Friday, December 7, 2012

The New York Times finds a tax deduction it likes

If you think about it for just a moment, and then look at the handy map at the link, you will not be surprised that there is one tax deduction for the rich much beloved by the editors of the Grey Lady.

Just do not confuse their position with, er, principles.


  1. I don't understand the rhetoric surrounding itemized deductions, and I can't tell who is lying and who is simply ignorant.

    Keeping state and local tax deductions, while simultaneously removing nearly all benefit of them though the AMT and the deduction phaseout (coming back in 2013), means the "rich" already get little or no benefit from them. Removing them entirely is basically a formality. Obama's BS line about limiting the tax rate at which deductions are taken to 28% is similarly stupid. It doesn't matter what rate you get for an itemized deduction when it's been reduced to near zero value. The tax revenue raised by such a change would be near zero.

  2. I agree, I do not understand the intersection of the AMT and all the rhetoric about the individual income tax. I am in fact wearing of the whole charade. My own opinion is that the House should enact Simpson-Bowles, lock, stock, and barrel, and then go home for Christmas. It might flip the discussion to cuts. Even the NYT would struggle to say the Republicans were not being constructive.


Web Statistics