HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Mar 30, 2004 I know the United States Tax Code is complicated. There are some people who complicate matters further when they try to blame the Bush administration for the current tax code in force. Dorothy A. Brown wrote a column that confused the heck out of me. Ms. Brown “is a professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law.” according to her byline on the article entitled, “In sickness, health, and the tax code”. She took umbrage with President Bush’s State of the Union message concerning the unfairness of the marriage tax. Ms. Brown sees unfairness, but writes: “If Bush wants to promote marriage, as he says, he should abolish the marriage penalty for those it hurts the most: Two-income households.” Now, I do not understand the double-speak here. Bush wants to eliminate the marriage penalty tax, but every single voice speaking against any Bush tax cut proposal speaks for the elimination of this tax cut too. Ms. Brown says Bush’s tax cuts don’t go far enough. She says nothing about every democrat saying there should be any cuts at all of any kind. Every democrat voice is saying the same thing; that he would raise taxes on all families making more than $200,000 a year. Many professional two-income families make that much and a little more, especially if they are trial lawyers, doctors, or administration officials of any of the unions that support the liberal agenda. Ms. Brown writes, “The marriage penalty is not universal; some couples actually receive a marriage bonus.” Now, she doesn’t give any facts or figures to support that statement so it can be confusing. I thought the tax code, even though complicated; contains a standard. Doesn’t a two- income family with two children in Georgia, making exactly the same money as a two-income family with two children in New York State, pay at exactly the same tax table? If there are any bonuses involved it is perhaps due to the types of allowable deductions, or charitable giving, or cost of living index between Georgia and New York. I do not see separate standards for similar family types with equal incomes. Ms. Brown does attempt an explanation, saying: “Sometimes couples filing jointly pay more in taxes than they would have if each person remained single. Other times the tax bill for married couples is less than the combined bill would have been had each person stayed single.” Now, this is a true statement, but isn’t that why we hire H&R Block or some private CPA to aid us in our tax preparations? We expect those we trust to prepare our forms not to get every last dollar for the government. We hire them to find every last refundable dollar for us. As I recall, each person has several withholding options available to them. Once the option is selected, then the tax bracket is determined upon the receipt of the last paycheck for the tax year. If during the tax year it is determined you paid too much tax, you receive a refund. If it is found you did not pay enough, you have to write a check to the government. Again, a single person making $50,000 in Georgia would be taxed at the same rate as a single person making $50,000 in New Jersey. There is no inequity there. Ms. Brown does see inequity and asks, “What accounts for the different treatment?” Then suggests, “The politics of the tax law are always complicated.” Politics? In the tax law? I don’t understand. Ms. Brown continues, “There is no denying that more traditional families receive better treatment under the tax code.” The marriage “bonus” [which is neither described nor explained] is greatest when only one person in a household works outside the home. The marriage penalty is greatest when both husband and wife have jobs and earn roughly equal amounts.” Now I will assume “bonus” is the ability of a traditional family to have a lower income, therefore, less taxes and a lower tax bracket. That “bonus” disappears when a family less traditional draws two incomes and raises the overall tax bracket of the family unit. My assumption is reinforced by Ms. Brown’s next statement, “The most substantial tax relief, therefore, should be aimed at married couples in which both spouses work and make about the same salary.” Under all plans spoken of by all opposed to tax cuts, that would be the greatest improbability. All Democrat tax plans involve increasing the percentages of money taken away from higher earners. Two-income families would be further penalized. Aside from the reference to “Political Penalties” in the tax code, what further confused me about Ms. Brown’s column was her assertion that the tax code contained intended racial penalties. She smoothly goes from talking about single people, traditional and two-income families; to discussion involving “white couples” verses “African-American” households. The transition was almost too subtle. Ms. Brown wrote: “It is true that at some income levels – households where total annual income is between $60,000 and $90,000 – more married white couples pay a penalty than receive a bonus. But at all other income levels, more white couples receive a marriage bonus than a marriage penalty. For African-American households, it is just the opposite. At every income level, from $30,000 to $120,000 more couples are penalized than benefit.” Ms. Brown does not cite any sources for her assertions, which makes things more confusing. Are U.S. Tax Codes and tables really different for different races? I know each tax bracket is treated differently, but how does the U.S. Code tell whether a taxpayer is white or black if they both earn exactly $50,000 a year? If taxes are different for African-American couples, surely they would be different for single African- Americans? And what of Latino, Asian-American and Native American Indians; are the Tax Codes different there too? Ms. Brown’s paragraph just can’t be based in fact. President Bush did not write the tax code. President Bush is not the guy who raised taxes on all Americans, including that taxation of Social Security benefits for the elderly (a la Al Gore’s 1993 tie-breaker). What President Bush is trying to do is relieve the tax burden of all Americans. I am a proponent of the flat tax. If everyone in America paid the same 12-15 percent of their income, this would be equitable. Those making $10,000 a year would pay the same 12-15 percent as those making $120,000 a year. A couple, filing jointly, making $60,000 a year would pay exactly the same 12-15 percent as a couple paying separately, each making $30,000 a year. Someone would have to explain to me why that would not be fair. To call the U.S. Tax Code politically based, or racially based has got to be, at the least, misguided. Ms. Brown’s assertions cannot possibly be true without a whole host of lawsuits attesting to the unconstitutionality of race based taxation. ------------ About the Author: Independent, Conservative, Christian. Married 29 years with 5 children raised and one grandson being raised. 30 year Army Veteran and published poet with www.poetry.com since Y2K. Email Michael John McCrae: michael.mccrae@us.army.mil Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
