Is allowing a temporary tax cut to expire raising taxes

[Zyphlin]

Pretty simpe here.

A Tax Cut is passed and is set to be temporary.

The time period for that temporary cut to expire is about to occur.

Attempts to extend the "temporary" time period fails.

Is the expiration of the temporary tax cut an example of "raising taxes".

Are those who vote against such a temporary extension voting in to "raise taxes"?

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Yes and no.

It is raising taxes in the sense that what you're currently paying might increase.

It is not a tax raise in the sense that it wasn't there before and now it is.

 

[misterman]

According to the GOP, it is in the case of Bush's tax cuts for the rich, but not in the case of a payroll tax cut for the average person. Because they say so.

 

[jamesrage]

Do your taxes go up or down after a tax cut you got is allowed to expire? They do go up and as a result you are paying more taxes.Therefore it is a tax increase.

If all these people the 46% who do not pay federal income taxes lost all the deductions and had to pay 10,15 or 25 percent or more depending on what income tax bracket they fell into, would these people's taxes go up?

46 Percent of Americans Exempt From Federal Income Tax in 2011
Tax Brackets (Federal Income Tax Rates) 2000 through 2011

 

[Blue Dog]

Not continuing a tax cut translates into an increase. Unless the math is incorrect.

 

[misterman]

This just goes to show how silly our political discussions have become.

Raising taxes after lowering them by the same amount may be a tax increase, but it's not an increase in the level of taxation in the long term. The discussion should be about how high or low taxes should be NOW, not whether it's going up or down or whatever. The idea that we should never ever raise a tax rate, even if some other tax goes down or has gone down in the past, is simplistic Norquistian idiocy.

 

[pbrauer]

I chose "other" because it's a matter semantics, it depends upon where you're coming from, cases can be made for both "yes" and "no."

 

[iliveonramen]

Attempts to extend the "temporary" time period fails.

Is the expiration of the temporary tax cut an example of "raising taxes".

Are those who vote against such a temporary extension voting in to "raise taxes"?

Only if we're creating our own definitions. If something is temporary....then it was created as something that would eventually no longer be around. If it was created to be permanant...then it should of been passed as permanant.

 

[Zyphlin]

According to the GOP, it is in the case of Bush's tax cuts for the rich, but not in the case of a payroll tax cut for the average person. Because they say so.

Thank you for the wonderfully one sided partisan input that ignores there are people on the left that claimed that letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire wasn't raising taxes but claiming the Republicans were in favor of a tax hike by voting against extending the pay roll tax cut.

 

[Zyphlin]

Figure I'll add my own input...

For me, this is the same as in December

Is it a "tax increase"? Essentially, yes for the average person. One day your tax is X, the next day your tax is X + Y. (X+Y) is > X, therefore your taxes increased. Regardless of WHY it did, that's the essential gist of it.

The problem is that there is no such thing as "temporary" in our government. There are simply things that have sunsets but they always allow a vote to essentially go "lets extend it". There's never a guarantee that a tax rate drop, or hike, is going to go away so banking on it doing so is being unrealistic and naive imho.

Voting to not extend something and thus allow it to expire is essentially casting your vote in favor of raising taxes (in the case of a temporary cut, "raising" it to the level it was before). This was true in regards to Democrats looking to raise taxes by allowing the Bush Tax cuts to expire or Republicans allowing this pay roll tax cut to expire.

 

[earthworm]

If its not, then, what is it ??
Lets not be so obtuse.
Its a small part of the problem, obviously, the tax rates should be effective and fair.....I do not know for certain that this is the case..
The greater problem is that too much money has left our nation and is now in the hands of the Chinese, the Mexicans, and the OPEC nations.
This, we must work on, both liberals and conservatives.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

If one has to pay more than they did the previous year, it is a tax increase.

 

[Ockham]

I don't see it as a tax increase - I saw the tax cut as temporary only. I never expected taxes to always and forever more to stay so low, especially given the amount of misuse of tax revenue by our government both at the state and federal level. I also do not expect the current federal government to curb it's irresponsible spending no matter what political rhetoric or political party is pushing it. History shows over the past 3 to 4 decades that our government increases spending. Once our fed shows it can be responsible, I may change my mind - however I fully expect taxes to be raised at some point but the expiration of the tax cut is not it. There's more coming... it's just a matter of how it's hidden from the public under what guise of some program or alleged benefit or new un needed services.

 

[soccerboy22]

They are in favor of raising taxes back to their normal levels. So, yes it is a tax increase, but no at the same time because the tax cuts were only temp.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

They are in favor of raising taxes back to their normal levels. So, yes it is a tax increase, but no at the same time because the tax cuts were only temp.

With how much Bush-hate that went around I'm surprised all of those Bush-haters aren't in full support of it.

I guess it was only part-time hatred

 

[whysoserious]

No, it's not raising taxes.

I am not sure if this is the time to let the cuts expire, however, as I'd be afraid that it would push us into a double-dip recession. Congress and Bush just ****ed up by lower taxes and spending too much during normal times instead of taxing higher and spending less (aka saving for recession when they needed it).

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

No, it's not raising taxes.

Then by the same logic, taxes were never lowered either then.

I am not sure if this is the time to let the cuts expire, however, as I'd be afraid that it would push us into a double-dip recession. Congress and Bush just ****ed up by lower taxes and spending too much during normal times instead of taxing higher and spending less (aka saving for recession when they needed it).

I think that this is miniscule compared to the housing loans, NINJA loans, and the crash of the markets.

 

[soccerboy22]

With how much Bush-hate that went around I'm surprised all of those Bush-haters aren't in full support of it.

I guess it was only part-time hatred

I'll teach people how to truly. I had a friend in college who is a Jets/Yankee fan and every day we would sit next to each other in one of our classes, except for the days the Jets/Yankees played the Patriots/Red Sox. Our professor called asked us why we seemed to randomly not sit next to each other. My response, "I hate his teams so much we aren't friends for those days."

 

[American]

This just goes to show how silly our political discussions have become.

Raising taxes after lowering them by the same amount may be a tax increase, but it's not an increase in the level of taxation in the long term. The discussion should be about how high or low taxes should be NOW, not whether it's going up or down or whatever. The idea that we should never ever raise a tax rate, even if some other tax goes down or has gone down in the past, is simplistic Norquistian idiocy.

Effectively it's an increase, because that's all that matters. You name it a flying pig if you want to, because that doesn't cost me anything.

 

[whysoserious]

Then by the same logic, taxes were never lowered either then.

Well, they were temporarily lowered. If Bush had temporarily raised taxes, and Obama let them lapse, do you think anyone would be here cheering Obama saying he lowered taxes?

I think that this is miniscule compared to the housing loans, NINJA loans, and the crash of the markets.

Possibly. I've read that it may not be a great idea to end them, but I am always open to other suggestion.

 

[American]

Then by the same logic, taxes were never lowered either then.



I think that this is miniscule compared to the housing loans, NINJA loans, and the crash of the markets.

So let's use leftwing thinking to demonstrate that the Reagan tax cuts were really temporary (though called permanent) because Clinton raised them, which means his tax increase really weren't a tax increase. :roll:

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[American]

Then by the same logic, taxes were never lowered either then.

Well, they were temporarily lowered. If Bush had temporarily raised taxes, and Obama let them lapse, do you think anyone would be here cheering Obama saying he lowered taxes?


Possibly. I've read that it may not be a great idea to end them, but I am always open to other suggestion.

I would .

 

[iliveonramen]

So let's use leftwing thinking to demonstrate that the Reagan tax cuts were really temporary (though called permanent) because Clinton raised them, which means his tax increase really weren't a tax increase. :roll:

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yeah, that makes no sense...just like the argument that a temporary tax cut is really a permanant tax cut. Clinton cut and rasied taxes, Reagan did as well. None of them had Sunset provisions because neither of them were trying to bypass the Byrd Rule to pass something.

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Well, they were temporarily lowered. If Bush had temporarily raised taxes, and Obama let them lapse, do you think anyone would be here cheering Obama saying he lowered taxes?

If he supported making them permanent, in opposition to those who wanted to make them permanent, I would surely cheer that he indeed "lowered taxes" if by ommision.

Possibly. I've read that it may not be a great idea to end them, but I am always open to other suggestion.

I would support going back to clinton era taxes, as long as we returned to inflation adjusted clinton level spending.

 

[American]

Yeah, that makes no sense...just like the argument that a temporary tax cut is really a permanant tax cut. Clinton cut and rasied taxes, Reagan did as well. None of them had Sunset provisions because neither of them were trying to bypass the Byrd Rule to pass something.

How long has this temporary tax cut been in effect?