Sen. Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren spar over income taxes

[cali]

Published: Friday, April 20, 2012, 1:35 PM Updated: Friday, April 20, 2012, 1:37 PM
The Associated Press By The Associated Press



By STEVE LeBLANC, Associated Press

BOSTON (AP) — U.S. Sen. Scott Brown says he'll probably make public his tax returns for the last five or six years while his chief Democratic challenger Elizabeth Warren said she didn't voluntarily pay a higher state tax rate.

The Republican told WTKK-FM on Friday that he had nothing to hide, but didn't say when he might release the returns.

<snip>

Warren also said she didn't voluntarily pay higher income taxes in Massachusetts, where taxpayers can opt to pay a higher 5.85 percent rate rather than the standard 5.3 percent.

The Brown campaign has called Warren "hypocritical" for supporting higher taxes on millionaires without saying if she paid the higher rate.

<snip>

http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2012/04/sen_scott_brown_and_elizabeth_8.html

[JDPriestly]

1. Is Warren a millionaire?

If not, what does whether she pays the extra taxes have to do with increasing taxes on millionaires?

Is Brown a millionaire? Does he claim to have paid the extra taxes?

How many people in Massachusetts pay the extra taxes?

Answered this last question myself, or rather Google answered it:

Of the 3,240,000 returns filed in 2005, only 1,162 opted for the higher rate causing less than $200,000 in extra taxes to be collected. The latest data for 2006 shows that of the 1,540,000 tax returns filed, only 424 people opted for the higher rate. The average income of these people is $20,000.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070719182659AAzCo79

Which goes to show that people want the tax rate to apply equally to everyone.

[hfojvt]

2. it's certainly not hyoicritical for me to opt for a lower rate

when I am at $13,000 or even $32,000

When what I propose is higher rates for ALL of those above $100,000.

[hughee99]

3. Apparently, she is a millionaire

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/elizabeth-warren-wealth-income_n_1237607.html

[JDPriestly]

4. Wow! What about Brown?

[hughee99]

5. According to this, maybe

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/otherdata.php?cid=N00031174&cycle=2012

His net work is somewhere between 800K and 2.25 million. Since Coakley's the one talking about higher taxes though, I don't see how this is relevant to what Brown is making. It's like a repuke who talks about family values and gets caught cheating on his wife. It doesn't really matter that some Democrat was also cheating on their wife, because the democrat wasn't building a platform based on "family values".

[JDPriestly]

8. You mean Warren not Coakley.

Warren is saying she is willing to pay higher taxes if everyone pays them. Seems reasonable to me. I do not think that it should be left up to the individual to decide whether or not to pay higher taxes. If Warren is to be taxed at a higher rate, so should everyone earning around her income.

The analogy to the family values does not work.

Warren pays all the taxes she is required to pay. That she didn't pay extra is not an issue especially if Brown did not pay extra.

The issue is what tax rates should be charged, not what tax rates people choose to pay.

[hughee99]

10. I'm sorry, but if a candidate campaigns on the idea that the rich aren't paying their fair share

and when given the opportunity to pay higher taxes (aka "their fair share&quot they choose not to, Brown has a legitimate campaign talking point here. No, it's not a good reason to vote for Brown or against Warren, but it's the same sort of perceived hypocrisy as a candidate who talks about the value of military intervention but avoided military service themselves.

[JDPriestly]

11. There is a big different between asking to be asked to pay a higher fair share and

volunteering to pay more than what has been deemed your fair share.

There is nothing to prevent anyone from donating money to the government. It doesn't take a special law to do that. You just don't deduct things when you could. It's quite simple.

This is just a Republican gotcha' that doesn't really mean much.

This is not about hypocrisy. It is about someone who pays her fair share stating that her fair share should be higher.

It doesn't help the government if a few people volunteer to pay a little more. What we need is a higher tax obligation for those who earn the most.

We need to tax the wealth, not the poverty.

[hughee99]

12. I agree that it's a little more than a meaningless gotcha'

to the voters who are paying attention, but for some independent voters who barely pay attention to the issues, this is the sort of shit that has the potential to swing a few votes.

Repukes will argue that...
Warren thinks rich people should pay more in taxes (and I'll bet most independents will agree with this)
Warren is rich, so she must believe she does not pay enough in taxes.
When presented the chance to pay more in taxes, she chose not to.

It's essentially the same argument as one would have for a politician who "supports public schools" but sends their children to private ones. Yes, there's always other factors involved but the voters these sort of messages are targeted toward are the ones who don't bother to investigate the issues. They hear the message, think to themselves "If the public school system is so good, why don't they send THEIR kids to one" and don't even bother to find out that the politician who "supports public schools" is talking about the need for additional funding and how important they are, NOT necessarily how good they are.

I'm not saying it's right, I just believe it's the perception that some uneducated voters have. People who don't pay attention can be swayed by simple, inaccurate sound-bytes, and Brown's people will push it as long as they think it will swing a couple of votes their way.

[dkf]

13. If she has $8 million in investments, she may have a pretty low tax rate.

No wonder Brown wants to goad her into releasing her taxes.

[JDPriestly]

15. I think you would have to have a pretty high income to have $8 million in investments

although if you bought your house long ago, the market value can be way out of proportion with your income. Some of her money may be in the professor's equivalent of a 401(K) and not actually produce much income for her.

[spanone]

6. huffpo hit piece. from the title on...

[hughee99]

7. Are you suggesting she's NOT a millionaire?

I just used this to reference her net worth.

Here's one from Boston.com
http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2012/01/elizabeth-warren-salary-topped-over-two-years/7WBGJxCbpYuENukiAE6N6J/index.html suggesting at least the numbers in the huffpo are accurate.

[dkf]

14. Those numbers look funny...large drop off in returns filed in 2005 vs 2006.

[JDPriestly]

16. Maybe she published a book that sold and then didn't sell the next year --

or had work in addition to her teaching that paid well -- say consulting or something.

[dkf]

17. No...i am referencing the yahoo link showing the number of filers who checked the donation box.

The total number of returns is funny.

[LiberalFighter]

9. Are they challenging each other on the need to pay higher taxes in Massachusetts

or the federal tax?

If the federal tax then why is the Massachusetts state income tax an issue?

[Selatius]

18. The problem is they're running for a US Senate seat to represent MA.

The issue of taxation would necessarily play on a local level as well as the federal level because you're trying to get the locals to come out and vote for you.

[MrMickeysMom]

19. The Brown campaign needs a non-issue in convincing the voter who is the better candidate...

I wonder how many times this will be massaged.

Taking the gloves off, I'm pretty sure Warren will address any and all of this and not loose sight of the bigger issues.