Messrs. Bush and Cheney have released portions of their 2005 federal income tax returns. The White House website includes an announcement for each, but does not make the tax returns themselves readily accessible. See announcement of release of Bush return and announcement of release of Cheney return. The excerpted returns themselves are available at TaxHistory.org and on the TaxProf website. See Bush's Return and Cheney's Return.
There has been a veritable deluge of commentary about them. The New York Times and Associated Press carry general stories reporting particular items of interest from the returns. The TaxProf website links to a number of commentaries that themselves are interesting.
They include, for example, Americans for Tax Reform's rather patronizing praise of Bush for setting aside $3700 in a tax free health savings account for his routine medical expenses. That is a luxury that many of the 40 million Americans who have no health insurance can hardly afford, not to mention the fact that the purported premise of health savings accounts--that "consumer-directed health care" will cut medical costs--is barely short of laughable. If we were medical experts and we only had non-emergency medical needs and we all lived in towns with ample medical services, we might be able to do some comparison shopping for health care that might impact the costs to some extent. But in the normal use of medical services, we need to be able to develop a relationship with a provider and trust in expedited treatment when necessary. Consumer choice enters into the establishment of a provider relationship, but not pricing of particular services. HSAs are therefore primarily just another tax-advantaged savings vehicle for those with money to spare. We should look to Europe and Canada to see how to provide universal health care at a cost far lower than our current system's costs.
The TaxProf links as well to commentary on the Daily Kos that attacks Cheney for taking advantage of the tax break that Congress passed as part of the KETRA tax bill for Katrina aid. Ordinarily, a person cannot take charitable contribution deductions in excess of 50% of adjusted gross income. KETRA removed that limitation for contributions made in the last quarter of 2005 after the August 27 date of Hurricane Katrina, as an incentive for charitable contributions. Of course, only the very rich, who can afford to donate more than half of their income, could take advantage of such a provision. So this was a provision targeted as a benefit for the wealthy from the beginning. And since contributions to any charitable organization were eligible for the benefit, there was no assurance that Katrina victims would benefit at all. In fact, one could hypothesize that wealthy donors would most likely support the kinds of charities that wealthy donors often support--ones that provide status and prestige to donors who are toasted and hosted in symphony halls and art museums and celebrity receptions to grease the palm for more. The Cheneys, who still have enormous wealth in the form of Halliburton stock options, took advantage of Congress's gift to multimillionaires by donating $6.8 million and taking a related itemized deduction against about 75% of their income. See Cheneys Donate Millions In Charity: Scholarship Fund, Heart Center Benefit.
So the KETRA charitable contribution provision likely aided rich people much more than it aided Katrina victims, but it isn't really cricket to call Cheney contributions and deductions "shady" , as the Daily Kos commentary does, and imply that Cheney engaged in chicanery. He simply arranged the contributions for the maximum benefit under the law as passed. In this case, it was Congress that engaged in questionable practices by claiming credit for helping Katrina victims and glossing over the way the charitable contribution deduction would benefit the wealthy.
As is frequently the case, one of the most even-handed commentaries can be found at Citizens for Tax Justice, which provides a factual analysis of the impace of the 2001-2005 tax cuts on both the Bush and Cheney tax returns. CTJ concludes that Bush's taxes were cut by $26,204 in 2005 due to the tax cuts, while Cheney's were cut $1,093,937. Bush benefited from lower rates and the treatment of dividends as preferential capital gains. Cheney benefited from both of those features as well as the KETRA charitable contribution provision, described by CTJ as "ostensibly designed to encourage charitable donations to the victims of Hurricane Katrina." Id. CTJ does note the fact that none of Cheney's donations went to Katrina victims. Instead, they support the hospital that cares for his heart condition, his alma mater, and a program in DC to help students go to private schools instead of public schools.
Recent Comments