About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Fox News' Perino misleads on Medicare tax impact on small businesses

March 19, 2010 10:32 am ET — 37 Comments

Appearing as a guest host on Fox & Friends, Dana Perino asserted that the health care reform bill's Medicare investment tax on those making over $200,000 a year is "so disturbing ... because the people who make that money are the small business owners." In fact, fewer than 1.3 percent of small business owners would be affected by the tax.

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Perino claimed "small business owners" are "the people who make" over $200,000

Perino: Medicare investment tax on wealthy is "so disturbing" because "the people who make that money are the small business owners." From the March 19 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

PERINO: One of the most disturbing things to me is a 3.8 percent tax on unearned income, so that's all your investment income, if you make over $200,000 a year. The reason that's so disturbing is because the people who make that money are the small business owners, and they're the ones who create the jobs. And so this will feel like, as I've said, a lead-blanket on economic growth and then supposedly the administration's next priority is going to be increasing jobs in the states.

In fact, fewer than 1.3 percent of small businesses make enough to be affected by the tax

Medicare investment tax does not apply to those earning less than $200,000. The House Rules Committee's section-by-section analysis of the health care reconciliation act states that the 3.8 percent Medicare tax on investment income -- which takes effect in 2013 -- "does not apply if modified adjusted gross income is less than $250,000 in the case of a joint return, or $200,000 in the case of a single return":

Sec. 1402.  Medicare tax.  Modifies the tax to include net investment income in the taxable base.  Currently, the Medicare tax does not apply to net investment income.    The Medicare tax on net investment income does not apply if modified adjusted gross income is less than $250,000 in the case of a joint return, or $200,000 in the case of a single return.  Net investment income is interest, dividends, royalties, rents, gross income from a trade or business involving passive activities, and net gain from disposition of property (other than property held in a trade or business).  Net investment income is reduced by properly allocable deductions to such income. 

Fewer than 1.3 percent of those who claim small business income would be affected by Medicare investment tax. Despite Perino's claim that "small business owners" are "the people who make" over $200,000 and would therefore be affected by the Medicare investment tax, according to the Tax Policy Center's table of 2009 tax returns, 457,000 of the 36,064,000 returns that reported small-business income -- or 1.3 percent of them -- were in the top two income tax brackets, which include all filers with taxable incomes high enough to trigger the investment tax in the health care reform bill.

TPC: "[N]ot everyone who receives small business income should be classified as a small business owner." Ben Harris wrote on the Tax Policy Center's TaxVox blog that "0.5 percent of small business owners both fall into the top two marginal tax rates AND derive more than half their income from a small business." From the April 2009 post, which addressed Obama's proposal to "allow the top two marginal income tax rates to revert to their pre-Bush levels":

Allowing these rates to rise would hurt very few small business owners. In 2009, about 36 million taxpayers have small business income - defined as taxpayers who report a gain or loss on tax schedules C, E, or F. This group includes not only sole proprietorships, S corporations and partnerships, but also taxpayers who receive royalties, rental income, and income from trusts. Of these 36 million small business owners, just 1.3 percent (about 457,000) fall into the top two tax brackets-indicating that approximately 99 percent of small business owners fare better under the President's proposed changes to the statutory tax rates. Estimates by the Treasury Department and Joint Committee on Taxation reach a similar conclusion.  

And not everyone who receives small business income should be classified as a small business owner; most derive the bulk of their income from other sources. TPC estimates show that only about 174,000 taxpayers, or 0.5 percent of small business owners, both fall into the top two marginal tax rates AND derive more than half their income from a small business. This group makes up 0.1 percent of all taxpayers, meaning that the chances of being in this group-a small business owner getting at least half of total income from small businesses and being subject to a tax increase-is about one in a thousand.   

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by terrapin53 (March 19, 2010 10:42 am ET)
      3 1
      Does this mean Warren buffet will have to start paying medicare taxes?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by roundhouse (March 19, 2010 11:25 am ET)
      5 2
      Dana's lie aside, why do Republicans only care about rich people?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by seahawks123 (March 19, 2010 12:00 pm ET)
      2 7
      How many poor people do you know that employ anyone?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by roundhouse (March 19, 2010 12:16 pm ET)
        8 2
        How many poor people do you know who work for poverty wage paying, greedy rich bastards?

        Report Abuse
      • Author by ScienceBuff (March 19, 2010 1:04 pm ET)
        3 1
        No one's getting gouged. This will have no effect on employment.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by SimonRusk (March 19, 2010 1:11 pm ET)
           
        What a pointless post seahawks. Do you honestly believe that this modest tax increase on investment income which effects less them 1.5% of small business is going to significantly decrease job creation? Even if you assume it will, which I think is a big assumption, wouldn’t you agree that improving the health of the employment pool, and there by creating a more productive and effective workforce outweighs the potential minimal decline in job creation? You seem to have a very very very short sighted and narrow view of how the world actually works. Perhaps you would benefit from some basic classes in economics and business management.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Another_Cat (March 19, 2010 2:16 pm ET)
        3  
        How many rich people (as a percentage) really contribute to the overall wealth of the country, and not just their own personal wealth? Re-investing in American jobs, products, and services; not sending jobs overseas, manufacturing or obtaining manufactured goods from this country instead of China, paying the taxes required by law, practicing general and community-specific philanthropy, supporting tourism by vacationing here in the states...etc. The sad truth is that the list above is an antithesis of corporation's habits. In order to get more money, they must eschew the list above. Granted, some of the blame for this lay at the feet of our lawmakers, who have presided over legislation that pushes jobs out of the country or allows corporations to evade taxes legally. But by and large, if you have the ambition and character to get rich, you generally fall into two categories; that of someone who had a great idea and market they could sell it to (right time, right place), and those "Me, me, me" folks who could give a rip how thier actions affect anyone else as long as it increases the lining of thier pockets. It is my opinion that we have far more of the latter than the former.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by southerngal (March 19, 2010 2:52 pm ET)
          1 4
          I just don't understand the obsession many on this website have with "rich" people. Worrying about how somebody else earns and spends their money, how much they make, how much they "contribute", do they hoard it all, is it only from trust funds, greedy, lazy, evil, on and on and on.

          Some of you are constantly using them as the favorite liberal whipping post, yet they are the first people you turn to with your hands in their pockets when you want money for government. Incredible.

          I would say refocus your attention and your energy to figuring how you too can become "rich", so you won't have to sit around with a misplaced sense of entitlement envious over of what someone else has.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by steeve (March 19, 2010 7:42 pm ET)
            3  
            Personally, I'm not obsessed with rich people's behavior. I just want to jack their taxes up because every time we've done it it's been nothing but good.

            Do you have a problem with the rich getting their taxes jacked up? I doubt it, because you aren't obsessed with the rich. The rich can take care of themselves and don't need you to keep worrying about them and tucking them in gently at night. You aren't going to waste your time contemplating the fairness of their tax structure. You'll figure that if the rich have a problem, they can just purchase a few congresspeople and take care of it.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by jeffro (March 19, 2010 5:34 pm ET)
        1  
        All Small businesses that don't fall into the top two tax brackets could easily be owned by poor people. They are not getting rich,but still employ people. Stop with the wingnut talking points.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 12:45 pm ET)
      3 3
      If only about 1% of the people who might have to pay the increased Medicare tax have small business income, then it's not true that "the people who make that money are the small business owners."

      If 99% aren't small business owners, then it's incredibly deceptive to claim that "the people who make that money" ARE small business owners.

      Dana's spreading a lie. This has been debunked countless times. Therefore, she knows it's not true, therefore she's lying.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 1:40 pm ET)
        1 3
        That would seem to be a lot of opinion coming from you. Where exactly has it been 'debunked' countless times?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by knowledgereigns (March 19, 2010 1:46 pm ET)
          3 1
          You're an idiot. Read the article.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 1:52 pm ET)
            1 5
            Thank you for the compliment, however I don't take anything on this web site for face value because of their long track record.

            Hey, you should check out this article instead!:

            http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150
            Report Abuse
            • Author by knowledgereigns (March 19, 2010 2:01 pm ET)
              3 1
              That lame article focused on funding, which doesn't really interest me. MediaMatters uses links and sources. So you don't have to trust them at face value.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 2:10 pm ET)
                1 4
                There were tons of articles on there, smart guy.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by knowledgereigns (March 19, 2010 2:40 pm ET)
                  3 1
                  "Hey, you should check out this article instead!"
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 2:44 pm ET)
                    1 4
                    Ok you got me there. What I should have said is: "Check out the articles on this web site that shows MMFA's track record and why I'm not going to take the article at face value" After you called me an idiot and said "Read the article."
                    Report Abuse
            • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 2:54 pm ET)
              2 3
              An attack on Media Matters is a fallacios argument against their point here that Dana Perino mislead her viewers about Medicare's small increase in taxes and its impact on small business owners.

              So, no, your link does nothing to support your "argument" that you don't trust THIS article by MMFA. Nor is it responsive, in any, way, the the previous poster's comment, NOR is it related, in any way, to MY previous post.

              As such, all it was seems to be a troll post, trying to derail the thread AWAY from Dana Perino's LIE about the impact of this tax on small businesses!

              Please don't feed this troll anymore.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by southerngal (March 19, 2010 3:00 pm ET)
                2 3
                You have "fed" him about 3 or 4 times yourself, you phony. Just when someone has a bead on your nonsense you admonish everyone else to stop, tired of being embarrassed? If you want to cease being made to look foolish, then stop posting replies yourself.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 6:09 pm ET)
                  2 3
                  Nope.

                  As I already explained to you earlier today (why do you insist on having it proven that you're slow on the uptake?) that the TROLL is the POST.

                  A poster who consistently makes troll posts may ALSO be a troll, or a poster may make an occasioinal troll post about a certain topic.

                  But I did NOT repeatedly feed a troll post.

                  You've changed the focus of your personal attacks, but you're still out to lunch, as usual.

                  I don't have any NEED to stop looking foolish, as I haven't STARTED looking foolish!
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by southerngal (March 19, 2010 6:37 pm ET)
                    3 3
                    "I don't have any NEED to stop looking foolish"

                    OK then, knock your lights out.
                    Report Abuse
                    • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 8:34 pm ET)
                      1 1
                      Again, you dishonestly crop a statement to make a personal attack because you couldn't successfully debunk a thing I said.

                      Thanks for continuing to prove that you're a paid troll who only true skills are the ability to find a dishonest way to crop someone else's comment to change the meaning and the ability to parse words like nobody's business.

                      I appreciate your continuing digging of that hole!
                      Report Abuse
        • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 2:05 pm ET)
          3 2
          What has been debunked countless times?

          That a LOT of small business owners will be affected by the increased taxes that people making over $200,000 or couples making over $250,000, that's what!

          I didn't express ANY opinion above, so your assertion that I expressed a LOT of opinion is simply a baseless personal attack since you couldn't debate/debunk the point I raised.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 2:14 pm ET)
            2 3
            No, "If only about 1% of the people who might have to pay the increased Medicare tax have small business income, then it's not true that "the people who make that money are the small business owners."
            If 99% aren't small business owners, then it's incredibly deceptive to claim that "the people who make that money" ARE small business owners."

            Is ALL opinion, not fact. "then it's incredibly deceptive" is a statement of opinion. You'll get it right one of these days.

            Your opinions are not facts yet you can't seem to distinguish between that.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 3:04 pm ET)
              2 2
              Yeah, I'm the one detached from reality, the one who's trying desperately to avoid talking about the actual subject here!!!

              But no, saying that what she did was incredibly deceptive is NOT a statement of opinion. Saying that the Corvair was a dangerous car for many drivers is NOT a statement of opinion, and neither is saying that claiming that Dana Perino saying "the people who make that money are the small business owners" is clearly untrue if only 1% of payers are small business owners!
              Report Abuse
              • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 3:08 pm ET)
                2 2
                Yes, those are all statements of opinions.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 6:11 pm ET)
                  1 2
                  Nope, they aren't. You saying that they aren't doesn't make them so, and considering how little credibility you have here compared to me, it's a ridiculous fight for you to get in.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by retiredinsf (March 20, 2010 6:44 pm ET)
                    2  
                    DD the troll: " You saying that they aren't doesn't make them so, and considering how little credibility you have here compared to me, it's a ridiculous fight for you to get in."

                    Too FUNNY! Sponge Bob Square Pants has more credibility then DD.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by rumpleteasermom (March 20, 2010 10:08 am ET)
                   
                and neither is saying that claiming that Dana Perino saying "the people who make that money are the small business owners" is clearly untrue if only 1% of payers are small business owners!


                I think you all need to go back to the top and read again. The 1.3% stat did not refer to the fraction of the people who will have to pay the tax who own small businesses. The 1.3% stat refers to the fraction of small business owners who actually do make enough money to have to pay the tax.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by capollock (March 19, 2010 2:19 pm ET)
               
            We should define small business owner. A small business may be owned partly by a person who works 80 hours a week at the business. This person will not likely generate investment income because she most likely will be getting compensated for services performed. However, a small business may also be owned by a billionaire venture capitalist firm whose only involvement will be invetsing money in the business. The venture capital firm will likely be another business entity not subject to a medicare tax. No analysis is as simple as either side would make it seem.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by null1fy (March 19, 2010 2:45 pm ET)
              2
            Btw: I said "where" has it been debunked a thousand times.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by capollock (March 19, 2010 1:50 pm ET)
         
      (1) Small business owners are not likely to create investment income in their business activities because income from business activities is most likely ordinary income. If they did create investment income like dividends or capital gains--they would be getting taxed at around 15% instead of in the 30 percentile.

      (2) People that work 9-5 for a living have to pay the medicare and other payroll taxes. Why shouldn't people that collect investment income for a living have to pay medicare taxes? What's the distinguishing principle?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mr econotarian (March 19, 2010 9:03 pm ET)
         
      " In 2009, about 36 million taxpayers have small business income - defined as taxpayers who report a gain or loss on tax schedules C, E, or F. This group includes not only sole proprietorships, S corporations and partnerships, but also taxpayers who receive royalties, rental income, and income from trusts. "

      When I owned a small company, it was a C-corp, and I paid myself a salary. Thus, I would not be counted in those categories.

      Certainly if you were a small employer, and have any investors, your company would be a C-corp.

      Also LLC's are very popular today. While a sole-member LLC would file schedule C, a multi-member LLC will file on schedule K-1, as would other general partnerships.

      So this analysis falls way short of reality.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MediaTruth (March 21, 2010 9:28 am ET)
         
      You state someone on Fox news reported that the people who will suffer the tax increases are small business owners.

      And you imply that is not true by stating:

      "In fact, fewer than 1.3 percent of small businesses make enough to be affected by the tax.."

      However, it is the 1.3% of small businesses who who will paying the majority of the tax. So, the individual on Fox News is correct.

      Most small businesses fail. A little over half of small businesses make it to 5 years. 70% of small businesses fail before they reach 10 years.

      Of the businesses that are left, most scrape by. A few make good money. The ones that make good money are the ones that employ the most people.

      This bill takes the money of those who produce and generate wealth in the country and pays it out to doctors and hospitals so people who do not create any value and who do not have health care can go to the doctor even more than they do.

      Those individuals currently get free emergency medical care. This bill additionally provides them unlimited doctor visits and prescription drugs.

      The cost estimates don't account for the fact that these are the most expensive people to insure and you won't be able to get them out of the doctor's office on this passes. They will want long term, in-hospital care and since there is no cap to coverage, fraud will run rampant.

      But who cares, right? We'll just increase taxes on 1% of the people in the US.. they'll pay for anything. And since it is only 1% paying for it, it doesn't matter.

      And will those without health care at least send a thank you care to those people paying for their free medical care? And those who are paying their welfare? And their transportation, and the FDA and the police force and those who pay for their free education?

      No. Instead they feel they still "don't get enough".
      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.