Clinton, Sanders Somewhat Confusing Vigorous Agreement On Social Security Cap
The social security cap, along with the way “Medicare for all” is financed, is one of the biggest differences between the tax plans released by Clinton and Sanders. Although both plans reduce the after tax income of those making over $730,000 (Sanders much more dramatically), the Clinton plan barely touches what I call “the other 4%” ($140,000 to $730,000), the Sanders plan reduces their after tax income by over 10%.
Much of that difference comes from the Sanders plan fooling with the income cap on social security tax. Social security tax still gets turned off at $118,500 under the Sanders plan, but it gets switched back on at $250,000. That change would have cost the Clintons over $2 million on their 2014 returns and the Sanders, well, zero. The challenge in the debate was to Clinton as to whether she would support the cap change in order to shore up social security.
Friedman LLP Survey Of Business Leaders On Tax Issues Has Surprising Results
Just over half of the respondents with international transactions found the international tax environment at least somewhat overwhelming. On a perhaps encouraging note, 65% of the business leaders indicated that they would not move their intangible property and logistical functions outside the United States even if it meant achieving a tax rate as low as 10%. The folks at Friedman seem to think that they are missing out.
Follow Me
Over and over again courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one’s affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary contributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant.