Where I Stand — Brian Greenspun: Rich are getting richer

Saturday, Feb. 10, 2001 | 9:56 a.m.

PRESIDENT Bush's plan is taxing my marriage.

I know the numbers before the presidential election showed that a large majority of men favored the Republican candidate, now President George W. Bush, while the female side of the ledger was pulling for then-Vice President Al Gore.

The pundits and pollsters explained this phenomenon in terms of taxes. In its most simplistic form, which works well for people like me, the men were interested in the meat and potatoes issues, like how to put more food on the table and more financial security in the bank, and the women seemed more concerned with issues like the education and health care of their children and their parents.

Without making a political statement, it is obvious that the men won the coin toss because the man with the tax plan is now our president. And, true to his word, he has submitted a $1.6 trillion tax proposal that he wants Congress to pass as soon as possible.There is nothing political in this analysis because I expect that at some point our president will also submit his plan to save Social Security, fix our school problems and take care of our elderly and children in the way any compassionate conservative would be most willing and eager to do.

Rather, this is a plea for help to all of my fellow males who voted differently than I did last November. Here's the problem: I don't know what to say to my wife who says that her conscience is bothering her when she reads the tax proposal and sees that most of the benefits come our way and very few of them go to the people in this country who work very hard for a living and who earn far less than we do.

I, of course, have already done the math. Accepting the fact that President Bush's planners fully expect that negotiations in Congress will change what he submitted almost beyond recognition, it is still helpful to look at the proposal to see just how the taxpayers are treated under the president's concept of tax reduction.

First, my friend Tom Daschle has it all wrong. While the wage earners at the lower end of the tax bracket may be able to afford a new muffler when they get their tax refund, some of the people I know will be able to afford far more than a new Lexus. In fact,a quick bit of addition, subtraction and multiplication would suggest that a few of my friends will be able to park a new Bentley in their garage with their rebate checks. That's really good news for the wealthy people who don't already own one, not to mention car dealers like Dan Towbin, who sells those beauties but not nearly enough of them, yet.

And, if you are in the mood for some fanciful ciphering, try to figure out what happens to the inhabitants of the Forbes list of multimillionaires and billionaires. Heck, if I am not mistaken, Bill Gates can buy Ford with his tax savings. No, I don't mean buy a Ford, I mean buy the whole company! That is, of course, if Microsoft climbs back up the Nasdaq charts and eventually out of trouble with the feds.

Anyway, my wife of a very long time doesn't think it is right for us to get back so much money when the people at the other end of the tax chart will get little or nothing at all. The mistake I have already made is returning, in part, to my Republican roots and suggesting she read up on Marie Antoinette. It has been very quiet around my house since that foolish statement, so now I am trying to work my way back to the point where she will at least acknowledge my existence.

There is some good news,though. Before the chill set in,there was an acceptance of the inevitable, which means when the refund does hit the mailbox,Myra will do her best to keep it or spend it rather than send it back. She's not crazy, you know.

But back to the proposal for a moment. If a taxpayer has$0-$6,000 in taxable income he goes from a 15 percent tax bite to a 10 percent hit. But, if he earns $6,000-$26,250 in taxable income, his rate stays the same at 15 percent. There is no break for that taxpayer,who represents a significant number of Americans. If, however, you are in the vast middle of American earners,$26,251-$63,550, you will get a 10 percent break. Instead of the current 28 percent tax,you will only pay 25 percent of that income.That's good but not nearly as good as the folks just above you who make between$63,551 and $132,600. Those folks go from 31 percent down to 25 percent which, if my figuring is right, is close to a 20 percent drop in the tax rate.

How many of you qualify for that category, which is where it seems the biggest benefit lies? If you make more than$132,000 and less than $288,350 your tax rate drops from 36 percent to 33 percent,which is a little less than a 10 percent give back. But, if you are among those fortunate few Americans who can claim taxable income over $288,350, the numbers get much better. Right now those taxpayers give up 39.6 percent of their money to the federal government. Under the Bush plan they will also drop to the 33 percent level, making their windfall close to a 17 percent drop in their tax obligations.

That means that the people in the middle of America those earning roughly$26,000 to $63,550 will get a 10 percent reduction while the people at the very top will get a near 17 percent reduction in the amounts they pay. As much as it sounds great for those of us who are fortunate enough to be at or near the top of the financial rung, it hardly seems fair or even compassionate.

I usually have no trouble arguing from any side of an issue. Whether I believe it or not, it has always been somewhat of a challenge to take the other side of an argument just to see how persuasive I can be or, more likely, how easily I can change my mind.This is one time, however, when as much as I want to believe the White House and the proponents of this tax cut that it is fair to all Americans, that I just can't make the leap. (I catch myself daydreaming about what color Bentley I might buy.)

I really don't want to admit that Myra has a point when she says that the real middle class is getting nailed under this plan and the very wealthy are getting most of the benefits. Heck,that's what Al Gore kept saying and all my friends told me he didn't know what he was talking about. So, what can I say that I haven't already thought of to assure my wife that the men in this society really are compassionate, understanding and selfless enough to make sure that most Americans will get at least as much of a tax break as the people who need it least. Mind you, I didn't say want it least.

I, of course, agree with her and many Americans that taxing people on what they own at death at confiscatory rates is unconscionable, not to mention a strong disincentive for those who build and hire to continue to do more. I also agree that once our debts are paid and our people are taken care of for their most basic needs health, education and elderly security that giving the taxpayers their money back, rather than wasting it on new programs that are absolutely unnecessary, is a good idea. I also believe, as do most people in this country, that giving us back what we aren't certain we are going to have may be too much like putting the cart before the horse. That should mean we go slower in creating tax breaks until we know for certain that the money will be there. I say this because if I have learned anything during my adult years it is that the economy tends to do what it wants at the most inopportune times.

So, I am asking for your help and your ideas to save my marriage. Keep your thoughts civil, please. I have had enough of the other kind lately to last for quite awhile.

archive