Clinical Professor Ken Kowalski published a letter to the editor in the Cleveland Plain Dealer on Tuesday, August 23rd, supporting Warren Buffett’s assertion that the rich should pay more taxes. To read the letter, click here: http://blog.cleveland.com/letters/2011/08/warren_buffet_is_right_the_ric.html
-
Recent Posts
- Professor Ray Co-Authors Blog Post on Digital Contact Tracing
- Professor Kalir Publishes in the Wake Forest Law Review Online on the Inner Logic of Bostock
- Sagers’ High Court Brief Covered in Washington Post and Other Media
- Professor Ray Testifies on Ohio House Bill
- Professor Sterio Advises on Ukrainian Legal Reform
Archives
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
Categories
I don’t understand why Mr. Buffet thinks the way he does. He has already paid income tax on the wealth that he invests to earn his return. Taxing capital gains is a second level of taxation, above the initial taxation of income. If I already have billions of dollars, and no job, increasing taxation on me would have no impact.
As to an entrepenuer forgoing an opportunity because of higher taxes, I agree with the professors comment…sort of. If I were to invent an amazing product, there’s no way high taxation of my income would stop me from pursuing its production. It may, however, make me think twice about producting that product in the United States. We live in a competitive world, and there is always somewhere else with lower taxes and less regulation than the U.S.
I think the professor’s comment regarding historical tax rates and income may need to be clarified. What exactly was the “most prosperous time” in our history that Mr. Buffet and Prof. Kowalski are referencing? And, were there factors outside taxation that might have a much larger impact on said prosperity? Such as the internet, railroads, the automobile, electricity, etc. Was the professor suggesting that the tax rate does not affect the economy? or that it has a positive effect? I would argue that during periods of high growth, the impact of taxation is minor relative to other factors, but in low growth periods, high taxation makes it harder to get moving again (if taxes are thought of as friction in the economy, that would seem to make sense).
Finally, it is worthwhile to mention that income metrics are very susceptible to how they are measured. For example, looking at household income vs. individual income can lead to distortions, as the definition of the term household has changed over time (we used to have one earner per home, typically, but now in many cases there are two). Similarly, if we measure changes in income by looking at tax brackets as a whole, versus individuals in those brackets over time, our data will be very different. See Thomas Sowell on Income Confusion (http://www.creators.com/opinion/thomas-sowell/income-confusion.html).