Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Rage in Brazil

Mass protests erupt in the biggest cities of Brazil.  Slideshow 

Photo

The Afghan Army

The many faces of the Afghan National Army, which has taken over security of the country from NATO.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Obama signals he may compromise on tax cuts

Related Topics

Related Video

Video

Obama signals tax stance

Sat, Nov 6 2010
President Barack Obama answers a question during a post-election news conference in the East Room of the White House in Washington, November 3, 2010. REUTERS/Larry Downing

President Barack Obama answers a question during a post-election news conference in the East Room of the White House in Washington, November 3, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Larry Downing

WASHINGTON | Sat Nov 6, 2010 4:47pm EDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama gave his clearest signal yet on Saturday of a possible post-election compromise with resurgent Republicans that could prevent tax rates from rising for any American, even the wealthiest, come January.

Obama, in his first weekly radio address since his Democrats suffered big losses in Tuesday's congressional elections, reasserted that Bush-era tax cuts should be made permanent for the middle class before they expire at year-end.

But while insisting tax cuts for wealthier Americans should not become permanent because of a $700 billion impact on the deficit over the next decade, he left the door open to a temporary extension for higher income levels -- as long as it falls short of costing that much.

"I believe there's room for us to compromise and get it done together," Obama said, previewing his administration's negotiating stance when the current Congress returns later this month for its final session.

It was the latest sign that Obama might give ground in the high-stakes tax battle, which could test the new dynamic in Washington after Republicans won control of the House of Representatives and weakened the Democrats' Senate majority.

The conciliatory tone comes after Obama had argued fervently for months that the country could not afford to keep tax rates low on those with individual incomes above $200,000.

The possible makings of an agreement that the Democrats could support points to a permanent extension for the middle class coupled with a temporary extension -- possibly for a year or more -- of higher earners' tax cuts.

Republicans, emboldened by their election victories and vowing to block Obama's agenda, have taken a harder line on making permanent for all Americans, including the wealthiest, the tax cuts enacted under former President George W. Bush.

GRIDLOCK OR COMPROMISE

Obama, for his part, made clear he still does not want the rates for the wealthier Americans to be set permanently lower but stopped short of saying he would oppose a temporary fix.

"I believe we can't afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires," he said. He will meet Democratic and Republican leaders at the White House on November 18 to discuss the issue.

The pressure for compromise is that neither party wants to alienate middle-class voters, who on Tuesday punished Democrats at the polls for Obama's economic policies that have failed to put much of a dent in persistently high unemployment.

"All of us want certainty for middle-class Americans," Obama said. "None of us want them to wake up on January 1st with a higher tax bill."

Lawmakers return the week after next for a post-election "lame duck" session. Until the new Congress convenes in January, Democrats will still be in charge in the House.

But gridlock is still possible, especially over sensitive tax policy in the context of a $1.3 trillion budget deficit. Republicans must now decide what their best option is -- take what they can get from Democrats now or wait until next year.

Republicans say small businesses would be hurt if taxes on the wealthiest rise. About 3 percent of small business would be impacted, but they account for about half of small business income, according to the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. The lower rates for the wealthiest would impact about 3 percent of all Americans.

(Additional reporting by Kim Dixon; Editing by Eric Beech)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (9)
minipaws wrote:
Well, of course, why would we raise taxes to pay our bills when we can just print more money!!

Nov 06, 2010 7:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Velmaa1 wrote:
If the tax cuts for the wealthy work, then why have no new jobs been created? Why has there been no increased spending? This is because the wealthy do no really create that many jobs or spend in the same way as the middle class. They tend to use their money to make more money. They invest and hoard and in actuality do nothing to help this economy. I this were not true, then this economic disaster would not have happened while they were receiving their large tax breaks!!! They need to pay their fair share and stop letting this country try to run on the backs of the poor and the middle class as it has done for the past 12 years. I don’t have to be an accountant to know that I pay more in taxes than the wealthiest in this country. What is wrong with that picture???

Nov 06, 2010 8:08am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Trooth wrote:
@Velmaa1

How do you pay more taxes tha the wealtiest in this country? We are talking income taxes here, not a property tax. Income taxes tax people who work, not people like John Kerry, Bill Gates, George Sorros, etc.

US Corporate taxes are the second highest (soon to be highest) in the world. The “evil” rich people, pay for the programs that we give away to the bottom 40% who pay no taxes, and get money given to them for being poor.

I am for letting all of the tax cuts expire, until we get the budget under control and until we get the deficit paid off, those are more important. I am not for taxing the rich out of jealousy. Classism is as bad as racism. You are a monetary bigot.

Nov 06, 2010 2:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.