Mitt Romney contends that he pays a higher rate of income tax if you add in what Bain pays in taxes before Mitt receives his $20 million annually. That argument applies to all taxpayers who do not work for a non-profit organization. If Mitt can argue in favor of going back one step in the income producing chain, why stop there?
Let’s construct a hypothetical example and test Mitt’s logic.
X Co pays 30% on its profits and buys products from
Y Corp which pays 25% on its profits and then is purchased and restructured by Bain
Bain pays 35% on its profits (untrue because 35% is a nominal rate, not a true rate after tax loopholes)
Mitt pays 14% plus the percentage paid by Bain and its acquired companies and their suppliers. In this example, a total of 104%. Therefore, in Mitt’s version of reality, he has paid 104% of his income in taxes. Then why is he not on food stamps and collecting unemployment insurance like so many of us?
- Who does Mitt Romney care about? Mitt Romney, of course (dailykos.com)
- Mitt Romney’s 2009 Income (taxprof.typepad.com)
- Did Mitt Romney Lie About His 2010 Taxes? (johnhively.wordpress.com)
- Should Mitt Romney Pay More in Taxes? (usnews.com)