moksha wrote:Kevin Graham wrote:It is saying revenues from taxes are expected to increase, not that the "taxes" would increase by 30%.
Kevin is such a stickler for details. Ruins a good rant!!!
Yes, but only details he manages to make up as he goes along, and hope you don't notice. Here's what the CBO report says:
If current laws remain unchanged, federal revenues
will grow by almost 10 percent in fiscal year 2012, to a
total of about $2.5 trillion, the Congressional Budget
Office (CBO) projects. Those revenues will equal
16.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), substantially
above the range of 15.1 percent to 15.4 percent of
GDP seen in the past three years, though still well below
the roughly 18 percent of GDP that revenues have averaged
over the past 40 years (see Figure 4-1). Almost all
of the projected growth in revenues relative to GDP in
2012 comes from changes in tax rules that have already
occurred or that are scheduled to occur this year under
current law. The most notable are the acceleration of
businesses’ tax deductions for the depreciation of new
equipment into 2011 and 2012 (which reduced revenues
to a greater extent in 2011 than it will in 2012) and the
scheduled expiration at the end of February 2012 of a
2 percentage-point reduction in the payroll tax rate for
Social Security.
The expiration of the payroll tax rate reduction is a tax increase. The acceleration of business depreciation is a near term tax increase. But there's more, more that Kevin, who, because he thinks everyone who does not agree with him stupid and therefore thinks you won't research for yourself, glosses over hoping you won't notice. The CBO report continues:
Under current law—the assumption that underlies
CBO’s baseline budget projections—revenues are projected
to grow even faster between 2012 and 2014: by a
total of 31 percent, far outstripping the 7 percent total
growth in GDP projected for that two-year period. As a
result, revenues as a share of GDP are projected to rise
by 3.7 percentage points during that period, reaching
20.0 percent of GDP in 2014—a level that has been
exceeded only once since World War II.
About four-fifths of that projected increase stems from expiring tax provisions and other scheduled changes in tax rules, several of which are particularly important:
The expiration of the Bush tax cuts are a tax increase.
Reductions in individual income taxes that were initially
enacted in calendar years 2001, 2003, or 2009,
and extended for two years in 2010, are set to expire at
the end of December 2012, boosting revenues significantly
thereafter (see Box 4-1 on page 82).
This is a tax hike.
The latest temporary measure to keep a large number
of taxpayers from being subject to the individual alternative
minimum tax (AMT) expired at the end of
December 2011. That expiration is expected to have a
significant impact on revenues starting in the spring of
2013, when people file their tax returns for 2012.
Capturing more people within the AMT is a tax increase for those so captured.
The temporary cut of 2 percentage points in the portion
of Social Security taxes paid by employees is due
to expire at the end of February 2012, which will
increase payroll tax receipts in fiscal year 2013 and
thereafter relative to those in 2012.
This is a tax increase.
An acceleration of corporate tax payments will shift
revenues into 2014 that would have been paid
between 2015 and 2017.
Another "acceleration," or a near term tax increase.
Various taxes, fees, and tax credits enacted in the
Affordable Care Act are scheduled to take effect in
2013 and 2014, with the net effect of raising revenues
beginning in those years, CBO estimates.
These are substantial and numerous, and I've been over them here before at length.
In other words, one could just have asked Graham how tax revenues could rise so substantially without actually raising more revenue through more extensive taxation, but that would be asking for logical thought and honest intellectual inquiry, which Graham has shown consistently he is not interested in pursuing.
