The expiration of the payroll tax cut would increase taxes by $115 billion in 2013, Maag writes,?yet President Obama and others have been strangely silent ? arguing instead about the fate of the 2001-2003 tax cuts.
President Barack Obama gestures as he speaks in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, on the White House campus in Washington Wednesday. The expiration of the payroll tax cut would affect more households than any other, Maag writes.
Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP
EnlargeIf a tax cut is scheduled to expire, but the focus of the debate is elsewhere, will people notice? Will the average family be surprised when their taxes rise by $1,000 or more next year, even if most of the rest of the 2001-2003 tax cuts are extended for all but the wealthiest Americans? That?s precisely what could happen to a family earning $50,000 when the current law reducing payroll taxes by 2 percent expires at the end of the year. This same thing was scheduled to happen at the end of 2011, but politicians assured us then this was a bad idea. This year, they don?t appear as concerned.
Skip to next paragraph TaxVoxThe Tax Policy Center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. The Center is made up of nationally recognized experts in tax, budget, and social policy who have served at the highest levels of government. TaxVox is the Tax Policy Center's tax and budget policy blog.
Recent posts
' +
google_ads[0].line2 + '
' +
google_ads[0].line3 + '
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
According to my colleagues at the?Tax Policy Center, the expiration of the payroll tax cut would?increase taxes?by $115 billion in 2013. This provision affects more households than any other, yet President Obama and others have been strangely silent ? arguing instead about the fate of the 2001-2003 tax cuts.
As I noted last month on?TaxVox, focusing only on the 2001-2003 tax cuts?ignores important changes to the Child Tax Credit for very low-income families that will?expire at the end of 2012. But the payroll tax cut affects nearly every worker. No doubt, the 2010 version was expensive and?poorly targeted. But it had its roots in a better-designed predecessor ? the Making Work Pay (MWP) tax credit? that might offer a palatable step down from current policy, without sending those who remain vulnerable over the cliff.
To refresh your memory, in 2009 and 2010, the MWP provided a credit of 6.2 percent of earnings, up to $400 for singles ($800 for married couples). MWP started to phase out once earnings reached $75,000 ($150,000 for couples), with no credit available once earnings reached $95,000 ($190,000 for couples).?
But MWP was temporary and the Obama Administration made no effort to extend it. Instead, in 2010, Congress replaced MWP with a payroll tax cut that had no income limit. Ultimately, MWP dollars were better targeted towards people who were likely to spend them ? and cost about half as much as the current payroll tax cut. Restoring MWP?would at least reduce the number of people who will be shocked to see their first paycheck in January.
Now, all Obama has to do is find a new name for this old but useful credit. Perhaps TaxVox readers can help.? Send us your ideas. We can?t compete with Powerball but will pick a winning name on December 6.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org.
paul mccartney duggar miscarriage roman holiday belize adele lyrics best new artist 2012 grammys
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.