역시 워런 버핏, "부자 증세해 미국 살려라"
"부시의 부자감세가 재정파탄 근원", 한국 '복지 망국론자'에 타격
'미국의 양심' 워런 버핏 버크셔 해서웨이 회장이 미국 재정적자를 줄이기 위해 자신을 비롯한 부자들에 대한 증세를 해야 한다고 촉구하고 나섰다. 이는 미국 재정적자 위기의 근원이 부시 정권의 부자감세 때문에 촉발됐다는 지적으로, 미국 재정위기를 복지 탓으로 돌리는 한국 정부여당에게도 큰 타격으로 작용할 전망이다.
버핏은 14일(현지시각) <뉴욕타임스(NYT)>에 기고한 '슈퍼부자 감싸주기를 중단하라'는 글을 통해 "미국인 대다수가 먹고 살려고 아등바등하는 동안 우리같은 슈퍼 부자들은 비정상적인 감세 혜택을 계속 받고 있다"며 "지난해 나는 소득의 17.4%를 연방 세금으로 냈으나 내 사무실의 부하 직원 20명의 세율은 33~41%로 모두 나보다 높다"고 지적했다.
그는 "노동을 해서 버는 사람의 세율이 돈으로 돈을 버는 사람의 세율보다 상당히 높다"며 부시 정권때 단행된 부자감세가 미국을 파산 위기로 몰아넣고 있는 재정위기의 근원임을 강조했다.
실제로 미국 국세청(IRS) 집계에 따르면 미국 내 소득 상위 400명의 연방 세율은 1992년에는 소득의 29.2%였으나 2008년에는 21.5%로 하락하는 등 1980~90년대에는 부유층에 대한 세율이 현재보다 훨씬 높았다. 그는 자신이 투자사업을 60년간 해왔지만 자본소득세가 39.9%에 달했던 1976~77년에도 세금이 무서워 투자를 꺼렸던 사람은 단 한 명도 없었다고 강조했다.
그는 높은 세율이 일자리 창출을 저해한다는 공화당 주장에 대해서도 "세율이 높았던 1980~2000년에 약 4천만개의 일자리가 순수하게 증가한 반면 세율이 낮아진 2000년대 이후 일자리 창출은 훨씬 줄어들었다"고 신랄히 반박했다.
그는 자신이 아는 슈퍼부자 대다수는 미국을 사랑하는 매우 품위있는 사람들로, 이들 대부분은 미국인 다수가 고통받는 이때 세금을 더 내는 것을 꺼리지 않을 것이라고 밝혔다. 실제로 그는 빌 게이츠 마이크로소프트 회장 등과 함께 자신의 거의 모든 재산을 사회에 기부하는 등, 세계 재계에 모범을 보여왔다.
그는 연방정부 지출 감축 방안을 논의하기 위해 여야로 구성된 초당적 특별위원회에 대해서도 자신이라면 납세자 대다수에 적용되는 세율과 중산층·빈곤층의 급여세 감면 혜택은 그대로 두고 대신 연간 소득 100만달러(약 10억원) 이상의 부유층에게는 즉각 세금을 늘릴 것이라며, 즉각적 부자증세를 촉구했다.
그는 "미국 지도자들이 '고통분담'을 요구하고 있으나 나와 슈퍼부자 친구들은 분담 대상에서 제외됐다"며 "내 친구들과 나는 억만장자 친화적인 하원으로부터 충분히 오랫동안 총애를 받아왔으니, 이제는 정부가 고통분담에 대해 진지해져야 할 때"라며 거듭 신속한 부자증세를 주문했다.
미국이 위기에 직면했으나 아직 미국일 수 있는 것은 바로 워런 버핏 같은 참된 갑부들이 존재하기 때문임을 보여주는 것으로, 부자 감세를 고집하면서 복지 망국론을 펴고 있는 MB정권에게 큰 충격으로 작용할 전망이다.
다음은 워런 버핏의 기고문 원문 전문.
Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
By WARREN E. BUFFETT
OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.
While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.
Last year my federal tax bill ? the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf ? was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income ? and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.
If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine ? most likely by a lot.
To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.
I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone ? not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 ? shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.
Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion ? a staggering $227.4 million on average ? but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.
The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)
I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.
Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.
Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.
But for those making more than $1 million ? there were 236,883 such households in 2009 ? I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more ? there were 8,274 in 2009 ? I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.
버핏은 14일(현지시각) <뉴욕타임스(NYT)>에 기고한 '슈퍼부자 감싸주기를 중단하라'는 글을 통해 "미국인 대다수가 먹고 살려고 아등바등하는 동안 우리같은 슈퍼 부자들은 비정상적인 감세 혜택을 계속 받고 있다"며 "지난해 나는 소득의 17.4%를 연방 세금으로 냈으나 내 사무실의 부하 직원 20명의 세율은 33~41%로 모두 나보다 높다"고 지적했다.
그는 "노동을 해서 버는 사람의 세율이 돈으로 돈을 버는 사람의 세율보다 상당히 높다"며 부시 정권때 단행된 부자감세가 미국을 파산 위기로 몰아넣고 있는 재정위기의 근원임을 강조했다.
실제로 미국 국세청(IRS) 집계에 따르면 미국 내 소득 상위 400명의 연방 세율은 1992년에는 소득의 29.2%였으나 2008년에는 21.5%로 하락하는 등 1980~90년대에는 부유층에 대한 세율이 현재보다 훨씬 높았다. 그는 자신이 투자사업을 60년간 해왔지만 자본소득세가 39.9%에 달했던 1976~77년에도 세금이 무서워 투자를 꺼렸던 사람은 단 한 명도 없었다고 강조했다.
그는 높은 세율이 일자리 창출을 저해한다는 공화당 주장에 대해서도 "세율이 높았던 1980~2000년에 약 4천만개의 일자리가 순수하게 증가한 반면 세율이 낮아진 2000년대 이후 일자리 창출은 훨씬 줄어들었다"고 신랄히 반박했다.
그는 자신이 아는 슈퍼부자 대다수는 미국을 사랑하는 매우 품위있는 사람들로, 이들 대부분은 미국인 다수가 고통받는 이때 세금을 더 내는 것을 꺼리지 않을 것이라고 밝혔다. 실제로 그는 빌 게이츠 마이크로소프트 회장 등과 함께 자신의 거의 모든 재산을 사회에 기부하는 등, 세계 재계에 모범을 보여왔다.
그는 연방정부 지출 감축 방안을 논의하기 위해 여야로 구성된 초당적 특별위원회에 대해서도 자신이라면 납세자 대다수에 적용되는 세율과 중산층·빈곤층의 급여세 감면 혜택은 그대로 두고 대신 연간 소득 100만달러(약 10억원) 이상의 부유층에게는 즉각 세금을 늘릴 것이라며, 즉각적 부자증세를 촉구했다.
그는 "미국 지도자들이 '고통분담'을 요구하고 있으나 나와 슈퍼부자 친구들은 분담 대상에서 제외됐다"며 "내 친구들과 나는 억만장자 친화적인 하원으로부터 충분히 오랫동안 총애를 받아왔으니, 이제는 정부가 고통분담에 대해 진지해져야 할 때"라며 거듭 신속한 부자증세를 주문했다.
미국이 위기에 직면했으나 아직 미국일 수 있는 것은 바로 워런 버핏 같은 참된 갑부들이 존재하기 때문임을 보여주는 것으로, 부자 감세를 고집하면서 복지 망국론을 펴고 있는 MB정권에게 큰 충격으로 작용할 전망이다.
다음은 워런 버핏의 기고문 원문 전문.
Stop Coddling the Super-Rich
By WARREN E. BUFFETT
OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.
While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.
These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.
Last year my federal tax bill ? the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf ? was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income ? and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.
If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine ? most likely by a lot.
To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.
Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.
I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone ? not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 ? shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.
Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion ? a staggering $227.4 million on average ? but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.
The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)
I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.
Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.
Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.
But for those making more than $1 million ? there were 236,883 such households in 2009 ? I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more ? there were 8,274 in 2009 ? I would suggest an additional increase in rate.
My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.
Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.
<저작권자ⓒ뷰스앤뉴스. 무단전재-재배포금지>
