Of course this is true. The fund managers currently only have to pay a 15 percent tax rate on much of their pay. By contrast, without the tax break, most of them will pay a 35 percent tax rate.
Nonetheless, the Post's way of characterizing the removal of a tax break for some of the richest people in the country is rather unusual. I suppose this is case of the glass being half empty or half full.
People who are upset about a special tax break for extremely rich fund managers focus on the fact that the tax break allows them to pay a tax rate that is 60 percent lower than what the law would require in the absence of special treatment. On the other hand, people who are sympathetic to the extremely rich fund managers focus on the fact that removing the tax break will more than double the tax rate that these managers will pay on their compensation.
There's too much at stake this November for us to quit. As we navigate another presidential election year, thoughtful independent journalism is more important than ever. We're committed to bringing you the latest news on what's really happening across the country this election season, shining a light on the stories corporate media overlooks and keeping the public informed about how power really works in America.
Quality reporting doesn't come for free, and we don't have corporate backers to rely on to fund our work. Everything we do is thanks to our incredible community of readers, who chip in a few dollars at a time to make what we do possible. This month, we're trying to raise $50,000 to help fuel our election coverage, and we've fallen behind on reaching our goal. Any amount you give today will bring us closer to making our reporting possible—and a generous donor has agreed to match all online donations, so your impact will be doubled.
