Bookmark this page
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's selection of Paul Ryan as a running mate solidifies his position on promoting job creation and the wealthy – and gives President Obama, who favors higher taxes on the wealthy and businesses, a bigger target for his attack.
Republican running mate Paul Ryan
Ryan, currently House Budget Committee chairman, has made no secret of his support of the wealthy as job creators and investors. "Economic growth comes when American families and small businesses work, save, and invest," Ryan's House website states. Congress can do its part by lowering taxes and controlling government spending, according to the statement on the site.
Through his 2010 Roadmap and his subsequent budget resolutions, Ryan has continued to support that position. He's proposed two tax brackets for individuals, 10 percent and 25 percent, while eliminating some deductions, though he doesn't specify which ones. His 2013 budget would eliminate taxes on corporate income, estates, dividends, interest and capital gains. He also proposes dropping the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent.
Ryan feels the Democrats are hindering business growth with regulations. In his 2013 budget, he wrote: "The free enterprise system is being stifled by a federal bureaucracy fixated on depriving citizens and businesses of their ability to make social and economic decisions according to what is best for their own needs and interests."
President Obama, on the other hand, has made it known he intends to make the rich pay their fair share. He proposes increasing the capital gains rate from its current 15 percent to 20 percent for households earning more than $250,000. Dividends would be taxed at ordinary income rates, currently 35 percent for top earners, but increasing to 39.6 percent if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire at the end of the year.
Kay Bell breaks down the tax proposals of both Romney and Obama in this article.
Though Romney's and Ryan's tax plans differ slightly and details still need to be hammered out, the two are unified in their support of the wealthy and job creation as a means to drive economic growth.
What do you think of the Romney-Ryan ticket?
Keep up with your wealth and mortgages and follow me on Twitter.
Get more news, money-saving tips and expert advice by signing up for a free Bankrate newsletter.
Ryan is correct on both taxes and regulations. Furthermore, I totally disagree with Eric. We don't need more taxes. What we need is to return to 2008 or earlier spending levels and limit the growth of government spending to the rate of inflation plus the rate of population growth, and for the government officials to stop giving our tax money to their cronies in return for campaign donations and votes. A balanced budget amendment would help greatly.
The author interprets the president's position as making the rich "pay their fair share." That's a subjective statement, and betrays her bias.
I admire Paul Ryan's boldness to create a plan to address our deficits. However I disagree on the "trickle down" theory of giving massive tax breaks to the wealthy with the expense passed on to middle class families who have been hurt the most. We all need to pay more taxes to get this debt under control, but unfortunately Ryan's plan gives upper income families a tax decrease at the expense of middle to lower class families. A balanced approach would make more sense.