AP Headline: Keeping 2011-2012 Income Tax Rates the Same Is 'Big New Tax Law'
Did you know that the "big new tax law" signed by President Obama yesterday "will save taxpayers, on average, about $3,000 next year," and that it will have "tax breaks for being married, having children, paying for child care, going to college or investing in securities"?
Don't spend that extra $3,000 yet, because it mostly won't be there. With the only major exception being the 2-point cut in the Social Security payroll tax, and of course barring new legislation the next Congress may take on, the tax laws for the next two years will essentially be the same as they have been since 2003, when Congress lowered marginal income, capital gain, and dividend income tax rates.
This lack of major change didn't stop the Ministry of Propaganda -- er, the Associated Press -- and reporter Stephen Ohlemacher from calling the new legislation "the most significant new tax law in a decade," when there's almost nothing "new" about it, or from trumpeting how much certain American families will "save" as a result.
Here are a few paragraphs from Ohlemacher's report:
What will the big new tax law mean for you?
It's the most significant new tax law in a decade, but what does it mean for you? Big savings for millions of taxpayers, more if you have young children or attend college, a lot more if you're wealthy.
The package, signed Friday by President Barack Obama, will save taxpayers, on average, about $3,000 next year.
But many families will be able to save much more by taking advantage of tax breaks for being married, having children, paying for child care, going to college or investing in securities. There are even tax breaks for paying local sales taxes and using mass transit, and a new Social Security tax cut for nearly every worker who earns a wage.
Geez, Steve, everything you just mentioned has been there for eight years, and you're treating the ideas as some kind of new, wonderful tax-saving opportunities.
It isn't until the fourth paragraph that Ohlemacher owned up to the reality:
Most of the tax cuts have been around since early in the decade. The new law will prevent them from expiring Jan. 1. Others are new, such as the decrease in the Social Security payroll tax. Altogether, they provide a thick menu of opportunities for families at every income level.
This is very "clever" writing by Ohlemacher. He and his AP bosses know that the story will stop at the second or third paragraph when read over the air at many if not most subscribing AP radio and TV outlets. This will leave relatively disengaged viewers and listeners with significant misimpressions about what has just occurred, including a key one: that even though everyone is somehow better off (mostly not true), "the wealthy" (really those with high incomes) are somehow disproportionately benefiting.
This second item is definitely not true. Had income tax rates gone up, the hits to middle and upper middle income taxpayers as a percentage of their take-home pay would have been higher than the hits on the highest income earners. Additionally, the Social Security tax reduction is capped at 2% of the first $106,800 of earnings, so the maximum savings is $2,136, even if you earn a million.
In later paragraphs, Ohlemacher used tax estimates from The Tax Institute at H&R Block to show how much four example taxpayers would "save" as a result of the new law, even though, again with the exception of the 2-point Social Security tax break, essentially nothing changes. His constant reference to "lower rates" when there won't be any beyond Social Security justifies my Ministry of Propaganda reference at this post's introduction. Income tax rates won't be lower next year, Steve, no matter how many times you type "lower rates."
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
I wonder if
Submitted by Lakewood Ed on Sat, 12/18/2010 - 11:43am.
I wonder if the 2% FICA rate drop was intended to give everyone an increased paycheck thus giving credence to the farce of "lower taxes"?
Yep
Submitted by forest on Sat, 12/18/2010 - 12:16pm.
And it's only for the emloyee half of FICA. Employers are naturally still paying the full amount because they are made of money.
Same deal with 'Making Work Pay" tax credit. Democrats will only go for "tax credits" or the FICA deal because real tax cuts only impact people who pay income tax.
Tax credits can be essentially welfare payments from the government to lower wage employees who do not pay income tax. The "credit" approach has the huge benefit that the MSM will call them "tax breaks". Welfare is now called "tax breaks" or "tax cuts" by the media. Unbelievable. It's the greatest political deception I've ever seen in my lifetime because so few people still to this day have not noticed it. Conservatives are running around using the terms "tac cut" and "tax credit" interchangably, and also calling this tax compromise a "tax cuts bill".
Tom....Thanks for hightlighting this intentionally deceptive
Submitted by Rush Fan on Sat, 12/18/2010 - 12:20pm.
AP report. Like most on the left, the AP is a master at manipulating the truth recklessly.
My thanks also to all those who were responsible for the development of the Internet. Can you imagine how uninformed we were regarding what was truly happening around us prior to the internet?
Sorry but having the first
Submitted by Barack_must_go..... on Sat, 12/18/2010 - 12:39pm.
Sorry but having the first black man in the White House hasn't just lowered the bar, they've had to completely remove it.
Never before in the history of this country have we seen the lame street media, immediately upon completion of the Ass Clown rolling out a plan or making a speech, having to turn out in full force to interpret ( lie about ) what the hell he just said..............NEVER !
Barack_Must_Go.....
I sense some desperate
Submitted by TerryWest on Sat, 12/18/2010 - 2:15pm.
I sense some desperate manipulation from the MSM to re label the Bush tax cuts the "new & improved" Obama tax cuts.