Have not seen any discussion on the bill that Obama delivered to Congress this morning. Want to hear some thoughts.
I have put my thoughts out there already when I first learned the details of the bill last week. I dont think this bill will spur any kind of job growth. Now with the way Obama plans to pay for the bill, it very well may not pass. I think that this can be disastrous for the Republicans and some nice ammo for the Democrats if they oppose this bill- And I think he knows that and that is why he is putting this bill out there.
Thoughts?
The prospects for President Barack Obama's $447 billion jobs plan grew dimmer Monday as he unveiled the fine print of how it would be paid for—primarily through tax increases that Republicans said would kill jobs, not create them.
Mr. Obama proposed limiting itemized deductions for Americans making $200,000 or more a year, ending tax breaks for oil companies and corporate jet owners, and cutting out a tax break for investment-fund managers. The White House says the tax changes would take effect in 2013 and estimates they would raise $467 billion in additional revenue over 10 years.
Enlarge Image
Reuters
President Obama holds a copy of the "American Jobs Act" he will send up to Congress for passage while standing next to Vice President Biden in the Rose Garden Monday.
Journal Community
Republicans in Congress, who had been striking a more conciliatory tone about backing at least parts of the proposal the president unveiled last Thursday, disputed the White House contention that the plan would cause no additional job losses for the struggling economy.
"It would be fair to say this tax increase on job creators is the kind of proposal both parties have opposed in the past,'' said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio). "We remain eager to work together on ways to support job growth, but this proposal doesn't appear to have been offered in that bipartisan spirit.''
Mr. Obama made a new pitch for his plan at the White House Monday and has said he intends to campaign against Congress and Republicans in 2012 if they don't pass the bill.
The Bill
Read the text of the American Jobs Act of 2011
View Document
"We've got to decide what our priorities are," he said. "Do we keep tax loopholes for oil companies, or do we put teachers back to work? Should we keep tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, or should we invest in education and technology and infrastructure?"
Despite Mr. Obama's demand that Congress act on the legislation quickly, neither the jobs nor tax proposals are likely to be approved or take affect any time soon. Senate Democratic leaders are expected to bring the bill to a vote in the coming weeks, but it is not expected to pass.
More likely some of the proposals in the bill could be passed piecemeal or could be included in a broader deficit-reduction plan crafted by a congressional supercommittee charged with finding at least $1.2 trillion in savings over the next 10 years. Mr. Obama will submit his own deficit-cutting plan of at least $2 trillion over 10 years to the committee on Sept. 19, administration officials said. That plan will include budget cuts, including to programs such as Medicare, not just tax increases like the ones he's proposing to pay for his jobs bill, administration officials said.
More
Deal Journal: PE Mavens to Arms? Obama Seeks to End Carried Interest Tax Break
The congressional committee faces a Nov. 23 deadline to agree on which measures are to be include in the deficit-reduction package, which would be put to Congress for an up or down vote by Dec. 23.
From the outset, Republicans said Mr. Obama's jobs bill—which comprises tax cuts for employers and employees and a raft of government spending measures, including funds to states to rehire teachers and first responders—was unlikely to pass intact, a point White House officials privately conceded. But GOP leaders had signaled in recent days that they may support an extension of a payroll-tax cut in 2012 and changes to help the long-term unemployed.
Despite the White House's hope that Republicans would have a change of heart after their political standing decreased after the acrimonious debt ceiling debate this summer, GOP reaction to Mr. Obama's proposal on Monday expressed a familiar sentiment, although in a less combative tone. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) said that more than half of the president's jobs bill—the part involving spending aimed at stimulating economic growth—was unacceptable to Republicans.
"Anything that is akin to a stimulus bill is not going to be acceptable," he said. "Over half of the total dollar amount is so called stimulus spending. We have been there, done that. The country cannot afford more spending like a stimulus bill."
The largest chunk of Mr. Obama's tax package comes from eliminating itemized deductions for people making $200,000 or more per year, including those for home-mortgage interest, state and local property taxes and charitable donations. The White House says that measure would raise roughly $400 billion over 10 years.
Enlarge Image
Getty Images
President Obama introduced his jobs proposal at the White House Rose Garden with workers on Monday.
For higher-income earners, the administration's proposal would limit the value of itemized deductions to 28 cents for each dollar of income that is deducted. Currently, higher-income earners can use deductions to shelter larger amounts—33 cents or 35 cents on the dollar—because they're in the 33% and 35% brackets.
Another proposed change would affect hedge funds and investment partnerships. Currently, many managers of those firms hold what is known as carried interest in their investments and receive much of their compensation through the appreciating value when those stakes are sold. Because the value often isn't distributed for several years, those shares are taxed at relatively low capital-gains rates, currently a maximum of 15%. Mr. Obama proposed counting that as regular income.
Enlarge Image
Another provision would make corporate jets depreciate at the same rate as commerical airliners, seven years instead of five. It would save $3 billion over 10 years.
White House officials said Mr. Obama decided to release these particular measures this week, ahead of releasing his complete deficit-reduction plan, so the jobs bill could move on a path separate from and faster than the congressional supercommittee.
Separating the two proposals gives Mr. Obama another advantage: a clear plan to run on as he campaigns for his re-election. The president began to pitch his jobs proposal in Virginia on Friday and will continue doing so this week, daring Republicans to choose tax breaks for the wealthy over jobs for the middle class in two other electoral swing states, Ohio and North Carolina.
"It is a campaign," White House press secretary Jay Carney said when pressed on Mr. Obama's political motives. "The president is campaigning—for growth and jobs."
—John D. McKinnon and Jared Favole contributed
Terrible. If Obama wants to tax millionaires, make a new tax bracket that kicks in at $1 million and jack THAT rate. Also, leave my carried interest alone -- what the hell!
Not only that, but look at where the new tax revenues are going: Tax cuts for others. Shit, I practically can see the queue of people gathering on my lawn right now getting ready to collect their checks...
Haha the joke I have with my accountants is that the first year they tax carry as regular income will be my first year with a very big AUM.
And you don't have a lawn...
More class warfare and attacks on companies that are actually profitable. What a shocker.
Herman Cain is our only hope.
Obama is a little child who doesn't understand the word NO. This "jobs" act is bullshit. It will do nothing to actually create jobs and only seeks to back door increase taxes.
What a horrible President.
You see that the top tax bracket starts at $200k not $250k...lol...this is gonna get passed (sarcasm)
Does Obama know nothing of economics?
Obama using the phrase "stalling economy" in his speech just proves that his "stimulus" plan was an epic fail. If youre going to try and utilize Keynesian economics in practice you should be advocating LOWERING taxes right now (and two years ago), of course that is completely out of the question if you ask Washington.
CrushedEntrepreneurDreams
I just see it as a transfer of wealth. No job creation.
Obama doesn't care about jobs, only punishing the producers in this country. The base that elected him aren't the people he is trying to milk.
The jobs bill itself is an absolute joke--an insult to America's collective intelligence. If it were passed in its entirety with no changes and paid for in the way Obama would like it would create no jobs or virtually no jobs.
That said, the Republicans can't reject it outright. They need to find some areas of common ground and/or accept some bitter pills that are of nominal damage. For example, they should probably reluctantly agree to the "hedge fund manager's" tax increase--changing the rules on carried interest--and acquiesce to the corporate jets tax increase. On a macro scale neither will be particularly harmful to the economy at large, although neither will be helpful to the economy at large. On the other hand, raising taxes on oil companies, i.e. the people at large, ought to be rejected outright.
In sum, I think the Republicans should start calling the Democrats' bluff on taxes. Democrats keep talking about "millionaires and billionaires"--so the Republicans should end the debate once and for all time and move tax rates to the Clinton era tax rates for those earning $1 million or more and then adjust it by inflation each year. Bluff called, debate finished, egg on the American Left's face, and the expansion of the state haulted in its tracks.
This. If Republicans reject this bill outright then the Democrats are going to be railing on them about being for the rich, corporate jet owning oil company executives. This bill is disastrous, but the majority of Americans dont know wtf they are talking about and this is too easy of a talking point for the Democrats this coming election. They will have to compromise on something.
Anyone else thinking about leaving?
What is so funny is Obama's policies will ultimately hurt the very people who support him and are pushing for these taxes and punishments. Companies will just fire people or pass through costs. Because these people don't understand basic economics they do not realize this. Why we try and help them when they just want to hurt us is beyond me.
The bill is a joke. It is the stimulus lite. Just like the 1st one it will create very few jobs at about $300k for a $50k/year job. What a fucking idiot. He couldn't me more stupid about the economy and job creation.
ive been reading a lot of small business owners reactions to this bill and they all say the same thing i dont care how big of a tax break you give me if my phone isnt ringing with new business im not hiring. Get rid of the 25 percent bracket entirely.
I may be out there... I realize that $200K/yr is a lot more than the average american makes but it is amazing that Mr. Obama is lumping a family who makes over $250K in with Warren Buffet... a family that makes $250K/yr is not rich, even without excessive debt, for quite some time. I don't know if 'they' are still trying to lump the $200K earner in with the private jet owner, but that idea is absurd.
The majority of millionaires in this country are small business owners. People making 200k a year are doing ok, but are not rich. These people buy white goods, buy cars, improve their homes, send their kids to school. Basically fuel the economy and help create jobs through their consumption. Taking money from them and giving it to others doesn't fundamentally fix the economy. It just empowers the government.
what a farce.......reaks of desperation to get reelected. Anyone who has a good handle on economics knows exactly what this "jobs act" means.
Seems like its clear WSO hates this bill.
Would like to hear the left thinking perspective on this site --- TheKing, Eokpark, etc. Where are you guys???? haha.
I also think the Republicans should take Obama's bill as-is, and heavily edit it. Keep some vestiges of the original bill (like the hedge fund and corporate jet tax increases) and pass a bill, under the EXACT same name, that roles back hundreds of new Obama-imposed regulations, takes away and/or reduces EPA, DOE, and NLRB ability to regulate the economy. The bill could also put in an explicit ban on, say, net neutrality and open up territory to oil drilling and approve pending nuclear reactor building licenses. The bill could also speed the patent process and ratify some outstanding trade treaties (although that would be for the Senate only). Call it the EXACT same name and send it to the Senate. Call Obama's bluff.
The truth is, we don't need more tax cuts and spending. We need bureaucracy to work better and we need to give the economy time to slowly but surely emerge from recession. The Federal Reserve is doing all it can to pump liquidity into the system--government now needs to show industry that it is on their side and not their enemy and let the system slowly turn itself around.
Actually, there is no legal definition of a "hedge fund" or "private equity fund"; they are just LPs (sometimes they're LLCs or something else, but usually LP). Thus, this would apply to all investment vehicles. It's a legal clusterfuck. How are they defining the fund types (if they're going that route)? If it's applying to all LPs indiscriminately, this will impact a ton of legal entities, many of which have absolutely nothing to do with hedge funds or private equity. If I set up an LP to buy real estate, or something obscure like broadband spectrum, would I pay capital gains tax rates or income tax rates? Are you going to have LPs in the funds pay income tax rates or capital gains rates? If capital gains, how will you ensure that members of the GP don't just become LPs? If you just tax the GP at income tax rates, then the owners of the GP can just invest in the fund as an LP and bypass the onerous tax rate. If you tax all LPs at income tax rates, you're going to create a serious disincentive from investing in alternative asset classes (this is not good, you'd be creating an inefficiency in the market much greater than any you could argue currently exists because the GPs get a tax break on "income").
This would be the biggest fucking clusterfuck of a bill to ever pass. It would be a total absolute fucking disaster. I don't see how you can resolve the legal issues stated above without just tearing up legal precedent and crazy cherry picking of the law to fuck over with specific sub-groups of people. It's hard to put into words from a legal perspective just how ridiculous this is. I'm not even a lawyer, but since I have a hedge fund, I can see how disastrous this could be. They're taking something that's very clear cut (from a legal and tax perspective) and destroying it by creating a ridiculous amount of grey area.
A much easier fix would be to say that capital gains above X amount are taxed at normal income tax rates. So if for example you made $1M+ in capital gains, you would have to pay income tax rates. That's at least something that doesn't fuck the system over as bad, and singles out the rich that Obama so despises (unless he's fundraising...that hypocrite).
Even the left has abandoned Obama. He is the oddest President I can remember. He isn't appeasing his base, he isn't moving to the center, he is just flailing around like a fish out of water.
I mean this job bill isn't going to do anything. Hiring back teachers and spending a menial amount on infrastructure? Last time I checked road work and teaching weren't massive drivers of employment.
This is simply a dead fall. It is worthless in doing what it should be meant to do, but instead it has value in a way to make the Republicans look bad. It is a tax increase hidden in a shitty jobs bill. You vote it down and you don't care about jobs, you pass it and you do nothing but jack up taxes and piss away more money.
Instead of acting like a leader and doing something he plays bullshit political chess. Yah, this is a change from what we are used to.
That's what I've been thinking. There seems to be nothing rational about Obama's actions, unless he wants to create total disillusionment and play saviour again (which I wouldn't rule out as his strategy or as implausible). I'm not a fan of stimulus (although not really absolutely opposed), but who would ever think something so small would even stem job losses? Come on, let's have 5trn in stimulus already. If you factored in the growth that would ensue, it'd probably be cheaper than numerous, weak attempts.
bingo. this bill is about positioning for re-election. if republicans don't pass it, obambi can paint them as obstructionists that vetoed tax cuts. if it passes, he will tout some unverifiable number of jobs saved or created.
"This is a bill that will help our economy in a moment of national crisis. This is a bill based on ideas from both Democrats and Republicans. And this is a bill that Congress needs to pass. No games, no politics, no delays."
Here is the left thinking perspective from reddit: "It's about time families making over 250k pay. They make me fucking sick."
Apparently success is sickening?
I don't consider TheKing a liberal..he just really hates people who mention religion of any degree. We don't have any really liberal people on here...maybe RedState?
Reddit is the biggest piece of shit I have ever encountered. I troll that dump all the time.
TheKing is Robespierre (the irony is not lost).
Glad to hear there are others trolling reddit. Just found this gem on it:
and this lovely tidbit of information:And just to stir some debate, the payroll tax cut would be beneficial but needs to be coupled with increases to the retirement age so as not to fuck the ss and medicare fund over.
The infrastructure bank has potential with some tweaking.
Hopefully he meant world GDP, which was around $62tn, but that person is an idiot if he thinks that the U.S. could raise $6tn/year. Even if we confiscated 50% of all the wealth produced it wouldn't be $6tn.
There are some good things here (like the payroll tax cut), but they don't go far enough. A lot of the key provisions only last until the end of 2012 (just in time for the election, conveniently enough). And the tax credits are peanuts--is a company going to take on a $50,000/year expense to hire somebody for a one-time hit of $4,000? Come on.
http://www.amazon.com/President-Obama-Countdown-Political-Election/dp/B…
Magical.
This "jobs bill" has as much hot air as a fart and smells twice as bad...for all of the reasons listed above.
Obama lives in his own world where he thinks he is king. The fact that he demanded this be passed immediately, practically sight unseen, is absurd.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7380384n
Sooooo, what are we suppose to do? LOL.
Regards
Jobs bills: $312,500 per job created.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/cost-obamas-stimulus-plan-312500-job-vote…
Bushs Fault.
NYT's take on the bill:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/politics/jobs-bill-could-help-econ…
[quote=Nobama88]NYT's take on the bill:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/politics/jobs-bill-could-help-econ…]
What a shitty fucking article, NYT has become so one-sided I struggle to read their articles.
Not that I had any hope to begin with but I'm more worried that this is looking more and more like a "hey if you don't pass this you are going to look like total assholes" bill versus something that will actually help out which means that we're pretty pretty screwed as far as the economy goes.
Somewhat disingenuous economic forecasts. Half the bill is EXTENDING payroll tax cuts. Saying that the bill will "add" 100,000+ jobs per month is more like saying that not extending these payroll tax cuts, for example, will cause a net loss of 100,000+ jobs per month. It also takes the jobs bill in a vacuum and doesn't analyze how raising taxes to "pay" for the bill will impact the analysis. No doubt forecasters are taking the bill by itself. Sure, spending $447 billion will create jobs--and from what we know it will be about $312,500 per job created. The government might as well just hire 7-9 million unemployed people at a wage of $40-50k per year rather than inact this bill.
tax small buisnesses why are they getting any tax breaks.... half of them don't even produce anything new they just sell shit.
we need producers, so tax small/large buisnesses and give grants to start ups that invent new goods(including software)
Btw, if you say that the GP investing as an LP doesn't allow you to bypass the tax rate because the carry has to flow to the GP, my LPA clearly gives me the right to enter into side letters with certain investors where any terms, (i.e. fees) differ. You could set up some sort of structure within the fund that would allow carry to flow to a special LP or something of the sort. I'm sure creative lawyers will think of some great loopholes. Trying to tax carry at income tax rates is incredibly difficult because of the way the law works.
I don't know why we do all this crap. In my view, it should just be a 20% flat rate, no loopholes whatsoever. Calculate a person's income, and then tax that at 20%. Would lead to a nice economic boom. Would be really efficient and save us all a lot of trouble.
as if $787B wasn't enough...
Those people who earn more are generally hard workers so increasing tax on hard work, is not going to benefit the economy in the long term.
Well, an easy "hedge fund" tax law would probably raise the capital gains tax to earnings over a certain threshold, say, $5 million. I don't believe the bill is calling for an actual "hedge fund" tax law. I think that is a colloquial name or a euphemism.
Since when is someone making 200-250k considered rich? Pre-tax and a few kids, that's nothing, especially if you live in states with a high cost of living. I can't even imagine living in Cali or NY. Those ppl get screwed so hard, i'll never understand how they put up with it.
One question I want to know is where's the money coming from?? That bill seems like nothing more than a political chess move. Not to mention, it won't create any jobs. How stupid does one have to be to pass a bill that would cost $300k for each job created??? IMO, the problem is most politicians are dirty lawyers that don't understand economics or the side effects/cost of actual implementation of the bills they pass. It's almost like they just say "yea, that sounds good and works well with our agenda" without giving a single afterthought to how it will affect REAL PEOPLE and the business environment. Entrepreneurship creates jobs! It's really not a hard concept...
As another poster stated above, if that bill passes, it will be a legal nightmare...and we're using the chinese credit card to fund it lol.. god help us
While I don't support this Job Act, if anybody is pulling in 200-250k a year and is "struggling", even with a couple of kids, they might need to be introduced to something the rest of us like to call a budget. If you honestly can't imagine living in California/New York with that kind of income, well then I really don't know what to tell you.
Also, rich is relative, so when you have the Top 2% of American folks in the $200k+ bracket, then of course, with the median household income less than $50k, you'd be considered rich.
I never said it was struggling. 200-250k pre-tax is not even close to being considered rich, especially if you live in those states I mentioned with a few kids and a face a city income tax as well.
All I'm saying is we should not lump those ppl into the group that have multiple houses, jets, etc. If they want to do something, then create a separate tax bracket for super rich ppl that aren't affected by taxes regardless.
Instead the morons in washington are killing off the middle class (100k-250k)
If you're making 200-250k, you're very well off in Orange County and that's saying a lot when Orange County is one of the most affluent counties in the country and in one of the most heavily taxed states in the country.
The middle class definitely does not start at 100k-250k either.
PRE-TAX
200k of income in NYC is taxed after it's all said and done at around 40-50% depending on amount of deductions. I have filed these returns before. So after tax you're around 100-110k. Two kids cost 20-30k each and you got wife who likes to live decently well. Rent/mortgage and you got nothing. Not to mention, a hot dog is like 6 bucks
200-250k is not "rich" and in my opinion, not even wealthy if you live in big cities in lib states like cali, ny
Whatever makes you sleep better though
$200 - $250K is "very well off" in Orange County? Where the hell are you living? Median house price in Orange count is around $550K, and you are living in bumfuck Orange County at that range. Living in the affluent neighborhoods, or the places you would actually want to live in, you are running $1MM+++. Take into account that California takes 50% of your fucking income... so you are making around $100K - $125K take home a year. Food prices 20% more then in the Midwest, Gas is $4 a gallon, the California public school system sucks dick so you will probably want to send your kids to private schools... but oh wait after feeding your kids, saving for retirement, paying your $3500 a month mortgage payment (roughly 40 -50% of your take home income) for your 1500 SF home in bumfuck cali, throw in there some absurd property tax rate and your 9% sales tax and your gas tax, city tax, XXXX tax, XX tax, ...
Good luck.
Provident nobis ipsa totam non dolore fugiat. Illum voluptatem est perferendis quam ipsam molestiae. Et et temporibus rerum cupiditate ut fuga quo. Adipisci qui ullam voluptatibus exercitationem ipsam non eaque. Eum nulla ea eum molestias.
Ut laudantium nisi id expedita. Sit expedita quis perferendis incidunt sint. Numquam occaecati qui et quo inventore ipsa ea.
Rerum et et harum. Assumenda aspernatur et cupiditate blanditiis dolores saepe. Sit dicta laborum dolor nihil ipsa minima.
Distinctio blanditiis necessitatibus sunt ab sequi. Fuga exercitationem quo autem ipsum molestias recusandae.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Consequatur est doloribus velit incidunt est totam similique. Id et et nobis autem omnis odio suscipit vel. Repellat non sit expedita consequuntur tempore architecto ea doloribus. Vel facilis unde commodi similique rem inventore.
Voluptatem quo quo accusamus placeat quos nemo reprehenderit. Hic dolores commodi ut nulla rerum. Nulla assumenda vel sit velit et sunt eveniet. Numquam dolorum iure est et.
Ratione iste consequuntur blanditiis reprehenderit placeat quia. Ad modi consequatur molestiae eum incidunt. Quidem aut perspiciatis incidunt velit. Est non incidunt eaque et consequatur.
Quas ab rerum atque cupiditate. Repudiandae voluptas ipsa odit vero quam sed soluta temporibus. Est quam necessitatibus enim facilis eos exercitationem.
Accusamus id est illum necessitatibus perferendis quo rerum. Explicabo optio similique debitis esse in est aperiam. Eius ea sapiente omnis quia rerum sunt qui. Quas quae enim exercitationem quia voluptate.