California Estate Planning Blog by Kevin Staker

December 17, 2010

2010 Tax Relief Act Now Law

Filed under: estate tax,estate tax news,Kevin Staker — Kevin Staker @ 2:23 pm

It is over (except for the shouting and the gnashing of teeth).  The President signed the “The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010”. Reid and Pelosi not there; claimed too busy.  Truth: the President is a terrible negotiator and they know they blew it by not passing the tax provisions before the election.

However, it really is not over.  This is temporary for only two years. Hence, the debate can now begin on what to do for after 2012.

President Obama should, and may, frequently speak out for not extending the upper income tax cuts.  The Republicans will want to make permanent.

Personally, I believe they should not have been extended for anyone and certainly should not be extended beyond 2012.  We are borrowing money from our descendants to live beyond our means.  We should dramatically cut federal spending and allow the tax cuts to expire in 2013.  The Simpsons-Bowles Deficit Commission was a good start to the discussion.

Where are the leaders with the courage to stand for what is right? I believe this is true conservatism.  (sorry for the personal views)

By Kevin Staker

Advertisements

4 Comments »

  1. “We are borrowing money from out descendants to live beyond our means”. Your thinking is completely confused.

    It has been the federal government which has been spending wildly beyond its means for decades, kicking the fiscal can down the road so later generations can deal with the problem. And you support giving more money to the crowd that created the problem in the first place?

    So they can do what, exactly? How will giving them more reduce the deficit? Previous tax increases did not reduce it — the accidentally balanced budget in the Clinton years was an artifact of the dot com boom — it was certainly not due to any competent action by the feds.

    It is true that for decades the US consumer had a negative savings rate — but surely you are not confusing that problem with the federal deficit?

    This is the second time I have submitted a post — I wonder if you will delete this one too — thereby compounding confusion with cowardice.

    Comment by Jack Mitchell — December 18, 2010 @ 9:45 pm | Reply

    • Thanks for your comment. We can agree to disagree.

      Comment by kevinstaker — December 20, 2010 @ 8:43 am | Reply

  2. “We are borrowing money from our descendants to live beyond our means.” — Bravo. Pay no mind to the other commenter. He’s the one who’s confused. You didn’t argue for the spending, only against the tax cuts. I suspect you’re against the spending too. And the tax cuts will not pay for themselves — a pernicious falsehood that even the Ayn Rand disciple Alan Greenspan maintains is untrue. The economic activity generated by tax cuts results in additional revenue, but not enough to pay for the tax cuts. The whole thing is the same old potion that got us into the quasi-depression we’re in: spending too many of tomorrow’s dollars today.

    Comment by TKL — December 19, 2010 @ 11:42 am | Reply

  3. I’d prefer to just make all the tax cuts permanent, while eliminating social security, medicaid, welfare, foreign aid, and all other forms of “forced charity”.

    Comment by Ben — December 20, 2010 @ 9:29 am | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: