Explore Candidates → President → Ralph Nader on Taxes and Budget
Ralph Nader
on
Taxes and Budget
- Abortion and Birth Control
- Civil Liberties and Domestic Security
- Crime and Punishment
- Education
- Environment and Energy
- Gay Rights
- Government and Elections
- Gun Control
- Health Care
- Immigration
- Internet and Media
- Iraq and Foreign Policy
- Medical Marijuana and Drug Policy
- Religion and Public Life
- Science
- Social Security
- Taxes and Budget
- Trade and Economics
"I'd really put meat in the process of progressive taxation. The richer people are, the more the percentage you pay."
"RN: I think we should have a very modest wealth tax. I agree with the founder of the Price Club, who thinks it should be 1 percent. PB: One percent of your wealth each year would be turned over to the federal government? RN: Right."
"Q: What do you think is the maximum income-tax rate that should be imposed on wage earners? A: Zero under $100,000. Now you got to ask me how I am going to make — Q: What is the rate above $100,000? What is the top rate? A: Then you have a graduated rate. Thirty-five percent, in that range, for the top rate. It comes down to the loopholes. When it was 70 percent, did you ever meet anybody who paid 70 percent? Now, where would I make it up? This is where the creativity comes in. I would move the incidence of taxation, first, from work to wealth."
"We can solve the problem of poverty and homelessness. But it will take more than the "Alice in Wonderland" economics of the Bush Administration which believes there is only one solution to all problems-cut taxes for the wealthy who, unlike working families, do not spend their Bush bonus. We need to get off this plutocratic tax-cutting binge and start grappling with real solutions to real problems."
In the Public Interest, "Tax Cuts Homeless Problems Grow" Jun 3, 2003
“You speak of being "wise with the people's money," while your trillions of dollars in deficits will inflict the most gigantic baby tax in all of American history, while your Homeland Security and Defense budgets are full of waste, fraud and abuse by contractors. Do you ever read the GAO reports, the internal audits of your own Administration?”
"I'd really put meat in the process of progressive taxation. The richer people are, the more the percentage you pay."
Q: Would you support something like a flat tax? A: "No. I would simplify the tax bill but always keep progressivity in there. First of all, it’s hard to find a major fortune in America that hasn’t benefited by special-interest legislation. So when people ask, “Why should the rich pay a larger percent of their income than middle-income people?” -- my answer is not an answer most people get: It’s because their power developed from laws that enriched them."
San Francisco Chronicle, Sunday Interview, p. 3/Z1 Oct 13, 1996
"I would move the incidence of taxation, first, from work to wealth. So I would keep the estate tax, number one."
"I think all estates over, say, $500,000 should pay some tax. The estate tax as a whole raises about $32 billion a year, but the thing is the loopholes. Buffett, as an example, won’t pay because all of it is going to his foundation."
[Nader] Using the key below, indicate what levels you support regarding taxes, deductions, and tax credits in the following categories: 6) Should a married couple filing jointly pay the same taxes as if they were an unmarried couple filing separately? YES
“One of the boldest grabs for cash has been by corporations seeking to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which was enacted during the Reagan Administration to prevent profitable corporations from escaping all tax liability through various loopholes. Not only do the corporations want relief from the current year's AMT taxes, but they are seeking a retroactive refund of all AMT taxes paid since 1986. This giveaway, as passed by the House of Representatives, would make corporations eligible for $25 billion in tax refunds.”
"I think the tax incidence, the burden of taxes, should be least on workers and earnings and more on wealth, capital gains, and dividends. More on corporations, who are seriously under-taxed."
In late September, Senator Obama said to the Democrats – vote for the bailout. Senator McCain said to the Republicans – vote for the bailout. President Bush said to the Congress – vote for the bailout. But the American people were fed up. They told their members of Congress – if you vote for the bailout, we will vote against you. And now, the action is shifting from the corporate occupied territory of Washington, D.C., back to the country. Where the uprising continues. Nader/Gonzalez is taking the lead. Standing with the American people. Against the corporate Republicans and corporate Democrats. From the beginning, we were against the McCain/Obama/Bush bailout.
"What can be done about these gigantic runaway sprees? First, pass legislation that broadens individual taxpayers' right to sue in federal court against waste, fraud and abuse, including those receivers of bailouts-the reckless, avaricious corporations who have Uncle Sam in their back pockets. Second, have a voluntary checkoff on the 1040 tax return inviting individual taxpayers to join their own taxpayer defense organization. Such a group would have millions of small dues paying members and an on-the-spot skillful watchdog group in our national capital. Finally, place our public elections off the private auction block and have them funded by well promoted voluntary checkoffs on the tax returns together with a certain amount of free radio and television time for ballot-qualified candidates seeking federal office."
"Without public hearings, without civil justice safeguards, accountability and Congressional oversight, without comprehensive regulation and shareholder governance, this three-page bill could be the mother of terrible unintended consequences. For example, what if it is the wrong kind of bailout?" Nader also calls for changes to the bill that would include: 1)Provisions for homeowners to stay in their homes in default, or rent them at market value; 2) A cap on executive compensation and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains; 3) A stimulus package for infrastructure repair and upgrade to generate new community jobs; 4)Comprehensive regulation of and disclosures by the financial industry and Wall Street to prevent this from occurring again; 5)Prudent margin requirements on derivatives trading and a tax on securities derivatives transactions; 6)Shareholders control over the corporations they own; 7) Tougher criminal enforcement against culpable firms and executives.
Independent presidential candidate and longtime consumer advocate Ralph Nader said today that he opposes giving Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson -- heralded as King Henry on the cover of Newsweek -- what amounts to a blank check for $700 billion with nothing more than a promise to keep the U.S. financial system from imploding. Nader said that any bailout should have strict accountability, conflict-of-interest, regulatory, and oversight rules attached, including a cap on executive compensation and stock warrants for the rescuing taxpayers.