Adam Smith Institute

Europe's favourite think tank website
  • Narrow screen resolution
  • Wide screen resolution
  • Decrease font size
  • Default font size
  • Increase font size
Just below the surface Print E-mail
Written by Dr Eamonn Butler   
Friday, 25 July 2008

A friend has just sent me a comparison of the McCain and Obama tax plans, which make interesting reading. McCain does not actually propose to change much, but Obama, says the comparison, would be raising tax rates in several key areas.

On capital gains, McCain would have no tax on the sale of homes up to $500,000 but Obama proposes a 28% tax on the sale of all homes. On dividends, McCain's 15% represents no change, but Obama's team would tax dividends at nearly 40%. On income tax, McCain would again change nothing, but Obama would revert to the pre-Bush-tax-cuts position, raising rates even for those on just $30,000 a year. And Obama would restore the inheritance tax that Bush repealed.

Obama fans would no doubt challenge this interpretation. But the fact is that the last thing America needs right now is higher taxes. After seven fat years, you have to expect a few lean ones. Everyone has to go a bit hungry, the government included. You can't maintain a bloated public sector through hard times and expect an over-burdened private sector to carry it without stumbling. Certainly, Margaret Thatcher in the UK raised taxes in the teeth of a recession: but that was done to bring the government's books back into balance, no longer dependent on the frauds of borrowing and inflation. With sound money and sound budgets restored, the economy boomed and Thatcher was able to cut the tax burden year upon year upon year.

As Ronald Reagan put it: We don't have a budget deficit because we haven't taxed enough. We have a budget deficit because we've spent too much. Simple, really.

Comments (5)Add Comment
Perhaps not what it seems?
written by Paul, July 25, 2008
Would that be this comparison? http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/taxes.asp If so I wouldn't place too much weight on it.
Another debunking...
written by JA, July 25, 2008
Here's another debunking of the home sales tax claim (and other bogus claims): http://www.factcheck.org/askfa..._if_i.html
...
written by Alasdair, July 25, 2008
I'm disappointed to see the once-respected Snopes reduced to yet another Obamessiah-shill-lite group ... for those who jump to the cited entry, they see the "False" at the top ... and yet, by the end of reading the whole thing, they should instead have seen "False in places, accurate in places" - and that is what the formerly-impartial Snopes site used to do ...

I can but hope that the Snopes site hasn't realised that the entry was authored (or possibly edited) by an Obama supporter ...
...
written by Alasdair, July 26, 2008
Good to see that FactCheck.org is still trying to be fairer and more balanced ...
...
written by Paul, July 28, 2008
Alasdair - I read the Snopes thing through, and I didn't see a great deal of 'accurate in places', because the hit piece isn't. I suppose that it mentions that Obama wants to tax people, which is true. But if I wrote that McCain wants to kill all Iranians it wouldn't be 'accurate in places' because he wants to kill a few Iranians, would it?

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

About the ASI

The Adam Smith Institute is the UK's leading innovator of free-market economic and social policies. Politically independent and non-profit, the Institute promotes its ideas through reports, briefings, events, media appearances, and its website and blog. For further information, click here.

Join our email list

Keep up-to-date with the latest events, reports and information from the Adam Smith Institute by joining our fortnightly email list. It's free and you can unsubscribe at any point. Just enter your email address here: 


Support the ASI

Enter Amount: