Timothy Geithner: 'No Credible Basis' For Argument That Buffett Rule Will Hurt Economy

WASHINGTON, April 15 (Reuters) - A proposal to impose at least 30 percent income tax on Americans making more than a million dollars a year will not hurt the economy by stifling investment and growth, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on Sunday.

"No credible basis for that argument, in my judgment," Geithner said on CBC's "Face the Nation."

"I don't think there is a plausible path to tax reform ... that doesn't recognize the reality that we cannot afford to extend these tax cuts for the most fortunate Americans," he said.

Comments

[flexibility2013]

04:04 AM on 04/16/2012

Why would I want to give money to somebody, that hires somebody, so I could pay the same as they do in taxes. They took no risk, they got paid every two weeks or whatever. They lose nothing, I could lose everything. Just ask the bond holders at gm.

[CB5]

08:48 PM on 04/15/2012

The Buffett Rule will not cure our deficit. Nor will it help us significantly. That is why Geithner is behind it.

We should ask more of the rich or those who make more than a million a year. Our country has lots of problems to resolve. So far the cost has been on the back of the public (us.) We can't solve our problems and economy without money or good leadership. This is a sacrifice we must ALL face…

*Under President Dwight D. Eisenhower
Marginal Tax Rate on Regular Income over $400,000: 92% - 91%

http://news.yahoo.com/eisenhower-obama-wealthiest-americans-pay-taxes-193734550--abc-news.html

[dumocraps]

05:34 PM on 04/15/2012

Timmy " Tax Cheat " Geithner has no credibility what so ever.

[ny hot mic]

12:31 PM on 04/16/2012

From a Marx, Alinsky, Cloward-Piven perspective….
Yes, Obama has been a resounding success.

[Huffdoo]

12:26 PM on 04/15/2012

Anytime a government finds it acceptable to print money to enrich one sector of the population, be it the 1% or the 99% that is the end of the economy, not that this policy couldn't end tomorrow but it just won't. History shows why. The FED now owns over half the national debt. That money was simply created (printed) to buy bonds that no one else would buy. When it crashes remenber: Geithner, Greenspan and Bernanke were the 'yes' men but Congress and the last 3 administrations were the the forcing factor. This tax squabble is over such a small amount of money it is a mere distraction.

[ponderingtoo]

12:16 PM on 04/15/2012

The problem with the "Buffett Rule" is that it does not really do anything to address deficit issues. It is a drop in the bucket at best. For the same reason that Geithner can legitimately say there is no credible basis to say that it will hurt the economy, others can say there is no credible basis that it will do anything to address a runaway deficit.

With that said, I've never believed the argument that taxing dividends and capital gains at lower levels promotes job growth. There's a reason no one ever brings out facts to support that argument.

They just repeat it over and over again hoping to make it true.

[lewiscave]

12:07 PM on 04/15/2012

BS! Obama tax rate that he paid 20%, and Geithner pay taxs?The problem is not sticking it to the rich. Its new payroll taxs ...like new JOBS.