When Bill Clinton cut the capital gains tax rate from 28% to 20%, did THAT pay for itself?

Question

And on what basis do you make that statement?

That revenue increased?

That it increased faster than it was projected to increase without the tax cut?

That the rate of revenue increase was higher than the rate of inflation?

dstr his problem with Bush is the spending, and that's an opinion I share with Greenspan.

http://www.accf.org/publications/reports/sr-capgainstaxes1999.html

Jacob there are parts of the pro-free-market agenda that was passed in the 1990s that your assessment is more accurate about.

If Clinton opposed the tax cuts in 1997 he could have easily grandstanded on the notion of no tax cuts for billionaires etc.... like his wife does. He had already won re-election. Also, Robert Rubin had his ear. Lastly, Clinton took the 1997 tax act and went much further than Congress had asked him to in terms of creating loopholes for the largest US-based multinationals - everyone in '97 agreed on tax cuts for business and investment.

And they were right!

The problem is, NOW, after all the evidence is in and nobody can deny that it WORKED, WHY do some lefties still oppose tax cuts?

Answer 1

Revenue, increased as it usually does whenever a tax is cut. Why? Well, this is due to the basic principle. If you want to discourage something, tax it. If people will be hit with a hard capital gains tax by selling something, they won't sell it. If they don't sell it, no one else will buy it and the economy stagnates.

It would really be a worthwhile endeavor to really look at all the rules and regulations in the tax code and realize how much people are forced to modify their behavior to accommodate those rules.

It speaks volumes in support of a flat tax. In that, you pay X amount in taxes and then you are free to buy, sell, invest etc. as you desire. Right now, you cannot even give very much money to your own family without a gift tax.

BTW- The Republican controlled congress passed the tax cut. Clinton only signed it after it showed a positive reaction among his various focus groups. It was not the President's initiative.

.

Answer 2

All tax cuts have a positive impact on revenue .
Just read the reports put out by the press office of the white house .
You know they would never lie to the people .

Answer 3

Greenspan, the King of economics preferred Clinton's economy over Bush's, do you know more than Greenspan?

Answer 4

Link?

Do you have link that shows this cut?

If Clinton cut taxes that is great. Can you prove it?

Answer 5

it hasnt paid for itself and is causing a problem. there is a capital "bubble" now, with too much money churning around trying to find worthy investments to serve markets which are in fact declining.

Answer 6

Darn tax and spend lib. Right cons?

Answer 7

Sure did,it was reinvested and made more money which was taxed.