这
些年来，我的收入的很大一部分都上缴给联邦、州以及我所生活的这个地方的行政机构了。奥巴马总统认为我并不需要这些年来我缴税之后剩下的全部钱财，而且我应该给我的子孙们少留一些钱而多给他一些钱让他想怎么花就怎么花，他的这些决策令我深为痛恨。而且我还痛恨巴菲特和其他一些人，他们为自己积累了巨额财富，却认为我"被溺爱"了，因为他们相信他们应该缴更多的税。我当然不会因为各级政府没有征收更高的所得税而感到"被溺爱"。不管怎么说，这些钱都是我赚来的。我今年已经72岁了，我能料到的，就是我得把我积累下来的财富的很大一部分作为遗产税上缴给联邦政府，而且还要根据彼时我所在州的要求，向州政府缴纳遗产税。我今年的收入的80%-90%要用来缴纳联邦所得税、社保医疗税和联邦遗产税及州遗产税，难道这还不够吗？
其他人如果想的话可以多缴一些税。他们可以自愿地开出支票，或者他们可以主张他们给基金会的捐赠也应该以税后收入计，不得享受所得税抵减待遇。如果不允许他们设立基金会来规避资本利得税和遗产税的话，他们缴的税也会更多。
Bloomberg News
今天，最高收入群体（即年收入达到100万美元及以上的那25万人）缴纳的所得税占全部所得税的20%，而年收入超过20万美元的占人口总数3%的那部分人缴纳的所得税占全部所得税的比例几乎达到了一半。而差不多一半的报税人则根本不必缴纳所得税。显然，他们赚得少，也应该少缴税。但他们多少也应该交一点税，这样政府花出去的钱也跟他们多少有一点关系。
此外，税收制度极其复杂，充斥着对不同的利益群体和行业人员的各种优惠，而这些优惠全都是那些想要保住手里的权力的政客们同意授予的。住房抵押贷款利率抵减对私营房地产市场构成了支撑，但却损害了租房者的利益。为了支持加入了工会的工人和政府工作人员，他们的额外薪酬则完全不必缴税，而这损害了那些用自己的税后收入买保险的那些人的利益。捐给慈善机构的钱可以享受抵减所得税待遇，而赠给子孙的钱则不能。上面只是列出了几个例子而已，所有这些都是不公平的。
政府有义务把我们的税款用到那些真正有用的项目之上。但这项基础工作他们却并没有做好。我们真的需要几十个绩效和结果都没法考评的雇员再培训计划吗？我们真的需要在能源供应尚且充足的时候把钱花在太阳电池板、风力发电厂和电动汽车上吗？我们真的需要那些提高了我们购买的东西的价格从而给经济带来了约两万亿美元负担的条例吗？我们真的需要向国内的糖农和乙醇生产商提供补贴吗？
为什么要求公共项目支付高于市场水平的劳动力成本？为什么要在没有人会乘坐的火车上花掉数十亿美元？为什么要在没人居住的地方保留邮局？为什么要对那些紧邻大型机场的小型社区机场提供补助？为什么要向政府工作人员支付高于市场水平的薪资和大笔福利？我们真的需要一个能源部或是教育部吗？
我想说的是：在你们"要求"我还有其他人多缴一些税的时候，请你们首先更加公正地征收已有的每年2.2万亿美元的税款，并且更加明智地加以使用。这样你们需要我缴的钱就会少一些了。
（编者注：戈卢布（HARVEY GOLUB）是美国运通公司前董事会主席兼首席执行长，目前在美国企业研究所（American Enterprise Institute）执行委员会任职。）
（本文版权归道琼斯公司所有，未经许可不得翻译或转载。）
HARVEY GOLUB
Over the years, I have paid a significant portion of my income to the various federal, state and local jurisdictions in which I have lived, and I deeply resent that President Obama has decided that I don't need all the money I've not paid in taxes over the years, or that I should leave less for my children and grandchildren and give more to him to spend as he thinks fit. I also resent that Warren Buffett and others who have created massive wealth for themselves think I'm 'coddled' because they believe they should pay more in taxes. I certainly don't feel 'coddled' because these various governments have not imposed a higher income tax. After all, I did earn it.
Now that I'm 72 years old, I can look forward to paying a significant portion of my accumulated wealth in estate taxes to the federal government and, depending on the state I live in at the time, to that state government as well. Of my current income this year, I expect to pay 80%-90% in federal income taxes, state income taxes, Social Security and Medicare taxes, and federal and state estate taxes. Isn't that enough?
Others could pay higher taxes if they choose. They could voluntarily write a check or they could advocate that their gifts to foundations should be made with after-tax dollars and not be deductible. They could also pay higher taxes if they were not allowed to set up foundations to avoid capital gains and estate taxes.
What gets me most upset is two other things about this argument: the unfair way taxes are collected, and the violation of the implicit social contract between me and my government that my taxes will be spent─effectively and efficiently─on purposes that support the general needs of the country. Before you call me greedy, make sure you operate fairly on both fronts.
Today, top earners─the 250,000 people who earn $1 million or more─pay 20% of all income taxes, and the 3% who earn more than $200,000 pay almost half. Almost half of all filers pay no income taxes at all. Clearly they earn less and should pay less. But they should pay something and have a stake in our government spending their money too.
In addition, the extraordinarily complex tax code is replete with favors to various interest groups and industries, favors granted by politicians seeking to retain power. Mortgage interest deductions support the private housing industry at the expense of renters. Generous fringe benefits are not taxed at all, in order to support union and government workers at the expense of people who buy their own insurance with after-tax dollars. Gifts to charities are deductible but gifts to grandchildren are not. That's just a short list, and all of it is unfair.
Governments have an obligation to spend our tax money on programs that work. They fail at this fundamental task. Do we really need dozens of retraining programs with no measure of performance or results? Do we really need to spend money on solar panels, windmills and battery-operated cars when we have ample energy supplies in this country? Do we really need all the regulations that put an estimated $2 trillion burden on our economy by raising the price of things we buy? Do we really need subsidies for domestic sugar farmers and ethanol producers?
Why do we require that public projects pay above-market labor costs? Why do we spend billions on trains that no one will ride? Why do we keep post offices open in places no one lives? Why do we subsidize small airports in communities close to larger ones? Why do we pay government workers above-market rates and outlandish benefits? Do we really need an energy department or an education department at all?
Here's my message: Before you 'ask' for more tax money from me and others, raise the $2.2 trillion you already collect each year more fairly and spend it more wisely. Then you'll need less of my money.
(Mr. Golub, a former chairman and CEO of American Express, currently serves on the executive committee of the American Enterprise Institute. )
Over the years, I have paid a significant portion of my income to the various federal, state and local jurisdictions in which I have lived, and I deeply resent that President Obama has decided that I don't need all the money I've not paid in taxes over the years, or that I should leave less for my children and grandchildren and give more to him to spend as he thinks fit. I also resent that Warren Buffett and others who have created massive wealth for themselves think I'm 'coddled' because they believe they should pay more in taxes. I certainly don't feel 'coddled' because these various governments have not imposed a higher income tax. After all, I did earn it.
Now that I'm 72 years old, I can look forward to paying a significant portion of my accumulated wealth in estate taxes to the federal government and, depending on the state I live in at the time, to that state government as well. Of my current income this year, I expect to pay 80%-90% in federal income taxes, state income taxes, Social Security and Medicare taxes, and federal and state estate taxes. Isn't that enough?
Others could pay higher taxes if they choose. They could voluntarily write a check or they could advocate that their gifts to foundations should be made with after-tax dollars and not be deductible. They could also pay higher taxes if they were not allowed to set up foundations to avoid capital gains and estate taxes.
What gets me most upset is two other things about this argument: the unfair way taxes are collected, and the violation of the implicit social contract between me and my government that my taxes will be spent─effectively and efficiently─on purposes that support the general needs of the country. Before you call me greedy, make sure you operate fairly on both fronts.
Today, top earners─the 250,000 people who earn $1 million or more─pay 20% of all income taxes, and the 3% who earn more than $200,000 pay almost half. Almost half of all filers pay no income taxes at all. Clearly they earn less and should pay less. But they should pay something and have a stake in our government spending their money too.
In addition, the extraordinarily complex tax code is replete with favors to various interest groups and industries, favors granted by politicians seeking to retain power. Mortgage interest deductions support the private housing industry at the expense of renters. Generous fringe benefits are not taxed at all, in order to support union and government workers at the expense of people who buy their own insurance with after-tax dollars. Gifts to charities are deductible but gifts to grandchildren are not. That's just a short list, and all of it is unfair.
Governments have an obligation to spend our tax money on programs that work. They fail at this fundamental task. Do we really need dozens of retraining programs with no measure of performance or results? Do we really need to spend money on solar panels, windmills and battery-operated cars when we have ample energy supplies in this country? Do we really need all the regulations that put an estimated $2 trillion burden on our economy by raising the price of things we buy? Do we really need subsidies for domestic sugar farmers and ethanol producers?
Why do we require that public projects pay above-market labor costs? Why do we spend billions on trains that no one will ride? Why do we keep post offices open in places no one lives? Why do we subsidize small airports in communities close to larger ones? Why do we pay government workers above-market rates and outlandish benefits? Do we really need an energy department or an education department at all?
Here's my message: Before you 'ask' for more tax money from me and others, raise the $2.2 trillion you already collect each year more fairly and spend it more wisely. Then you'll need less of my money.
(Mr. Golub, a former chairman and CEO of American Express, currently serves on the executive committee of the American Enterprise Institute. )
没有评论:
发表评论