# Taxing the Rich and Super Rich - Warren Buffet's Recent Endorsement of this



## onq (15 Aug 2011)

It was heartening to see Warren Buffet weighing in behind the President of the United States stating he sees no reason why the very wealthy should be so coddled in tax percentage terms.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...s-to-raise-taxes-on-coddled-billionaires.html


_“My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress,” the chairman and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A) wrote in an opinion article published in the New York Times. “It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.” 

Buffett’s advocacy of higher taxes for the “mega-rich” may reinforce President Barack Obama’s call for an end to tax breaks for corporate-jet owners. In the op-ed, the 80-year-old investor said his federal tax bill last year, or the income tax he paid and payroll taxes paid by him and on his behalf, was $6,938,744. _ _

 “That sounds like a lot of money,” Buffett wrote. “But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income -- and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.” _ 

----------------------------

_Buffett said the notion that high taxes discourage hiring and investment is false. 

 “I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone -- not even when _ _[broken link removed] rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 -- shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain,” he said. 

 “People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off,” he said. “And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.” _ 

----------------------------

Its refreshing to see someone who's done it all debunk the monetarist theorizing by captains of industry.

ONQ.


----------



## shnaek (16 Aug 2011)

Buffet paid between almost 7 million in tax last year. Even if that were doubled, he would around 14 million in tax. And he is one of the worlds richest men. It is merely a drop in the ocean compared to what the US owes. 
They, like us, have a spending problem. They could take every penny off the rich, and they would still have a spending problem. 
But fair play to Buffet all the same.


----------



## Firefly (16 Aug 2011)

I like Warren Buffet and one has to admire his success as an investor. However, perhaps it's a little easier for him to seek tax increases this late in his life. Also, his income is considerably less than his wealth so perhaps he should be calling for a wealth tax if he's that concerned.


----------



## onq (16 Aug 2011)

A wealth tax unless it universally applied tends to promote a flight of capital or domicile or both, but its something to consider to get people doing something with their money - in moderation, we don't want to encourage another round of boom and bust just yet. We haven't gotten past this one yet and with our banks lending less this year than last, it doesn't look like we will get past it any time soon. Stupid banks. Do we own them or wha'?


ONQ.


----------



## Chris (22 Aug 2011)

I think you need to first understand what a monetarist is, as Buffett is one of the Chicago School and Friedman monetarism's biggest supporters. 
But besides that, there is nothing stopping Buffett to write a cheque for a couple of hundred million and send to the IRS with a letter saying that that is what he thinks he should be paying. He also completely ignores the fact that the reason he has been so successful is because at least in the past he was subject to quite low taxes. If he had been taxed higher he may have decided to do something else or he may have taken his business abroad.

It is also a fallacy to think that when wealthy people don't spend their wealth that the wealth is sitting idle. If the wealth is spent directly by the owner or indirectly through taxation then that means that there is less money invested or available for loans. The life blood of an economy is capital, and all spending does is decrease capital available.

Shnaek is also right about taking the majority of what the rich own. Here is a great youtube clip about what would be achieved:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=661pi6K-8WQ


----------



## RMCF (24 Aug 2011)

The French super-rich are asking to be taxed more too

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0823/france-business.html

Just waiting for the Irish super rich now ....................


----------



## orka (25 Aug 2011)

Well, the French got their wish... [broken link removed]



> *French budget targets high earners *
> Under the plan, a temporary 3 per cent tax will be levied from this year on all incomes above €500,000, while the social charges on capital income will be increased. The two measures will bring in €1.5 billion by 2012


----------



## Shawady (25 Aug 2011)

Chris said:


> But besides that, there is nothing stopping Buffett to write a cheque for a couple of hundred million and send to the IRS with a letter saying that that is what he thinks he should be paying. .


 

Looks like he'd prefer to put it into a bank.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0825/boa-business.html


----------



## Chris (26 Aug 2011)

Shawady said:


> Looks like he'd prefer to put it into a bank.
> 
> http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0825/boa-business.html



Yeah, I heard that. I'm starting to think the man may be going senile.


----------

