Taxing The Shit Out of Them

Posted on 03/19/2009 at 3:12 pm by Bob Cesca

The House voted 328-93 to tax bailed-out executive bonuses of $250K or more — at a massive 90 percent tax rate.

For what it’s worth, a move like this is supported by a margin of 76-17 in a recent Gallup poll.

This entry was posted in Economy and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • GItheJOE

    HOLY SHIT!!! The wingnuts are not going to like this. But I love it.Come on 1949!

  • http://www.politicalpartypooper.wordpress.com politicalpartypooper

    93 voted against it? WTF!?

  • GItheJOE

    PPP, Remember the GOP is a Party of NO!

  • A.J.

    Don’t forget the “HOLY.” “TAXING THE HOLY SHIT OUT OF THEM!” Wow. 328-93. Let’s get our money back!

  • Jan

    I hate to be a wet blanket here but do we really think these folks are going to sit down and write a check to the IRS tonight? That phones at big time tax attorneys offices aren’t ringing off the hook this afternoon? I mean, how does it work? Are they given a certain amount of time to pay these taxes and then their bank accounts are seized? Do we really want to give the IRS the power just to take this money? What if they spent a good part of the money already or gave it to kids or relatives or stuck it all in a foreign bank account?Just askin’.

  • Cory

    Jan, I have many of the same questions. I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t see this holding up in court. I’m afraid this is going to come off as desperation from a Democratic party that is already about to get smacked in the press for the administration’s apparent decision to allow for the bonuses. If you’re watching the cable news hacks today, you can watch the narrative taking shape.

  • http://www.thenewwearsoff.com Kyle

    A little tax law birdie told me that it can hold up just fine.If they refuse to pay, the IRS will take the necessary measures to try to get the money, same as in any other circumstance of non-payment. I have worked jobs where I filed a 1099, and not having the owed cash on you is NOT a valid excuse for non-payment; at least the IRS sees it that way.

  • http://www.thenewwearsoff.com Kyle

    Adding:The only issues here are constitutional issues. Mainly, the idea that this is some sort of bill of attainder, which it is not. If tax rates change AFTER you got paid, but WITHIN the year in which you were paid, you are still obligated to pay the higher tax rate, despite having earned the money before the change.Hope that makes sense.

  • http://www.gravesdig.blogspot.com David

    The tax will be assessed on their 2009 return (the bonus being received in 2009). If they do not pay, they will be assessed late filing penalties and interest until the money is paid. If the money is not paid and they do not respond to the notices sent by the IRS, the IRS will levy the funds from their bank accounts, including all penalties and interest. No legal maneuvering can stop this. I work in a CPA’s office.

  • Jan

    So this could take years, especially if some of them fight it. Does anyone know if legislation has been put in TARP yet for future bonuses? I thought I heard that Fannie and Freddie are up for about 600K in bonus pay

  • bjritz

    Perhaps the IRS could add this as an audit flag. Just let that idea pass around those bailed out execs and see if they capitulate.

  • TravisTheChimp

    This all would have been unnecssary had the commander in chief acted as such rather than lampooning on comedy shows. Can we impeach Obama now?

  • http://www.thenewwearsoff.com Kyle

    Dearest TravisTheChimp,I’m sorry to hear that the doctors were unable to retrieve your pet gerbil from your colon. Don’t shed too many tears when he finally emerges in the midst of a movement.Yours,Kyle

  • http://broadwaycarl.blogspot.com Broadway Carl

    93 voted against it? WTF!?

    I haven’t looked yet, but I’m guessing those 93 votes have an “R” after their name judging by Boehner on the House floor saying it was a “joke.” I’ll look it up and post it here.

  • SillyRatfacedGit

    Yes Carl ’twas the R’sThe R’s claim that this is an unconstitutional bill of attainder. That’s their story and they’re sticking to it.Like Kyle, I think that they are full of shit.I am also bemused that their concern for constitutionality, like their fiscal conservatism, seems to come and go like a unit step function depending on the party in the white house.Come witness the hypocrisy inherent in the Ruplicanastycal Obstructionists.

  • AdyLeigh

    Yes, SillyGit, it was the R’s. I posted about this on FB.So, let me get this straight. The Republicans aligned themselves with 17% of the folks who do NOT want the bonuses taxed and/or recovered?I do hope the Republicans keep doing stuff like this.

  • ElMystico

    >>This all would have been unnecssary had the commander in chief acted as such rather than lampooning on comedy shows. Can we impeach Obama now?Impeach the president for going on Leno? That’s patheti-sad.Also, lampoon is a transitive verb, meaning it’s only used with an object. You can’t ‘go lampooning’ unless you’re lampooning something in particular. It’s also not a synonym for joking around. Can you maybe stop with the second-rate fancy talk, calling people sir, pointing out your breeding, and what not. Unless you want to continue coming across like Hugh Laurie in Black Adder