General Discussion

pnwmom

(110,346 posts)

108. No, that's not I'm saying -- or, really, Bloomberg.

Thu Jan 3, 2013, 08:01 PM

Jan 2013

What Bloomberg says below is that during the Bush years, the standard long-term rate became "accessible" at one year instead of five; and the rate was reduced from 20 percent to 15%.

So now the new legislation has raised the long-term (over one year) rate again, to 20%.

This article does not address short-term capital gains, but I believe that that continues to be taxed the same as ordinary income, which now has been raised for those individuals at the highest income levels.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-28/breaking-down-the-cliff-the-bush-tax-cuts.html

Bush's 2003 tax-cut package accelerated many of the original law's tax changes. It also eliminated the long-term capital-gains tax on individuals and couples in the two lowest marginal income brackets, and the 20 percent capital-gains tax bracket fell to 15 percent. And it eliminated the capital gains tax treatment for assets held longer than five years, folding it into the standard long-term rate, which is accessible at one year. Qualified dividends shifted from tax treatment as ordinary income into capital gains.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

152 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

FAIL. Obama LOWERED Capital Gains Tax from 40% to 20%! [View all] grahamhgreen Jan 2013 OP

The capital gains was 15% and went up to 20% BumRushDaShow Jan 2013 #1

The short-term rate ProSense Jan 2013 #7

not according to this: HiPointDem Jan 2013 #22

Do you have a link for that? grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #35

LOL! ProSense Jan 2013 #61

Isn't the lower rate on the first $250K of capital gains? kentuck Jan 2013 #80

Do you have a link to that data other than one of your own posts, like from the CBO, or the grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #85

They are right. The Capital Gains rate used to be 25%. The rate was decreased to 20% bluestate10 Jan 2013 #128

Obama said the rich would go back to the "Clinton rates" BlueStreak Jan 2013 #19

You say: truedelphi Jan 2013 #94

Case in point, right out of today's news BlueStreak Jan 2013 #110

What very sad news. truedelphi Jan 2013 #144

What it appears is that when the "Budget Control Act of 2011" went into effect at Midnight on the grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #38

Capital gains is ProSense Jan 2013 #2

Has anyone made the comparison of the deal vs. no deal? nm rhett o rick Jan 2013 #17

"No deal" would have raised more taxes and resulted in a more progressive tax system. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #24

That makes no sense. ProSense Jan 2013 #26

Yes, it does. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #31

Nonsense. ProSense Jan 2013 #36

Just because you say it's nonsense doesn't make it so. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #39

That chart doesn't prove your point. ProSense Jan 2013 #41

Your two-sentence responses aren't doing very much to further your position or this discussion. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #45

You think it is a good idea that the average middle class family would pay $2000 more in taxes per stevenleser Jan 2013 #50

Ouch. Good one, Steve! SunSeeker Jan 2013 #54

This message was self-deleted by its author rhett o rick Jan 2013 #147

If simply paying more taxes than you were before means a deal is not progressive... W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #55

Hurting the middle class so we can also hurt the wealthy at the same time is not Progressivism stevenleser Jan 2013 #56

Exactly. And I think some who claim to be progressive are really just vindictive towards wealth. phleshdef Jan 2013 #59

It's not about "hurting" anyone. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #62

The payroll tax holiday was a temporary stimulus measure and has zero to do with a progressive code. phleshdef Jan 2013 #78

The Bush tax cuts were supposed to be temporary, too. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #97

He was explaining a progressive tax structure (http://bit.ly/Un4onH) grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #96

No one wants to "hurt poor and/or middle class people" and for you to suggest that rhett o rick Jan 2013 #146

It's not intellectually dishonest, it's right on point considering the feedback here. We won this stevenleser Jan 2013 #149

No cuts in SS is not a victory. This is a good example of where some Democrats are today. rhett o rick Jan 2013 #150

Wrong. The payroll tax cut as a long term tax cut would harm solvency of Social Security. phleshdef Jan 2013 #58

Eliminating the payroll tax holiday... W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #65

Yes. If it is phased back in with triggers based on the unemployment rate BlueStreak Jan 2013 #63

How was it "less than half as much" as Obama was going for? phleshdef Jan 2013 #79

Obama was going for $1,600,000,000,000 of revenue -- "compromised" on about 1/3 that much BlueStreak Jan 2013 #81

I'm done at the word "backbone". Its being overused by a bunch of keyboard warriors.... phleshdef Jan 2013 #83

That was the NY Times using that phrase, not me. BlueStreak Jan 2013 #92

And? phleshdef Jan 2013 #111

Makes perfect sense. Tax would have been raised on the middle class but rhett o rick Jan 2013 #148

+1 Luminous Animal Jan 2013 #32

It would have raised more revenue, but would have been more regressive jeff47 Jan 2013 #42

You are completely wrong. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #46

Apparently, you can't read your own chart jeff47 Jan 2013 #77

Please don't accuse me of not being able to understand something... W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #95

Repeating the same errors doesn't make them true. jeff47 Jan 2013 #99

Well, that's the first thing I'll agree with you on: the title of your post. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #123

You're still not bothering to find out what's actually in the deal jeff47 Jan 2013 #142

Thats also what I am curious about NoOneMan Jan 2013 #25

I don't know the exact numbers, but that's probably true. W_HAMILTON Jan 2013 #34

Yes, I noticed that NoOneMan Jan 2013 #40

why do you need to manipulate the facts to make your point? MjolnirTime Jan 2013 #3

It went up significantly less than it would have had nothing been done. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #69

You are wrong about the Capital Gains tax, it would not have been raised had Obama bluestate10 Jan 2013 #132

OK fine, I'm tired of arguing minutiae. That still doesn't change the fact that overall revenues Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #137

No 'fail;' you are wrong. elleng Jan 2013 #4

The question is not this year vs last year, but deal vs no deal. grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #43

You're wrong, and ProSense Jan 2013 #47

That's not correct. I think maybe some of the confusion pnwmom Jan 2013 #66

So you're saying the short term capital gain went from 39.6% to 20%, grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #100

No, short term gains are still taxed as normal income jeff47 Jan 2013 #106

Right. And that is a big change for dividends. n/t pnwmom Jan 2013 #109

No, that's not I'm saying -- or, really, Bloomberg. pnwmom Jan 2013 #108

20%, instead of 40%. It was supposed to go to 40%. All that revenue was just given to the rich. robinlynne Jan 2013 #127

No it wasn't. bluestate10 Jan 2013 #134

Actually, the max. CG rate HAS been at or above 40% spooky3 Jan 2013 #141

"Bankers Anonymous"? Tarheel_Dem Jan 2013 #5

That's exactly what I said: tosh Jan 2013 #27

how come all the graham's on DU have OP that fail? snooper2 Jan 2013 #6

They're all crackers. Ikonoklast Jan 2013 #8

my name is bob and while not mean i do get easily irritated leftyohiolib Jan 2013 #9

My uncle Bob always said his name was short for Back Off, Bud. DFab420 Jan 2013 #15

You Better Believe It!! nt msanthrope Jan 2013 #13

Blast from the past!!! LOL! JoePhilly Jan 2013 #82

Wrong Cali_Democrat Jan 2013 #10

This is the sort of OP that makes me wish we still had an "unrec" button... regnaD kciN Jan 2013 #11

You Better Believe It!! nt msanthrope Jan 2013 #12

op fail bigtree Jan 2013 #14

I'm beginning to find people who invent silly names like The Grand Bamboozle for important issues.. DFab420 Jan 2013 #16

You should be more concerned about the lie in "Fiscal Cliff" JackRiddler Jan 2013 #88

I stand with you on that one, Jack! n/t truedelphi Jan 2013 #93

How 'bout "Grand Bargain"? grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #101

Um.. the FAIL is all on you. HappyMe Jan 2013 #18

Capital Gains Taxes Applies to Folks Selling Their Homes to Pay Their Retirement Yavin4 Jan 2013 #20

If you roll the proceeds into any approved retirement account all the taxes are deferred. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #71

I don't think this is correct. Do you have a link? spooky3 Jan 2013 #87

And real estate proceeds. When the accounting pro comes home I'll double check. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #91

I thought the capital gain on a home is forgiven ... JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #76

The first $250k of gains is tax free spooky3 Jan 2013 #89

I didn't know that, thanks JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #135

There is a chapter in Al Frankens book about what you are doing Renew Deal Jan 2013 #21

wow.. there's a lot of FAIL in this OP... try harder next time graham. dionysus Jan 2013 #23

This tax thing has only just started & BO is NO fool about what AMERICAN jobs look like. nt patrice Jan 2013 #28

President Obama raised the capital gains tax. Another anti-President Obama slant. graham4anything Jan 2013 #29

Capital gains and dividends should be taxed at the exact same rate as income nt abelenkpe Jan 2013 #30

What part of, "The Right is lining up DROOOLING at the chops for 2016 already" don't you get????? patrice Jan 2013 #33

Republicans won't rest until BHO's tax cuts for the most affluent have been paid for indepat Jan 2013 #37

Funniest thread all week! tjwash Jan 2013 #44

You didn't make it clear that those would have been the rates had we stepped off the fiscal curb. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #48

No, they would not have been the rates. The entire thing is false. ProSense Jan 2013 #51

No deal, the cuts expired. That is completely documented. You can pretend otherwise all you Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #57

It expired? What the hell does that have to do with the fact that the rate was never 40 percent? n/t ProSense Jan 2013 #60

Which rate are you talking about? Here's another sheet from FactCheck Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #68

1999-2000, long-term rates were 20 percent and short-term rates were 39.6 percent ProSense Jan 2013 #72

You link to your post which links to 3 more of your posts, none of which says Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #74

The information is from your second link. ProSense Jan 2013 #86

Yes. The short term capital gains rate was 39.6%. So what about it? The 4/10ths? Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #90

You clearly don't ProSense Jan 2013 #105

You have yet to show one single fact in this whole thread, as I pointed out. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #129

Short-term capital gains are still taxed as regular income jeff47 Jan 2013 #107

See post 87. eom RomneyLies Jan 2013 #49

i thought it went from 15 to 20% samsingh Jan 2013 #52

Here's the thing, at midnight on the 31st, short term capital gains went up to 39.6%, grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #102

You are ridiculously wrong ProSense Jan 2013 #103

Link? grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #118

At least it went up at all. Neon2012 Jan 2013 #53

Bloomberg reports Bush lowered long term capital gains tax from 20 to 15. Obama restored it to 20. pnwmom Jan 2013 #64

Totally wrong. budkin Jan 2013 #67

Where is the unrec button? Carnage251 Jan 2013 #70

Have a child, quickly demwing Jan 2013 #73

I understand. I'm not saying he is a total loser, just that this deal was not the best he could grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #116

They went up 5%. They need to go up another 40%. raouldukelives Jan 2013 #75

Wall street profits the most from short term capital gains rates being low. They were 39.6% just grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #114

FAIL. Rex Jan 2013 #84

DU used to have rules about intentionally misleading OPs. Is that all in the past? Buzz Clik Jan 2013 #98

It's disingenuous ProSense Jan 2013 #104

No, it's true. Although I will admit I have learned from the discussion that it is SHORT TERM grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #113

Completely ProSense Jan 2013 #115

They were reduced, on midnight of DEC 31st, 2012, the grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #117

Learn to read. ProSense Jan 2013 #120

If you read further, it says grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #122

"I'd love for you to be right, just prove it to me!" ProSense Jan 2013 #124

I have not seen a link to the short term cap gains rate being taxed at 39.6% post deal. grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #131

How ironic that you have the nerve to jump on this point. Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #139

Post removed Post removed Jan 2013 #112

Bless your heart. DevonRex Jan 2013 #119

short term capital gains are taxed as ordinary income magical thyme Jan 2013 #121

You clearly don't understand what Capital Gains are. bluestate10 Jan 2013 #125

It was 15%, not 40% BlueDemKev Jan 2013 #126

The long term rate was reduced to 20 percent from 1997 to 2000. ProSense Jan 2013 #130

Okay, thanks for clarifying that. BlueDemKev Jan 2013 #133

FAIL. Adelson's estate is in the BILLIONS. The difference between ... 11 Bravo Jan 2013 #136

But the difference between 40% and 55% is $3.24 billion. You think he doesn't care about that? n/t Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #138

What? I couldn't hear that. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jan 2013 #145

HELLO??? backscatter712 Jan 2013 #140

Yes, that change cost us 200 billion... grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #143

Capital gains The revenge Jan 2013 #151

This is an opportunity for state governments to impose higher taxes on those types of income. JDPriestly Jan 2013 #152