Tax on AIG bonuses just a ploy

Canceled2

Banned
On Thursday, Lynn voted against congressional Democrats cynical tax plan for AIG bonuses.

“House and Senate Democrats messed up big time and now they want to tinker with the tax code as part of a public relations stunt,” Lynn said after the vote. “I know Americans want to punish executives who are getting taxpayer dollars as bonuses – I know it because I’m just as outraged. But honest members of Congress have a duty to stand up against these shenanigans and explain to Americans that Democrats messed up and now they’re trying to sweep it under the rug.”

The legislation imposes a retroactive 90 percent tax for bonuses received since Jan. 1 by an employee of any company that has received more than $5 billion from federal bailouts. Language protecting these bonuses in the so-called stimulus package was written entirely by Democrats and signed by President Obama.

“I voted against the stimulus that allowed these bonuses and I voted against the TARP legislation that funded these bonuses,” Lynn said. “As I’ve said on the floor of the House, we don’t know what would have happened if Congress hadn’t passed TARP, but we do know that AIG’s employees wouldn’t be getting bonuses because they wouldn’t have jobs.

“I didn’t vote ‘no’ because I support bonuses for AIG employees. I voted 'no' because I can’t support using the tax code retroactively to punish a particular group or to score political points. I don’t want American taxpayers to get back 90 percent of the bonuses; I want them to get back 100 percent of the hundreds of billions they have doled out to corporations whose bad decisions have blown a gaping hole into the global economy.”

Watch Lynn's video on the AIG vote:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbrk37ofKHM"]YouTube - Democrats try to cover their tracks on AIG bonus mess-up[/ame]
President Obama’s plan to spend up to $15 billion on loans won’t provide a “river of green” to small businesses in need of the money, Lynn said on St. Patrick’s Day.

“As we’ve come to expect in the past two months, President Obama gives a little with one hand and takes a lot with the other,” Lynn said. “First, the president is offering $15 billion in loans just after announcing his plans to hike taxes on small businesses by hundreds of billions of dollars. Second, this action through the Small Business Administration will benefit only about 5 percent of the small business loan market. We know there’s a better way.”

According to the Tax Policy Center (TPC), a research organization often cited by Democrats as having the most reliable estimates outside of government, more than 3 million taxpayers with small business income will face higher taxes under the Obama budget outline. Furthermore, TPC states nearly 2/3 of those paying higher taxes under the Obama budget outline will be small businesses.

Westmoreland said the Obama administration thus far had fallen far short on small business’s real need: unfreezing the credit market.

“The American taxpayers have watched the administration dole out hundreds of billions in bailouts to banks that made bad decisions,” Westmoreland said. “We have not received good answers on how that money is being spent. All we hear about it is workers in AIG’s financial sector – which played a big role in creating this mess – are getting bonuses. All the while, the small business people in Georgia who played by the rules and worked hard can’t get the credit that’s their lifeblood.

“As a former small businessman and as a member of the Small Business Committee, I’m glad that President Obama sees the real need that outs there. I actually support his efforts to expand these loan programs. But if we’re going to really help our nation’s job creators, we can’t burden them with these huge tax increases.”

The money for the loan program will come from the $700 billion financial rescue package. Westmoreland noted that the program would give lenders greater profits and less risk.

“Big banks owe a lot to the taxpayers,” he said. “It’s time to do their duty and get credit flowing again.”
 
How would they get past the provision in the Constitution that taxes must be applied equally to the states?
 
Back
Top