Republicans Oppose Compromise with President Obama on Tax Cuts

From Chicago Tribune.com:

In another ominous sign of new political gridlock developing in Washington, House Republican leaders Sunday took a hard line on compromising with President Obama on extending tax cuts that are due to expire at the end of this year.

"I really want to see that we can come together and agree upon the notion that Washington doesn't need more revenues right now," Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the No. 2 House Republican, said on "Fox News Sunday."

"And to sit here and say we're just going to go about halfway, or we're going to send a signal that it's going to be uncertain for job creators and investors to put capital to work, that's exactly what we don't need right now."

Obama has proposed permanently extending tax cuts for American households making less than $250,000 a year, but he has argued that the country cannot afford to extend those cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

The president repeated that proposal in his weekly address this weekend.

"At a time when we are going to ask folks across the board to make such difficult sacrifices, I don't see how we can afford to borrow an additional $700 billion from other countries to make all the Bush tax cuts permanent, even for the wealthiest 2% of Americans," he said.

Nonprofits Wrong to Oppose Obama Tax Changes

From Beyondchron.org:

Nonprofit organizations across the nation are expressing opposition to one of the most progressive parts of the Obama budget: reducing the tax break for itemized deductions, including charitable contributions, that are taken by individuals making over $200,000 a year or married couples earning over $250,000. Under the plan, a taxpayer in the highest bracket who gives $100,000 a year to charity can deduct only $28,000 a year, not $35,000. Obama’s plan directs the tax savings toward universal health care. Charities are concerned that reduced deductions will translate into reduced donations, hurting nonprofits just as foundation and government support declines. But nonprofits opposing this progressive reform miss the big picture. Government, not private donors, should decide how tax dollars are allocated. For too long, wealthy people have been allowed to redirect their taxpayer dollars away from serving education, health care and other pressing public needs to boosting symphonies, operas and elite institutions like Harvard, whose endowment alone exceeded $36 billion in 2008.

Having spent my entire career heading a nonprofit, I always find it sad when my fellow nonprofit leaders become fronts for campaigns by the wealthy to perpetuate social injustice. We saw this in San Francisco when groups like Project Open Hand opposed (unsuccessfully) the city’s living wage law, and we are now hearing that many nonprofits are opposing President Obama’s plan to raise revenue for universal health care by limiting tax deductions by the wealthy.

A Charity Revolt?

According to the Wall Street Journal, “from the Ivy League to the United Jewish Appeal, petitions and manifestos are in the works” to oppose Obama’s charitable deduction reform. Many of the charities opposing the reform are based in New York City, whose Congressmember Charles Rangel heads the House Ways and Means Committee and whose Senator Chuck Schumer is influential on tax issues.

But as White House budget chief Peter Orszag explained on his blog, "If you're a teacher making $50,000 a year and decide to donate $1,000 to the Red Cross or United Way, you enjoy a tax break of $150. If you are Warren Buffet or Bill Gates and you make that same donation, you get a $350 deduction -- more than twice the break as the teacher."

So proponents of the Obama reform see it as a progressive strategy for funding universal health care. Opponents accuse the Obama Administration of “turning even philanthropy into a class issue”.