Give a Gift

Washington Matters

Sooner or Later, Big Tax Hikes Inevitable

It won't happen this year, not with elections coming up, but there's no other way to close the budget gap.

By Joan Pryde, Senior Tax Editor, the Kiplinger letters

March 12, 2010
Text Size T T
  • Comments
  • Print This Article
  • Order a Reprint
  • Advertisement

Don’t be fooled by all the tax cuts you’re going to see approved this year. Tax increases are on the horizon -- and yes, they’re likely to apply to the middle class, too. The U.S. Congress just can’t get its fiscal house in order without raising revenues. Democratic leaders will be careful to keep a lid on the tax-hike talk through the November midterm elections, but the debate over whose ox gets gored will have to begin next year.

There’s no getting around the budget hole that the U.S. finds itself in. The Congressional Budget Office recently projected that the deficit will exceed $600 billion a year for the next 10 years. And if deficits remain unchecked during that time, the total federal debt could climb to a stratospheric $15 trillion by the end of this decade. Anyone who says that a gap of that size can be plugged by cutting spending alone is either kidding or crazy.

The debate, when it comes, isn’t going to be over tax changes that nip around the edges of the IRS code. Lawmakers are going to have to raise massive amounts of revenue, and they’ll be forced to look at big-ticket items. So where are taxpayers going to take the hit? That will depend, of course, on who is in power after November. If Democrats retain the upper hand, it’s a safe bet that upper-bracket taxpayers will face higher taxes on income and capital gains. The deficit will play right into the president’s hands: He’ll use the budget gap as an argument for raising the top marginal income tax rate -- currently 35% -- to 39.6% on single folks with taxable incomes above approximately $196,000 and married couples over $231,000. He’ll also push for a top capital gains rate of 20% for this group, up from 15% now.

Democrats could also trot out a plan for a surtax on upper income taxpayers. This idea was endorsed by the House last year during the debate on health care reform, and it would have pulled in more than $500 billion, so it’s likely to be on the table in any deficit debate. And middle-class taxpayers will probably be included as well: It’s not hard to imagine some form of payroll tax increase, since the House considered a hike in the 1.45% Medicare tax to 1.8% last year, also as part of health care reform.

What direction will Republicans go in, if they’re in charge? They’re more likely to push a consumption tax, which would hit all income levels. The huge revenue that could be raised by a value-added tax or national sales tax would look very attractive to deficit cutters. The trick, of course, would be where to set the rate. Lawmakers will want it as low as possible, say 1%, to garner votes, but they will be under heavy pressure to exempt things such as food and medicine. To offset those exemptions, the rate would have to be 3% or more.

As controversial as they are, it’s hard to see any of these tax hikes making it through Congress -- at this point. And there’s no sign that either party has the spine yet to make the tough decisions on revenues. But the budget numbers aren’t going to get any better, and they are what will finally force lawmakers into making some pretty distasteful decisions about raising taxes.

Tags:


DISCUSS

Permission to post your comment is assumed when you submit it. The name you provide will be used to identify your post, and NOT your e-mail address. We reserve the right to excerpt or edit any posted comments for clarity, appropriateness, civility, and relevance to the topic.
View our full privacy policy

Reader Comments (7)

Posted by: taxguy at 03/12/2010 04:10:40 PM

Simple answer = 15% for every Tom, Dick, Jane, Harry; !0% for every business to help make US industry competitive and to create jobs. There will be no exemptions for any pupose. Low income people will get exemptions. A flat tax will solve the deficit problems and insure that everyone pays their fair share

Posted by: erie_angel at 03/13/2010 01:47:36 PM

I've laways wondered why we don't have a flat tax. It would make things so much easier, increase revenue and eliminate fraud.

Posted by: libertarianman at 03/13/2010 06:18:51 PM

With all this talk of taxes, the oddest one to me is the AMT. All you ever read about AMT is that it was designed to make sure the rich don't get away with paying some minimal tax and that it has never been indexed for inflation. What you don't hear is that AMT really just affects the middle and upper middle class. The rich and super rich aren't really affected by AMT. In one case, it's because the income tax rate is higher than AMT. In the other case, which is the less talked about situation, is that the super rich income is exempt from AMT. That is one reason you see so many executives get most of their compensation from stock and/or stock options. That kind of compensation is taxed at the much lower capital gains rate. Raising taxes will only hurt the regular guy. The rich and super rich will just change their type of compensation to avoid paying the higher tax. This is one good reason for a VAT type tax. It's something even the super rich can't avoid, which is consumption. You can always give a tax break to lower income folks on the VAT in the form of a refund or credit.

Posted by: Oatley at 03/15/2010 06:30:13 AM

Now is the time to completely restructure the tax code. Flat tax, simple, one page filing. And while we're at it, EVERYONE who earns income pays something. Horrible public policy that nearly 40% of the population pays zero, when everyone ostensibly gains 'benefit' from government.

Posted by: texastaxlady at 03/15/2010 09:24:52 AM

Having analyzed the flat tax with REAL tax returns - guess what? The people making over half a million and up are the ones who saved, so let's get off the flat tax solving the deficit.

Posted by: MarkVA at 03/15/2010 11:54:54 AM

It's time to approve the Fair Tax Act (see HR 25/S296). I just read The FairTax book by Neil Boortz and he advocates replacing all income and business taxes with a single consumption tax of ~23% FOR EVERYONE, including the government when they purchase goods. Read the book and the read HR 25.

Posted by: Ed Secco at 03/15/2010 01:41:50 PM

The author said "Anyone who says that a gap of that size can be plugged by cutting spending alone is either kidding or crazy." I believe she in fact is the crazy one. It is uncontrolled spending that got us in this situation in the first place. The federal government already collects a staggering amount of revenues. Too much in my opinion. If our Congress magically showed fidelity to the Constitution, our budget deficits would turn into large surpluses. Article I, Section 8 enumerates the sole spending powers of Congress.



Featured Videos From Kiplinger





Connect With Kiplinger

E-mail Updates: Select the Kiplinger columns and topics to be delivered to your inbox.

email-sign-up

facebook
twitter
RSS