“Going Galt”– 90 percent tax may provide impetus

by Fran Smith on March 20, 2009 · 3 comments

in Bailout Watch, Economy, Personal Liberty, Politics as Usual, Sanctimony

Already there’s confusion over what the 90 percent bonus tax bill passed by the House really means. Targeted at the AIG bonuses, which sparked bi-partisan demagogism, the bill would really apply to all firms that received more than $5 billion from the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Here’s what the text of the bill states:

· (1) IN GENERAL- The term `TARP bonus’ means, with respect to any individual for any taxable year, the lesser of–

(A) the aggregate disqualified bonus payments received from covered TARP recipients during such taxable year, or

(B) the excess of–

(i) the adjusted gross income of the taxpayer for such taxable year, over

(ii) $250,000 ($125,000 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return).

Here’s what Henry Blodgett thinks it means (by way of MarginalRevolution:

If the “TARP bonus” bill the House passed today becomes law, any of the hundreds of thousands of people who work for Citigroup, Bank of America, AIG, and nine other major US corporations will have to fork over 90 cents of every dollar they make that puts their household income over $250,000.

That’s household income, not individual income.*  If you’re married and filing singly, you’ll have to surrender anything over $125,000.  Indefinitely.

It does seem to mean that if somebody is making $125,000 or a couple filing jointly making $250,000 gets a bonus, the amount above that income level gets taxed at the confiscatory rate.

It’s not likely that those thousands of employees around the country will be happy with this confiscatory taxation. There’s been lots of talk in recent months about “going Galt,”but so far it hasn’t really caught on at the big firms. Caroline Baum at Bloomberg thinks the time may be ripe for that to happen, and this was written before the 90 percent tax vote.

Somewhere John Galt is smiling.

The hero of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” is smiling because he’s seen it all before: the government’s intervention in the private sector; the constraints placed on business in the name of the people; the desperation on the part of government bureaucrats when they realize their leverage is limited; and — this part is still fiction — the decision on the part of business leaders to walk away from the enterprises they built.

Wonder how AIG head Edward Liddy feels after his contemptible treatment by lawmakers this week. And this is the guy who took over the firm in September 2008 and pays himself $1 in salary. He should have been praised for taking on this almost-impossible job. But no, legislators were too busy posturing for the cameras and venting their outrage. But he would be a hero if he “goes Galt.”

{ 3 comments }

Hal March 20, 2009 at 6:39 am

This is maddening. Our government made it ok for these people that we bailed out to get the bonuses then they turned around and singled out those people for a tax! That's unconstitutional to say the least! And some may say down right evil particularly in light of it being "household income". Didn't we have a revolution over such taxation policies!!

They just announced adding another trillion plus dollars to our debt enslaving more Americans to future taxes. Our debt is about to, if it hasn't already, out pace our GDP for pity sake.

Did you see what that did to things like gold! I was watching with the free widget ExactPrice ( http://www.learcapital.com/exactprice ) when the announcement came out and it sky rocketed. But what a lot of people haven't mentioned is that it just before that announcement the gold dropped big time. Smelled like manipulation to me. And I saw in the news that a number of banks are now buying up gold. I wonder how many bought gold during that drastic fall only to have it sky rocket on the FED announcement.

Something that's been itching at the back of my head was the FDR deal where they made it illegal for citizens to own gold and so confiscated all the gold they could get their hands on. With this 90% unconstitutional tax they just levied against the AIG employees I am not so sure that we won't see a redo of FDR where they'll come and take our real wealth in the form of land and precious metals to secure real wealth once this money bubble bursts.

Alex Harris March 21, 2009 at 8:00 am

Fran,

To be fair, the guys who were on the Hill begging for trillions of our money aren't exactly John Galt. The real problem with the bailout bonus scandal is that it has gotten people upset at exactly the wrong thing: the bonuses, not the bailout! I mean, is it any big surprise that the companies pay bonuses to the employees that managed to get them billions of taxpayer dollars?

How to Get Six Pack April 15, 2009 at 5:31 am

This is very up-to-date information. I think I'll share it on Delicious.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: