-MAIL:1779642876@qq.com ;
The United States should raise taxes to 1% wealthy? 2012-02-03
Right now, Romney seems to find it difficult to get rid of the enormous wealth brought him negative “labeling effect”.
U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s wealth = 8 President of the United States starting from the Nixon, has been up to the Obama property the sum of x 2, the proportion of tax, much lower than the middle class
January 24, Popular U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, within the party primary opponent Jiaozhen the strong pressure of public tax list for the past two years, the results show: his tax ratio of less than 14% , well below the general level of the middle class, lead to the American people in an uproar.
At the same time, seek re-election of Democratic President Barack Obama raised again to the rich and tax claims, as if to portray itself as a middle-class defender. For a time, the gap between rich and poor, and social equity has become a central topic of this year’s U.S. presidential election.
He is not one percent, but 0.1%
United States politicians, tycoons gathered Romney belongs to the ranks of the wealthy.
According to data released by the Romney campaign team, the former governor of Massachusetts, the founder of the private equity fund Bain Capital in 2010, revenue was $ 21.6 million; 2011 projected revenue of 20.9 million yuan. Income after Romney retired politicians; Romney can do nothing, just money.
Statistics of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in 2008, Americans average annual income, adjusting, about $ 33,000;
Romney day’s income, nearly $ 60,000.
Protesters target, income in the country, belonging to “one percent” of America’s wealthiest, the adjusted annual per capita income of only $ 380,000, as Romney standing to the credit of the week.
Romney in the end how rich? “Forbes” magazine in the United States there is a vivid metaphor: almost, that is: the former President Richard Nixon began to Obama so far has been, eight presidential property are added together, multiplied by two.
Perhaps Romney is not the United States, 1%, but 0.1%. See Romney announced the bill, Santo Haslem, another Republican presidential candidate to compete with him, exclaimed: “He is really very, very rich!”
The rich seems to have taken the trouble of the rich.
Romney annually to the state tax paid, up to $ 3 million, his less than 15% of the low-tax proportion for voters to feel very uncomfortable, the average American middle-class families the tax ratio, usually 15% -25% between the increase in wages, the proportion may even reach more than 35%.
, Romney is wronged: “I do not because of my success should be punished.” Romney’s campaign team is scrambling to hold a press conference to explain his tax bill and overseas financial situation, saying he no matter in a foreign country, or taxes, are perfectly legal in the United States.
Indeed, according to the laws of the United States, the personal income tax, income tax “and” payroll tax “two. Money begets money “investment class income, the highest tax rate does not exceed 15%
Romney’s revenue almost entirely from investment income. Coupled with a series of tax concessions, Romney, the final tax rate is less than 15% is not unusual.
Faced with the nerve of the countries already differentiated to the harsh reality of the highest level in history, nearly 9 percent of high unemployment and the gap between the rich and the poor to the rich like Romney, speaking accidentally, will be touched is struggling with the economic crisis, voters .
Explain their source of income, from the speech, he also gained some income, “but the small amount of” Romney said: So, immediately the media to his calculations: Romney each lecture, the average charge is 4.1592 million U.S. dollars; 2010, the United States an average family income is 4.9445 million U.S. dollars.
Clearly, Romney money, low tax, although not against the law, but in most production in the eyes of voters, who can say such things, apparently they are not “similar” high above “the rich” if elected, whether to really understand the sufferings of the people, became voters naturally think of the problem.
The general election, the rich are “labeled”
Romney’s tax issues, the Republican party primaries, “insiders” to seize and hold is the Obama camp has been Romney Lock “The biggest opponent, found a good opportunity.
In a series of recent speeches, Obama repeatedly told his supporters, the U.S. government’s role is to ensure that their talent each of us, to enjoy a fair chance to everyone to compete on the same rules of the game, to promote a fair and prosperous society.
Obama said: “Our direction, there are two. First, fewer opportunities, less fair; Or, we can strive for – I think we must do to create a people the benefit, not just a small number of wealthy people benefit the economy. ”
Opportunity with the annual “State of the Union” to the people across the country, Barack Obama, January 24, once again played the protector role of the middle class, fight for economic fairness and justice, and called for reform of the tax mechanism proposed for the middle class, Let the rich bear the corresponding responsibility.
He suggested to cancel the millionaire tax breaks for housing, medical care, retirement and child care. Year earned $ 1,000,000, you do not need a special tax subsidies and exemptions. ”
Obama camp criticized by Romney responded: “a president actually use the State of the Union to divide the people, this is shameful!”
Indeed, from a historical point of view, the U.S. presidential election topics relating to internal affairs, relating to diplomacy, relating to racial equality, is really very little about the divide between rich and poor. Because Americans believe that the “American dream” is concerned, wealth is desirable and struggle, rather than jealousy and hatred.
However, this election is not. The economic crisis has passed more than three years, but the U.S. economy remains stuck in a quagmire. The American people were forced to tighten their belts to live on, but found that: rich Wall Street bankers, led by still holding high bonuses and dividends paid than the people (their own) ratio is even lower amount of tax.
At the same time, the wealth of the United States, the trend of an increasing concentration of 1% very crowd to the top of the pyramid. Statistics show that America’s richest 1% of annual income, close to 1/4 of the total income of all Americans; wealth at their disposal, accounting for 40% of the national wealth. In sharp contrast, to grasp the wealth of the “bottom” 50 percent of Americans, only a mere 3%.
The face of a heavy economic pressure, as well as the growing gap between rich and poor, the ordinary people of the United States contradiction to those wealthy, have exacerbated the trend. Therefore, even though Romney reluctantly, a tax form, is still his “rich” label became very clear, but also to information about whether we should debate phone-rich tax renewed. Romney in the end should not be to pay more tax? Increase taxes, the rich can help the U.S. economy is recovering?
Pros: the tax system loopholes, an urgent need to make up
Strongly advocated raising taxes for the rich “Warren Buffett said in a television interview:” Romney does not need to pay a higher tax rate than required by law, so I will not accuse him of. should be accused, the law itself, the law gave him, and I am in a great income at the same time enjoy the benefits of half the tax rate of only my office colleagues. ”
American’s richest man, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has also publicly said that wealthy Americans should solve the deficit problem, make a greater contribution to the rich more tax and social equity. At the same time, Gates did not forget the self-review, saying that they do is not good enough taxes to pay enough.
In fact, the two parties argue about the tax system itself, a lot of political content, if they can thus ultimately prompted the U.S. tax system to a more efficient and more equitable direction, after all, a meaningful discussion.
From the U.S. tax code itself, the debate concentrated on the terms on which one is called “carried interest” that is, means: private equity fund a certain percentage of their profits, and give to the fund manager benefits.
According to the current U.S. tax laws, this part of the revenue, and general “investment income” is levied in accordance with the tax rate no higher than 15%, rather than high tax rates levied in accordance with the salary income. This makes Mitt Romney, a year from the profits of the company of Bain Capital, he has long since retired, continue to enjoy low tax rates below 15%, and then get high returns.
Obama believes that such a system is “unfair”
Some person, as a “can not easily be noticed, oriented affluent bribery”.
Democratic Party proposed that the existing tax law, as long as the U.S. multinational corporations in the Cayman Islands, Ireland, the Virgin Islands tax haven tax will not be required to pay tax in the United States, it is this loophole that allows many rich and powerful are doing everything possible to to use their overseas assets of tax avoidance. Romney’s Bain Capital is in Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands tax.
Negative side: the rich tax increases, only for the election
Add to the rich tax “proposal, a lot of support, Republicans continue to oppose this policy, and accused Obama of votes, at a duel”.
Republican Party of the reason is that the rich tax increases will damage investment and employment in the United States, will provoke a contradiction between the Americans internal damage the already fragile economy. Moreover, in times of economic crisis, to any tax increases, are wrong.
The idea that raising taxes for the rich does not solve the current U.S. debt, the problem of the deficit high.
Romney in the election campaign, in response to Obama’s speech, said: “he says, out of touch with the fact that the United States spend too much and borrow too much, the debt problem is not resolved to the U.S. economy, such as the Titanic general sink, we do not see an iceberg, but we are still approaching the iceberg at full speed. ”
There are some tax experts, 15% of assets to enjoy for many rich profits tax defense, pointed out: this tax was originally a kind of “double taxation”, the reason is that revenue-generating company, has to pay corporation tax in the form of over taxes, therefore, should not investors value-added taxation. Although a lot of rich tax rates, only 15% of the surface, but, if one adds the company has handed over before the taxes, the actual tax rate of lot of rich people, reached 45%.
At the same time, experts warn that this capital gains tax on stock market transactions are directly related to, if the tax rate is too high, the impact on the vitality of the stock market investments, thereby affecting the sources of funding and financing costs.
In fact, both positive and negative view of both sides which side is more reasonable, can be expected that, in the U.S. presidential election, the topic of “wealth gap”, “rich man’s tax increases will again be filed and with the depth of the election campaign, becoming more and more hot. People these proposals can be passed by Congress, not optimistic, one thing is certain: If all of this controversy is really only limited to a political show, did not put the substantive change of the fair distribution of wealth, it will become all the sorrow of the people.
President Chen
The the Qzone URL: 1779642876@qzone.qq.com; QQ: 1,779,642,876; E-MAIL: 1779642876@qq.com;
美国该不该向1%巨富增税?2012-02-03
眼下，罗姆尼似乎一时难以摆脱巨额财富给他带来的负面“标签效应”。
美国总统竞选人罗姆尼的财富=从尼克松起,一直到奥巴马为止的8个美国总统的财产总和×2，他的纳税比例,远低于中产阶级
1月24日，美国共和党热门总统竞选人米特·罗姆尼,在党内初选对手叫阵的强大压力下，公开了过去两年的纳税单，结果显示:他的纳税比例不到14%，远低于一般中产阶级的水平,引发美国民众一片哗然。
与此同时，谋求连任的民主党总统奥巴马再次提出了要向富人加税的主张，俨然将自己塑造成中产阶级的卫士。一时间，贫富差距,以及社会公平,成为今年美国大选的中心话题。
他不是美国的1%，而是0.1%
美国的大政客中,富豪云集,罗姆尼属于“巨富”的行列。
按照罗姆尼竞选团队公布的数据，这位前马萨诸塞州州长、私募基金贝恩资本公司的创始人,2010年,收入为2160万美元;2011年的预计收入,为2090万元。这些收入,是在罗姆尼退休从政以后得到的;罗姆尼可以什么也不干，只管收钱。
美国国内税务署(IRS)的统计，2008年,美国人年均收入,调整后,大约3.3万美元;
罗姆尼一天的收入,将近有6万美元。
那些成为抗议者靶子、收入在全国,属于前“1%”的美国富豪，调整后的年人均收入,仅为38万美元，不如罗姆尼一周的进账。
罗姆尼到底有多富?美国的《 福布斯》杂志有一个形象的比喻：差不多,就是:从前总统尼克松开始，一直到奥巴马为止,8个总统的财产,加起来，再乘以二。
也许,罗姆尼不是美国的1%，而是0.1%。看到罗姆尼公布的账单后，与他竞争的另一位共和党总统竞选人桑托勒姆惊呼：“他真是非常非常有钱！”
有钱人似乎也有着有钱人的烦恼。
罗姆尼每年向国家缴纳的税款,高达300万美元,他那不到15%的低纳税比例,让选民们感觉很不爽,一般美国中产阶级家庭的纳税比例,通常在15%-25%之间，随着工资的增加，这一比例,甚至会达到35%以上。
对此，罗姆尼显得很委屈：“我不应该因为我的成功而受到惩罚。”罗姆尼的竞选团队忙不迭地召开新闻发布会，解释他的税单和海外帐务情况，称,他无论在外国,还是在美国的纳税,都完全合法。
的确，根据美国的法律，个人所得税,分为“收入税”和“薪资税”两种。对于“钱生钱”的投资类收入，最高税率不超过15%
罗姆尼的收入,几乎全部来自投资性收入。加上一系列的减税项目，罗姆尼最终税率,不足15%,并不稀奇。
面对国家接近9%的高失业率以及贫富差距已经分化到历史最高水平的残酷现实，像罗姆尼这样的有钱人，说话一不小心,就会触动正在经济危机中挣扎的选民的神经。
在解释自己的收入来源时，罗姆尼表示:他也从发表演讲中获得了一些收入，“但,数额不大”。于是，立刻有媒体给他算了一笔账：罗姆尼每场演讲,平均收费是4.1592万美元;2010年,美国家庭年平均收入是4.9445万美元。
显然，罗姆尼有钱、低税,虽不犯法，但,在多数中产选民眼中，能说出这样话的人,显然和他们不是“同类”，高高在上的“有钱人”如果当选,是否能够真正理解“民间疾苦”,成了选民们自然想到的问题。
大选中,富人被“贴上标签”
罗姆尼的税务问题,在共和党党内初选中,被“自己人”抓住不放，更是让一直把罗姆尼锁定为“最大竞选对手”的奥巴马阵营,找到了一个好机会。
在最近的一系列讲话中，奥巴马反复告诉他的支持者，美国政府的角色,是确保人尽其才，每个人,都享有公平的机会,人人按相同的游戏规则竞争，促成一个公平而繁荣的社会。
奥巴马说：“我们的方向,有两个。一是,机会更少、更不公平；或者，我们可以努力争取-我认为我们必须做的，打造一个让人人得利,而非仅少数有钱人得利的经济。”
借助一年一度向全国民众发表《 国情咨文》的机会，奥巴马,1月24日,再次扮演中产阶级保护者的角色，提出为中产阶级争取经济上的公平正义，并呼吁改革税收机制，让富人承担相应责任。
他建议取消百万富翁在住房、医疗、退休和儿童看护方面的税收减免。“如果一年赚100万美元，你不需要特殊的纳税补贴和减免。”
对于奥巴马阵营的“口诛笔伐”，罗姆尼回应：“一位总统竟然利用国情咨文来分化民众，这是多么的可耻！”
的确，从历史上看，美国大选的话题,关乎内政、关乎外交、关乎种族平等,真的很少关乎贫富分化。因为,对于相信“美国梦”的美国人来讲，财富是值得向往和奋斗的，而不是妒忌和仇恨的。
然而，这次大选,并不一般。经济危机已经过去了三年多，但,美国经济仍然深陷泥潭。美国老百姓被迫勒紧裤腰带过生活，却发现:那些以华尔街大银行家为首的富豪们仍然拿着高额的奖金和分红，交着比老百姓(自己)比例还低的税额。
与此同时，美国的财富出现了越来越向金字塔顶端“1%极富人群”集中的趋势。有统计显示，美国最富有的1%,每年所得收入,接近全体美国人总收入的1/4;他们掌握的财富,占据全国财富的40%。形成鲜明对比的是，“塔底”50%的美国人掌握的财富,仅有区区3%。
面对沉重的经济压力,以及不断增大的贫富差距，美国普通民众对那些巨富的抵触心理,有加剧的趋势。因此，尽管罗姆尼很不情愿，一张税单,仍让他的“富人”标签,变得异常清晰，也让有关是否应该对富人加税的争论烽烟再起。那么，罗姆尼到底应不应该交纳更多的税？向富人加税,能不能帮助美国的经济走向复苏？
正方：税制漏洞,亟需弥补
极力主张为富人加税的“股神”巴菲特,在接受电视访问的时候说：“罗姆尼自己并不需要付出比法律要求更高的税率，所以,我不会为此指责他。应该指责的,是法律本身，是法律给了他、以及我本人，在获得巨大收入的同时，享受仅有我办公室同事一半税率的好处。”
美国首富、微软公司联合创始人比尔·盖茨也公开表示，富裕的美国人,应该为解决赤字问题,做出更大的贡献，向富人多征税,是社会公平的体现。与此同时，盖茨不忘自我检讨，说自己做的还不够好，税交的不够多。
实际上，两党目前有关税制本身的争论,有着很大的政治成分,如果能因此最终促使美国的税制,向更为高效、更为公平的方向迈进,不失为一次有意义的探讨。
从美国的税法本身来看，本次争论的焦点,集中在一个被称为“附带权益”的条款上，即,指的是:私募基金将其所获利润的一定百分比,分给基金经理人的收益。
按照目前美国的税法，这部分收入,与一般“投资收益”一样，按照不高于15%的税率征收，而并非按照薪金收入的高税率征收。这就使得罗姆尼,每年可以从他早已退休的贝恩资本公司的盈利中,继续享受15%以下的低税率，进而得到高额收益。
奥巴马认为，这种税制是“不公平的”
还有一些人称,其为一种“不易被人察觉的，面向富裕人群的贿赂”。
民主党提出，现有税法规定,只要美国跨国公司在开曼群岛、爱尔兰、维京群岛等国际避税天堂缴税，便无须在美国缴税，正是这样的漏洞,能让很多大富豪们千方百计地利用自己的海外资产避税。罗姆尼的贝恩资本公司正是在卢森堡和开曼群岛缴税。
反方：给富人增税,只为选战
“向富人加税”的建议,得到了很多人的支持,共和党一如既往地反对这项政策，并指责奥巴马为拉选票,不惜“挑起斗争”。
共和党的理由是，向富人加税,将损害美国的投资和就业,将在美国人内部之间,挑起矛盾，损害已经脆弱的经济。不仅如此，在经济危机的时候，向任何人加税,都是错误的。
有观点认为，为富人加税,并不能解决美国目前债台高筑、赤字高企的问题。
罗姆尼在参加竞选活动时,回应奥巴马的演说,指出：“他的说法,与事实脱节，美国花太多,也借太多，债务问题不解决美国经济,将如泰坦尼克一般下沉。虽然,我们现在还看不到冰山，但,我们仍然在全速向冰山驶近。”
有一些税务问题专家,为很多富人享受的15%资产利得税辩护，指出:这一税种,原本就是一种“双重征税”，原因是,产生收益的公司,已经以公司税的形式交纳过税金，因此,不应该再对投资者的增值课税。虽然,很多美国富人的税率,表面上只有15%左右，但,如果加上之前公司已经交过的税费，很多富人实际的缴税税率,达到了45%。
与此同时，专家警告，由于这种资产增值税与股票市场交易直接相关，如果税率过高，将影响到股票投资市场的活力，进而影响到公司资金来源和融资成本。
其实，无论正反两方的观点哪一方更有道理，可以预见的是，在本次美国总统大选中，“贫富差距”、“富人加税”等话题,都将一次次被提起，并将随着选战的深入,变得越来越炙手可热。人们对这些建议是否能被国会通过,不敢乐观,有一点可以肯定：如果这所有的争论,真的只限于一场政治秀,没有付诸财富公平分配的实质性变革，那,将成为所有人的悲哀。
陈总经理
我的Qzone 网址:1779642876@qzone.qq.com; QQ:1779642876 ;E-MAIL:1779642876@qq.com ;
The United States should raise taxes to 1% wealthy? 2012-02-03
Right now, Romney seems to find it difficult to get rid of the enormous wealth brought him negative “labeling effect”.
U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s wealth = 8 President of the United States starting from the Nixon, has been up to the Obama property the sum of x 2, the proportion of tax, much lower than the middle class
January 24, Popular U.S. Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, within the party primary opponent Jiaozhen the strong pressure of public tax list for the past two years, the results show: his tax ratio of less than 14% , well below the general level of the middle class, lead to the American people in an uproar.
At the same time, seek re-election of Democratic President Barack Obama raised again to the rich and tax claims, as if to portray itself as a middle-class defender. For a time, the gap between rich and poor, and social equity has become a central topic of this year’s U.S. presidential election.
He is not one percent, but 0.1%
United States politicians, tycoons gathered Romney belongs to the ranks of the wealthy.
According to data released by the Romney campaign team, the former governor of Massachusetts, the founder of the private equity fund Bain Capital in 2010, revenue was $ 21.6 million; 2011 projected revenue of 20.9 million yuan. Income after Romney retired politicians; Romney can do nothing, just money.
Statistics of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in 2008, Americans average annual income, adjusting, about $ 33,000;
Romney day’s income, nearly $ 60,000.
Protesters target, income in the country, belonging to “one percent” of America’s wealthiest, the adjusted annual per capita income of only $ 380,000, as Romney standing to the credit of the week.
Romney in the end how rich? “Forbes” magazine in the United States there is a vivid metaphor: almost, that is: the former President Richard Nixon began to Obama so far has been, eight presidential property are added together, multiplied by two.
Perhaps Romney is not the United States, 1%, but 0.1%. See Romney announced the bill, Santo Haslem, another Republican presidential candidate to compete with him, exclaimed: “He is really very, very rich!”
The rich seems to have taken the trouble of the rich.
Romney annually to the state tax paid, up to $ 3 million, his less than 15% of the low-tax proportion for voters to feel very uncomfortable, the average American middle-class families the tax ratio, usually 15% -25% between the increase in wages, the proportion may even reach more than 35%.
, Romney is wronged: “I do not because of my success should be punished.” Romney’s campaign team is scrambling to hold a press conference to explain his tax bill and overseas financial situation, saying he no matter in a foreign country, or taxes, are perfectly legal in the United States.
Indeed, according to the laws of the United States, the personal income tax, income tax “and” payroll tax “two. Money begets money “investment class income, the highest tax rate does not exceed 15%
Romney’s revenue almost entirely from investment income. Coupled with a series of tax concessions, Romney, the final tax rate is less than 15% is not unusual.
Faced with the nerve of the countries already differentiated to the harsh reality of the highest level in history, nearly 9 percent of high unemployment and the gap between the rich and the poor to the rich like Romney, speaking accidentally, will be touched is struggling with the economic crisis, voters .
Explain their source of income, from the speech, he also gained some income, “but the small amount of” Romney said: So, immediately the media to his calculations: Romney each lecture, the average charge is 4.1592 million U.S. dollars; 2010, the United States an average family income is 4.9445 million U.S. dollars.
Clearly, Romney money, low tax, although not against the law, but in most production in the eyes of voters, who can say such things, apparently they are not “similar” high above “the rich” if elected, whether to really understand the sufferings of the people, became voters naturally think of the problem.
The general election, the rich are “labeled”
Romney’s tax issues, the Republican party primaries, “insiders” to seize and hold is the Obama camp has been Romney Lock “The biggest opponent, found a good opportunity.
In a series of recent speeches, Obama repeatedly told his supporters, the U.S. government’s role is to ensure that their talent each of us, to enjoy a fair chance to everyone to compete on the same rules of the game, to promote a fair and prosperous society.
Obama said: “Our direction, there are two. First, fewer opportunities, less fair; Or, we can strive for – I think we must do to create a people the benefit, not just a small number of wealthy people benefit the economy. ”
Opportunity with the annual “State of the Union” to the people across the country, Barack Obama, January 24, once again played the protector role of the middle class, fight for economic fairness and justice, and called for reform of the tax mechanism proposed for the middle class, Let the rich bear the corresponding responsibility.
He suggested to cancel the millionaire tax breaks for housing, medical care, retirement and child care. Year earned $ 1,000,000, you do not need a special tax subsidies and exemptions. ”
Obama camp criticized by Romney responded: “a president actually use the State of the Union to divide the people, this is shameful!”
Indeed, from a historical point of view, the U.S. presidential election topics relating to internal affairs, relating to diplomacy, relating to racial equality, is really very little about the divide between rich and poor. Because Americans believe that the “American dream” is concerned, wealth is desirable and struggle, rather than jealousy and hatred.
However, this election is not. The economic crisis has passed more than three years, but the U.S. economy remains stuck in a quagmire. The American people were forced to tighten their belts to live on, but found that: rich Wall Street bankers, led by still holding high bonuses and dividends paid than the people (their own) ratio is even lower amount of tax.
At the same time, the wealth of the United States, the trend of an increasing concentration of 1% very crowd to the top of the pyramid. Statistics show that America’s richest 1% of annual income, close to 1/4 of the total income of all Americans; wealth at their disposal, accounting for 40% of the national wealth. In sharp contrast, to grasp the wealth of the “bottom” 50 percent of Americans, only a mere 3%.
The face of a heavy economic pressure, as well as the growing gap between rich and poor, the ordinary people of the United States contradiction to those wealthy, have exacerbated the trend. Therefore, even though Romney reluctantly, a tax form, is still his “rich” label became very clear, but also to information about whether we should debate phone-rich tax renewed. Romney in the end should not be to pay more tax? Increase taxes, the rich can help the U.S. economy is recovering?
Pros: the tax system loopholes, an urgent need to make up
Strongly advocated raising taxes for the rich “Warren Buffett said in a television interview:” Romney does not need to pay a higher tax rate than required by law, so I will not accuse him of. should be accused, the law itself, the law gave him, and I am in a great income at the same time enjoy the benefits of half the tax rate of only my office colleagues. ”
American’s richest man, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates has also publicly said that wealthy Americans should solve the deficit problem, make a greater contribution to the rich more tax and social equity. At the same time, Gates did not forget the self-review, saying that they do is not good enough taxes to pay enough.
In fact, the two parties argue about the tax system itself, a lot of political content, if they can thus ultimately prompted the U.S. tax system to a more efficient and more equitable direction, after all, a meaningful discussion.
From the U.S. tax code itself, the debate concentrated on the terms on which one is called “carried interest” that is, means: private equity fund a certain percentage of their profits, and give to the fund manager benefits.
According to the current U.S. tax laws, this part of the revenue, and general “investment income” is levied in accordance with the tax rate no higher than 15%, rather than high tax rates levied in accordance with the salary income. This makes Mitt Romney, a year from the profits of the company of Bain Capital, he has long since retired, continue to enjoy low tax rates below 15%, and then get high returns.
Obama believes that such a system is “unfair”
Some person, as a “can not easily be noticed, oriented affluent bribery”.
Democratic Party proposed that the existing tax law, as long as the U.S. multinational corporations in the Cayman Islands, Ireland, the Virgin Islands tax haven tax will not be required to pay tax in the United States, it is this loophole that allows many rich and powerful are doing everything possible to to use their overseas assets of tax avoidance. Romney’s Bain Capital is in Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands tax.
Negative side: the rich tax increases, only for the election
Add to the rich tax “proposal, a lot of support, Republicans continue to oppose this policy, and accused Obama of votes, at a duel”.
Republican Party of the reason is that the rich tax increases will damage investment and employment in the United States, will provoke a contradiction between the Americans internal damage the already fragile economy. Moreover, in times of economic crisis, to any tax increases, are wrong.
The idea that raising taxes for the rich does not solve the current U.S. debt, the problem of the deficit high.
Romney in the election campaign, in response to Obama’s speech, said: “he says, out of touch with the fact that the United States spend too much and borrow too much, the debt problem is not resolved to the U.S. economy, such as the Titanic general sink, we do not see an iceberg, but we are still approaching the iceberg at full speed. ”
There are some tax experts, 15% of assets to enjoy for many rich profits tax defense, pointed out: this tax was originally a kind of “double taxation”, the reason is that revenue-generating company, has to pay corporation tax in the form of over taxes, therefore, should not investors value-added taxation. Although a lot of rich tax rates, only 15% of the surface, but, if one adds the company has handed over before the taxes, the actual tax rate of lot of rich people, reached 45%.
At the same time, experts warn that this capital gains tax on stock market transactions are directly related to, if the tax rate is too high, the impact on the vitality of the stock market investments, thereby affecting the sources of funding and financing costs.
In fact, both positive and negative view of both sides which side is more reasonable, can be expected that, in the U.S. presidential election, the topic of “wealth gap”, “rich man’s tax increases will again be filed and with the depth of the election campaign, becoming more and more hot. People these proposals can be passed by Congress, not optimistic, one thing is certain: If all of this controversy is really only limited to a political show, did not put the substantive change of the fair distribution of wealth, it will become all the sorrow of the people.
President Chen
The the Qzone URL: 1779642876@qzone.qq.com; QQ: 1,779,642,876; E-MAIL: 1779642876@qq.com;