The Numbers

A Run at the Latest Data from ABC's Poobah of Polling, Gary Langer

Gary Langer is director of polling at ABC News, where he's covered the beat of public opinion for nearly 20 years - conducting and analyzing ABC News polls, evaluating data from other sources and setting the news division's standards for poll reporting. Langer is a two-time Emmy award winner, both for ABC's reporting of public opinion polls in Iraq.

ARCHIVES

FAVORITES

July 2009
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« Previous | Main | Next »

Tax Impact

September 10, 2008 5:30 PM

There are some interesting nuggets on taxes in our latest ABC/Post poll: Registered voters by a 17-point margin are more apt to think their taxes would rise under Barack Obama than under John McCain, a perception that cuts closely to vote preference.

So why are they even overall? Because Obama makes it back among those who see a positive or neutral tax impact.

All told 51 percent think their federal taxes would increase under an Obama presidency, while 34 percent think they’d pay more in taxes with McCain in the White House. Just 9 percent think McCain would cut their taxes; slightly more, 13 percent, say Obama would do so. The rest think their tax load would stay the same. (McCain, it's worth noting, has been running ads hammering Obama as a tax-raiser.)

Among people who think their taxes would go up under Obama, our poll finds that 72 percent support McCain for president; it’s interesting that nearly a quarter of them, 23 percent, support Obama anyway. Among those who think their taxes would rise under McCain, similarly, 75 percent support Obama; 18 percent stick with McCain nonetheless.

Since more people think Obama would raise their taxes, he loses more ground there. But he gets more support from people who think he’d cut their taxes or leave them alone than does McCain – and that brings the contest between them back essentially to a dead heat.

Specifically, McCain’s supported by about three-quarters of people who think he’d cut their taxes, but Obama wins 93 percent of those who think he’d bring their taxes down. And Obama does 7 points better than McCain among people who think he’d leave their taxes unchanged.

The interplay among these views helps explain why the two ultimately come out even in overall trust to handle taxes – 45 percent of registered voters pick Obama, 44 percent McCain – as well as in overall vote preference, 47-46 percent.

It’s also noteworthy that there’s less overlap on these questions than you might expect: Just 14 percent of registered voters say that both Obama and McCain alike would boost their taxes as president. That suggests we’re seeing political (and certainly partisan) judgments – but not sheer cynicism.

One other of our results touches on personal finances: Sixty-five percent of registered voters describe themselves as financially secure, about the same as in July; many fewer, though, say they’re “very” secure financially – just 20 percent. (We know from our weekly consumer confidence index that ratings of personal finances are always better than views of the buying climate and national economy.)

What’s interesting is the correlation with vote: Among financially secure Americans, McCain has a 55-38 percent lead; among the financially insecure (who’re more apt to be Democrats), it’s Obama by 63-30.

Per our Political Unit’s Teddy Davis, a summary of the candidates’ tax positions follows:

McCain says he’d make permanent the 2001 and 2003 income-tax cuts that expire at the end of 2010, including those that set the tax rate for most dividend and capital-gains income at 15 percent. He’d would preserve most of George W. Bush's temporary cut in estate taxes, establishing a 15 percent rate for estates worth $10 million or more.

McCain says he’d eliminate the alternative minimum tax, double the personal exemption for dependents from $3,500 to $7,000 and would cut the corporate income-tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent.

Obama, for his part, says he’d make the 2001 and 2003 income-tax cuts permanent for individuals making less than $200,000 a year; people in the top two income-tax brackets would return to their 1990s tax levels of 36 percent and 39.6 percent (including the exemption and deduction phase-outs).

Obama says he’d return the top capital-gains rate for families making more than $250,000 to 20 percent; the tax rate on dividends also would be 20 percent for families making more than $250,000, rather than returning to the ordinary income rate. He proposes effectively to repeal the estate tax for 99.7 of estates, retaining it at 45 percent for estates valued at over $7 million per couple.

Obama also says he’d provide a yearly tax credit of $500 for individuals and $1,000 for married couples who work and pay Social Security taxes; and an exemption from income tax for people 65 and older earning less than $50,000 a year. On income above $250,000 per year Obama would impose an additional payroll tax of between 2 and 4 percent, starting in 10 years.

September 10, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (71)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I's surprised that anyone would think Obama wouldn't raise taxes. He's promised millions more than could ever be raised by taxing the top 5% of wage earners. Where do his followers think the money will come from to implement all those programs.

ANSWER: From every American! No thanks!

Posted by: dl | Sep 10, 2008 5:58:15 PM

If you make less than $250,000 a year and you vote for McCain, you're voting to take money out of your own pocket. Under McCain's plan...the more you make, the less you pay. Do the math people. Obama's tax plan is the best plan for middle and lower class people.

Posted by: Hockey Moms for Obama | Sep 10, 2008 5:58:37 PM

Its one of those claims that gets so much applause.

"I told Congress 'thanks but no thanks,' to that bridge to nowhere," Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has said over and over on the campaign trail, CBS News correspondent Wyatt Andrews reports.

Palin just won't let it go. But the truth is the governor never rebuffed Congress. Here are the facts.

After a year of supporting the proposed bridge, near Ketchikan, Palin pulled state funds from the project, which killed the bridge for good, but she never said "no thanks" to the Federal funds promised by Congress - $233 million.

In fact, here's the list of how Palin is spending those federal tax dollars - on other highway projects around Alaska. As a candidate for governor, she defended every dollar for roads and bridges the state could wrangle from Washington, according to the Congressional Record and the Alaska Department of Transportation.

"I'm not going to stand in the way of progress that our Congressional delegation in the position of strength that they have right now, they are making those efforts for the state of Alaska," Palin said.

Posted by: Reality Check | Sep 10, 2008 6:02:55 PM

Palin = $450 MILLION in EAR MARKS IN JUST TWO YEARS!

Posted by: Reality Check | Sep 10, 2008 6:04:01 PM

Hockey Moms for Obama

Sure, right. Dream on.

Posted by: dl | Sep 10, 2008 6:06:01 PM

dl...apparently you aren't good at math. It's the truth. Confirmed by the independent Tax Policy Institute.

Posted by: Hockey Moms for Obama | Sep 10, 2008 6:24:23 PM

McCain's tax policy follows that of Bush and Reagan and might be likened to the old line that Steve Martin used to use on SNL: How to be a millionaire and Avoid Taxes--- First You Have to Be a millionaire. Unfortunately all too many people are fooled all too easily.

Posted by: bhciapol | Sep 10, 2008 6:32:11 PM

McCain's tax policy follows that of Bush and Reagan and might be likened to the old line that Steve Martin used to use on SNL: How to be a millionaire and Avoid Taxes--- First You Have to Be a millionaire. Unfortunately all too many people are fooled all too easily.

Posted by: bhciapol | Sep 10, 2008 6:32:59 PM

So if McCain is a conservative, where is all that tax money from the lower and middle class going to. Probably that big expensive war in the Middle East. Under the Bush administration, there has been the largest transfer of wealth from the lower and middle class. You would have to be a total moron to think that you would have lower taxes under McCain. Unless of course if you are like the McCains making a lot of money. Perhaps this is why they support the Bush tax cuts.

Posted by: Andrew | Sep 10, 2008 7:18:02 PM

Hockey Moms for Obama
Regardless of who promises to put money in my pocket, I don't buy it nor do I want someone elses money regardless as to where they got it. We all have an obligation to pay our share. Simply raising the burden on someone to shift it to me will cause the people they got it from to either stop spending their money or if running a business charge us more for their services, in the end we all pay. A better idea would be for the government to control their spending and use any extra to pay down the debt-not the advertised puny 10 trillion but the debt coming for social security and medicare which will make the advertised one look like pocket change.

Posted by: david | Sep 10, 2008 8:01:15 PM

This is a great article,but unfortunately the Republicans don't read or believe any of the facts ---they have created their own reality.

Posted by: SmileAlready | Sep 10, 2008 9:23:31 PM

McCain will raise taxes for almost all Americans because he plans to tax the full value of employer-provided health care insurance. Under current law, employees do not pay a dime for this valuable benefit. McCain would change that by taxing workers for health care insurance as ordinary income at rates at high as 35%. The average value of a family policy is $12,000 to $14,000 annually, so McCain's proposed tax credits of $2500 for individuals and $5000 for couples will not even begin to make up for the increased tax burden McCain plans to impose.

The middle class also gets little benefit from McCain's tax cut plan, a paltry $319 vs. $1042 in savings under Obama's plan on taxable incomes up to $67,000. If you make $600,000 per year or more, McCain is your guy. Everyone below that does much better under Obama's plan.

Posted by: skye | Sep 10, 2008 9:25:13 PM

skye: I wish you luck under Obamas plan. With all the programs and big plans to spent money, if you think the top money maker will cover it you have a serious problem. People need to remember that we "the people" are the government. The government dosen't make money except from "the people". There are alot of people who pay NO TAXES, but receive checks from "the people" every month. I don't care if they are handicapped. They should receive money. But, there are to many people with their hands out and we just can't keep doing this. If you will remember 2 years ago thing were much better than today. No high gas and food prices, etc. When the Dems. took over they really messed everything up. This was done to try to put Obama in the White House. The Dems believe that the American prople are stupid. Are We?

Posted by: Barbara | Sep 10, 2008 10:40:39 PM

OBAMA IS A LIAR. 95% TAX CUT. WHERE THE MONEY FOR HIS EARMARKS?
STUPID MATH

Posted by: James 770 | Sep 10, 2008 10:51:00 PM

Barbara,
Obama would pay for his health care plan by gradually reducing the troop commitment in Iraq, cutting other government spending and increasing income taxes on those who have taxable incomes in excess of $2.3 million annually. By the way, that's not much of a burden for these folks because they got virtually all the gains from the increased productivity of American workers since 2001.

As for the economy supposedly being good before the Dems took control of Congress in January 2007, how do you spell real estate b-u-b-b-l-e? The boom times were phony, in case you haven't been paying attention, and, oh yes, gas prices have been rising since Bush took office.

What did you expect with two oilmen from Texas in the White House?

Posted by: skye | Sep 10, 2008 11:17:30 PM

Anyone with any economic sense will realize that Obama will strangle the economy. You actually think he will give tax breaks to 95% of the people. He plans to kill the current tax breaks most people are getting, raising capital gains tax thereby discouraging investments, raising payroll taxes on small businesses thereby increasing costs on goods and services and causing people to lose jobs. He plans to stifle free trade in order to "keep american jobs here." But all the expert economists agree that this would be a major disaster. Read "Trading Up" - the full 20 page text not the summary by Daniel Griswold an economist from the Cato Institute - an independent think tank containing the best economists in the U.S. Retooling is the way to go for outsourcing as there is a net wash between outsourcing and new jobs because of free trade (with better pay) according to the Cato Institute - a concept that John McCain understands and sadly Obama does not.

Posted by: MissouriMan | Sep 11, 2008 1:05:50 PM

Personally, I think that the rich people should be taxed more. People who work hard every day of their life and struggle to make ends meet are the people that need the most help. People who could afford numerous houses and yachts and other luxuries could afford to pay more in taxes. It is simple "The more you make, the more they take"

Posted by: Diane | Sep 11, 2008 1:49:32 PM

Obama proposes to restore the tax rates that existed during the 1990s for taxable incomes in excess of $250,000
annually, while reducing taxes substantially for everyone else. The economy did very well under the Clinton administration; Republicans made similarly dire predictions of economic catastrophe then, which never materialized.

BTW, if you think Cato is independent, you might like to buy my bridge. Cato is universally recognized as a conservative/libertarian mouthpiece--
they shill for big business and don't give a rat's tail about the American middle class.

Posted by: Skye | Sep 11, 2008 3:49:56 PM

McCain & Palin are liars. They have lied a about the BRIDGE and EARMARKS, their TAX CUTS what next? Is this the type of President you want?

Posted by: P | Sep 11, 2008 4:03:21 PM

I make around 250- 260k a year and I work hard for it. I DO NOT SUPPORT Obama and his 39% tax bracket forget it.

Posted by: hank | Sep 11, 2008 5:07:29 PM

Post a comment