In August, 2011, Warren Buffett wrote an opinion piece in the New York Times in which he made the assertion that his 2010 “federal tax rate” of 17.4% was 18.6 percentage points less than the 36.0% average rate paid by the twenty other workers in his office.
Buffett’s piece garnered substantial media attention and, in the months since its publication, his “federal tax rate” assertion has been woven into the fabric of American politics. His analysis was the basis for the “Buffett Rule,” a tax plan proposed by President Obama that would implement measures under which everyone making more than $1 million in income per year would pay a minimum effective tax rate of 30%.
Clearly, given Buffett’s status as a legendary businessman and investor (the “Oracle ORCL +0.43% of Omaha”), his tax analysis carried a great deal of credibility and, as such, it was never challenged. Adding to the unchallenged acceptance of Buffett’s assertion was the fact that Buffett never released (a) his 2010 federal tax return, (b) the federal tax returns of his office workers, and (c), the analysis underlying has “federal tax rate” assertion.
In truth, Buffett’s assertion is completely inaccurate and is based on a fundamentally flawed analysis of basic federal taxation principles. In reality, he pays a much higher relevant “federal tax rate” than any of his office workers.
Read the full story: www.forbes.com
Follow Larry Elder on Twitter
"Like" Larry Elder on Facebook
