Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
No. of Recommendations: 2
Re the new Buffett op ed, you say "We need to get the idea of “fairness” out of the debate. Instead, we should look at how much money we need and what is the most efficient and responsible way of raising it is. “Fair” is always subjective and can never be achieved to the satisfaction of all."

There's an argument to be made that the way to establish tax rates in a pragmatic and non-biased way is to research what the optimum tax-rate is to raise the most revenue. For example: there was some research done on capital gains tax rates (although I can't cite the source off the top of my head). The study found that above a certain rate revenue dropped off, even though the tax rate was higher, because people slowed down the rotation of their assets due to the amount of tax levied each time. Likewise, if the tax rate was too low it could be raised and more revenue would be collected. In other words: there's a sweet-spot. The study found that the sweet-spot for capital gains tax was 21% (assuming memory serves). Given this to be the case one could argue that rates lower, or higher, than the sweet stop are purely a function of ideology (political bias).

Print the post  


When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.