January 18th, 2012
07:33 PM ET

Why does Mitt Romney's 15% tax rate matter–and cost America?

Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney has yet to release his tax return, but it's already the subject of much debate in the GOP presidential contest. CNN's Erin Burnett explains Romney–who says he'll share the returns in April–has paid a 15 percent tax rate that may cause ripples in the Republican contest and–should Romney prevail–in the general election.

Filed under: Economy • Politics
soundoff (4 Responses)
  1. Alisha

    His rate doesn't really matter to me, what matters to me is what the govenment does with that money.

    I also want the people that benefitted from the housing bubble to pay the costs of the housing bubble. People should paid part of their real estate gains to offset the costs of driving prices up into a bubble and the cost of frauds.

    Romney has strong problem solving credentials (Governor & SLC Olympics), charitable acts of service and giving thousands to disaster relief and the homeless.
    We know that he will fire government workers and departments that are not delivering results to support their budgets and their pay. When he was governor of Mass. there were not that many new jobs created because, think back a few years, everyone already had a job!
    Romney is an excellent parent, husband, has a solid BYU education, a Harvard MBA/JD, international experience, excellent debate skills and really good hair. He doesn’t have much charisma, but charisma doesn’t pay the bills. I know he will solve a lot of America's problems and what he lacks in charisma will be made up with results, he has been doing that his whole life.

    February 8, 2012 at 12:05 am | Reply
  2. Remford

    Anybody who happens to pay AS MUCH tax as Romney is welcome to comment on how much MORE they believe he should be paying.

    February 5, 2012 at 11:54 pm | Reply
  3. Charles from Nevada

    You are a great reporter, but I was disappointed that you failed to show the full picture. A $100MM investment that returns $10MM in a single year. Corporate tax claims 35% ($3.5MM). Dividends issued to investors has a tax claim of 15% ($975K) (($10MM-$3.5MM)X15%). Total taxes paid $4.475MM or 44.75% of the total return of $10MM on the investment. If Mitt invested $100MM, he paid his share. If he or his company invested $100MM of others money, his company did a great job investing for the investors. His company also contributed significantly to our economy. I think there are many Americans who wish they knew how to invest and how to be successful 80% of the time with positive gains. Out Front is a great show and you are a great reporter, please take the time to show the whole picture

    February 3, 2012 at 4:48 pm | Reply
  4. Stephen R. Ganns

    The keynote is it being considered "sweat equity", in lieu of other current payments and waiting to be paid alongside the investors. The waiting and risk is what apparently makes the difference on one side. The other side would be: they’re not risking the money and so therefore it should be taxed as ordinary income. Ok, these can be argued. But what is the delta really if carried interest was taxed as ordinary income in terms of tax revenue. Is it really that significant? How many General Partners are there in the labor force? I would argue it's not that large an order of magnitude. Compare that to other important issues such as the bloated and insolvent Fed balance sheet, the unregulated derivatives markets, anemic banking capital, depressed housing markets, etc. Does it really make a difference?

    February 2, 2012 at 9:06 pm | Reply

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.