41% increase in corporate tax revenue (federal)

[digno dave]

this is a statement i just heard a repub Rep. say in the floor of the House. He was calling attention to the "decrease" in the federal budget deficit, as reported today. He was defending the tax cuts passed 2 years ago.
So, my question is, can anyone legitimize or refute this?

[LisaM]

1. Well, since corporate tax revenue was at such a low percentage

it could be true (heck, if it's at zero, they could just claim a million percent increase.) I don't believe it though.

[Skink]

2. Paul Krugman

His last op ed in the NYT, a preemptive strike on the spin due out this week points out how the corporate tax provision sunsets this year so it won't be till next year that we see the true effects of decreased tax revenue.

[bowens43]

3. Unspin the budget

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/11/opinion/11krugman.html

"It turns out that all of the upside surprise in tax receipts is coming from
two sources. One is tax payments from corporations, up both because last
year corporate profits grew much more rapidly than the rest of the economy and because the effective tax rate on corporations went up when a temporary tax break, introduced in 2002, expired. Both are one-time events.

<snip>

"In other words, we're still deep in the fiscal quagmire, with federal
revenues far below what's needed to pay for federal programs. And we won't get out of that quagmire until a future president admits that the Bush tax cuts were a mistake, and must be reversed."

[Tux]

4. In other words

Tax cuts are meant to limit the budget so neocons can eliminate social programs.