Primitives Squibble-squabble over this admission, and believe they have Rmoney 'nailed' --
http://demu.gr/1014196683
Romney: I’ve paid at least 13 percent tax rate in each of past 10 years
Source: Washington Post
By Philip Rucker and Rosalind S. Helderman, Updated: Thursday, August 16, 12:29 PM
GREER, S.C. — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Thursday that he has paid a tax rate of at least 13 percent on his income in each of the last 10 years, offering his fullest explanation to date of his tax status.
“I did go back and look at my taxes and over the past 10 years I never paid less than 13 percent. I think the most recent year is 13.6 or something like that. So I paid taxes every single year,†he told reporters Thursday.
Democrats have hit Romney repeatedly on the tax issue, using it as an illustration for their argument that the Republican presidential candidate’s tax policies would favor the wealthy, like himself, over the middle class.
---
In response to pressure from his rivals during the Republican primaries, Romney released his 2010 tax return in January, showing he paid 13.9 percent on his $21.7 million in 2010 income. His campaign said that in his comments to reporters Thursday, he meant to indicate he’d paid 13.9 percent--not 13.6 percent---in his most recent tax year.
Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-says-he-paid-at-least-13-percent-in-taxes-for-past-10-years/2012/08/16/bf4b5944-e7be-11e1-8487-64e4b2a79ba8_story.html
He said he wouldn't release any more information... yet he's crumbling. It's working. Bit by bit, he will be ground down on this issue, because 13% is far less than the middle class pays. He's not paying his fair share, and he's admitted it now.
However, There are...."detractors"..
44. If so, I pity him.
He's an idiot. Or she, if that single person's a female.
1. That percentage is on adjusted income. Most people, when reporting their actual income tax rate, use gross income as the denominator.
2. That percentage is the rate for income that exceeds the next lowest cut-off. So that single person making 86,000/year in adjusted gross income is paying 28% on all his income over 85,651. If he's making $86,001, then he's paying 28% on a whopping $362. And 25% on the amount between 35,351 and 85,650, and 15% on the amount between 8701-35,350, and 10% on the amount from 1 to 8700.
He pays $870 for the first bracket.
He pays $3998 for the second bracket,
He pays $12575 for the third bracket,
and he pays $101 for the remainder in the 4th bracket.
Total: $17,544 on adjusted income of 86000. That's 20.4%.
Now, unless he's a dependent then he's taking the standard deductions (at a minimum, so his income's probably $92,000 or above. At 92k, he's paying 19%.
3. That assumes he has no taxable dividend income. The tax rate for that is currently 15% on net dividend income. That's capital gains - qualifying capital losses. Note that a lot of increased wealth is non-taxable. My mother's IRA went from $175k to $200k over a few years, but only those stocks that were sold contributed to capital gains.
4. This also assumes he has no retirement account contributions or any other kind of deduction--no kids, no self-employment tax, etc. Any additional deduction would increase his unadjusted gross income and that would reduce his effective income rate.
Our family income's gone between $50-60k/year in the last 6 years. In no year have we paid more than around 6% federal income tax, and we're only two parents and one kid, have no dividend income, and don't itemize.
Perfectly reasoned explanation. Ignored.
47. Barely.
Almost all his income is from dividends. They're taxed at 15%. Even when he did the Bain "thing" his "earned income" was still counted as dividends and taxed at that rate.
People don't like the 15% unearned income tax rate for dividends (or the quirk in the law that says hedge fund manager salaries get taxed at the dividend rate). They also tend to think that the top marginal rate is what they pay on all their income, even though most of them know better when they do their IRS forms (or should, if they stopped to actually ponder the ratio of tax paid after filing the 1040 to their annual gross income).
A lot of people also don't distinguish between wealth and income. Your IRA goes from $10 million to $100 million and you pay no taxes on the increase in wealth because it's not income.
A lot of people also don't realize that 2008 and 2009 also saw a lot of capital losses. They count against investment income in many cases.
Start at 15%, look at actual income and not wealth, remove any qualifying capital losses and fairly routine deductions (and some not-so-routine but still perfectly legal) and that 13% doesn't sound too fishy.
Also ignored..
Then Atman minces words.. becomes an instant hero...
33. The REPORTER said he paid "at least 13 percent on his income."
Romney said no such thing. Once again, he specifically AVOIDED using the term "Income Taxes."
“I did go back and look at my taxes and over the past 10 years I never paid less than 13 percent. I think the most recent year is 13.6 or something like that. So I paid taxes every single year,†he told reporters Thursday.
He is just being his usual lying businessman self.
Poor Igel - soon to be the next Math Witch burned at the stake for crimes against primitivity.
