TPM & WSJ: GOP offers limits on tax deductions, wants Bush tax cuts made permanent, lower corp. rate

[highplainsdem]

From WSJ editorialist Stephen Moore:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203716204577017640028084180.html

But raising rates and raising revenues are different. Eliminating loopholes in exchange for making the Bush tax cuts permanent after 2013 is on the table—and by broadening the tax base, this could bring in tens of billions of new revenues each year. Says Mr. Hensarling: "Republicans want more revenues. We want more revenues by growing the economy; we're not happy with revenues at 14% of GDP, but we don't want to do it by raising rates."

One positive development on taxes taking shape is a deal that could include limiting tax deductions, perhaps by capping write-offs on charities, state and local taxes, and mortgage interest payments as a percentage of each tax filer's gross income. That idea was introduced on these pages by Harvard economist Martin Feldstein.

In exchange, Democrats would agree to make the Bush income-tax cuts permanent. This would mean preventing top rates from going to 42% from 35% today, and keeping the capital gains and dividend tax rate at 15%, as opposed to plans to raise them to 23.8% or higher after 2013.

And there is some indication that corporate rates might actually be pushed lower. Republicans would agree to a broader tax base and Democrats would accept a rate of between 25% and 28%, down from 35% now.

-snip-

From TPM's Brian Beutler, commenting on what Moore is reporting:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/11/report-super-committee-republicans-agree-to-violate-norquist-pledgewith-a-catch.php

Neither Republican nor Democratic aides were immediately available to discuss the proposal. But if accurate as reported, it represents both a significant expansion of the growing rift between Norquist and the GOP, and a bad deal for Democrats.

For months, Republicans have insisted that any tax reforms they agree to be mathematically revenue neutral. If they somehow trigger a burst of economic growth, and thus increase revenue, that’s fine — but effective rate increases were verboten. They tried to construe revenues collected in the form of higher fees, copays, etc. as “new revenue” but refused to use the tax code for the same purposes.

The plan Moore outlined breaks the trend. But it isn’t offered as a concession Republicans are willing to make in exchange for entitlement cuts — a key Democratic demand. It’s designed as a concession Republicans are willing to make if Democrats will agree to make all of the Bush tax cuts permanent — and thereby throw away an enormous amount of leverage they have over Republicans who are committed to extending them.

Democrats, thus, would be expected to agree to throw in entitlement cuts just because.

[aquart]

1. Any GOP proposal is a bad deal for Democrats.

And the Bush tax cuts have to go or we die.

[mike_c]

2. it's game over if the Bush tax cuts become permanent....

That is just the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. Why is that even a possibility? WTF happened to the adults in charge?

[LonePirate]

3. The Dems need to say no to this Trojan horse. The Bush rates need to be raised not made permanent.

[kentuck]

4. I am so surprised.

Not!

[kysrsoze]

5. perhaps by capping write-offs on charities, state and local taxes, and mortgage interest payments

Of course... yet again on the backs of the middle and lower classes. But keep the cap gains tax and top tier the same. What a bunch of shitbags.

Stephen Moore is a complete GOP apologist tool, and the panel collectively hands him his ass every time he goes on Maher's show.