In last week's Liberty Update, we highlighted the Heritage Foundation's 2022 Index of Economic Freedom…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Image of the Day: More Economic Freedom = Higher Standard of Living

In last week's Liberty Update, we highlighted the Heritage Foundation's 2022 Index of Economic Freedom, which shows that Joe Biden has dragged the U.S. down to 22nd, our lowest rank ever (we placed 4th in the first Index in 1995, and climbed back up from 18th to 12th under President Trump).  As we noted, among the Index's invaluable metrics is how it demonstrates the objective correlation between more economic freedom and higher citizen standards of living, which this graphic illustrates:

 …[more]

May 19, 2022 • 12:53 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
New Survey: 73% Favor Lower Corporate Taxes Print
By Timothy H. Lee
Thursday, March 01 2012
According to polling this week by The Hill and Pulse Opinion Research, '73 percent of likely voters believe corporations should pay a lower rate than the current 35%,' a rate that stands second highest among developed economies.

Barack Obama seems to assume that “The 99%” stand with him when he hypocritically campaigns for higher taxes on employers and individuals.  (“Hypocritically” because he doesn’t practice what he preaches by filing his own taxes at the same rate he claims is “fair” for millionaires such as himself.) 

A new public opinion survey, however, suggests something quite different.  Namely, American voters are receptive to dramatic reductions in both corporate and individual rates. 

According to polling this week by The Hill and Pulse Opinion Research, “73 percent of likely voters believe corporations should pay a lower rate than the current 35%,” a rate that stands second highest among developed economies.  In fact, 56% believe that the top tax rate on corporations should be 25% or lower, and almost one-third advocate a corporate rate of 20% or lower. 

A similar 75% supermajority also favors lower, not higher, individual income tax rates.  Three-quarters of respondents agreed that “the tax rate on families earning $250,000 should be 30% or less,” substantially lower than the current top income tax rate of 35%.  Fully 61% of those polled said that the highest rate should be 25% or lower, and 38% advocate a rate of 20% or lower.  That’s hardly the sort of class warfare that Obama has made the centerpiece of his campaign. 

Those results, moreover, are remarkably bipartisan.  According to the survey, 26% of Republicans favor a top rate of less than 20%, while 25% of Democrats support a top rate of 25% or lower. 

Obama, however, proceeds full speed ahead with plans to increase taxes.  As noted by The Hill, “Only 4 percent thought it was appropriate to take 40 percent, which is approximately the level that President Obama is seeking from January 2013 onward.” 

In addition to raising taxes on families earning $250,000 and individuals earning over $200,000 (which pay a greater share of the nation’s income taxes than the remaining 97% of taxpayers combined), his latest budget plan terminates certain investment incentives, creates a new investment tax of 3%, doubles capital gains taxes from 15% to 30% (despite the fact that doing so reduces incoming revenues), doubles dividend taxes from 15% to 30%, hikes the death tax from 35% to 45% and even ends the payroll tax reduction that he exploits to gain street cred with working class audiences. 

How Obama believes that a higher-tax agenda will attack America’s unemployment rate, which has remained above 8% for a record number of consecutive months during his tenure, is anybody’s guess.  Employers that pay individual income tax rates account for a majority of all private sector workers and create most new jobs in America, so raising taxes on “the rich” would mean even fewer dollars available for hiring and investment. 

As for corporate taxes, Obama deceptively proposes a reduction in rates from 35% to 28%, but simultaneously increases overall taxes by doubling taxation of dividends and capital gains, eliminating accelerated depreciation, ending last-in-first-out (LIFO) accounting and introducing a 3.8% ObamaCare investment surcharge.  The Wall Street Journal noted that Obama’s proposal would hurt all shareholders, but especially retirees and near-retirees: 

“IRS data show that retirees and near-retirees who depend on dividend income would be hit especially hard.  Almost three of four dividend payments go to those over the age of 55, and more than half go to those older than 65, according to IRS data.  But all Americans would lose.  Higher dividend and capital gains taxes make stocks less valuable.  A share of stock is worth the discounted present value of the future earnings stream after taxes.  Stock prices would fall over time to adjust to the new after-tax rate of return.”

Ominously, chief economic adviser Gene Sperling also announced that the Obama Administration seeks a new “global minimum tax” so that, “nobody is escaping doing their fair share as part of a race to the bottom or having our tax code actually subsidize and facilitate people moving their funds to tax havens.” 

The Obama Administration apparently places confidence from opinion surveys showing support for tax increases on upper-income businesses and individuals as a general proposition.  But this new poll suggests that “a dramatically different picture emerges when voters are asked to specify the ‘most appropriate’ rates.” 

In other words, Obama may be in for a rude awakening when the reality sets in that Americans actually favor lower, not higher, corporate and individual income tax rates. 

Quiz Question   
How many days does it take the average U.S. household to consume as much electrical power as one single bitcoin transaction?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"The trial of former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann crossed a critical threshold Friday when a key witness uttered the name 'Hillary Clinton' in conjunction with a plan to spread the false Alfa Bank Russian collusion claim before the 2016 presidential election.For Democrats and many in the media, Hillary Clinton has long held a Voldemort-like status as 'She who must not be named' in scandals…[more]
 
 
—Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University
— Jonathan Turley, Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University
 
Liberty Poll   

Should any U.S. government agency have a function called the "Disinformation Governance Board" (See Homeland Security, Department of)?