Tuesday, September 25, 2012

Romney Doesn't Pay 14%, He Pays 43%

Romney needs to speak of his taxes only when combined with charitable contributions.

Mitt Romney’s 2011 tax returns were recently released showing income of approximately $13M with federal taxes of approximately 14%, and charitable contributions of approximately 4.1M.  Additionally, Romney declared only half of his eligible charitable donations as deductions, with the effect of raising his tax bill, and raising his tax rate.

Predictably, there has been very little in MSM concerning his charitable contributions.  Most of the comment has been around his “paltry” tax percentage and how didn’t declare his charitable contributions in order to increase his tax liability so he could “look better.”

This is not surprising.  Only the left and the left-wing Main Stream Media can figure out a way to make charitable contributions look devious and somehow wrong – even deceitful.  And we know their attitudes won’t change.  They will do everything they can to misrepresent all the good things about Romney and, worse, turn them into negatives.  The trick, therefore, is for Romney to refuse to play on their terms and only play on his.

Romney’s taxes and charitable contributions combined are approximately 43% of his income.  I am quite sure this is more than Warren Buffet’s secretary.  When mention of his tax rate comes up in the debates (and it will) Romney needs to consistently say he pays 43% in taxes and charitable contributions.  If Obama or one of the moderators wants to push the issue that his deductions are not the same as taxes, he should say, “Well, if you mean that first of all deductions are voluntary – and always have been – and secondly they generally go to private organizations that are far more responsible and efficient at utilizing money for social benefit than the government, then you are correct.  I think most Americans would agree that $4M in the hands of private, socially responsible institutions is far better use for the money than in the hands of politicians in Washington DC.”

Furthermore, whenever anyone tries to stray from Romney’s narrative on this, he should refuse to go along.  “No, you can’t separate the two.  It’s 43%.  Taxes are collected in part for social and general welfare purposes – things we all agree with in principal, but don’t approve of how the government distributes them.  Charitable contributions are simply a more effective way of accomplishing the goal.  Taxes and contributions are not separate things.  They should always be taken together when assessing a person’s take-home pay not only from an actual, but also from a moral standpoint.  I paid 43% last year.  Period.”

The MSM will not help him with this, but if he is effective with this persistent argument when pushed, at a minimum he will force the media to remove it from the arena of discussion.

Joe and Jane Paycheck don’t necessarily understand why capital gains tax rates are low, nor how lower taxes contribute to the economy and job creation.  When sitting at the dinner table with their families, they generally buy into Obama’s argument that Romney should pay a “little” more.  Without thinking, it sounds “fair.”  However, M/M Paycheck do understand that 43% is a sizable amount, and certainly more than enough.

One additional talking point - it is certainly arguable that donations to charitable contributions do more to simulate economic growth than contributions to the government.

This would turn the whole conversation around.

No comments:

Post a Comment