The Potential for Major Tax Reform in 2013

Join Our Mailing List

Romney and Schumer Talk Taxes

By Children’s Home Society of Florida Foundation

Members of both parties made speeches on this past October 9th that focused attention on taxes. While there undoubtedly will be discussion of tax provisions in the upcoming November congressional session, the focus of the two speeches this week by Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was potential major tax reform in 2013.

Mitt Romney’s Tax Plan

Mr. Romney explained his principal proposal on taxes to reduce the top rate from 35% to 28%. Because the goal is for the plan to be “tax neutral,” the total revenue to be raised should not change from the current amount. The Romney proposal intends to limit itemized deductions to produce a lower top rate and maintain the existing level of tax revenue.

The major itemized deductions are for state and local taxes, home mortgage interest, health insurance and charitable giving. Mr. Romney suggested that a cap of $17,000 on itemized deductions could be one acceptable option.

On a national media news program, Romney was asked whether he would consider reducing the charitable deduction and the home mortgage deduction. He stated, “I can tell you, with regards to the deductions you described – home mortgage interest deduction and charitable contributions – there will, of course, continue to be preferences for those types of expenses.”

In subsequent discussions with news media, aides to the Romney campaign indicated that the cap on deductions could be negotiated to a higher level such as $25,000 or $50,000. All of the final provisions of a tax bill would be subject to negotiation with both parties in Congress.

Romney campaign aides also mentioned other potential options. There could be a percentage cap on itemized deductions similar to the percentage limits for charitable deductions. Another option would be a conversion of some of the itemized deductions to credits.

During the Vice-Presidential debate on October 11, nominee Paul Ryan (R-WI) stated that the tax rate reduction from 35% to 28% could be accomplished without increasing middle-class taxes. He stated that the current levels of taxes paid by upper-income and middle-income Americans could be retained. Vice President Joseph Biden did not agree with this statement and suggested that the current progressivity of the tax system would suffer under the Romney proposal.

Senator Schumer’s Tax Plan

Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) spoke on October 9 and discussed in detail both personal and corporate tax reform.

Schumer stated that the tax reform would be quite different from the last comprehensive tax bill in 1986. That bill was negotiated by House Ways and Means Chair Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL), Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill (D-MA) and President Ronald Reagan. Schumer noted, “Our needs today are different compared to 1986, and we cannot take the same approach we did then.”

He observed that the 1986 bill was revenue neutral. However, because the current national debt is “approximately 73% of GDP” and approximately double the debt level of 1986, Schumer indicated that any tax reform must also lead to higher revenues.

Three Legs

The Schumer plan would start with corporate tax reform. This would be revenue neutral. The rate would be reduced from the current 35% by limiting depreciation and other corporate deductions. A lower overall corporate rate is essential in competing with other nations. All other industrialized nations now have lower corporate rates than the United States. Schumer believes that a lower corporate rate will assist in job creation.

Schumer then discussed three options for personal income tax reform.

1. First, he reviewed the proposals such as a reduction to a 25% top rate accompanied by very limited itemized deductions. He noted that the Joint Economic Committee, a nonpartisan group that assists Congress, estimates that this plan would lead to a tax increase for many taxpayers. Couples with incomes over $100,000 would pay $2,681 in higher taxes.

2. Second, the Simpson-Bowles plan from the Bipartisan Debt Commission appointed by President Obama suggested reducing the top rate to 28% through changing many of the deductions to credits. This plan would also involve a tax increase for couples with incomes over $100,000 in the amount of $1,000.

3. Schumer then explored his third approach. He suggested that it is important to protect some tax expenditures, such as those for college education, retirement savings, mortgage interest, charitable deductions, and state and local tax deductions.

In order to protect these tax expenditures, Schumer proposed increasing the top rate to 39.6%. He points to a Congressional Research Service report that states tax cuts “do not appear correlated with economic growth.” If that report is correct, Schumer claims that increasing the rates on upper-income persons will not harm the economy.

A major part of the solution in the view of Schumer is to increase the tax rate on capital gains. A substantial portion of the benefit of the 15% rate on long term capital gains accrues to upper-income persons. Schumer indicates that the capital gain rate should not increase to 39.6%, but should be substantially above the present 15%.

In summary, the Schumer solution involves three elements:

  1. Reduce tax expenditures by limiting itemized deductions.
  2. Increase the top rate to the 39.6% that existed under President Clinton.
  3. Increase the long term capital gain tax rate.

Schumer suggests that a “grand bargain” is possible between the two parties. It would include the higher taxes suggested under his plan together with the entitlement reforms that have been proposed by the other party.

Editor’s Note: Your editor and this organization take no position on the Romney and Schumer tax proposals. It is now probable that there will be a major effort towards tax reform in 2013. While there will be discussion of taxes during the November session, the majority of tax changes are likely to be passed by Congress in 2013.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Hospitals: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

Product Details  Product Details

 

Who Won the First Presidential Debate?

Join Our Mailing List

Mitt or Barack? A Voting and ME-P Opinion Poll

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Hospitals: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.org

     Our Newest Textbook Release

Buy from Amazon

Learn How to Profit and Thrive in the PP-ACA Era

BOOK FOREWORD / TESTIMONIAL

Public Misconceptions of Private Equity

Join Our Mailing List

A Political Season Review

By Rick Kahler CFP® MS ChFC CCIM

www.kahlerfinancial.com

During tax time and this very political season, some of the attacks on Mitt Romney as a Presidential candidate have focused on his tenure with the private equity firm Bain Capital. Critics and rivals have denounced Romney as “profiteering off the backs of fired workers,” and running a “vulture capital” rather than a “venture capital” fund. A PAC supporting Newt Gingrich even produced a documentary about Bain which tries hard to leave viewers with the idea that capitalism isn’t evil, but private equity firms are.

The Negative Impressions

Some of this negativity may come from a lack of understanding as to what “private equity” really means. Here’s my explanation.

First, equity just means “common stock.” Whether equity is public or private depends on whether the company lists its shares on a public exchange, like the New York Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ, or is privately held.  When you purchase a share of common stock, either directly or through a mutual fund, you buy it from a public stock exchange where anyone can buy or sell shares of stock. Private equity shares, however, are bought and sold privately, just like houses or small businesses.

One of the benefits of a public exchange is that it makes owning a slice of a company exceedingly affordable. For example, for about $600 you can own a share of Apple, the largest company in the U.S. If Apple were privately held, you would need $500 billion to buy it. If you were a little short on cash but still wanted a piece of Apple, you and 999 of your closest friends could pool your resources. You’d only need $500 million each.

That is exactly what a private equity company does. It brings together substantial investors, usually institutions, pooling their money to purchase companies not available on public exchanges. This requires raising or borrowing amounts that may be in the billions of dollars. The minimum to invest in a public equity company is often one million to 25 million dollars or more, putting it out of reach of most Americans.

An Asset Class

However, that doesn’t mean John Q. Public doesn’t own a slice of the private equity pie. Public pension funds, like the South Dakota Retirement System, have invested over $200 billion in private equity funds. The SDRS invests over 10% of its $7.8 billion fund in private equity. Many investment officers and committees feel this is such an important asset class that not holding a portion of their portfolio in private equity would violate their fiduciary duty to the fund.

Why Invest Privately?

Why invest in companies that are privately held? They often are purchased for lower prices than their publicly traded cousins, which makes owning them more profitable. In other cases a private equity firm will purchase a company that is failing or purchase a public firm and make it private.

In most every case, the private equity company’s aim is to try and improve the profitability of the company in the hope of reselling it at a profit or taking it public. Sometimes this is successful; sometimes it isn’t.

Goals of Private Equity Firms

What is the goal of a private equity company? Why, to produce a return for its investors, of course. Like any other business, its ultimate goal is not to create jobs. While more jobs may be a byproduct of creating better profitability, that isn’t always the case. Nor should it be.

Assessment

Failing to turn around a struggling company or laying off a division that is sucking a company dry in order to save the company isn’t evil. It is a natural and crucial component of a competitive free market system, a system that has given the U.S. one of the highest standards of living the world has ever known.

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed: And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed.

Link: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

Product Details  Product Details

OWS versus Tea Party Movement

Understanding Two Poplar Political Movements

By Staff Reporters

This infographic compares the two most popular political movements in the United States: Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party Movement.

It debunks several misconceptions surrounding both movements, including the stereotype that OWS protesters are largely lazy, liberal, and jobless -OR- does it?

Assessment

Is this a matter of conservative [republican] medical professionals versus liberal [democratic] laymen – or something else?

More:

Conclusion                

And so, your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed: And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed.

Link: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

Product DetailsProduct DetailsProduct Details       

Product Details  Product Details

   Product Details

Prominent Politician Views on Health Information Technology

A Guest Thought-Leader Op-Ed Piece

Ann Miller; RN, MHA [Executive-Director]  

By Alberto Borges; MD

In this review, ME-P thought-leader and colleague, Al Borges MD dissects and presents the political views of HIT by several prominent politicians.  WHY?

He believes that only a handful of politicians are questioning whether the cost of HIT will actually improve healthcare as promised, which can end up in wasted taxpayer money, and worse, become a slow-moving HIT blunder which puts patient lives at risk. Even President Obama’s staff quietly admits that these statements are unproven.

Assessment

For example, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and the current health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research stated last year that:

“Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality are merely ‘lipstick’ cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change.”

Link: Politician Views of HIT [updated November 2009]

Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too.

Get our Widget: Get this widget!

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/prod.aspx?prod_id=23759

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Health Administration Terms: www.HealthDictionarySeries.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com