About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Quick Fact: Wash. Times falsely claims Obama is raising all income tax rates

February 03, 2010 6:41 am ET — 9 Comments

A Washington Times editorial falsely claimed that under president Obama's 2011 budget, "people currently in the 10 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, 33 percent and 36 percent personal income tax rates will all face higher tax rates." In fact, Obama's budget proposes allowing the top two income tax rates to return to their pre-Bush tax cut levels -- affecting only income that exceeds $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for families -- and leaving the other three income tax rates at their current levels.

From a February 2 Washington Times editorial:

Next year, despite Mr. Obama's frequent campaign promises not to raise taxes on those making less than $250,000, people currently in the 10 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, 33 percent and 36 percent personal income tax rates will all face higher tax rates. This is not the first time that Mr. Obama has broken or tried to break this promise, but higher marginal income tax rates will completely obliterate yet another Obama promise.

Fact: Only top two income tax rates will increase under Obama's budget

Budget proposal extends Bush tax cuts for "98 percent of all households." The budget proposal states that "the President supports allowing those tax cuts that affect families earning more than $250,000 a year to expire and committing these resources to reducing the deficit instead. This step will have no effect on the 98 percent of all households who make less than $250,000." The budget includes $135 billion in fiscal 2011 and $3.097 trillion for 2011-2020 to "[c]ontinue the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts," but lists several "Upper-Income Tax Provisions" that would roll back the Bush tax cuts for individuals with income greater than $200,000 and families with income greater than $250,000.

CNN: Under Obama's budget "today's rates on income tax" would "remain the same" for everyone making less than $200,000. From a February 2 CNNMoney.com article, "Obama's budget: Impact on your taxes":

High-income households

Let tax cuts expire: The 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts are scheduled to expire by 2011. Obama is sticking to his call to let those tax cuts expire for high-income households ($200,000 for individuals; $250,000 for families). The White House estimates close to $700 billion would be raised over 10 years.

This provision would raise the top two individual income tax rates to where they were in 2001, before passage of the Bush tax cuts. The 33% bracket would become 36%. And the 35% bracket would rise to 39.6%.

[...]

Lower and middle income households

Make tax cuts permanent: The president's budget assumes all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts will be made permanent for everyone making less than $200,000 ($250,000 for couples), which is the majority of American households.

That means, among other things, that today's rates on income tax, capital gains and dividends would remain the same.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by nerzog (February 03, 2010 8:33 am ET)
      3  
      Oh, come on... this guy wouldn't lie to us...would he?

      [http://antimoon.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/rev-moon.jpg]
      Report Abuse
      • Author by nativeofsf (February 03, 2010 8:50 am ET)
        3  
        Oh my stars...heaven's no!

        Remember, you're very lucky when just a spot of bird poop lands on you.

        Just think, it could've been a whole dump truck load of it...and daily tooo!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (February 03, 2010 8:46 am ET)
      2  
      Looks like they used Reuters' false and retracted story as their source and not the Budget Proposal.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (February 03, 2010 9:35 am ET)
        2
      yep, $700 billion over 10 years ($70 billion per year) will go a long way to reducing the deficit.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by vhw28672478 (February 03, 2010 10:25 am ET)
           
        Wash Times is a joke
        Report Abuse
      • Author by achrispage6992 (February 03, 2010 12:08 pm ET)
        3  
        Well, we know one thing for certain Oscar. The tax cuts created deficit and by the look of employment numbers in 2008, not too much of that money "trickled" down to people, that money was not invested in R&D nor business expansion which is why unemployment rose. We know that wages were stagnant and the gap between the rich and poor increased under Bush and his tax cuts. The reality is that supply side theory is a farce. I challenge you to show us a specific positive improvement in our overall economy from those tax cuts. Look, John Stockman has already told us everything we need to know about top marginal rate cuts for the wealthy. The sad part is that he told us in the late 80's and despite the fact that the evidence is not only compelling but overwhelming, folks like you continue to hold fast to the fallacy that reducing tax rates on the wealthiest of Americans somehow provides for better times for middle class Americans. The even sadder part is that there are middle and lower middle class Americans who support this ideology against their own financial interests.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by jediknight65 (February 03, 2010 2:08 pm ET)
        1  
        yeah considering that Bush NEVER reduced the deficit....i would say thats a good start
        Report Abuse
    • Author by riverdog (February 03, 2010 10:10 am ET)
        3
      its also about spending, not just tax rates.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (February 03, 2010 10:17 am ET)
        6  
        Yeah, did you hear this morning on Fox where an economist stated that the problem wasn't with Obama OR Bush, it was with Congress, both Republicans and Democrats? If you knew how our government worked, you would understand that Presidents don't spend ANY money unless Congress agrees to give it to them to spend. Presidents propose, Congress legislates and funds.
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.