Are the President and First Lady Paying Their Fair Share?

Posted by Tina

It’s no secret that I don’t like the US tax code. I think it is too complicated and much too progressive and, because of this it’s completely unfair to every citizen and business in America. Yesterday I read that the President released his tax return and will pay an effective tax rate of 18%. Is that a fair share?

The President has done everything in his power to grab and redistribute wealth using the phony tax slogan, “…pay their fair share”. This is a man who believes in the depths of his being that the rich can never pay enough so that “economic fairness” can be arranged and implemented by him. This is the very same man who ran against Mitt Romney, demonizing him for using the tax code, as the Obama’s used the tax code, to “avoid paying his fair share.” This is a man that produces a budget to spend taxpayer money without regard to the added debt it will produce or the effect it will have on jobs and the economy.

I don’t expect the President and First Lady to figure their taxes any differently than any other tax payer. I do expect them to use every advantage legally available in the code to lower their effective tax rate. But I also expect them to be honest with the American people about taxes, tax rates, and about what constitutes fairness.

I expect the President to serve all of the people in his capacity as president.

There is nothing “fair” about policies that destroy the economy and jobs or that is used just to funnel money to special interest groups and the poor. There is nothing “fair” about “taxing the rich” at higher rates when they already pay nearly all of federal income taxes:

The top 10 percent of taxpayers paid over 70% of the total amount collected in federal income taxes in 2010, the latest year figures are available, according to the Tax Foundation, a think tank that advocates for lower taxes. That’s up from 55% in 1986.

The remaining 90% bore just under 30% of the tax burden.

Speaking of fairness, how about fairness to every American that is striving to put away a nest egg for his retirement? Guess what? There is nothing “fair” about a presidential budget that proposes placing a limit on what workers can save for their retirement years. As the WSJ article correctly sneers, “Thus do our political betters now feel free to define for everyone what is “needed” for a “reasonable” retirement. Not to be impertinent, but does this White House definition include being able to afford summers at age 70 at Martha’s Vineyard near the Obamas?”

President Obama is a man that has been promoted to the highest office in the land and given extreme power and wealth. His policies as president have come down hard on the middle and poor classes and diminished their chances for a brighter future. Is that fair? A low tax rate does little to comfort when food and gas prices are rising and jobs are nearly impossible to find. Speeches about tax fairness do little for a family trying to save when interest rates are being kept artificially low. I reconciled my check book the other day and dutifully noted the $.01 in interest that my meager account had earned for the month.

To answer my own question I say most emphatically, “No! The Obama’s have not paid their ‘fair share’ in taxes.” Here’s another question: Who will hold President Obama accountable for the unfair losses his progressive, redistribution policies have caused for the American people?