John,

My guess is Obama, however he is far from being a guardian of liberty!

All the accumulated media punditry just doesn’t get it.

Perhaps you could explain it to them.

All those comparisons are meaningless, because they are based on effective tax rates as a percentage of Adjusted Gross Income. AGI is after “above the line” payroll deductions for health insurance and, more significantly, contributions to 401k’s or the deferred comp plans I mentioned. For very highly compensated people, those deferred comp plans exclude a lot more income from taxation than itemized deductions. As I already described, the deferred comp plans really distort the effective tax rate analysis. If it were up to me, traditional 401k’s would be eliminated in favor of Roth plans, so that the amount contributed would be part of an employee’s taxable income, but the income earned on that money would never be taxable. We should get rid of (phase out) all exclusions, both “above the line” and “below the line,” and recalibrate the tax rates according to the broader tax base. It’s not only fair but good economics.

FACT CHECK: Are rich taxed less than secretaries?

“WASHINGTON (AP) – President Barack Obama says he wants to make sure millionaires are taxed at higher rates than their secretaries. The data say they already are.”

http://apnews.myway.com//article/20110920/D9PSC2RO0.html

If we’re talking about upper management executives, these statistics overlook executive deferred compensation plans. If we’re talking about business owners, we’re overlooking those who set their salaries just high enough to pass the IRS smell test and receive most of their compensation in the form of dividends taxed at 15%.

The executive deferred comp plans are never mentioned in the tax debates, because the pols don’t even know about them. However, BusinessWeek ran a detailed story on the subject about a year ago.

Here’s how a typical plan works. Most employees can contribute, say, 6-10 percent of their pay to a 401k plan and maybe get a 3% company match. Contributions are capped by the government at $15k or so.

In the executive deferred comp plans, eligible execs would be allowed to contribute 50% or more of their pay. In the company I formerly worked for, the plan was open only to people with a base salary of at least $200k. That’s a few years ago, so the entry point is probably higher now. Somebody making $200k probably wouldn’t put anything like 50% into the plan. But an exec making a million or more would. The exec has to pay the 1.45% Medicare payroll tax but no income tax until the money is withdrawn. While the money remains in the plan, the company pays interest way above the market. In 2003, when the market for 10 year Treasuries was about 4%. The exec def comp plan at the company where I worked payed 12% interest, more than enough to cover normal interest plus any taxes that would eventually be paid on the deferred comp. CEO’s and top tier execs typically have sophisticated estate plans that would enable them to defer taxes indefinitely. In other words, if they play their cards right, their effective tax rate on that portion of income is basically zero.

The tax savings advantage of the def comp plans is much greater than itemized deductions that the exec would normally take for mortgage interest etc. When they say the effective rate is around 30%, they are including only the currently taxed portion of the compensation. If an exec puts 50% into the plan, the effective rate would be more like 15%.

Only downside to these plans is that the execs are last in line for getting their money if the company goes bankrupt. So it only makes sense to participate if you have a high degree of confidence in the company’s long-term solvency.

“The vast majority of millionaires pay a 35 percent current tax rate on personal income from salaries, bonuses and small-business income. Their effective tax rate is around 30 percent, much higher than the roughly 20 percent effective rate for the so-called middle class (depending, of course, on how you define the middle class).” –Larry Kudlow

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/19/obamas-bizarre-tax-attack/#ixzz1YSTEUX4G

““When you remove the accounting tricks and Washington gimmicks from the president’s plan you’re left with only half of the $3 trillion in deficit reduction the White House promised,” Sessions said in a release. “The White House also claims the president’s plan is $2 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. But in truth, the president’s deficit reduction comes entirely from tax hikes. Total federal spending, including the stimulus, will increase under the president’s plan, not decrease.”

Senate Budget Committee Republicans contend Obama’s plan would never reduce deficit spending and grow the country’s gross debt by $9.7 trillion dollars over 10 years.” –Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/09/19/senate-republicans-challenge-obamas-math/#ixzz1YSR6mMv2

“President Obama’s smooth path to the Democratic nomination may have gotten rockier Monday, after a group of liberal leaders, including former presidential candidate Ralph Nader, announced plans to challenge the incumbent in primaries next year.

The group said the goal is to offer up a handful of candidates from various fields and areas where the president either has failed to stake out a “progressive” position or where he has “drifted toward the corporatist right.”

Poor O’bummer! He can’t catch a break!

http://tinyurl.com/3j4xr24

From your perspective, apparently not. So, perhaps you could clue us into who would be the guardian of liberty that the country would cheerfully embrace come 1/20/13.