Yarmuth proposes sensible taxation to alleviate debt crisis, inequality (UPDATE)

Proving yet again that he’s one of the few members of Congress equipped to confront the nation’s fiscal crisis with novel reality-based solutions, Louisville Rep. John Yarmuth, D-3, today introduced the Fairness in Taxation Act, which would, if enacted this year, generate more than $78 billion in revenue by equitably spreading the tax burden to something resembling post-WWII era/sane levels.

Via B&P (bold emphasis mine):

“At a time when Republicans in Congress are cutting funding and sacrificing the needs of everyone from pregnant women and students to firefighters and nurses, and even seniors and veterans, this legislation asks that the wealthiest Americans tighten their belts and contribute to our economic recovery, just like the rest of the nation,” said Congressman Yarmuth. “It is a critical step to ensuring our economy works for all Americans, and not just the wealthy few.”

Currently, the richest 1 percent of Americans control 34 percent of our nation’s wealth 120 percent more than they did 30 years ago and more than the entire bottom 90 percent of income-earners. The top one-hundredth of 1 percent now earns an average of $27 million per household per year, while the average income for the bottom 90 percent of Americans is about $31,000.

At the same time, the tax rate for just the top 400 earning households has declined by almost 50 percent over the last 20 years as their income has grown five times larger.

There are currently four tax brackets progressively impacting Americans earning between $1 and $373,650 per year but only one for earners making more than $373,650 annually.

The awesome legislation would enact new tax brackets for incomes beginning at $1 million as follows:

* $1 million -$10 million: 45%
* $10-$20 million: 46%
* $20-$100 million: 47%
* $100 million to $1 billion: 48%
* $1 billion and over: 49%

Give the man a hand (and a pat on the back).

UPDATE: Here’s a taste of some of the coverage the legislation is getting from The Hill, including a quote from foolish, orange-tinted Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, R-Sun Tan City:

The current top (tax) bracket starts at roughly $373,000, and the current top rate is 35 percent. Citizens for Tax Justice, which has endorsed the tax proposal, estimates that it would raise roughly $79 billion in revenue.

Republicans on Capitol Hill have long stressed that they believe Washington has less of a revenue problem than a spending problem. At a separate Wednesday event, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reiterated his belief that higher taxes stand in the way of job creation.

“As someone who understands what uncertainty does to small employers, obviously, more regulations, higher taxes creates more uncertainty,” said Boehner.

But Schakowsky declared that the idea of raising taxes on the wealthy is popular, citing a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that found 81 percent of adults thought it was totally or mostly acceptable to place a surtax on people over $1 million a year. (Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is pushing for a millionaire surtax, has also referred to that survey to help make his case.)

3 Comments

  1. Jeff Blanchard
    Posted March 18, 2011 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

    We do have a spending problem: an unrealistic global military position.

  2. StevieRay
    Posted March 24, 2011 at 1:45 am | Permalink

    More class warfare from the commies.

    Just what America needs, more class envy.

    Wake up. On Nov 2, 2010, We The People REJECTED Karl Marx, Barack Obama, and George Soros.

    YOU LOST.

    WE WON.

  3. Ken
    Posted March 24, 2011 at 10:28 am | Permalink

    So Stevie, when the majority of Americans (looks like about 81%) wants to do something to reverse the trend of constantly looking to cut things that benefit all Americans and trade that for tax cuts aimed at the richest Americans, you call that envy? I call it being tired of getting fleeced.

    Cut out this pejorative nonsense. The idea of a vaguely equal playing field has only been considered “radical” by the right in the last couple of decades, so unless you think that Dwight Eisenhower was a communist as well, then you need to read your history. Since you put Karl Marx and Barack Obama together, I assume that you should get on that sooner rather than later.