You're watching...
Heritage Foundation’s Curtis Dubay and Citizens for Tax Justice’s Rebecca Wilkins debate the Buffett Rule.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
-- now on Monday the senate will have a vote on the Buffett rule called paying.
A fair share act that really rolls -- your -- it would require tax rate of 30% on income of one million or more.
Is this is campaign -- by the president or start.
For real tax code reform we had to guess -- two perspectives Rebecca Wilkens is -- citizens for tax justice should I expect gripping Curtis debate.
Of The Heritage Foundation thanks to both of you for joining us.
Rebecca you think this represents tax fairness how come.
Well -- other role is designed to get at that problem in our federal tax had that taxes income from work at a much higher rate and it's taxes income from while.
And that's really what the president's trying to do with about the role.
-- -- from well I -- you party pay tax on that a lot of kids especially if you look at somebody like Mitt Romney you know he earned that income first.
He paid tax on and now he's re investing it again so why isn't he entitled to it to a lower tax rate the second time that money is being taxed for him.
He's not gonna be tax on the part that he pay tax on again but before -- -- any tax on the gain.
Sabbath so widespread method income is taxed twice it's not.
When we tax capital gains -- -- tax the amount that your investment has increase we don't tax the original investment again.
Curtis what do you think.
It actually.
That capital gain that did the companies that Mitt Romney or -- Buffett invested they pay the 35% federal tax rate corporate tax rate which is the highest in the world.
That's that's -- the double tax the corporations pay tax first.
Then the investor pays on their on their returns.
The thing to keep my with the Buffett rule is -- -- distraction.
The president wants to distract us all from his failed economic policies that they have not bad economy going they have not -- job creation going.
It if you want to distract us from the fact that he has no plans to reduce the deficit to to.
Stop impending debt crisis he just want to turn the page and distract us from his failed policies.
Rebecca what about that I mean the corporations did already pay tax on -- -- -- -- in the end kind of no matter how you want a slice of the income has already been taxed when -- The other I'm really glad you asked that question and November we issued a require -- -- institute for our taxation and economic policy that looked at the fortune 500.
And we found that the 288.
Of the fortune 500 companies that were consistently profitable -- three years 2008 through 2000 intend.
Paid an average effective right and only eighteen and a half percent.
There -- 78 kind of companies and I agree that patent at zero attacks and at least one of those years.
And thirty -- companies didn't pay tax in all three years.
We recently updated -- grieve for the 201110.
-- instead -- just -- come out.
And again 26 some have zero or lettuce and crime and taxes.
Again this is a distraction -- -- with -- bought several here which is actually nothing to do with the biggest issues facing our country today which is a slow -- economy slow job creation.
And impending debt crisis that the president has absolutely no -- To prevent.
The buffer -- is a distraction it had absent nothing to do with what's the forefront of voters' minds today.
OK guys we're gonna have to leave it there as we're out of time I wish we had more time -- this debate and I know we're gonna get back to it.
Many more times Rebecca -- -- debate thanks to both of you for joining thanks.
