By Jim Puzzanghera, Los Angeles Times –
WASHINGTON — Six in 10 Americans support a tax increase on annual income of more than $250,000, according to a nationwide poll released Wednesday.
Such a move is the centerpiece of President Barack Obama’s efforts to avoid the large automatic tax increases and spending cuts, collectively known as the fiscal cliff, that are coming at the start of next year.
The Washington Post/ABC News poll showed 73 percent of Democrats and 63 percent of independents back raising taxes on incomes over $250,000, while just 39 percent of Republicans support it.
The poll results show the divide in Washington between Democrats and Republicans over reaching a major deficit-reduction package that would avoid the fiscal cliff. But the findings could boost Obama as he takes his case to the public.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has said he’s open to raising additional tax revenue from the wealthy to help close the deficit, but wants to do it by eliminating deductions in the tax code.
The Post/ABC poll showed that approach has less support than Obama’s, with 44 percent supporting a reduction in deductions that people can claim on their federal taxes and 49 percent opposed.
Democratic and independent support for that idea is about the same as the national figure, but only 39 percent of Republicans back the approach, the poll said.
One area of agreement among Democrats, Republicans and independents is opposition to raising the age for Medicare coverage to 67 years old from 65, with 67 percent of respondents opposing it.
Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., has proposed a gradual increase in the eligibility age for Medicare and Social Security as part of a deficit-reduction plan.
Why only those over $250 thousand a year? Obama won, why his he trying to protect those under $250? Let the Bush era tax cuts expire and go back to the Clinton tax era and watch everyone squeal when they see their paychecks.
If you took every dollar from the top 1% of wage earners in this country, just took it all, it would run our government for 7 to 8 days, then what do you do? We don’t have a tax problem, we have a spending problem.
Lets go back to 1950’s tax rates. we do have a spending problem but we have cut taxes to much when people like Mitt pay only 14%
Mitt gives his money directly to charity and cuts out government waste. That’s why his tax rate is always so low. I’d much prefer rich people do it that way than pay it in taxes through the government. The government is way more wasteful then most charities. People get way more bank for their buck through his charitable giving than if he paid taxes.
Mitt is not paying income tax on wages like you and I, he is paying capitol gains tax. It is actually a double tax because he already paid income tax when he earned the money in the first place and continues to pay 15% year after year on that same money.
Paying taxes on the same money twice is a republican myth. Once you have paid taxes on your original investment you don’t pay on that money again. You do have to pay taxes on interest or investment income that your original investment earns. but not on the original money. And I believe money you earned while sitting on your butt at home should be taxed at a higher rate than money you earn while working.
@happy guy: you need to understand this concept: The Laffer Curve. Please watch this video. It will explain why taxing the rich over 33% does NOT work. Are you aware that 10,000 of 16,000 of the UK’s millionaires left the UK when they raised their tax rate to 70% for them? Watch this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIqyCpCPrvU
Story should read, at least 6 in 10 make less than $250,000. Its always easy to decide someone else should pay the bill. We didn’t get into this crisis due to allowing people to keep more of their money, we did it by spending!
What about spending cuts ? The Dems only want a tax increase and are not willing to cut spending. A tax increase is fine, but spending needs to be cut.
Why not do both. Close the loopholes and add a tax to those that can afford it. This thing is not going away without funding and a reduction in spending.