PDA

View Full Version : Ron Paul on Government Subsidies: ‘Anathema to the Constitution’




sailingaway
06-27-2011, 03:08 PM
Ron Paul on Government Subsidies: ‘Anathema to the Constitution’


Paul argued that the difference between subsidies and tax credits or deductions “is night and day, yet so many times they are all lumped together as evil government handouts.” Paul defined a government subsidy as a “government handout” which “amounts to the government taking money from the people and giving it to a favored interest.” Paul added that “this kind of government mischief is anathema to the Constitution and the principles of freedom and the free market.”

On the other hand, Paul described a tax credit or deduction as they way that “industries, business, and individuals simply get to keep more of the money they have earned.” Paul added that, without tax reform, “I will always support tax credits and deductions that keep more dollars in the private sector where they are spent, saved, or invested.” As long as the money is being used by the private sector and not wasted by the government, “I’ve almost never met a tax cut, deduction, or credit I didn’t like,” Paul professed.

Paul also made it clear that he doesn’t support ethanol mandates. “I do not think anyone should be forced to use or buy ethanol,” Paul wrote. Paul argued that ethanol mandates are like “corporate welfare” for ethanol producers. Paul, who is known for his candid expressions of his Libertarian beliefs, professed that “the real reason ethanol mandates continue to surface in federal legislation is that agribusiness continues to have one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington.”




Read more: http://www.thestatecolumn.com/capitol/ron-paul-on-government-subsidies-anathema-to-the-constitution/#ixzz1QVqoX4yX

flightlesskiwi
06-27-2011, 03:30 PM
well, i'm going to have to go against Paul here. i wonder how he feels, specifically, about the Low Income Housing Tax Credits. these tax credits are put on the market and purchased for pennies on the dollar to fund housing projects that fail a majority of the time and opens the gate for massive federal intervention on the local level. pair those two together and it leaves the localities holding the bill and responsible for meeting MFA guidelines (through, guess what, higher taxes). sure, the companies that purchase these credits may hold on to more capital, but the wake of what these credits purchase is insidious.


The Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program (LIHTC) provides federal income tax credits to individuals or organizations that develop affordable housing through either new construction or acquisition and rehabilitation. The tax credits provide a dollar for dollar reduction in the developer's tax liability for a ten year period. Tax credits can also be used by nonprofit or public developers to attract investment to an affordable housing project by syndicating, or selling, the tax credit to investors.

In order to receive tax credits a developer must set-aside and rent restrict a number of units for occupancy by households below 60% of area median income. These units must remain affordable for a minimum of 30 years.

This program is a resource provided by the Internal Revenue Service. In addition to tax credits, the financing "gap" for certain LIHTC projects may be filled with a below market rate HOME loan. Tax credits and rental HOME loans are awarded annually through a competitive application process according to the state's Qualified Allocation Plan.

http://www.housingnm.org/low-income-housing-tax-credits-lihtc-allocations

sailingaway
06-27-2011, 04:02 PM
He said 'almost never'. :p

flightlesskiwi
06-27-2011, 04:08 PM
He said 'almost never'. :p

touche! but i still say if that particular credit is abused and has the potential to lead to chaos, then how many others do??

now tax cuts and deductions, i can get on board with that.