Warren Buffett calls for a minimum tax on the wealthy

Comments (210)
ChangeWhat wrote:

Mr.Buffet can you unburden me please? Contact Reuters or buy them and send me an email.

I agree with the minimal on $1-$10 million, but 35% needs to be increased. Maybe 1% increase per $10 million above the minimal range to a max of say 60% for billionaires. It’s only fair considering the debauchery we peasants have had to deal with for the last 35 years.

Nov 26, 2012 10:05am EST  --  Report as abuse
Alexander_Sr wrote:

Warren forgot about the people making $250,000.00 to 1 million. They should also be paying more, but not as much as the people making 1 million or more.

Nov 26, 2012 10:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
Alexander_Sr wrote:

Warren forgot about the people making $250,000.00 to 1 million. They should also be paying more, but not as much as the people making 1 million or more.

Nov 26, 2012 10:12am EST  --  Report as abuse
Billmenow wrote:

I think Buffett should pay 99.8% tax rate to show us how well it works.

Nov 26, 2012 10:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
Pragmat1st wrote:

I only agree with Mr Buffet 100% but there are other things to consider. To make it fair, there should be minimum tax on all american. Many rich in the US would not mind paying more if it would make the country better since they would benefit however there are many americans who have figured out ways not to make a single contribution to the country but are making the request that the rich pay their “fair share”. When a person who makes 1 million/year pays over 350K in federal taxes and be told you are not paying your fair share it makes one wonder what is fair. So lets make it a balanced approach; make sure there is a minimum tax that the rich will pay after the accountant is finished their magic but make a minimum that a member of each tax bracket will pay as well. Lets say we start at $100/year for those who are able to at the bottom of the income bracket as well

Nov 26, 2012 10:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
RLinc2012 wrote:

Making people with incomes over $1 million pay a little bit more in tax is only one part of the equation. There is a huge chunk of the country that is paying ZERO income taxes. How is that even possible? If you’re going to ask people to “sacrifice” and pay more to “help out”, why are you not asking everyone to do it? I’m definitely not one of them, but there are people out there with a ton of money who busted their ass to earn it. And I believe some of them probably wouldn’t mind paying a little more if they felt it was money well spent. But it’s not. And they’re tired of seeing almost half the country pay NOTHING (and don’t even start with the payroll tax, sales tax, etc argument- the “rich” pay far more of those also). Those are the people who will pull their money out and say deal with it yourselves. And that WILL hurt the economy.

Nov 26, 2012 10:53am EST  --  Report as abuse
NoVictim wrote:

As a denizen of New York City, I can assure you that the super rich among us, many of whom take home many millions annually running private equity and hedge funds, have never paid their fair share while the middle class(who in this town do earn over 250K) have carried the burden.

It is time to eliminate their carried interest loophole. If they have no basis in an investment these private equity and hedge fund vultures should not be taxed at the cap gains rate. They should pay ordinary rates like the rest of us.

Nov 26, 2012 10:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
Mashman wrote:

I’m sure that Mr Buffett is aware of the fact that 90% of those who make over $1 million in a year, do so for only one year. Why? Because the vast majority of people who report over $1million, the money comes from a one time event, such as the sale of a business.

So, according to Mr Buffett, if you build a small business, make is successful, and then sell it, you should have to give a large portion of that sale to the government?

I have a better idea. The vast majority of super rich pay very little in taxes, because they have very little ‘income’. How about we base taxes on ‘assets’, and not ‘income’? This way, Mr Buffett, and his super rich friends can pay their fair share, even if they don’t have ‘income’!

Nov 26, 2012 10:59am EST  --  Report as abuse
snowcloud wrote:

Hey, Buffett, why don’t you give up ALL your money so you can sleep well at night or shut up.

Nov 26, 2012 11:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
Jim_in_MD wrote:

Mashman and ghutch are correct. Small business owners and family farmers will not be able to survive. The media does not stress the fact that Mr. Buffett has built his empire around not receiving the gains of his work as income. He has vast wealth, but has never taken much income relative to that wealth.

Because he has a small army of accounts and tax lawyers he has been able to keep his earnings, and keep his effective tax rate low. I don’t read a lot of stories about his lawsuit with the IRS fighting his tax liabilities. If he thinks he should be paying more taxes why is he fighting the IRS?

I really don’t know his motivation because his wealth creats jobs at the companies he invests in. People who run small businesses who are allowed to keep their income are able to grow their businesses.

We know what the president’s motivations are for vastly increasing spending. No amount of taxing can close the deficit.

What is this really all about?

Nov 26, 2012 11:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
KDSwain wrote:

This comes from a guy who owes somewhere in the neighborhood of a billion dollars in unpaid taxes. Such a hypocrite

Nov 26, 2012 11:55am EST  --  Report as abuse
McDadeTX wrote:

Alexander – - the dudes between 250,000 and a million already have tax rates of 33 – 35% on earned incomes (not investments income thought). Check your last 1040 instructions.

Nov 26, 2012 11:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
BrianTX2012 wrote:

I think poor people should pay their fair share also. I say about 30% should cover it.

Nov 26, 2012 11:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
Tarmangani wrote:

So we raise the rates on capital gains taxes which will mean those people that are retired and living on stock investments will now have less to live on.

The reason that Buffet’s tax is less than his secretary is because of the loopholes. Like the republicans have said, close the loopholes and it will raise the tax income.

Nov 26, 2012 11:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Pragmat1st, we already have a minimum tax on all income earned through working, it is called the payroll tax. Nearly all those that make less then 50K a year and do not pat income taxes still pay payroll taxes.

Nov 26, 2012 12:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MWalter wrote:

If Buffett and his cronies want to turn over all their money to the government, please do so, and then shut up. Just because Buffett wants to turn over huge percentages of his money to the government, doesn’t mean the government should remotely listen to him about how much everyone else should pay. Why don’t we talk about all those who pay no income tax. Should they pay even 1%?

Nov 26, 2012 12:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Marshman, the main reason the wealthy have a lower effective tax rate is most of their income is capital gains. We do not need a wealth tax, we need to make all income the same, I have seen estimates that if the capital gains rate was same as ‘regular’ income revenues would increase by about 3-5 Trillion over 10 years. That could make a significant dent in our debt/deficit issue. Or maybe make all income the same, but also lower rates across the board in a way that still provides a revenue increase but that is not too constraining on people.

Also, as of now if you sell a business it is considered a capital gain, so you would not get hit at the normal income rate, but the lower capital gain rate.

Nov 26, 2012 12:05pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GTeye wrote:

@Alexander_Sr, Perhaps you can answer a question for me?

Wouldn’t fairness be that I keep what I earn and you keep what you earn?

If you disagree, could you explain how much of my money you deserve and why?

I also find it odd you are hung up on the top 10% of earners paying more in taxes, even though they already pay 50% of all taxes collected when the bottom 50% pay 0%.

Why is 0% fair for those 50%? Please enlighten me?

You want to raise taxes on “people” making $250,000 or more yet your limited thought process prevents you from understanding that people run businesses as an LLC… you have no idea the ramifications on the costs of every day goods you will be creating.

Nov 26, 2012 12:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tgregoryknox wrote:

If Buffett wants to pay 30%, he can pay 30%. But for someone to be able to force others to forfeit their property because someone else thinks they should is theft and against a free society.

A democracy is fine for electing officials, but in a free society individuals have rights to their lives and property first and is not up for vote.

Nov 26, 2012 12:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Yeah, except millionaires and certainly Billionaires like Buffet have the vast majority of their money anywhere in can be to avoid taxes. Not that I am complaining here. We should make it possible for anyone to be able to find over seas tax shelters to protect our money from the government. James Madison, author of the Constitution, in fact states in his debate for the Constitution that to prevent the Federal Government from becoming a Tyranny, the Feds need to be barred from direct access to the money of the individual. The Feds were supposed to have to go to the state governments for money and arguably corporations because both entities have the mans to battle and fight off Federal insanity.

So sorry Buffet, you are wrong. You should be pushing to find ways to protect the money of every individual from the government, not giving access to more money to the government.

Nov 26, 2012 12:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
sean64 wrote:

Take out loopholes so that Warren will pay taxes, too. He has no income, so if income taxes rates rise…it will not touch him….

Nov 26, 2012 12:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cruizin596 wrote:

I would like to remind everyone that he is not saying that the capital gains rate should be increased…just the income tax. How much income do the truly wealthy make? How much of his income is through capital gains and NOT income. THAT is why his rate is lower than his secretary’s. Capital Gains tax is about 15% I believe. Even if income tax were raised, my bet is that he would STILL be paying a lower percentage. I say – raise the Capital Gains tax for the wealthy – raising the income tax will not solve the debt problem.

Nov 26, 2012 12:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse

A global 60% derivatives tax would solve most of the planet’s economic problems. Don’t you think?

Nov 26, 2012 12:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RedAussie wrote:

What stops rich liberals (or rich anyones) from paying more voluntarily? The tax rate is a minimum. Warren, you can pay more if you want, without making it compulsory for everyone else. The IRS will gladly take your check.

As if Warren or any of these liberal blowhards would actually pay more willingly and quietly.

“I have never understood why it is ‘greed’ to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.” – Thomas Sowell

Nov 26, 2012 12:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jake452452345 wrote:

The estate tax alone is already higher than that. And that taxes everything someone owns at the end of his life. So we’re all set, Warren. Thanks though.

Nov 26, 2012 12:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Warren Buffet is an American treasure.

Nov 26, 2012 12:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TampaJoey wrote:

Liberals need more money to give away to the Obama zombies.

Nov 26, 2012 12:33pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Scoopanuts wrote:

Mr. Buffet, instead of taxing those who generate jobs and incomes for this country, why don’t you advocate just taxing “wealth” while leaving alone those who are working hard and generating their wealth? You make your money on the backs of those who are employed knowing full well that your stack of money will never be touched. You sir, are the worst offender to this great country. Let’s hear your pious words of taxation apply to that big mound of cash you sit on today, having not worked a day in your life for most of it.

Nov 26, 2012 12:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Max17 wrote:

I see the societal mooches are out demanding more of other people’s money. Here’s the only solution:

1. Balanced budget amendment
2. Flat tax rate on EVERY penny of income (earned, investment, welfare, EVERYTHING) with no exclusions or loopholes

It doesn’t matter what the starting flat rate is – EVERYBODY with income participates. After that, we can debate fairly about the size of government. If you want your taxes raised, vote for larger government. If you want your taxes lowered, vote for smaller government.

Societal mooches would never agree. By definition, they are greedy little parasites. Their ‘fair share’ is nothing – just ask them.

Nov 26, 2012 12:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
funksoul6 wrote:

Hey Warren, how about a 30% net worth tax instead of an income tax? No, wait….how about a “graduated net worth tax” that goes up to 100% for net worths over $100 million? Yeah! Let’s go for that. Well, it would only be more “fair.”

Nov 26, 2012 12:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MrReasonable wrote:

I used to respect Warren Buffett, but he has shown himself to be so dishonest lately. Unless his secretary makes an enormous salary of well over $350K per year, she does not pay a higher rate than he does. Secondly, he pays a lower rate because he CHOOSES to. He could pay himself a salary and pay a higher income tax rate, but he doesn’t. Instead, he takes all his income in capital gains which are taxed at a lower rate for a good reason. Thirdly, he is perfectly able to stop paying accountants to find loopholes for him, and to pay extra taxes each year, but he chooses not to. Fourth, he is saying all this while fighting in court $10 billion in back taxes he owes and refuses to pay.

USAPragmatist – Your prediction about the increased revenues from raising capital gains taxes does not match with history. Every time they have been raised, the revenues from them has decreased, and every time they have been lowered, the revenues have increased. Every single time. So why would it change now?

Nov 26, 2012 12:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ounceoflogic wrote:

Hey Buffet!

Nov 26, 2012 12:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse

The whole premise is completely wrong. Why is there an Income Tax penalty on those who actually work for a living to support themselves and their families? Employees are only paid a wholesale rate that is less than their actual worth to begin with. Any business hiring anyone must make a profit on that investment in order to remain profitable and remain in business. That means what each employee produces while at work is worth more than they are paid. So, since employees are already losing money, why does government punish them with a Tax Penalty for what is left instead of allowing them to support their families? Instead, pass a National Sales Tax of 10% on all non-essential items and a Law requiring government to stay on budget and not spend more than it takes in.

Nov 26, 2012 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Marlboro wrote:

I think there should be a 100% tax on every single thing Buffet has title to. All money, property, stocks and bonds. Then cover him with tar and feathers and ride him on a rail to Calcutta.

Nov 26, 2012 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
soarby wrote:

FAIR???$$$ I’m not rich, don’t make anywhere near $200k, but when the top 5% of the taxpayers pay 50% of the taxes, something else is wrong. We need more taxpayers, not increasing taxes. I believe this only opens the door for higher taxes on everyone that is not a freeloader.

Nov 26, 2012 12:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
iowafarm wrote:

what an a#$% – why doesn’t he pay his 30% share voluntarily?

Nov 26, 2012 12:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PARodrig wrote:

The reason Warren Buffett doesn’t care about increasing tax rates on capital gains and dividends is that he is a buy-and-hold investor who rarely sells and realizes gains, plus Berkshire Hathaway doesn’t pay a dividend. Furthermore, as far a income taxes, he only declares a salary of $100,000 per year from Bershire Hathaway and a total comp of less that $500,000 (as per the latest Proxy Statement). Not to mention that he donated the bulk of his assets to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and takes a significant charitable deduction based on this gift. So basically, he himself is not affected by the so-called Buffett Rule. It’s easy to be magnanimous about money when it’s not your own.

Nov 26, 2012 12:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
realestatepup wrote:

All of these comments are utter nonsense. Who determines “fair share”? Think about it people! The same rich politicians are telling you that “other evil” rich people should pay more while they gleefully find ways to not pay! And why is it considered a good thing to pay more into a corrupt system that cannot, nay, will not live within it’s means? Why pay more into a system that works to buy votes either through entitlements or corporate largesse? Why pay more into a system that continues to start and fight wars needlessly and endlessly? Killing millions of American men and women, for what? We are tax serfs, plain and simple. No amount of taxes raised will eliminate the Federal debt. It’s not possible. And, history has shown that no matter how much you raise tax rates, the gross tax receipts stay within a tight margin, I believe the number is 10-17% or so. Never changes. The rich will just leave. Why not? Where is the incentive to stay? Stop feeding the bloated leech on your neck! We need LESS GOVERNMENT. NO WORLD POLICE. Enough. Our money is being printed into oblivion. Wages are flat, no growth. Yet gas, food, clothing, etc, continues to go up. We need:
1. Smaller Federal Government. Eliminate Departments of Housing, Education, and Interior. Waste of time and money. Certainly the Dept of Education is a colossal failure as we are the least competitive on the planet education-wise.
2. Eliminate ALL income and corporate taxes. That’s right! All of them. Relax, you folks who think our roads and bridges will crumble in to dust. Replace these taxes with a flat tax on all goods and services. You don’t buy, you don’t pay. This will also put “black market” money into tax circulation as well, ie “drug money”. Evens the playing field even more. Who will pay more? The guy buying the toaster at Walmart or the guy buying the lamborghini? Duh. No brainer. Save us millions on not paying the IRS too. Imagine not having to file those forms every year. Now your employer would have extra cash not devoted to payroll taxes to, GASP! Expand! Give you a raise! Holy Crap!
3. Eliminate lobbying. They are the dark, slimy, underbelly of our Congress.
4. Congress gets to participate in the same ol’ stuff we do. Yup. No more perks. Being a Senator or Rep was meant to be honorable SERVICE to the people. Not a way to become an uber-powerful, lifelong crony politician insider-trading and flying to Bermuda on some company’s private jet to play golf.
5. Close a lot of foreign bases. We don’t need a lot of them. Domestic too. Stop being the world police with BS excuses like “liberty” and “democracy”. Never worked. They don’t want us there.
6. Audit the Fed. They have too much power. One man by a whim, affects everyone’s economy. He prints, QE’s, and Twists our dollar into nothing.
7. Open drilling offshore. Yes, safety regulate it. But stop the nonsense of giving foreign countries money to drill and then preach all this crap about “alternative” fuels. PUH-Leeze.
8. Stop foreign aid. Mostly. Why are we giving money to China when we are borrowing money from China? Really? We don’t have it, sorry China.
9. Make welfare/section8/ have an ending date. Otherwise, there is zero incentive to change. Sorry, folks, that’s just the reality. Women X has a baby, can’t support it, fine. I get it. People make mistakes. When baby is 6 and in school full time, party is over. Not more babies for longer party. Sorry, but in this day and age, you would have to live under a rock not to know about birth control. YOu can get it anywhere, I should know, my tax dollars pay for it. I don’t care what you do, stop asking me to pay for it. Section 8 should not go on and on and on. I personally have come in contact with people who have been on section 8 for over 10 years. Doing nothing to better themselves to make more money. Nothing. I am not talking about hadicapped/sick/elderly. If you are able-bodied, why and I paying for your apartment for 10 years? Again, behavior.
10. Get rid of state and federal unions. They are a monster. Unions were meant to even the playing field for workers who could not compete in the marketplace, or were unfairly being fired for retailiation/unsafe working conditions. We have labor laws for that people. Now the unions are merely like the Mob, crakcing their knuckles while they grin and take your money. Who are the US Postal workers being victimized by? Hmmm?
11. Make Social Security inviolate. CANNOT be touched. Ever. For anything but payments to retirees/disabled.
12. Allow folks to opt-out of Social Security. I personally am a little miffed at paying in for so long for something I probably will not ever see a dime of. I mean, come on.
13. Scale WAY back the FDA. Get the drug companies out. The FDA currently does not work in our interest. They work for Big Pharma. They are supposed to be an impartial group, but the whole lot of them are like a revolving door between corporate interest and the FDA.

I could go on. Nothing is perfect. But the fact remains that the only way to rise up out of any economic situation is to allow complete access by ALL THE PEOPLE to the free market. That means the FREEDOM to it as well. Not over-regulation by the government.

Nov 26, 2012 12:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gomperzoni wrote:

Marxism is alive and thriving in the Democrats party.

Nov 26, 2012 12:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RDBlakeslee wrote:

Mr. Buffet’s proposal is self-serving.

Mr. Buffet pays very little income tax and a pittance in capital gains tax, relative to his net worth.

He would tax the income whence the non-wealthy invest and hope to become rich, while leaving his capital intact.

“Fairness” and “Justice” should lead him to propose a direct tax on capital per se, say, 10% per year on net worth?

That was tried (albeit at a 100% rate) between 1917 and the fall of the Berlin wall.

The result is a matter of record.

Nov 26, 2012 1:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gator52501 wrote:

Face it, our tax system is punitive. It is not about funding the needs of the country. It is about burdening the wealthy with some ‘moral obligation’ to fund the poor, needy, or just plain lazy. Meanwhile, those at the bottom of the scale pay nothing, or next to it. If you want a fair tax system, quit the class-envy nonsense and create a level 25% flat tax for EVERYONE who earns money. Make sure that the poor and rich alike have their own skin in the game. That might shake up the elections a bit and change people’s opinions on taxation and spending.

Nov 26, 2012 1:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DrainSurfer wrote:

Mr. Buffett,

How about reducing government spending 30%? Why, sir, do you address only taxation but not spending? The debate should be about how taxpayer money has been misappropriated and mishandled by the US government, not how we need to raise taxes on one segment of the population to help solve the debt burden in this country. Mr. Buffett, by your rationale, we should be giving the junkie more crack and the alcoholic more booze. Let us see you write a check above and beyond your tax liability before you mouth off about increasing taxes on anyone. Or better yet, how about making a contribution to establishing a federal budget?..oh, that’s right, you don’t have to live within a budget no more than does the US government. Your opinion is as much drivel as is any politician’s. Actions speak louder than words…write that check, Mr. Buffett, write that check.

Nov 26, 2012 1:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ThinkAboutIt2 wrote:

Give a tax-hungry democrat $1.00 and then they will
think they’re entitled to the next $1,000. Is Buffet stupid!?
Does he not follow the mindset of the democrats? Is he blind to what they do to this country? Does he not know that their lifelong
ambition is to tax the hell out of everybody? By all means
fool, give more money to the over-taxers and the over-spenders.

No right minded person or economists would advocate Warren’s
fool-minded nonsense. For every action, there will be a
reaction. REACTION: Democrats see it as a license to tax
more and more and more, incresing their powers over freedoms
libertys just egging themmon to be micro-managers of every
person in ths US! Dah!

Nov 26, 2012 1:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dencal26 wrote:

I am all for raising taxes. Let Obama have his way and kill any chance of a recovery.

Nov 26, 2012 1:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dencal26 wrote:

I am all for raising taxes. Let Obama have his way and kill any chance of a recovery.

Nov 26, 2012 1:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ThinkAboutIt2 wrote:

Giving democrats $1.00 extra dollar and they will see that as a license to demand more and more, into perpetuity!!

Nov 26, 2012 1:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dwstick1 wrote:

Mr Buffett, you can always ease your conscience by paying the nearly $1 BILLION in taxes that you’ve owed the government for the past 10 years. Tell your lawyers and accountants to stop fighting this and just pay up!

Nov 26, 2012 1:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
FreeAgent wrote:

Taking all of Buffet’s money would only run the gov’t for about 4 days if I recall correctly. Hell, taking (confiscating) ALL the money Millionaires and above have only runs it for 6 months or so, if that. Then they will be broke. What will you do then?

Nov 26, 2012 1:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
lou5 wrote:

Mr. Buffett should donate Berkshire Hathaway to the taxpayers or be quiet. Some of us are afraid to part with a penny because we do not SEE a future for America.

He may be brainwashed but the rest of us are not.

Nov 26, 2012 1:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kicklibsout wrote:

Let’s see now, the real unemployment (U-6) is around 15%. I wonder what this would translate into? And it WILL mean more unemployment which is the Odumbo economic plan all along. I have a much better plan; put people to work, get them off welfare. There is a woman in Kalifornia on welfare with two kids she put on disability who sued a company for $20K (the family tradition)and bought a house (under a different name of course). That’s were your tax dollars go guys and gals. Don’t be chumps, don’t vote for welfare and vote fraud. Oops – it’s too late now. Chumps, one and all.

Nov 26, 2012 1:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IvanDrago wrote:

There was a period of time in the U.S. when it was perfectly legal for one group of people to confiscate from another group of people 100% of the product of that group’s labor. That was the period prior to 1863 when slavery was legal. So, at what percent does the theft of the product of a person’s labor cease to be slavery?

Nov 26, 2012 1:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Wow, Warren. And what does the government do with the extra $80 billion that the 30% minimum tax on millionaires will generate? (Or even the $145 billion that the 35% would generate) (And those #s are overstated as the IRS data on the Tax Foundation website has AGI which is almost always greater than taxable income on which taxes are calculated.) That still leaves around $1.200 Trillion of a deficit if spending doesn’t increase one penney from the last fiscal year. (And who honestly thinks the goofballs in D.C. will put every $ to deficit reduction and not spend 10 times more than that like they always do?)
I really don’t think you got where you are today with such insipid financial analysis. Why is there no mention of reining in spending which is the real cause of the abysmal fiscal condition of this government?

Nov 26, 2012 1:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Here are a few totally predictable outcomes of Mr. Buffet’s idea:
1) investments will become “sticky”. Mr. Buffet has forever espoused the idea of “buy and hold” therby avoiding capital gains taxes. While this may work for some, being able to actually liquidate investments is important to many. fewer transactions results in lower tax revenue
2) municipal bond yeilds will skyrocket. without the rich buying them for the deduction, municipalities will have to pay MUCH higher rates thus causing anyone who lives in a municipality that borrows money (which would probably include every single American) to pay higher taxes to make up for this loss of deduction for the rich. how does
that help those who are not rich?
3) expect charitable giving to be far more managed and controlled. any gifts that would trigger this “alternative minimum tax for the rich” would almost definitely get defferred until the tax bennefit can be realized.

Nov 26, 2012 1:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
godsmotive wrote:

So how is making government bigger by giving it more money to waste going to make the country better? F Buffett….raising taxes just means more spending without accompanying legislation that reduces spending and targets all revenue above a certain level to debt reduction…otherwise it is just a scam Buffett and other Democrats are cooking up to fool the stupid people…(majority).

Nov 26, 2012 1:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
robertoh wrote:

Like most Super-rich Buffet has his real wealth hidden in both legal and unlegal places,and if a tax on the rich is passed we’ll soon find out it won’t be enough to satisfy Obama’s thirst for more Trillions to spend to buy votes for the Democrats,and then Obama will next target the Middle-Class wage earners since after all this is still were the biggest wealth is in America in the Millions who make $35.000 to $100.000 a year and they will then become the new wealthy to have their pockets picked.

Nov 26, 2012 1:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IrateNate wrote:

I wonder if Buffett would sing the same tune were he not allowed the $29 million in deductions he took last year? I am tired of Buffett offering his advice – here’s some of my advice to Buffett: hurry up and die.

Nov 26, 2012 1:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GringoLingo wrote:

As soon as Warren Buffet runs for and gets elected to a government office, then his opinion will count. Till then, he is just another schmuck like the rest of us.
Besides, he has it wrong. Minimum tax for millionaires should be 65% and no loopholes like “farm credits” for Bruce Springsteen’s ranch or livestock credits for the Kardashian girls!

Nov 26, 2012 1:48pm EST  --  Report as abuse
snewsom2997 wrote:

Notice how he doesn’t set an example and write a multi-billion dollar check to the federal government, since he only pays himself 50k a year, and pays taxes like a person that pays himself 50k a year. Only when he cashes out his investments does he pay the Capital Gains Rate, and since that all goes to charity, he doesn’t pay taxes on that either.

Nov 26, 2012 1:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
weeone wrote:

I say a 30% net asset tax on Warren Buffet and all his holdings, including his foundation that is a multi-billion tax dodge.

Nov 26, 2012 1:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
frodo59 wrote:

What am I missing? From the “tax foundation dot org”, for 2009, the top 1%, with earnings over $343,927.00, filed 1,379,822 tax returns, claiming $1,324,572,000,000 in earnings (1.324T) and paid $318,043,000,000 (318B) in Federal Income Tax. That is a rate of 24.01% (318/1324). An additional 6%, total of 30%, would raise an additional $79,474,320,000 (79B). That is chump change compared to an annual deficit of 1.1T. The additional taxes (79B) is a mere 7% of the deficit. If fact we would need 100% of all of the 1%’rs income to balance the budget. BTW I’m in the top 5%-10% range $112k-$154k

Nov 26, 2012 1:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Wyrdless1 wrote:

Wouldn’t it be easier to just eliminate the distinction between capital gains and income?

That would involve simplifying the tax code and making it more fair at the same time so that people making $250,000 and $1 million would pay the same rate instead of having $250k at the top marginal rate and $1mill at the lower capital gains rate.

If it was revenue neutral income tax rates on all taxpayers could go WAY down for most people who work for a living

Nov 26, 2012 2:02pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ojfltxreuters wrote:

The IRS already says rich people pay close to that effective rate. So what will this accomplish? Will this be accompanied by significant spending cuts and reforms? Otherwise we are going into a never ending spiral of tax increases. The CBO, OMB and CMMS Trustees already say we are.

Nov 26, 2012 2:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
eclements wrote:

Warren Buffett is an old man who made his fortune under different tax rules than he is now touting. Kind of like a kid in a treehouse who wants to pull the rope ladder up behind him and keep anyone else from joining him.

Tax rates are a blunt instrument, and one which can cause tremendous damage if not used wisely. And treating various types of income identically is a horrible idea – we want to encourage some level of risking taking in this country, and to encourabe capital formation.

The entire “I pay less than my secretary” debate was an “apples to oranges type of thing.” She pays Social Security and Medicare, Warrnen makes his from Capital Gains and Dividends. A nice way to win a bet in a bar, but an idiotic measure to base our nation’s fiscal policy on.

There is talk of a balance approach – adjust some rates, close some loopholes, place a hard cap on non-charitable itemized deductions – perhaps even adjust the holding period for Capital Gains treatment. Treat carried interests where no capital is at risk as ordinary income, and recognize that dividends should be taxed – yet at a different rate as they are already the byproduct of corporate income that has already been taxed. Create more favorable opportunities for repatriation of overseas profits with an appropriate tax rate. Raise the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes, and index the cap going forward. (And let’s not overlook that little 3.8% “Obamacare” surtax already imposed on investment income for the wealthy. To be fair, that is a significant little bite right there that it seems noone really talks about.)

But let’s not overlook the spending side of things – we are out of control in many programs. Government Salaries and Benefits are significantly out of balance relative to the private sectory. Make appropriate changes to Social Security to address the changing demographics and lifespans of today versus 40 years ago.

But given that Warren’s “Suggestion” is beyond what anyone in either party, or the White House has asked for is just a side show distration from a man who is in a different position than 99.99999% of all Americans, and smacks of a man who is bordering on senile.

Full disclosure. I do not make $1 million or more, or even a small fraction of that amount. That said, America faces a problem what we should all work TOGETHER to solve, not stand on the sidelines and point out who we want to pay the price for what we collectively enjoy.

Nov 26, 2012 2:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
internet-joe wrote:

John D Rockefeller created an industry, and empire, employing thousands to lift their standard of living. He philanthropically gave $5 Billion. You cannot argue a person like he, or Carnegie, didn’t think of the person. Buffett wishes to limit the birth rate. Buffett gives to charity but nowhere close to the order of his predecessors.
You are smart, and have connections. Give all you have to charity (not the government in taxes) warren!

Nov 26, 2012 2:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Loptr wrote:

I agree with Warren in principle and believe many wealthy folks have no problem paying a few extra percent in taxes on a scaled basis. The problem I have is in the definition of who is wealthy. A couple earning a combined $250K per year or a single person earning $200K per year are hardly considered wealthy in this day and age.

Nov 26, 2012 2:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Justinia wrote:

It’s OK to tax those super rich more but unfortunately it will only develop the bad habit for the government to spend more and encourage some to rely on social programs more.

We have to control our government spending first to make the government productive and effective then the increase of tax for those super rich will make sense.

Otherwise, the government will quickly increase the spending and we will be deficit again soon. It will probably result to further tax increase again.

Nov 26, 2012 2:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@realestatepup, Look up the tax rates after WWII when the US was paying down a public debt of an all time of 120% of the GDP. And it worked until it tunrs virtually overnight when, guess who?, figured out how to turn public debt into profit and sell it as good for the economy. The Rich job creators led by Reagan and their prize winning pet of an economist. A principle of greed based on turning public debt into personal wealth and power.

As it was after WWII, the highest minimum tax on the Buffets’ and Gates’ should be over 90%. The wealthy own and operate ‘The Government’(aka our paid for leaders) and until the wealthy are not netting a single penny profit from the waste and deficit, the waste and deficit will continue.

Nov 26, 2012 2:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Batman_is_mad wrote:

Bravo Warren.. everyone should pay their fair share of taxes according to their income levels. This includes corporations and all businesses. Shut down forever these damned loop holes.

On top of this cut spending, ear marks, all the useless pork spending.

Pretty straight forward and common sense right? Seeing is believing and believing is seeing what those congressional yahoos want to do. Most of them millionaires by the way..

Nov 26, 2012 2:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

Everyone is quick to talk about taxes, but I haven’t heard Obama come forth with any SPECIFICS on SPENDING CUTS….you know, the same specifics he called on Romney to put forth….

Considering Obama’s tax the rich plan is expected to yield $700B over ten years while he blew his 2011 budget by $1,590B, it will take ten years of Obama’s tax the rich plan to repay LESS THAN HALF of what he overspent in 2011.

That is: We have a SPENDING problem and a President with no plans to address it.

Nov 26, 2012 2:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AlbertM wrote:

I think Warren has finally lost it. What a load of crap.
I still don’t understand why anyone is listening to this clown and his brilliant “tax” ideas. Hey, Warren why don’t you donate your assets to the government? No need to wait for new tax code.
What a clown.

Nov 26, 2012 2:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
notduped wrote:

Fire all of your tax accountants Buffet! All of these billionaires who call for higher taxes on the rich and yet use every means possible to reduce their exposure to more taxes make me sick! Even Obama calls for higher taxes on himself while at the same time pays someone to ensure he pays the least amount possible. You want to pay more taxes rich-boy, file income and investments straight up and take no deductions! Weasels! Its all about power and deception. The lower 48% need to pay more taxes, and if they then vote for higher taxes, it impacts them as well.

Nov 26, 2012 2:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
callmeBob wrote:

Thomas Jefferson once said, “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work, and give to those who will not.”

Nov 26, 2012 2:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CppThis wrote:

I make 40 grand and about 20 percent of that is federal income tax. Of course, I’m not a member of any politically protected demographics nor do I have an army of tax lawyers to ensure that my big pile of fake money remains untouched.

So if I understand Mr. Buffett correctly, what he’s really saying is that people like me should go from paying 20 percent to 25 or 30 percent since Washington will use any tax increase anywhere as justification to do it to everyone else, and also pay more for my goods and services since many of the people providing them will now pass the cost on to me. I’ll pass.

Nov 26, 2012 2:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JM_San_Diego wrote:

Don’t fall for the trick. Taxes are meaningless for somebody like Buffett. Even if he never took in another dime, he already has enough money to live like a king for a thousand years.

Nothing Buffett says has any bearing on my world … or yours. Ignore the man.

Nov 26, 2012 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kubuli wrote:

When was he elected?

Nov 26, 2012 3:12pm EST  --  Report as abuse
barneyfrank wrote:

Warren, has your company Berkshire Hathaway settled up with the IRS for the hundreds of millions they owe? Get back to me later.

Nov 26, 2012 3:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
reaganlives wrote:

OR you could just pay the $billion+ that you are trying to slide out of paying Mr. Buffett.

Nov 26, 2012 3:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Harvard professor of economics, Greg Mankiw, just posted an article for “Business Insider” in which he points out the following about Warren Buffett, whom he calls a “master” of tax avoidance:

1. Berkshire never pays a dividend (therefore, it is unaffected by hikes in dividend taxes)
2. Berkshire only trades long-term (short-term capital gains, which are taxed at income tax rates, don’t affect it)
3. Buffett gives away much of his money to charity (a nice thing to do. Also, it’s a tax write-off)
4. His children won’t pay any income taxes on any assets that are bequeathed to them (so an income-tax hike won’t affect them)

Buffett constantly lobbies for higher estate taxes (“death taxes”). You might be interested to learn that he has repeatedly bought up family businesses forced to sell because they cannot afford the “death tax.” Buffett also owns life-insurance companies that rely on the death-tax in order to sell their estate-planning businesses.

Yet the mainstream media (NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS, CNN, NPR, NYTimes, Washington Post) trumpet Buffett’s statements about higher taxes on the rich as if he’s a “rogue” billionaire, trying to be fair in an unfair world. There’s nothing rogue about him. He wants higher taxes because they will not affect his business, but most likely will affect potential competitors.

Nov 26, 2012 3:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MoeHoward wrote:

I don’t remember electing Warren to represent us. He can take a flying leap with his comments.

Nov 26, 2012 3:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
horikingi wrote:

Buffett should distinguish between income and wealth. He should be calling for a yearly tax on net worth.
He has pocketed billions because unrealized capital gains are not taxed, and capital gains are taxed at a low rate.

Nov 26, 2012 3:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
barneyfrank wrote:

Yo Warren. According to several news reports your company Berkshire Hathaway owes about ONE BILLION DOLLARS to the IRS going back to 2002. Have you settled up with the U.S. Treasury yet since your position on taxing the rich has evolved. Get back to me.

Nov 26, 2012 3:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JoeSovereign wrote:

Warren Buffet has paid himself a CEO salary of only $100,000 per year for the last 20 years. He keeps his salary low to avoid paying the higher income tax and collects his profits from the lower taxed capital gain from his stock. He also travels around the world in a private jet and stays in 5 star hotels and claims this as business expenses which Berkshire pays for and deducts from it’s corporate taxes.

Mr. Buffet also lobbied against higher taxes on private jets because he owns Netjets.

I have no problem with the rich paying more taxes but it is not as simple as raising the top income rate.

Nov 26, 2012 3:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
CannibalCat wrote:

This sounds like a brilliant idea. Coming from a family that earns well over $1million annually, I see no reason someone earning that much should pay less than 30% in taxes. regardless of number of dependents, charitable donations, loans, etc.

Nov 26, 2012 3:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
LMira wrote:

I am just a housewife, but if I were to be a journalist I would have written a comparison of the actual tax code vise Mr. Buffetts proposition in that way the reader would have a clear understanding of what he is talking about.
Also I would not perpetuate the myth of Mr.Buffetts/and his secretary and their taxes. Even an immigrant housewife like me knows that one is paying dividend taxes (already taxed once as income now taxed as investment) while the other one is being taxed for income. Two different things.
If Mr. Buffett were to pay himself the salary that he deserves, instead of a nominal $1, he would be paying more than his secretary…
Is that a loophole? I don’t know… like I said, just a housewife….

Nov 26, 2012 3:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Freelogic wrote:

Dear Mr. Buffett, Stop right there because you and the ultra rich (Streisand, Walton, Clooney) will never be markedly taxed by an income tax, Why? Because your class is not made up of producers, i.e., earner. Rather, you are investors. Nothing wrong with that, but there is a clear distinction between the two, and you need to quit obfuscating this matter. Your “wealth” will never be affected by such a puny bite, no matter how high you make it. Let me introduce you to a bite your class will truly feel and ease you collective guilty conscience: the WEALTH TAX.

Every 4 years you pay: 6% on net worth $20M – $50M (excluding primary home value)*
12% on net worth $50M – $100M (excluding primary home value)
20% on net worth $100M – $1B (no home value exclusion)
40% on net worth $1B +
*trusts included

How about that! I can hear Warren and Babs screaming: ” What?!!! But-but-but this is not we
meant! This will be disruptive to all our investments! This will require us to liquidate assets! This means we need to hire more accountants and appraisers and-and our pile will SHRINK!”

Yes, Warren and Babs, that’s the idea. You have an obscene share of this nations wealth, and the WEALTH TAX is meant to partially undo that. You will feel much more patriotic as a result. Uncle Sam gets real revenue to pay down the deficit, and congress can leave the earners alone to grow their businesses and hire more workers.

Next, we eliminate the income tax altogether and replace it with a national sales tax. (Don’t worry about the poor, every one gets a yearly sales tax credit card for the first $30,000 in purchases.)

Nov 26, 2012 3:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MBuehner wrote:

Mr Buffet, no need to wait for Congress to act. Checks for deficit reduction can be sent to:

P O BOX 2188
PARKERSBURG, WV 26106-2188

Although you employ hundreds of accountants and lawyers whose soul purpose is to minimize your tax exposure (and that indeed your company is currently litigating hundreds of millions of dollars the government claims you owe), somehow your spirit of patriotism and fairness will allow you to show leadership on this issue by paying yours first. There is no doubt in my mind that a stand up guy like you with such obvious passion of paying your fair share wont wait a moment longer than is necessary.


Nov 26, 2012 3:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
louisdous wrote:

Big problem is lack of honest and aware Americans focusing on real issue of spending. Couple this with dishonest distractions(and distractors) that require awareness, curiosity, and energy to debunk. Buffet knows there already is a minimum tax on the rich called the Alternate Minimum Tax (AMT). He also knows this tax was established to keep about 100 wealthy people from paying little to no taxes. He also knows somehow the law makers forgot to tie to any inflation measure so next year as many as 40 million tax payers will be affected by it. In case you are not aware, there are not 40 million people in this country maxing $250,000 much less $1 million a year…A liar, and pathetic, and mean.

Nov 26, 2012 3:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
steelydude wrote:

Mr. Buffet is self-serving for reasons cited above, and he has become part of the problem. As noted, when he or anyone only tlaks about the revenue side of the equation w/o addressing spending side they are being intellectually dishonest.

Start w/ facts! @65% of all people with incomes DO pay 30% or more on their income! So while we need to close that 35% gap, the revenues extracted there wouldn’t pay for even 4 days…but, we do need to close that gap.
That said, we need to immediately address ALL spending by the Fed AND State Govt’s. There is insanity at the Fed level, but outright fraud at the State level! California WILL sink into a financial abyss- only timing is uncertain, or if they get a Fed bailout…
Flogging the “rich” isn’t a new idea, and the Repubs should wake up and get this over with before they create a bigger political problem for themselve’s and their constituents! It is inevitable as the Lib’s MANTRA is “election’s have consequenses” and they have the optics and the polis in their pocket right now.
Need to start ARTICULATING planns and stop throwing slogans around. The biggest failing of the Right is the “de-intellectualization” of the Party and the process (read slogans vs proactive articulation) – you are handing the game over to the Left by doing this.
If we must acquiesce to the Lib Left and their new “buddy”, Mr. Buffet, then atleast give an intelligent response instead of letting them paint you behind Norquist & Party of the Rich claims.
$250 to 500 – leave them alone(middle class ), $500 to a million go with expiry of Bush cuts, $1M & up (non cap gain)-give them their 30%- MOST are already paying effective 30%!, $10M go 40% and then leave it alone !(though they won’t!).
You Libs want it? I say tax WEALTH! That would get Buffet! Income is the most regressive form of taxation – taxing the RICH is taxing the RICH – not those trying to ascend….
This is the USA, isn’t it??
Just remember, elections have consequences! This is only the beginning, folks! (read:Obamacare, EPA, Carbon Tax, infinite Quant Easing and the Treasury’s now 8yr duration bond portfolio, etc.)

Nov 26, 2012 3:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bryan60074 wrote:

I call for all the people milking the system to pretend to look for a job or limit the number of children that welfare will support so people that actually contribute to society in some shape or form don’t have to pay for those who take and give nothing in return.

Nov 26, 2012 3:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
bryan60074 wrote:

To those who want to demonize “the rich”, those who make over “x” amount…the more you make the more you pay period. The below is from the IRS. Those making 250K more pay for 90% of all taxes…what to people deem is there “fair share”.
Tax Bracket Married Filing Jointly Single
10% Bracket $0 – $17,400 $0 – $8,700
15% Bracket $17,400 – $70,700 $8,700 – $35,350
25% Bracket $70,700 – $142,700 $35,350 – $85,650
28% Bracket $142,700 – $217,450 $85,650 – $178,650
33% Bracket $217,450 – $388,350 $178,650 – $388,350
35% Bracket Over $388,350 Over $388,350

Nov 26, 2012 3:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Note to Warren Buffett- Either run for office or STFU.

Nov 26, 2012 4:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dogman1313 wrote:

I say tax the rich at 100%, then that would stop all these fricken idiots from contributing to these campaigns . This has got out of hand. You donate a lot of money to a politician, then you get it back at the cost to the taxpayer.

Nov 26, 2012 4:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
dogman1313 wrote:

I say tax the rich at 100%, then that would stop all these idiots from contributing to these campaigns . This has got out of hand. You donate a lot of money to a politician, then you get it back at the cost to the taxpayer.

Nov 26, 2012 4:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gregbrew56 wrote:

Theoretically, we already do…it’s called the AMT.

Nov 26, 2012 4:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
accbar wrote:

Buffet is ingratiating himself to the Marxists.
Old Buffet will soon die, without his investment income. Then he will be judged by the God of creation who made the law.
Reread the X law given Moses.

Nov 26, 2012 4:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
accbar wrote:

Buffet is ingratiating himself to the Marxists.
Old Buffet will soon die, without his investment income. Then he will be judged by the God of creation who made the law.
Reread the X law given Moses.

Nov 26, 2012 4:15pm EST  --  Report as abuse
domowames wrote:

maybe buffett should pay the 5 billion in back taxes he owes on his companies before he ask’s other people to pay more. he is such a fraud.. alot of his money comes from the government in his business so of course he would want us to pay more….

Nov 26, 2012 4:19pm EST  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

To all those saying the rich already pay their fair share because they contribute about 90% of the taxes….

1. What about payroll, sales and other taxes?
2. When that class has more then 90% of the wealth in this country and they are only paying 90% of the taxes, they ARE NOT paying their fair share.

What you righties/Obama haters don’t get is they have all the money so of course they going to pay most of the taxes. Get out of your Rovian Bubbles and see reality for what it is.

Nov 26, 2012 4:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse

He says this because almost none of the money he makes each year is salary. It comes from dividends and capital gains which is exactly what half of the 80K page tax code is written to circumvent by guys like Warren Buffett. All the small business working stiffs with 5 employees doing $1m in gross adjusted revenue can just start “taking one for the team”. This idea will be EXCELLENT for the economy. No really, this turns out well, I’m sure of it…

Nov 26, 2012 4:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
HerbbieT wrote:

National Income Tax is unconstitutional!
Why is this being discussed?

Nov 26, 2012 4:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
curiousDave wrote:

Mr. Buffett,
There is nothing in the U.S. Code which prevents you from paying amounts in excess of your legal tax liability. Any check made payable to the Treasury will be cashed and, with amazing rapidity, spent. But paying what you feel is your “fair share” isn’t enough, is it? You want others to pay what you feel is their fair share as well. Being afraid that someone will have more than you, if you do what you proclaim to be “right”, puts a very negative slant on your self-proclaimed altruism. In fact, it seems to reveal an unhealthy desire to see good done with someone Else’s money; perhaps a laudable trait in Robin Hood but which comes across from you as Robbing Hood.

Take some of that money you feel burdened by and actually start a company that hires people instead of acquiring existing companies and scaring the heck out of their staff. Maybe making Hathaway shirts in America again would be a start. Even if you squandered some of your excess wealth and subsidized each shirt produced, the benefits to the nation for which you claim concern would do more “good” than shipping your money to DC. A five dollar subsidy on, say, 200,000 shirts would be an even million; the number of Americans having a decent job making something they are proud of inures benefits to the country far in excess of the pocket change costs you would incur.

If you truly want positive change, Mr. Buffett, lead the way to a strong manufacturing economy, lead the way to valid employment, lead the way to wealth creation instead of spouting wealth discouragement. Be a colossus, Mr Buffett, not a whiney kid who won’t wash unless someone else is forced to dry.

Nov 26, 2012 4:34pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OtisLee77 wrote:

Tax the wealthy? Why would Buffett care? The wealthy is everyone having more than you.

Nov 26, 2012 4:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OtisLee77 wrote:

OR, at what point is someone rich?

Nov 26, 2012 4:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
steelydude wrote:

65% of taxpayers earning $1M or more already pay 30% or more effective(aggreagate) tax rate as of 2010 per IRS!
Close the gap and lets focus on spending side too!
It is simply intellectually dishonest not to discuss taxes without discussing spending…Does Mr. Buffet only examine one side of an Income Statement or Balance Sheet??? Of course not!
Republicans need to move the debate off of this before whole situation gets worse- either politically or actually/both. Dems are dug in as “elections have consequences”, and unfortunately, they have optics and polis on their side. Go with Kristol and “cede” to the Dems on taxes now so can move the debate to what else matters and get some political wind behind backs before get upstaged….again!

Nov 26, 2012 4:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Tish2 wrote:

Mr. Buffett, no one is stopping you if you want to pay more – go ahead and give the government all you want. However, why do you get to tell other people how much they should pay? You may certainly have an opinion, and that is all!

Nov 26, 2012 4:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
gregbrew56 wrote:

HerbbieT – It’s been tried, Federal taxation HAS been found to be constitutional, and the fraudsters have gone to jail. Every time.

Try not paying it when it’s due, then take the IRS to court. Go ahead, make their day.

Nov 26, 2012 4:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Teeshot wrote:

Warren Buffet talks a good talk but is full of manure, he says he should pay more in taxes! There is no law stopping him from opening his checkbook and writing a check to the IRS, Oh wait he’s in a $2billion battle with them now. What a hypocrite, plus he was for all the tax payer funded bailouts, of course, how many billions would dear old Warren lost if we weren’t their to help him. If there was one person I would like to see lose all his money Warren is it. Would love to see the look on his face if on morning he woke up and saw his bank statement showing an overdraft fee.
One can only dream!

Nov 26, 2012 5:08pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AZWarrior wrote:

Warren, you first.

Nov 26, 2012 5:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tigerdragon wrote:

Mr. Buffet, What’s in this for you? No self respecting person that has worked hard for his money just wants to turn it over to the government. The government can’t seem to spend money wisely, so why would you want to give them more just to waste it? If you want to give money away send me a check, I will pay taxes on it. I am sure you have something up your sleeve, one day we all may know what.

Nov 26, 2012 5:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Snailmail wrote:

Or, we can not penalize the people giving us jobs, ask the government why they are spending over 7x what they did in the Clinton years. Actually get our house in order rather than whining about those who put food on the table for everyone.

So sick of the ‘gotta pay their fair share’ argument, pay it to who? did the government earn it? Sheep.

Nov 26, 2012 5:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
The_Saxon wrote:

The comments of ChangeWhat and Alexander Sr. show how ignorant people are of the tax code, and maybe even Warren Buffet. 1) The marginal tax for people with income (i.e., salary, wages, draws on Partnership or LLC earnings) above 250,000 is already 36%. The reason Warren Buffets tax rate is higher than his is because she is paid about a million dollars a year in SALARY!!! Warren Butthead makes his money off capital gains. Raise taxes on capital gains if you wish, but the more you raise taxes on capital gains, the more people and institutions with money to invest end up investing that money overseas. You little Trotskys are going to end up choking the goose that lays the golden eggs you little urchins mooch off of.

Nov 26, 2012 5:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

Mr. Buffett made his billions as a direct result of the tax reforms of the 1980′s. Now he wishes to hobble future leaders with a high tax rate. “Hypocrite” seems too diplomatic a term for what he is engaging in.

Nov 26, 2012 5:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

Mr. Buffett made his billions as a direct result of the tax reforms of the 1980′s. Now he wishes to hobble future leaders with a high tax rate. “Hypocrite” seems too diplomatic a term for what he is engaging in.

Nov 26, 2012 5:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
katalin wrote:

Isn’t that the way the AMT (Aleternative Minimum Tax) was created back in the 1970′s, to make sure that “the rich” pay tax? It was originally created for those making over $100,000 which, back then, was alot of money. Equal to 1 million dollars today. And it wasn’t indexed for inflation, on purpose.

This is the basis of the dreaded “marriage tax” where you pay more filing jointly than filing separately. And this hits millions of filers it wasn’t supposed to, but no one cares.

Now, every year, Congress has to pass an extension so that “middle class” taxpayers don’t get hit.

And here we are again, looking for a “minimum tax rate” for “the rich”. And, of course, it won’t be indexed for inflation either so, i like 10 years, those making the equivalent of $250,000 a year will get hit too. And scaling down the income ladder as inlation continues to erode incomes.

Back to the future! It worked so well in the past…

Nov 26, 2012 5:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
february2 wrote:

I bet the wealthy lawmakers like Sen Kerry and those multimillionares and multi-billionaires will write laws that exempt themselves and their money. This goes for multi-millionaires Dems.

Nov 26, 2012 5:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

The idea that capital gains should be taxed the same as earned income is one of the worst ideas ever.
Again Mr. Buffett’s incredible hypocrisy is hard to ignore. His billions were made in an environment where invesotment was seen realistically- as a high risk proposition that often fails. Small business owners who build a million dollar business over decades, and sell it, will now be taxed as if they simply made a salary? what an unreasonable and unreaslitic way to treat hard work, risk taking and wealth creation.

Nov 26, 2012 5:51pm EST  --  Report as abuse
PistolPeteNC wrote:

Yes, and make it double if they are in the entertainment industry.

Nov 26, 2012 6:00pm EST  --  Report as abuse
rgovtal wrote:

Demand all elected officials pay 50% to 75% tax on any donation over $250. Also, they should be retroactive; those elected officials who have money in their election coffers of over $250,000.00 should pay 50% of what they have to the government. Also, they need to be taxed on their benefits differently than the rest of us since they get more than we do and it is paid for by taxpayers. How about THAT for a START!

Nov 26, 2012 6:01pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Numbersguy wrote:

Why Warren will even lend you HIS PERSONAL ACCOUNTANTS to help design the legislation mandating these new minimum taxes so that all of the loopholes that they can exploit to Warren’s benefit will be included

Nov 26, 2012 6:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
paperpushermj wrote:

That rate won’t bring in that much more money so it looks like he is saying after you make your first 10 mill it becomes easer and easer making the next 10 and the next and next.

Nov 26, 2012 6:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
EPfan wrote:

I am so sick of that senile man saying the rich should pay more. For all those rich people (I’m not one)I say YOU pay all the taxes you want to and leave the rest of us alone. Mind your own business. Who elected you as anything anyway? Shut up and go away!

Nov 26, 2012 6:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
putupjob wrote:

Buffett pays at a lot lower rate than 30%.
In fact, he doesn’t actually pay what he owes at a rate “that is less than his secretary”.
He is way behind on tax payments and owes a fortune.
Of course, he is now talking about how others aren’t paying enough.

Nov 26, 2012 6:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
cooperbry wrote:

We should find out how he feels about capital gains as that’s how he makes his fortune. He can easily adjust his “income” to be $999,999. J.O.!

Nov 26, 2012 6:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Well Buffett has given much of his wealth to charity…..ran by his children. Avoiding a death tax by taking a minimal salary through the charity is genius. How about “party A” not promise “party B” anything so he can avoid taking it from “party C”?

Nov 26, 2012 6:40pm EST  --  Report as abuse
corbinl wrote:

What better way to prevent anyone from ‘stealing’ your “Richest Man In The World” title than to tax all who try. Buffett, I used to respect you but this is sooo transparent.

Nov 26, 2012 6:50pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Peerless17 wrote:

Hilarious! Buffett owes hundreds of millions of $$$ to the Federal Govt and is paying an army of attorneys to avoid paying his own tax burden as we speak. Nice of him to volunteer more money from his friends while he refuses to pay the current rate… Shut up old man.

Nov 26, 2012 7:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Per an article from July 2012 in The Economist (a fairly neutral, but credible paper), it is cited that at the end of the Bush Presidency (FY 2008), the top 5% of earners (who earned 31.7% of total adjusted national income) payed 58.7% of total federal individual income taxes.

That’s right: The top 5% of earners paid 58.7% of ALL individual tax receipts.

I am so tired of liberals who use the RATE to determine if the “rich” paid their “fair” share. And, sick of conservatives who don’t call the libs out on it.

If anything, and I were in the top 5%, I would be PI$$ED that the other 95% are only paying 41.3% of taxes.

Especially the 40% or so of able-bodied, younger people who could work, but choose instead to take a check! There ARE jobs out there. But these younger generations feel it is beneath them to take any job – even if that means THEY are providing for them and their families instead of US paying for them and their families.

Bring on the plague and let’s get a fresh start!

Nov 26, 2012 7:25pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Capndiesalot wrote:

I think there should be a wealth tax…anything above $10 million goes to the US government. So, Warren, you need to cough up all of your billions, and keep that $10 million. After all, how much more do you need.

Until it’s a Wealth Tax, it’s just pretend for guys like you who love the President and support his collectivist efforts.

Nov 26, 2012 7:32pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Reuters13 wrote:

When Warren proposes a wealth and not income based tax he will approach credibility…until then keep sending flowers to Kate…and leave the bourgeois alone.

Nov 26, 2012 7:37pm EST  --  Report as abuse
GtownPolitics wrote:

How about we tax all your unrealized capital gains you POS hypocrite?

Nov 26, 2012 7:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OPA44 wrote:

Charge the boys at Goldman Sachs first old man, then we’ll talk.

Nov 26, 2012 7:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
paulinflor wrote:

Mr. Buffett, like his colleague Bill Gates, has an attitude toward philanthropy that is common among the super-rich: he values ne’er do wells and low-lifes higher than he does his own clients and employees, and makes his philanthropic contributions based on how far the recipients are removed from him both physically and culturally.

Nov 26, 2012 7:44pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mklrnzn wrote:

Why stop at 35 or 30? If a little does a little good then a whole lot does a whole lot of good. By what moral authority does this little ole man find his belief. Notice he never writes a bigger check to the IRS These Altruists never stop.

Nov 26, 2012 7:57pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Kinda funny coming from a man who is FIGHTING the IRS over a Billion Dollar past due tax bill! Just more BS from the government and their “friends”.

Nov 26, 2012 7:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:


The top 5% have 72% of ALL Financial wealth in this nation, and 63% of ALL Net Worth. The bottom 80% have 5% of Financial wealth and 11% of ALL net worth. THE BOTTOM 80%! The bottom 50% less than 1%, and probably less than 0.5% of financial wealth.

So go a head tell us some more about fair. A plague comes and the vampires die too.

Nov 26, 2012 8:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Says the two-faced POS with nine years of unpaid back taxes.

Nov 26, 2012 8:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
geezer117 wrote:

People who start small businesses gamble a large part of their assets, and statistics are, they lose over half the time. I speak from experience. If the government is going to step in when they win and take a third of the gains, the gamble makes no sense.

Nov 26, 2012 8:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
geezer117 wrote:

People who start small businesses gamble a large part of their assets, and statistics are, they lose over half the time. I speak from experience. If the government is going to step in when they win and take a third of the gains, the gamble makes no sense.

Nov 26, 2012 8:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
pakikake wrote:

Warren Buffet is a troll. If you will note he left all his money to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. He needs to shut up and send Obama his money and leave the rest of us alone. Troll

Nov 26, 2012 8:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
xsnake wrote:

I think that Mr. Buffet should give his money to the gubment and then spend the rest of his life wearing dresses.

Nov 26, 2012 8:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TexaSooner wrote:

And how many years is it that Buffett has been battling the IRS over whether dividends received by his company in past years are ‘qualified’ and thus not taxable at all. He’s been kicking and screaming over it for years.

Nov 26, 2012 8:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
MelAnosis wrote:

Sounds great to the class warfare crowd. However, this will produce little revenue and do little to change the increasing deficit and National Debt. I suggest Buffet voluntarily paid 30%, instead of using the system to avoid the taxes. The guys a hypocrite

Nov 26, 2012 8:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
JM_San_Diego wrote:

Buffett is concerned with himself, not you, not me, not anybody — just Buffett. It’s a miracle that his wheezing pronouncements make news.

He’s not actually worried about taxes — not at all. Even if he never took in another dollar, he’s already got enough money to live a thousand years in luxury.

Nov 26, 2012 9:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Maybe Mr. Buffet should pay the billion dollars in back taxes he and his entities owe before worrying about the rates the rest of us pay.

He sounds like Al Gore screaming about how the sky is falling unless everyone else reduces their carbon footprint while he lives in a 10,000 square foot house, has a 100 foot luxury houseboat and travels everywhere on private jets that emit more carbon on the way to one of his $50,000 speaking engagements than the average American family emits in 5 years.

Nov 26, 2012 9:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kicklibsout wrote:

Let’s see now, the real unemployment (U-6) is around 15%. More unemployment is the Odumbo economic plan all along per Kennedy. I have a much better plan; put people to work, get them off welfare. There is a woman in Kalifornia on welfare with two kids she put on disability who sued a company for $20K (the family tradition)and bought a house (under a different name of course). That’s were your tax dollars go guys and gals. Don’t be chumps, don’t vote for welfare and vote fraud. Oops – it’s too late now. Chumps, one and all.

Nov 26, 2012 9:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kicklibsout wrote:

Let’s see now, the real unemployment (U-6) is around 15%. More unemployment is the Odumbo economic plan all along per Kennedy. I have a much better plan; put people to work, get them off welfare. There is a woman in Kalifornia on welfare with two kids she put on disability who sued a company for $20K (the family tradition)and bought a house (under a different name of course). That’s were your tax dollars go guys and gals. Don’t be chumps, don’t vote for welfare and vote fraud. Oops – it’s too late now. Chumps, one and all.

Nov 26, 2012 9:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
EddieDarnel wrote:

If you took every single penny that Warren Buffet has, it would pay for 4-1/2 days of the US government. This tax-the-rich won’t work. The problem here is that the government is far bigger than even the capacity of the rich to sustain it. The Buffet Rule would raise $3.2 billion a year and take 514 years just to pay off Obama’s 2011 budget deficit.

Nov 26, 2012 11:03pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Zoney wrote:

Ahh, the damnable hypocrisy and sophistry of socialist-leftist twits.

Buffett made his billions under capitalism and now that he’s an old fool at the end of his life, he preaches the embrace of monstrous socialist politics — policies that HISTORY SHOWS only lead to poverty, misery, decline, and depression.

But of course you dumb-as-a-sack-of-hammers Obama cultists will lap it up.

Leftists want a dictatorial do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do ruling-class doling out “entitlements” to a dumbed-down, dispirited, dehumanized rabble, and you liberals always lap it up.

Nov 26, 2012 11:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Wolfman200 wrote:

I agree with you Warren as long as it is asset tax. Anything above a million should be taxed 40%. I bet you would be for that one.

Nov 26, 2012 11:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

What will happen is that with democrats being allowed to control the agenda, taxes will go up on everyone and spending will go up even faster.
Buffet and his billionaire pals got theirs already. By enabling the government to pretend capital gains are the same as income, they are working to make certain they keep on top forever. Buffet’s wealth exploded during the time taxes were reformed and successful investing rewarded. And American’s wealth in as a nation exploded as well. Now he is seeing to it that the opportunity he and America benefited so much from is taken away.

Nov 26, 2012 11:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jencaballero wrote:

Mr. Buffet. Riches are for spending and spending for honor and good actions. The riches in this country should not be gathered in just a few hands; and money, like butter is only good when it’s spread. As if we lived a thousand years or money could be taken from this life.

Nov 27, 2012 12:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
StewartIII wrote:

NewsBusters| Grover Norquist: ‘Warren Buffett Should Write a Check and Shut Up’


Nov 27, 2012 12:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
GeorgeAdams wrote:

Warren Buffet, like all liberals and Democrats, are the biggest hypocrite and liars!

Buffet does not mention that he is suing for not paying his own taxes. In fact, Buffet owes a minimum of $1 billion of taxes.

So, Mr. Buffet, put up or shut up!

Nov 27, 2012 1:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
iceman3232 wrote:

First of all you can tax everyone making $250k or more a year at 100% and only run the current government for 3 months. Secondly, Buffet has owed over $1 billion in back taxes for more than 3 years that he has been fighting in court. So for him to say they should pay more at the same time he is fighting a tax bill is hypocritical, but most liberals are.

Nov 27, 2012 1:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
iceman3232 wrote:

First of all you can tax everyone making $250k or more a year at 100% and only run the current government for 3 months. Secondly, Buffet has owed over $1 billion in back taxes for more than 3 years that he has been fighting in court. So for him to say they should pay more at the same time he is fighting a tax bill is hypocritical, but most liberals are.

Nov 27, 2012 1:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
terragord7 wrote:

It is well known among big four the only reason Buffet has achieved above normal returns is through his use of SPEs, controlled by the insurance companies he owns. A insurance company does not pay taxes on the investment income. Without that strategy, he would have achieved 5% return. If you have a 50 million portfolio, you can buy an insurance company to do the same. Most people do not want to bother but he did.That is he rumor mong hedge funds. IMHO he is a deceptive man who owes a lot to his father’s connections. To claim dividend should be taxed at ordinary rates is absurd but fine for him while trapped in insurance portfolio and not taxed, that is the rumor

Nov 27, 2012 3:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
BP2104 wrote:

I find it ironic that, in a country that still prides itself on being free, everyone seems to have an opinion on how much of their neighbors’ wealth should be confiscated by the government, all in the name of fairness and equality. Theft can never be noble or just, even when it’s done by legal decree. Unfortunately, private property is neither safe nor sacrosanct in the U.S. anymore. It is subject to majority vote (read: mob rule).

Besides, the U.S. Government is hopelessly insolvent as it is. It’s mathematically impossible for the U.S. to meet its obligations. They could confiscate 100% of everyone’s income, and it still wouldn’t be enough to balance the budget, let alone reduce the balance of debts outstanding. On a GAAP basis, the FY 2012 deficit is expected to be $7 trillion (this includes the increase in the net present value of entitlements). The U.S. Government has roughly $2.9 trillion in net debt that matures in the next year, it’s borrowing $1.1 trillion per year (net) from the public, and interest on outstanding marketable debt is running at about $276 billion per year (using last year’s interest expenditures). The Treasury’s net funding needs (net redemptions, net new issuance, and interest) amounts to about $4.275 trillion, at a minimum, over the next year. They could cut every single penny of federal spending, and they still wouldn’t be able to come close to meeting the scheduled debt maturities. Meanwhile, total federal tax receipts amount to only $2.4 trillion. As a point of reference, gross taxable income for individuals totaled $5.9 trillion in 2010, the latest year the data is available for. And, when you consider that the Federal Reserve has been the only marginal buyer of U.S. debt in town over the past few years, a trend that is certainly set to continue, it’s clear this solvency problem will be dealt with dishonestly by way of inflation. The writing is on the wall. Do the math…….

Nov 27, 2012 3:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
jabusse wrote:

30% on WHAT? The reason they pay less is because they don’t show the income. It is paid to other entiities they control, deferred, or embedded in the value of stock they hold but don’t sell.

The only way to steady the ship of state is to limit what it does and where it goes. In our form of government people muct fend a bit for themselves. We can’t fight the world on the taxpayer’s nickle and we can’t eliminate the poor. Government just sucks money out of the system and provides no tangible things. It simply sucks.

The French had a pretty good idea in the early 1800′s for those who lived off the people without retunrning anything.

Nov 27, 2012 4:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
TheBuzz wrote:

I say Warren should pay 50%. After all, how much money does he need? 50% of what he has won’t hurt him a bit.

Nov 27, 2012 7:11am EST  --  Report as abuse
EPat49 wrote:

-Mr.Buffett could write a check to the US treasury at any time for any additional amount he deemed necessary but doesn’t do so for the following Buffett Position on the tax-free foundations he established for his family members or contributes to via Bill Gates.
“In a 2007 CNBC interview, when asked why he shelters his money through tax-free strategies rather than writing big checks to Uncle Sam, Mr. Buffett responded: “I think that on balance the Gates Foundation, my daughter’s foundation, my two sons’ foundations will do a better job with lower administrative costs and better selection of beneficiaries than the government.”
So Mr. Buffett thinks he and his family can put their money to better use than the government can. I guess he’s really not so different from the rest of us who would rather direct our contributions to our own charitable institutions rather than passing them through high overhead government agencies to fund activities such as Acorn and Planned Parenthood.

Nov 27, 2012 7:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
lloydc1234 wrote:

Right or wrong, I agree with Buffet.

Nov 27, 2012 7:27am EST  --  Report as abuse
Lenny2012 wrote:

Buffet can feel free to donate up to 90% of his income to US treasury.

Nov 27, 2012 7:33am EST  --  Report as abuse
Lenny2012 wrote:

I think that all people in US a filthy rich comparing to people living in cardboxes around the world.
Let’s tax all Americans at 90% plus additional 8% tax for Warren Buffet.
As you can easily calculate, this tax will affect rich more than it would affect your household.

Nov 27, 2012 7:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
DASA wrote:

This genius of an investor should realize that you determine the necessity of spending before you decide how to fund it. Buffet’s blanket setting of tax rates assume, by his silence, that government spending is at least at appropriated levels and that every cent of that spending is wisely spent, needs to continue and needs to be funded. I can’t believe he takes that position. I think we need to reexamine what we are spending now, determine if we need to continue it at current levels, or at all, and then decide how to fund it. His approach seems to be 180 degrees backwards.

Nov 27, 2012 7:54am EST  --  Report as abuse
CuriousOne wrote:

Thank you for your wisdom Warren.

Thank you for your patriotic opinion that the rich need to hear from one of their own!

Nov 27, 2012 7:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
CuriousOne wrote:

Thank you for your wisdom Warren.

Thank you for your patriotic opinion that the rich need to hear from one of their own!

Nov 27, 2012 7:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
loweed wrote:

We are ALL being PLAYED for fools by progressives like Buffett, who is a hypocrit. He makes millions off of tax issues, and the higher the tax RATE, the higher the return if your rich from tax deductions. Bubbett is nothing more than a lobbiest for the insurance industry. Which he owns.

Nov 27, 2012 8:48am EST  --  Report as abuse
bates148 wrote:

This guy is great. Leftists love him because he wants to give more. He’s just sitting on billions of dollars, I mean, who wouldn’t?

Nov 27, 2012 8:51am EST  --  Report as abuse
Caseyw wrote:

If anyone wants to know what kind of company Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway is, go and do a Google search for complaints about Clayton Homes and Vanderbilt Mortgage. Clayton is a manufactured home company and Vanderbilt is a manufactured home finance company. These two companies have made the lives of many low to medium income people miserable due to their crooked and underhanded business practices. If Mr. Buffett was so concerned about the common man not getting a break or paying more than they should, he shouldn’t have two of the companies that he runs ripping so many of them off in the name of home ownership.

Nov 27, 2012 9:00am EST  --  Report as abuse
jlmr wrote:

Maybe Warren could volunteer to be taxed on 30% of his wealth rather than his income-then his actions would speak louder than his words.

Nov 27, 2012 9:22am EST  --  Report as abuse
drakos wrote:

“Hey, let’s tax all at 50% and the rich at 80%! Don’t worry though, we will exclude ourselves from this major tax hike.” Says a Democrat on the Hill.

Nov 27, 2012 9:55am EST  --  Report as abuse

Warren Buffett is such a hypocritical PIG. If he’s so interested in increasing “revenues” for our country, why does he take his own tax bills to court to LOWER them? If he’d just pay his own tab before he gets involved in someone else’s–we’d all be the better for it.

Nov 27, 2012 10:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
hwobstj wrote:

Hmmm, I didn’t see where Warren Buffet was calling for ‘lower’ taxes on those making less than his dictated amounts. Apparently he wants to keep all taxes high, even if not as high for those of us wealth-challenged people. Hey Warren, just shut up. If you’re going to say anything at all, why don’t you call on the government to reduce spending. All the companies you’re invested in do well because they manage their overhead well, unlike the bloated, and about to explode, elephant of a government we serve (yes, that WE SERVE, not the other etc). Warren, we’d do much better to cut taxes dramatically, open cross state commerce, especially health care, get rid of Obamacare, reduce entitlement spending to about 10% of what it is now, and get back to our Constitutionally authorized spending.

Nov 27, 2012 10:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
LTCB wrote:

Buffet should just go ahead and dump in ALL of his money if he really believes his lies so much. He’s just afraid someone else might get as much as he has and then he wouln’t have the power and clout he has now. He and Soros are BOTH equally evil and worthless. Take ALL their money. Not “some”.

Nov 27, 2012 10:37am EST  --  Report as abuse
lvtaxman wrote:

I find it humorous that the third richest man in the world calls for higher taxes, but as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, admits in SEC filngs his company owes back taxes since 2002. He also owns NetJets that has been sued by the IRS for $366 Million in back taxes.

How hypocritical can this socialist be. Maybe if everyone paid the taxes they owed, even under current rates, we wouldn’t be in such a mess.

As for the tax, an analysis showed that since there is already the Alternative Minimum Tax and other items affecting the wealthy, his proposal would raise less than $4 Billion per year. The taxes Obama wants to raise would be about $75-80 billion per year.

In comparison, the government borrowed $24.3 BILLION on Black Friday and over $1 trillion for 4 straight years. The above tax increases would cover the deficit for less than two weeks.

How about looking at spending?

Nov 27, 2012 10:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

Well then just pay it Warren. You don’t need to wait on a law do you?

I didn’t declare all I could have last year, you?

Nov 27, 2012 10:56am EST  --  Report as abuse
tuna63 wrote:

Berkshire Hathaway, the eighth-largest public company in the world according to Forbes, openly admits to still owing taxes for years 2002 through 2004 and 2005 through 2009, according to the New York Post.

Talk about hipocricy!

Nov 27, 2012 11:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
mmilesll wrote:

Warren shut up and write a check. Nobody with any sense cares what you think

Nov 27, 2012 11:15am EST  --  Report as abuse
TCumpton wrote:

Mr. Buffett should pay at least the same rate as his secretary. She will be at a 39% rate. I feel that since Mr. Buffett makes a lot more money than his secretary his rate should be a lot higher. The French are taxing wealth at a 75% rate. So somewhere between 39 to 75% should work. Also when he dies all of that money should not go to charity but to the government. 55% of everything over a million is the death tax, why should Mr. Buffett get a break, no one is above the law.

Nov 27, 2012 11:24am EST  --  Report as abuse
jkingo wrote:

Billionaire socialists like Buffett are not impacted the same way “billionaires” who scrape together $250,000 a year have to, especially in costly places like NYC and Caliphonya. I’d like to see Buffett and Hollywood libs try living on 250 grand a year. I don’t think they’d be singing the same tune.

Nov 27, 2012 12:14pm EST  --  Report as abuse
RIPatriot wrote:

When Warren Buffet pays all the taxes he owes I will care what he has to say. I don’t take any guys who has an army of tax lawyers fighting his tax bill seriously.

Nov 27, 2012 12:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Bingbird wrote:

Mr Buffett has reached the point where he just talks too much.
He has been so wealthy for so long that he feels he knows what
is best for the USA. Sounds a bit like you know who. Why doesn’t
he just run for public office and then he can make his opinions official. He has been a superior investor, but I, for one, have
no interest in his political or taxation opinions. His dealings
over the years have been with the expressed point of SAVING him
taxes. His deals with the Government and other entities make
excellent use of tax “loopholes”. Does anyone think that this
man does not take best advantage of the current tax system.
It is his job to do the best he can for the shareholders of
his company. Personally he gives a great deal of
tax-deductable money to charities/foundations.

Nov 27, 2012 12:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mdnielsen wrote:

BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY FRAUD- It is common knowledge to those who own substantial shares of class A Berkshire Hathaway to use trusts to avoid taxes. They put the shares into “street name” where the IRS and the SEC can not recognize the real owner. When the shareholder dies, the beneficiary uses the trust to transfer the shares without reporting them to the IRS and the SEC. They keep the street name on the shares and change the ownership. This is what Warren Buffett and Bill Gates did to my grandfathers shares to maintain controlling (over 51%) interest in Berkshire Hathway no matter what the shareholders vote every May. Bill Gates has been illegally voting my grandfathers shares since he dies three years ago since the transaction of the shares are illegal. This is the main reason that Buffett doesnt pay a dividned because this would expose all the fraud to the IRS. As of right now, shares of Berkshire Hathaway do not have a federal tax id number because they have not paid out a dividend since 1967. My grandfather paid off attorney, judges. attorney generals, etc to keep this out of the courts. Look up Judge Robert Ensz in Nebraska because he was asked politely to resign after my grandfather paid him $200,000 to look the other way. Berkshire also committted stock fraud in 1999 with NBH INC and OBH INC. I would love to explain this in full detail and get this out. This is playing out right now in Nebraska and more specifically Cuming County.

Nov 27, 2012 12:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ronmowry1976 wrote:

I don’t understand why we cannot simplify this argument and abolish all income and payroll taxes imposed by the Fed and replace these taxes with a flat national sales tax with a food exemption. Our Federal economists know what is spent in our economy by the GDP. Therefore you should be able to establish a flat tax % that would bring in the same or greater revenues than our current system. With this said now everyone pays their fair share, the rich spend more money therefore they would pay a greater amount in taxes without the loopholes that our current tax structure allows. And the poor would now be forced to contribute a fair share of taxes which currently some pay $0. Now with this system you have a choice on how you are taxed if you don’t want to pay a 15% tax on consumer electronics you just don’t buy that new big screen TV.

Nov 27, 2012 12:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Luxomni wrote:

Only a tax on high salaries. Not a tax on the wealthy, like Mr. Buffett. Insteasd, it is a tax on those trying to become wealthy. We must pull back into the pot like so many crabs on the stove.

Nov 27, 2012 1:36pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OdArmy wrote:

I used to admire Warren Buffett. Now, I think he has gone completely insane. What incentive do I ever have of doing better if I know that the government will take it all. Ridiculous! Buffett should keep his piehole shut!

Nov 27, 2012 1:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
nj2012 wrote:

Isn’t this America? Land of the free…or a dictatorship!

Nov 27, 2012 1:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Sheila_B wrote:

Buffet is such a phoney. On the one hand he’s paying lip service to Obama’s tax the rich policies (a convenient PR move for him). On the other hand he’s fighting the IRS about the $2 Billion in back taxes he owes. Shut up Buffet. We’re sick of your %.00001 hypocrisy, you Wall Street robber baron.

Nov 27, 2012 1:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse

These trust fund kid trolls are crying, they are saying how unfair it is to pay the rate that average American middle class are paying. Selling your business as a one time income? Pay a rate just like if you earn it every year like the rest of us. I’m sick and tired of these “punishing success” B S because everyone else, success or not, is paying that amount, so why should the better off pay less just because they can afford lobbyists and off shore tax shelter?

Nov 27, 2012 2:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Most importantly we should eliminate capital gain’s low tax rate, as well as the tax shelter game that put all income in tax shelter in Cayman Island, Bermuda, Ireland, etc.

Nov 27, 2012 2:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse

Most importantly we should eliminate capital gain’s low tax rate, as well as the tax shelter game that put all income in tax shelter in Cayman Island, Bermuda, Ireland, etc.

Nov 27, 2012 2:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
tom0702 wrote:

Warren: Go bone up on “Net Effective Income Tax Rates” and then come back here and apologize for the B.S. you’ve been promoting about our most financially successful not paying their fair share.

I realize that you only have perhaps 15 more laps around the sun left before you check out but trying to gain “love” through this B.S. is shameful.

Nov 27, 2012 4:06pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Butch_from_PA wrote:

Buffet is a shining brown beacon of what is wrong with out tax system.
Go after the tax code that allows billionaires like Warren to pay paltry wages to himself while continuing to accumulate massive wealth.

He is a fraud and huckster – knowing when the party in power is right – they can shift those massive corporate profits to personal accounts using special tax codes or foreign tax codes and personal accounts.

Go after the man not the puck.

Nov 27, 2012 4:30pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Ahurtxz wrote:

The problem is that those who make around that $250K mark already pay more than 30%. My effective tax rate is 39%, and I am NOT rich; I can’t afford a simple house and I don’t even qualify for a mortgage. We continue to talk about taxing income without including capital gains, and without taxing wealth.

If you fall into Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and all of your income is from salary (W2), you pay an effective tax rate of 35-39% and cannot take ANY deductions. Most young physicians (like me) fall into this category. They seemingly make “high salary”, but they are straddled with student debt. And, they make a few hundred dollars a week for 100hrs of work during residency training.

In short, young physicians making over $250K actually make $15-$20K per year over a 10 year period if you average in recent salaries during training netted with loan expenses….even less if you account for years in school. But, they already pay over 35% effective tax rate, and everyone wants to raise their taxes even more.

Don’t raise rates. Just tax other forms of income and wealth if you must increase taxes.

If we continue to “eat the rich”, we’ll all be hungry for everyone else soon.

Nov 27, 2012 5:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
altalks21 wrote:

Contributing to the problem is low wages. Any time businesses don’t provide employees with insurance plans and don’t pay a Living Wage to make ends meet, then the rest of us, taxpayers are paying for ANY government support their employees are receiving, such as welfare, food stamps, etc.

Nov 27, 2012 6:27pm EST  --  Report as abuse
IlIIlll wrote:

I agree with Buffet if and only if you get a vote for every $1000 you pay in taxes. If you pay no taxes you get no vote. Where do I sign up?

Nov 27, 2012 6:38pm EST  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

KingKong Jr. demosntrates the ignorance of the left by assuming that those who understand how crazy it is to tax capital gains like income are trust money babies. A person starts and builds a business with their own after-tax money, runs it well and can only afford to pay themselves a modes salary. Their health goes south, they seek a buyer and sell out for maybe ~$1.5 million.That was built on risk. It was not a salary paid by someone else. It was built by hard work and deferred gratification. Who in the hell is KingKong or Obama, much less Buffet, to say that this one time moveent of capital should be treated as income?
What a crock of revisionist ignorant shyte the lefties are spouting.

Nov 27, 2012 6:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

mdnielsen, you are a kook and have no idea how street name securities are documented or held. And the chances of you being part of a family group that could possibly control Berkshire Hathaway is precisely zero.

Nov 27, 2012 6:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BFWinston wrote:

The notion of taxing wealthy people at a higher tax rate is always challenged with the hazard of less jobs being created or the threat of the wealthy pulling out all their money and letting our society fall into financial disarray.
I believe it was the poet Bob Dylan that stated, “When you ain’t got nothin’, you got nothin’ to lose.”
There are way more of us that ain’t got nothin’, myself included, so have at it wealthy people.

Nov 27, 2012 7:23pm EST  --  Report as abuse
David_SD wrote:

Hey, Buffett, you LOSER: How about this? We’ll take your 30% minimum tax, as long as we also have a 30% MAXIMUM tax. And the poor need to start paying their 30%, too. All they do is breed, and breed, and breed, and then demand funding for “the children”. Those of us who WORK our tails off have had ENOUGH!

Nov 27, 2012 7:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kicklibsout wrote:

Buffet must have been a low life bum in his early years and just got lucky because here is his chance to set things right: Calling on all you leftists, here is your chance to give back to the America you hate but that made you rich:  http://www.treasurydirect.gov/…

Nov 27, 2012 8:31pm EST  --  Report as abuse
kevin2ia wrote:

I make no where near that amount, but to Warren:

1. Write a check – preferably for all your money.
2. Shut up.

Nov 27, 2012 11:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
BenWade wrote:

from reading these comments it looks like a lot of people see through buffet’s phony calls for higher taxes. i come from a poor background, and for the past few years made over 6 figures for the first time in my life. after having finally paid of school, and basic expenses i was dismayed to see how much the government took when i had literally spent my entire life getting to that income bracket. it’s not income they should be taxing, it’s wealth. like many have said, buffet is running around in luxury jets and paying for none of it with his “salary.” tax wealth, not income, and we’ll be on our way to a better society. i’m conservative, but reform the tax code liberals (you’re running things now) for the real middle class and you might get my vote.

Nov 28, 2012 2:18pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gandaffy wrote:

England just tried this same stunt, so most of the rich people just left.

Nov 28, 2012 2:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

I want a minimum property tax on the wealthy. I don’t want to prevent new people from becoming wealthy via the income tax, I want to take the money from the people who are already wealthy. I am sure you will hear a completely different story from Buffet if he felt his power was treatened.

Nov 28, 2012 6:55pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Aritra wrote:

60% is a bit too steep but Mr Buffet’s principle is spot-on. A straight minimum tax will plug loopholes that whittle down the tax the top earners pay and will knock down most of the defensive ramparts put up by their lawyers to stop the govt collecting the fair share from them.
But 60% or the idiot Hollande’s 90% will simply drive the billionaires away to other countries and that would not be good.

Nov 29, 2012 6:23am EST  --  Report as abuse
Urada wrote:

Well, I guess he DOES recommend minimum tax for wealthy. He’s wealthy.

Nov 29, 2012 9:19am EST  --  Report as abuse
Kanamori wrote:

Warren Buffett is giving away nearly all of his money away when he dies and has been (in)famous for being a frugal billionaire… so, yeah I would say that’s pretty unselfish and his money is exactly where his mouth is.

It probably does make more sense to tax wealth than income, or at least something in between — and then the invitation for more jumbled tax codes. I don’t think things have to be equalized as much as possible. People seem to go on the premise that things make them happy. Unless you’re the among the very, very richest, and even if you are, there are always new things to get — getting the über luxury jet over the run of the mill jet, etc. “I would be happy if I had x”, is the way to guarantee unhappiness.

It is silly that middle class or upper middle class people pay higher tax rates than the rich.

Nov 29, 2012 12:54pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Gigimoderate wrote:

Since Warren Buffett is the most successful investor of the 20th century, The most influential person of 2012, I think his opinion on taxes should be taken seriously. He was the richest person in 2008 and the 3rd richest in 2011, he knows money. But for all you negative people out there that hate rich people or just hate the world in general who don’t agree with him…..well your opinion doesn’t matter because you’re not the expert and no one cares what a right wing NUT thinks or doesn’t think because you just Regurgitate what you are told!

Nov 30, 2012 10:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Hard2Believe wrote:

Upon hearing that her subjects had no bread, the queen replies “Let them eat cake.”

Dec 03, 2012 2:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.