More

Social Security Tax Increase For Rich Proposed By House Liberals, Democrats

Social Security Tax Rich

09/14/11 09:01 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON -- Nervous that Social Security seems under siege from all sides, congressional liberals on Wednesday proposed raising the payroll tax that funds the program, but only for people earning more than $250,000 a year.

The legislation is designed to keep the pension program solvent for the next 75 years, which is the standard used by government actuaries, by putting an additional $6.5 trillion into the Social Security trust fund over that period. The plan also is intended to head off other efforts to overhaul the program or trim benefits, or to use its funds to help pay for debt reduction.

"No more discussion about raising the retirement age, no more discussion about cutting benefits, no more discussion about privatization," said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., one of the sponsors.

With Republicans making opposition to tax increases their mantra, the measure seems to have little chance of enactment.

Nonetheless, it gives liberals a chance to underscore their support for the widely popular program at a time when President Barack Obama has proposed cutting the payroll tax to help create jobs and GOP presidential contender Rick Perry, the Texas governor, has called its finances a "Ponzi scheme."

The bill's sponsors noted that during his 2008 presidential campaign, Obama proposed raising the payroll tax on people earning over $250,000. He's discussed the idea as president but has yet to offer legislation following through on it.

Currently, workers and their employers each owe a payroll tax of 6.2 percent of a worker's wages up to $106,800 a year. That tax would also be imposed on wages above $250,000 under the liberals' plan. Other sponsors include Sens. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I.

In an effort to boost consumer spending and create jobs, Obama last week proposed paring the 6.2 percent payroll tax on employees to 3.1 percent next year and cutting the payroll tax for employers as well. He would replace the revenue Social Security would lose with money from the government's overall budget.

That plan has split liberals. Sanders said he opposes it because it would make Social Security more vulnerable to budget cuts. Boxer said she favors it because it would create jobs while protecting Social Security.

In debt reduction talks between Obama and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, this summer, they discussed a plan to slow the growth of Social Security benefits that they never embraced. In 2005, President George W. Bush proposed letting recipients turn part of their Social Security nest egg into stock market investments. The idea went nowhere.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Nervous that Social Security seems under siege from all sides, congressional liberals on Wednesday proposed raising the payroll tax that funds the program, but only for people earning mo...
WASHINGTON -- Nervous that Social Security seems under siege from all sides, congressional liberals on Wednesday proposed raising the payroll tax that funds the program, but only for people earning mo...
Filed by Alana Horowitz  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,905
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (65 total)
  1 of 2  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
Bumpkins 07:34 AM on 09/15/2011
Do it.....give Main Street one , one benefit that can actually help 98% of the population. Take away the cap off of FICA taxes, and charge everyone the tax on every dollar of earned wages. Doing that will allow the Govt. to reduce the tax rate down to 3% for everyone......that is called a tax break or a stimulus for increased spending by the popuation.....boost for the economy....ususally a benefit to small  Read More...
04:45 PM on 09/19/2011
It's time to put the lockbox on Social Security. No payroll tax holidays! No more borrowing against Social Security. Pay as you go.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mikesfreedomblog
Citizen and Blogger
09:23 PM on 09/18/2011
The repubs will not allow the rich to be taxed at the same rate as you or I , after all they are creating jobs with all the filthy lucre they are getting off the backs of the working man, Right? Oh yeah, trickle down economics has worked so well in the past,,..the rich get richer and the working man gets the shaft! Keep voting these repubs in, they will keep doing what they do best, scrtewing the people and blaming the President for all the ills in the world.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
greengirl208
Where there's a will, there's a way.
01:18 PM on 09/17/2011
Finally a piece of legislation that makes sense.
GOODDOC1
"civil war" is an oxymoron
12:10 AM on 09/18/2011
I agree. What happens to the income earned between 106.8K and 250K? This article isn't clear.
10:41 AM on 09/17/2011
OLE' Bow wow Babs boxer not only wants to screw up california she wants to screw up america. How do those idiots in California keep sending these fools to washington? I would like to see the 51st state of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. It would show sacramento how a west coast government can work for the people. Newport Beach would make a great state capital or maybe Coto De Caza?
Hopfarmer
There is no civilization without fermentation
03:43 PM on 09/19/2011
What is your objection to raising taxes on the wealthy? You're too clueless to be rich so what is your problem with the increased revenue?
01:14 PM on 09/21/2011
You are the clueless one...and don't be so quick to judge who has the ability to think the issue through...I want my kids and grandkids to have the same opportunity I had...from a fishstick salesman to a corporate board member of one of the largest consumer products company IN THE WORLD. I live a modest lifestyle and continue to enjoy a great life...why go after the successful within society...is that where you aspire to...OH YEA, YOU ARE STILL SITTING ON THE FRONT PORCH...
11:21 AM on 09/16/2011
Obama and the government can't afford to pay back the payroll taxes. The republicans are already saying that it is going to take too much of the budget to even pay Social Security back.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Gailsunday
I think what I think...therefore, I am
06:49 PM on 09/20/2011
Isn't that just dumb....RethugliKans saying is going to take too much of budget to pay back Soc. Sec...first off, they have NO ChOICE....its a FAIR. OWED Debt per the Constitution,....US Bonds mandate repayment....
They can reign in MIC, curb their cadilac benefits, pay their own travel expenses to/from DC home & DC, like tolls etc., start paying for their own coffee instead of charging tax payers, paying for their own bottle water---instead of millions to tax payers annually, there's lota of cuts, legitimately to make, we do not OWE our Representatives in the Houses,....I think they need to be taken seriously
$325,000 a quarter (March 2010) for one Representative, Speaker of the House, FOR Coffee etc. in meetings!!!!!! Is an EXTRAVAGENCE...not to mention there are 3 quarters left of the yr., do the math!!! These types of expenses are way out of line with what I think is taxpayer responsibility btw the math... that's $1,280,000 for yr. How many Reps./Senators? IF they all spend these amts for these reasons? Do the math! I don't care who they are, they can take food, health care, etc., from US? and spend tax moneys this way? NO WAY..NO GO...Ream in their own high spending Belt first, before they say...Sorry tax payer public, we can't afford to spend your money on you.......
photo
jetjocki
Somewhere in the middle
06:55 PM on 09/15/2011
This is the biggest accumulation of bovine pie I have seen from either party for some time. It is nothing more than smoke and mirrors intended solely to pander for feels good votes.

For those of you that are thinking “oh goody” we’re going to really stick it to them evil rich folks and make them pay, I suggest you need to do some thinking and figure out who would really pay if it were passed. Hint, it is NOT them rich folks you so love to despise. They are laughing at you.

FICA is a payroll tax, operative word “payroll”. Meaning income derived from the employer employee relationship where both are contributors.

Most with a taxable income in excess of $250k earns most of the income from sources other than payroll. Those that currently have high levels of income from payroll will simple restructure how they are paid by the company. Therefore this FICA increase will have little or no effect on them.

Now before you get all warm and fuzzy with the idea that you just change what “income” this new FICA tax applies to, I would suggest you do some homework to discover just why ALL income other than payroll was excluded from FICA from the start. The reasons recognized as valid then are still valid now.

Just how long do you think it will be before the “gap” gets closed and sticks it to you if you make more than $51 per hour?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
youvebeenflagged
08:15 AM on 09/16/2011
oh s h u t up
11:26 AM on 09/16/2011
I can't think of a good enough reason not to tax the CEOs with their multimillion dollar payroll. How hard would it be to charge them 6.1% on their pay, even if part of it is in other forms, like options etc.

We need to tax their retirements too.

The higher paid live longer and draw the highest benefits, so they need to pay in more in the name of fairness.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TMS3100
Tea Party has run off with his light saber.
11:43 AM on 09/16/2011
Fairness is paying in more to receive nothing in return?
photo
jetjocki
Somewhere in the middle
12:40 PM on 09/16/2011
I made no mention regarding the ethics of fair taxation.

What I did do was point out that this proposal to do so is badly flawed and fundamentally unworkable for it's intended purpose.

When Social Security was initialy founded the decisions to exclude ALL forms of income other than payroll were well founded then and still apply today.
06:12 PM on 09/15/2011
I see the crowd that enthusiastically endorese the concept of using gov't to steal from others for their own selfishness are all gathered here. When you hire someone else to do your stealing, you're still a thief. And most likely you haven't the courtage to do your stealing yourself which is why you hire Democrat politicians do do your thieving. Thus, you are both a coward and a thief.What a pathetic existence you live. Disgusting..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AdamWest1313
Hardcore Agnostic
09:27 PM on 09/15/2011
I have to ask: Are you an anarchist? Because if not, then I am guessing you are willing to admit that taxation is granted to the government in the United States Constitution. That isn't stealing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
youvebeenflagged
08:15 AM on 09/16/2011
lorddumbass
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
03:46 PM on 09/15/2011
Next up, can we start calling capital gains what it is...income, and tax it as such.
photo
catrancher
More Peace Love and Groovy Things
03:50 PM on 09/15/2011
Amen!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
onionboy
Blessed are the Cheese Makers
03:56 PM on 09/15/2011
It's the biggest scam of the rich that there is. They pay no payroll taxes and so one AND they're not taxed at the same rate as income. It's ridiculous. America has the strongest economy in the world when capital gains was being taxed at 75%. People should be encouraged to WORK to make money...to produce something.
CogitoErgoSum VA
Every time you make a typo, the errorists win
03:22 PM on 09/15/2011
About effing time
photo
randytut
Liberalism is bliss
03:13 PM on 09/15/2011
"Social Security Tax Increase For Rich Proposed By House Liberals, Democrats "

Like has been said many times and has always rang true..eff liberals and Democrats.
photo
SaveTheMarshMouse
Disco Knockout
03:16 PM on 09/15/2011
So why shouldn't people who make 250K+ pay the same percentage FICA tax as everyone else? Why should they be exempt or capped?
photo
stunsitfel
Liberale sind verlorene Schafe
03:32 PM on 09/15/2011
Would you increase the benefits at the same level as the intake of capital?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AdamWest1313
Hardcore Agnostic
09:28 PM on 09/15/2011
Wow, way to take the high road. When in doubt, insult people you disagree with.
photo
dfranz
With Liberty and Justice for all
02:07 PM on 09/15/2011
Oooh, how uncomfortable for the GOP. Not only is this a verry popular idea supported by most people, it is being proposed by the Con's avowed enemies, the Progressives. Of course they are right and of course the House will ignore it. If you really want change in the way this country does business, vote for Progressive Democrats. It is and histroically has been the only time the country heals from the Republican plundering of the economy and the social contract with the people.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LoriAnn
loving my new blue state existence !!
02:03 PM on 09/15/2011
C'mon Hike Those Taxes !! Hike them to what the average citizen pays... I dare ya !! Nothing would give me more hope than seeing some equity in the tax code ! My spouse recieved a small incentive bonus of $1000. two weeks ago... taxes axed 33% ... & we are solidly middle class .
photo
stunsitfel
Liberale sind verlorene Schafe
03:14 PM on 09/15/2011
I get to take home about 48% of my year end bonus.
photo
SaveTheMarshMouse
Disco Knockout
03:18 PM on 09/15/2011
So...what is the FINAL percentage you pay in Federal income tax...17%? 22%? the withholdings on bonus pay have NOTHING to do with what your final payment is on Federal Income Tax....stop creating drama
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
p-junkie
never shut the door to knowledge
02:02 PM on 09/15/2011
[proposed raising the payroll tax that funds the program, but only for people earning more than $250,000 a year.]

Good luck with that one....If it were on the middle class and the working poor, republicans would love it...
ppace60657
We cut taxes on the rich, they created no jobs
01:43 PM on 09/15/2011
Oh please, the last time we raised taxes on the rich to balance the budget we only created 22 million jobs and got the strongest economy in history. Why would anyone want to go back to that??
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mrhandyman3105
Independent Voting Democrat This Year
01:35 PM on 09/15/2011
About time!!!! It's been LONG overdue for the "House" and "Senate" Demowhimps to get of their collective buts and start "speaking out". Stop waiting for Obama to propose it, or say it first. The Demowhimps should be stepping up to the plate speaking up helping and backing Obama at every turn instead of sitting off to the side looking in.

The Democratic support for Obama has been like having an offensive line (Democratic House members & Senate) that allows the opponents (republican) pass rushers to sack their quarterback.
photo
Totto
Not "noises", One-Round, *music*!
01:55 PM on 09/15/2011
You've noticed that too, have you? f/f