How about flat 10 % tax on up to 300 K income and 50-70 % on rest.

Another tax payer, Sunnyvale, ca

Why don't we have a flat tax rate (10-15%) for everyone and eliminate tax loop holes and Corporate Welfare. It is ludicrous that a "cleaning lady" or janitor pays a higher percentage of their income in taxes to, let's not forget, build transportation, energy, water infrastructure, schools, hospitals and other public services that we need. Also it's infuriating that CEOs of large corporations take home millions in government subsidies, essentially corporate welfare. God forbid a working class person get welfare but if a CEO or big company takes subsidies its OK and on top of that they get huge tax breaks from their good buddy "W". What we need is a president that has a clue about what it means to be poor and to have to work hard to get an education and struggle to rise out of poverty.

Alex, San Diego, CA

All that will come of this is the government will make more money. They will now just take out more taxes for the rich and won't lower it for the rest of us. Sick Puppies in charge of America. I'm voting for Ron Paul who wants less goevernment. You should too.

Sarah, Wausau, Wi

I have no idea what is wrong with helping your fellow man. With all the families that struggle to make ends meet, the increase would be only fair. Our system is so lopsided that most of our families are plagued with financial stress. Do you really think that the welfare system, AFDC, or health care helps us to alleviate our stress. It helps but when our employers give us a raise in our paychecks, it often knocks us out of the "needy " bracket. Then we are tossed into a world that we most definitely cant afford.

Julian Unzueta, Lompoc/, CA

warren buffet for president I believe I would like to join this movement.

walter santana, hartford,ct, usa

Plain and simple

www.fairtax.org

When you buy something you pay your taxes. I can't think of a more fair tax system than that!

RB, Auburndale, FL

Jon from Chandler, AZ, you get a grip. Republicans have you brain washed into holding onto the dream of getting rich and then avoiding taxes. How likely is it that you will amass a great fortune and then need to leave it to your family? Highly unlikely, I'm guessing. If you haven't done it yet, or aren't on your way there, I think you'll be stuck in the trailer park for the rest of your tax paying years. And wouldn't it be nice to not have to pay as many taxes? And let those with the most money help support a system they have been milking for years?

Sharon, Princeton, NJ

Warren

Get a clue, If I amass a fortune and want to leave it to my family, that is my business. Taking it thru taxes is immoral. If you want to give yours away, bully for you, but keep your dang hands off of my money. You are nothing but a cleaned up socialist. The fact you support Hillary, who states "that all you young entrepaneurs out there, don't you think that what you make is all yours it must be used for the common good, or oil companies (private companies) profits will be used for alternative fuels. To all you, who don't want to do what it takes to be successful, live with your decisions, but don't come after my or others dollars because you are either to lazy, dumb, or unable to make it yourself. To Craig in Springfield, do your homework, the more you make the higher rate you pay, not lower. The top 10% pay 90% of the taxes, or more.

Jon, Chandler, Az

I sure hope he lives forever as an investor in BRK . But seriously, the world will be a much better place if the leaders of the world get even a tiny bit of Warren Buffet's wisdom. May be they all should be made to read the Chairman's letter to his shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway.
In my opinion, depicting Mr. Buffet as the greatest investor on this planet would be a gross understatement. His wisdom applies to most fields of life.

Shivaji Kumar, Chicago, USA

What Buffet is saying is common sense but none of these rich people care. They defend the lower taxes on their personal incomes by making us think that if they are taxed at the same rate as the rest of us then it will stifle their ability to create jobs. I don't think we should raise taxes on corporate earnings above where they are now except in cases like the oil companies who earn greater than they expected due to oil prices skyrocketing unless they can show directly how they are putting those increased revenues to use and not just sitting on the money. One thing Congress doesn't understand is that lowering or at least capping the tax on the middle class would give them the extra income to save and or be in position to spend on consumable goods and deal with inflation. Inflation is not measured by the real stuff we buy day to day so they don't get that basic goods and services cost more today than 1 and 2 years ago.

Craig , Springfield, VA

We say in India "Washing sins before death".

Feroz, Chennai,

This isn’t anything new Mr. Buffett has been saying this same thing for years. Also this is from a man that isn’t running for office or trying to achieve anything for his self. Instead he is just a man with good old common sense and he knows the difference between right and wrong. Hopefully, God will blesses him and let him live forever.

David B., Charlotte, NC

on a simply view..lower the tax then suddenly consumes will raise, but only on a short term (6 months)... As there are more money available on the market inflation will steeply raise as well.. therefore after 6 months the buying power will remain unchanged.

Warren buffet investments make work thousands of people around the world whether direct or indirect. if he pays more tax maybe 5000 people more could have free healthcare, consume of luxury goods etc. etc. and investitors trust will drop on the other side ...

I eran as much as his secretary and i'm the first person to recognize the inequity of wealth division...however the magic formula doesn't exist as failure of socialist states has proven

Marco Grandi, london,

I find it laughable that a good portion of those offering financial criticism cannot grasp something as simple as cost of living adjustments. $60K for a secretary (someone most likely without a degree) is a lot in Omaha.

J, St. Louis, MO

Warren Buffet is just now realizing that the rich and super-rich need to pay their fair share? That's not the way it works, the rich and super-rich will continue to pay as little as they can and influence politicians as they have always done... why? ... because they can.

The only means of stopping them is to ferment ra evolution that does indeed threaten democracy as we know it. Democracy is just society's word for 'survival of the fittest and screw the weaker of society'

Billnospam, Largo,

WOW, it looks like Buffett has angered some millionairs. So that means he is right. Clearly some people are worried that their tax will be increased and won't be able to offer a grand parties, fancy cars, and private planes. Poor rich people - how can they live without few millions

Poor White Color Worker, Rockville, MD

Don't get mad at people making money. Get mad at the ones that lower their tax rates and make the poorest of us pay a higher percentage of our pay for them. Maybe $60K a year is not much but to me it is a whole lot of money. I live on a whole lot less and have all of my life. It does not make me bitter but the Republicans do with their lies and ways.

Earl Umfleet, Sumner, Illinois

Mr. Buuffet, I respect a guy who gave the bulk of his wealth for charity, but c'mon, you're an investor and we all know your business is about not paying taxes and comissions.

Jose Costa, Lisbon, Portugal

"Republicans want to downsize the size of government to a more affordable, long-term level much like Mr. Buffett runs companies.. Republicans want tax levels lower on all Americans. The government has no right to all of our money."

A fallacy. The Federal Reserve System, a private corporation of bankers, is where all of your tax dollars are ultimately going. They are making a few people very rich. Not a single penny of the taxes you pay goes to government expenses. It all goes to central banks and ultimately, to wealthy, private citizens. Don't believe me? Look it up.

Joe, NJ,

Sounds like his secretary needs a new job!

She only makes $60k, are you kidding me?

Cheap Bas%^*

g., pleasanton, CA

First, I would urge Mr.Buffet to fully disclose any and all tax shelters he uses or doesn't use for his personal or company's benefit.

Anuj, Manhattan , New York

Buffet sounds like a rich guy with a guilty conscience!

Ron C Clair, Sarasota, Florida, USA

Before the French Revolution the richest people paid the least taxes. Voltaire started making people aware that there might be a better solution and wrote plays that inspired revolts.

We know what happened then.

patricia garner, chevy chase, montgomery/MD

"Another false assumption would be that government's role is to create a redistribution of wealth...." JB, Monroe, Louisiana'

He isn't saying that at all. He is saying that his labor is no less relevant than any other persons and he should pay an equal share. I think we all can agree he could not make an excessive amount of money without his secretary, his housekeeper, his driver, his dry cleaner, his employees. So, its a statement to the effect that all peoples work is value added and that everyone should pay an equal amount, percentage wise.

I am able to do very well with the aid of my secretary. Without her, I would have to do her job and mine and that would decrease my productivity, But she is essential to my earnings. Her work is no less relevant than mine, and we should pay the same percentage in tax.

If you are unable to grasp such a simple concept, I pity you.

Mike, Seattle, WA

Is he great?, c'nt expect 'To Have' groups to come out boldly and say Historically Government works for them. And accept they have exploited/used all possible LEGAL loopholes.

More the the Tax laws more grind for 'Have not'.

Have Not, Washington DC, USA

Buffett is in the 0.00001 percent category. I'M IN THE 1 PERCENT CATEGORY YOU GREEDY SOCIALIST! I don't live like Buffett! A large part of my existence is spent keeping my employees busy so I can pay them. I don't fly around in fancy leer jets I can't afford, and I don't own 500 of the finest cars, and I don't leisurely fly to all parts of the world whenever I darn well please. Speak for the one millionth of 1 percent Buffett. As for the rest of us, I do my part. You could care less, with your "Gates Foudation" donation, that is nothing more than a way to keep the government from getting their hands on it. Something us 1 percenters could never imagine doing!

Rick Pedraza, Loxahatchee, Florida, USA

There's a big difference between taxes on regular income and taxes on capital gains. I'm pretty sure that Mr. Buffet knows that. Lower taxes on stock market gains encourage investment in America's economy. If the capital gains tax was increased, the market and the entire US economy would feel the hit. Instead of preaching, why doesn't he just donate more to charity? When government gives your money to those in need, you lose around 30-40% in the transfer. When you give to charity directly, those in need actually receive the funds. That's the right way to do it.

Eric Wenger, New York City, NY

This comes from a man who has adopted the most tax efficient tax structures for his companies and avoids paying taxes at any opportunity. Mr Buffet's mantra has been to minimize tax liabilities all along. What a hypocrite.

Jasper, Greenwich,

Another false assumption would be that government's role is to create a redistribution of wealth. Certainly there are many rich people who do not share Buffet's belief that government's role is to redistribute wealth. I am not rich, but I disagree with using the government as a means to redistribute wealth that was earned. Government might have a role to educate its citizens so they are empowered to build their own wealth, but I disagree that the government should redistribute wealth. If Mr. Buffet has so much faith in the government's ability to redistribute wealth, why doesn't he let them do that with his?

JB, Monroe, Louisiana

Warren is right on the mark. This will only change when he and those of his income level of similar belief start a national movement for equity. I have faith and hope that will happen...

The Common Good should rule for all!!

Bill Perry, Lansing, Michigan

He may be the 'world's greatest investor', but it's pretty obvious Warren hasn't spent much time studying economic systems or world history.

His announced plan last year to donate the vast majority of his wealth certainly gives him credibility in his admirable goal of helping the less fortunate. And he has earned my enduring respect for that. It's just a shame that he mis-uses the public forum he has by not sponsoring a more intelligent approach to taxation policies (and the role of government) than this sort of populist tripe.

Jeff , Philadelphia, USA,

When liberals speak there is always an underlying false assumption behind whatever they are saying. The assumption here is that government spending which is out of control must be funded. Government spending must be cut. Politicians act as if they have a right to spend the same amount of money each year that they spent last year plus another 7,8% or more. This of course is absurd with all the waste in Washington.If you don't like the fact that lower income folks are paying higher taxes than Mr. Buffets 17%, then institute a flat tax of 17% with generous personal deductions. The economy would explode bringing in a huge increase in revenue to the goverment from tax reciepts.Reform entitlements and keep spending under control and deficits would plummet. And if Buffet favors an estate tax why isn't he paying any, giving all his money to charitable trusts?

RP, Lynchburg, Virginia

Hmm...My observation is that the spin meisters are out in full force to "say it isn't so."

You guys are full of it. Buffett is right.

Colin Morris, Los Gatos, CA

People who believe that taxing capital gains at normal rates somehow stifles or even decreases investment are full of baloney.

It's totally illogical that wages---which are earned through labor---should be taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, which are nothing more than piles of money earning interest.

CJ, Houston,

You know, this would not even be an issue if we would only get rid of the private company that prints and backs our money. Interest paid to the federal reserve bank is really the only reason there is such a thing as income tax. Instead of bickering about what is fair and for whom we should come together and alleviate the problem all together. I know most of you will think I am crazy but do the research for yourself, it may be an eye opening experience.

I do agree however, if income tax is a necessity then it should be a simple flat tax without loopholes, just a hard figure based solely on how much money is made during the year. I do also realize however if that was the case there would be a lot of lost jobs because you would not need all the tax professionals and it would cut IRS jobs because of the simplicity and low maintenance (so to speak) of a system like that.

Chris, Parkersburg, WV

What an amazingly vicious response Mr Buffett is getting from his fellow Americans. I think you are all confusing the message and the messenger. I seem to recall that Buffett is giving almost all of his vast wealth to the Bill Gate’s charitable foundation, so comments about his charitable giving seem rather harsh. He may or may not pay over more in taxes than he needs to but the issue he is raising is whether the tax system should be asking more of him and others like him? When the richest, most powerful nation in the world has a health system that leaves so many who are near the bottom of the economic ladder without access to medical help they can afford then there seems to be an anomaly. Perhaps if more tax was taken from the top few per cent on the economic tree then you would be able to treat the less fortunate members of your society with greater compassion.

Kevin, Kent,

I don't know how many times I hear the liberals say that the rich should pay more but those same people sit on there butts all day. The young liberals today don't want to work hard, they want everything handed to them. Then you have the people who want to sit around all day, party and make babies. As with Social Security and Universal Healthcare, they want other people to support them. If Warren Buffet thinks he is making to much money, he can donate all his money if he chooses to. No one is stopping him from doing it. What makes this country so great is you can make as much money as you want without having to worry about the government taking it all away from you. You can be all that you can be.

Steve, Bradenton,

I love how everyone wants to attack a man who is trying to help the people who are bashing him. I am guessing there aren't too many people writing their opinions on here that are making over 2 mil a year. People hear raising taxes and they assume he wants everyones taxes raised. When he is just pointing out that he paid less of an overall percentage than his sec. did. And by the sounds of some of the responses I read I am guessing she makes more then the majority of people who wrote on this site. Treat a man who is giving almost all his money to charity, while he is still alive,with the respect he has earned and deserves. If all the rich where taxed more, people making less than $200k could be taxed less and the gov't would get the same money coming in, I think that is more along the lines of what he thinking. Same amount from taxes, but more from the extreme rich and less from poor. No one will be detered from a dream of becoming wealthy because they have to pay a higher tax.

Erik, Chicago, US

A single person making $60K without any deductions would fall in the 25% on only the income over $31,850. The effective rate that she would pay when including standard deduction and personal exemption is 15%.

Jon Devine, charlotte, USA/NC

I can see him getting down to a 17.7% tax rate, but a secretary earning $60,000 - unless he's counting state income tax in a state that has absurd rates - would only be somewhere in the vicinity of 12%, all told. She won't even be taxed on the first $10,500 or so, and would be paying 10% on the first roughly $15,000 and 15% on the rest. I'm pretty certain she wouldn't get into the next bracket.

Buffett's full of it. But if his money's where his mouth is, advocate a flat tax with an allowance that every American can be tax free on the first $50k they earn each year.

Alan, Vermont, USA

Here! Here! Mr. Buffet's comments are welcomed, however they are a bit late. I truly wish more fortunate and influential people would take the same step Mr. Buffet has, and push our so called "democracy" to improve humanity here in America and around the globe.

The number one cause of government and community failures is the disparity between the rich and the poor. This is exactly what caused the French Revolution. A flat tax would be nice, however, any educated individual knows that some individuals are instilled with better oppurtunities/skills that serve them better than others. To simply say all individuals are created equal (money, ability, capacity) is ignorant to the fact there are disabled individuals. A flat-tax will not work.

The indviduals entrusted to protect America in all aspects, have failed. Referencing Mr. Buffet's concerns, this is just another example. Granted Mr. Buffet's examples are late, some say "It's better late, than never."

Jefferson C., Norman, Oklahoma

According to the IRS statistics for 2004 (the latest available on the web), the top one percent of taxpayers pay over 30% of federal income tax revenues, the top five percent pay over fifty percent, and the top 25% pay over 95%. That leaves 75% of taxpayers (not the total population, mind you, just taxpayers) paying less than 5% of the tax revenues. Should we exempt 75% of taxpayers and raise taxes on the remaining 25% of earners? How fair is that? To suggest that the rich in the US, as in pre-Revolution France, are 'exempt' from taxes, is ludicrous. What we need is a flat income tax -- get the government out of the 'social engineering' business (rewarding certain behaviors with tax breaks) and make every person responsible for a share of the cost of government, regardless how small that share may be. Then people might sit up and pay more attention to the cost of 'free' government services. The Democrats definitely don't want that! They'd lose their voter base.

Robert H., Greenville, MS

As an American, I really don't understand all these comments coming from other Americans. You seem to be saying that because Buffet is wealthy, then he shouldn't complain about the tax code favoring the wealthy. Instead, he should just quietly donate to the government, without making a fuss about it. Huh?

What he obviously wants is for ALL wealthy people to pay at least their fair share, a goal this administration has been actively working against for the past 6 years.

As for some of the ridiculous comments made about estate taxes costing more to collect than they bring in, or that the richest 1% of tax payers pay 99% of taxes, well, that is just plain false. You really shouldn't just make stuff up like that. It is unethical, and it debases the conversation about what is the best for our society.

Deirdre Tisdale, Lexington, MA, USA

The Social Security and Medicare portion his secretary pays is 13.2% including the employer contribution. The solution is to let her invest that in the stock, bond and money markets so she can get the gains Buffet gets instead of getting no cap gains on her Social Security payments. This will spur economic growth and increase retirement savings, Everyone benefits.

Raising the cap gains tax that helps investors will just feed the DC spending madness that bankrupts us all.

While it is a nice idea to help the poor, the real question here is what helps the poor the most. Economics says that the millions of investors making the decisions creates more jobs, more opportunity and more income than federal spending. It increases government revenue more, as well. More people benefit more when dollars are invested in markets to fuel business.

Carl Worsham, Coppell, TX

I think Mr. Buffet point is that he would be less affected by paying 35% of 46 m (16.1 m USD) than his secretary is by paying 35% of 60000 USD (21000 USD). Mr. Buffet would keep 29.9 million, but his secretary would have to manage 39000. If his secretary was taxed 17.7% she could have 10389 USD more to invest for her retirement, or for her children education, or better home, or better health care or just to take a deserved luxury vacation. Mr. Buffet new tax % would cover the tax difference of 1550 middle class professionals earning 60000 each one with 17.7% tax. Buffet recognizes that those 10389 USD are not peanuts for the 99% of the people that are not born wealthy, or with a privileged brain for investment. Obviously Mr. Buffet will be paying more taxes in absolute money amount, but it will have less effect in his wealth and well being that the 10000 USD payment could have in middle class people.

Ivan, Caracas, Venezuela

There is no obligation for a person to help another. Income taxation is simply a liberal's way to force high earners to help low earners by subsidizing their lives. Such compulsory charity is completely unjust, because no one is obligated to lift a finger to help anyone else.

What we need is libertarianism in its purest form, or anarcho-capitalism. A just world would not require anyone to help another, and we'd have a social darwinistic Hobbesian jungle with a ruthless survival-of-the-fittest form of capitalism. Everyone for himself. Ban welfare, social security, medicaid, and all other social welfare programs that constitute redistribution (i.e. forced charity). All taxes should be replaced with user fees for government services, so that people only pay for the resources they USE, and not for what ANYONE ELSE uses. No one gets more from the government than they pay for, and no one pays more to the government than they receive in return in the form of services. THAT'S fairness.

Ben, New York, USA/New York

Shame on you Mr. Buffett,

You statements will be used as just one more reason to raise taxes on those of us who aren't millionaires, and aspire to make something of ourselves and do better for our families.

In truth, I'm certain that Mr. Buffet pays far more than 17.7% of his income on taxes. Much of his income comes from corporations. These corporations pay 35% federal corporate income tax and an average of 6.8% state corporate income tax. If his companies didn't pay that tax, Mr. Buffet would take home far more money. Figuring in corporate income tax, I calculate Mr. Buffet actually pays about 52% of his income on tax. And that doesn't count sales, property, or other taxes.

Do the math yourself Mr. Buffet, if your conscience still isn't clear, just send the government a bigger check.

Justin, Houston,

A) Even if Buffett's numbers are correct, that means that he paid $8,280,000 in tax last year, and his secretary paid $18,000. I make $60k, and I don't pay 30%, but maybe his secretary gets bad financial advice B) Buffett refers to himself as being in the "luckiest 1%." Well, I guess there is an off chance that he is financially stupid and got where he is by luck... C) Buffett has made is $52B in investments, and for that reason, wants us all to listen to him on financial policy. However, had the policies he now advocates been in place when he started out, he would not have $52B, and he would not have the "authority" he now claims. He's like Gates--he made a huge pile of money in a very specific way, under very specific circumstances, but now claims to be an expert on how money works in every way, in every circumstance.

john smith, augusta, ga,

Why not open a debate into a genuinely burning issue. And who better to start it it?

Some of the comments are incredibly blinkered:
Q: Why doesn't he write a cheque to the US Treasury?
A: How do you know he doesn't already? The man already is committed to giving Billions to charitable causes.

Q: How dare he suggest raising taxes for the rich?
A: After a million in the bank and a house and car, kids education covered, and health insured, do we really need the rest?

Someone suggested leaving the rich alone to pay minimal taxes. Do you really believe that the lion's share of the wealthy will of their own free will, contribute massively to good causes? It's not been my experience.

Why not equalise the pay scales? Up for the wealthy or down for the rich. Shouldn't we expect equality in America?

Tony Hobson, Geneva, Switzerland

His secretary paid $18,000 in federal income taxes on $60K?

She must have does her own return.

The numbers don't look right. Buffet must be including other taxes.

Mike Bowers, Philadelphia,

As someone who has earned less than $22,000 in a year, despite having a B.S. degree, I argue that the exceptionally wealthy need to evaluate what a mere $1,000 to $3,000 means to someone earning less than the average annual income. As I point out below, for a low equity employee, the cost benefit of having that income is much higher than to many of you. It is difference between having medicine, health care, a christmas present, or a tank of gas.


Mr. Kuat,

$3,500 to someone who earns $25,000, is the difference between essential medicine, doctor's appointments and food. Mr. Buffet's $177,000 loss costs him no real personal loss.

Mike Illenberg, Washington, D.C.

Some of the posts here are missing Buffett's point. It's not that he should be taxed more, simply that he should not be taxed lass than his receptionist. And mark his words: "it stifles motivation and opportunity." He's absolutely right.

If you heavily tax the lower paid and those who start life without cash, and without the received wisdom from sucessful parents, you are stifling their motivation to better themselves. You are also denying them the chance to accumulate investable cash.

Many people here are making a good case for incentives and motivation for the rich and the better off. If we can motivate even a part of the poorest 50% of our society, we'd all be better off. That's better off in more than just money.

Martin , Birmingham, England

Mr. Buffet, as smart as he is, knows that the tax he paid is a minimum tax. He can pay as much as he wants. Just don't tell the rest of us how much is too little or too much.

Peter Swift, North Adams, MA

As a practical matter, Mr. Buffet can't possibly spend all of his money unless he started buying small countries and that's not really his cup of tea. He certainly has enough to live on so higher taxes to him means nothing. Increased taxes to my family means the difference between my kids owning a vehicle, going to college and necessary medical care. Mr. Buffet, let me have the same opportunity to get rich that you had. Now is not the time to change the rules because you have maxed out your wealth. By the way, you are free to make contributions to the Federal Government in any amount you like, simply make your check payable to "Bureau of the Public Debt" which is an arm of the Department of the Treasury. I look forward to seeing the headline on your contribution.

M. Clay Sewell, Thomasville, Georgia

As Hillaire Belloc once wrote, "The control of the production of wealth is the control of human life itself."

Mr. Buffet may be a phenomenally astute investor, but his grasp of socio-economics seems rather obtuse.

C. Friedl II, Irving, TX

Perhaps if I were a secretary or cleaning lady, I would be motivated to work harder or take more risks so that by creating more value for other people I could be rewarded with a lower rate of tax.
I might spend more of my time being productive so that I can have more dollars with which to improve the economy for everyone.
I'm in favor of motivating people to work harder and be more productive as it creates a better life for all of us. Providing those who are less productive with an easier life motivates them to continue being less productive. We should want everyone to contribute as much value as they can to the rest by creating exchange value for value.

EllisWyatt, Lehi, Utah

Mr Buffett needs to check his math a single person with no deductions, no kids, no 401k etc... would pay $9451 in federal income tax on income of $60,000 which would mean his secretary would pay just under 16% NOT 30%. Get your facts straight first, then you can talk about who should pay how much and what is fair or unfair. As a side note about 45% of the BOTTOM wage earners in this country pay no federal income tax.

John, whitehall, Michigan

Did anybody bother to run the numbers besides me? Buffet, taking him at his word, would pay over $16 million in taxes if he filed individually before deductions (or nearly 35% of his income). His secretary would pay $11,560 if she filed individually before deductions (or 19.3% of her income). That is the absolute high end of payment in our tax system. I think Mr. Buffett is omitting some pertenant details in how the percentages he presented were arrived at. For starters, the comment about how he did not employ any tax avoidance tactics seems to be unlikely. This is just more political double talk from someone who wants to appear like he cares about the middle class. There is nothing of substance in his comments.

Greg, Saint Augustine, FL

If 'luck' is what got him in the top 1 percent then his moniker should be 'The Lucky Oracle of Omaha'. Who is resposible for preventing him from voluntarily contributing more of his 'lucky' income to the national treasury? As I understand the word 'fair' to mean, even when attached to the word tax, is not favoring one more than the other. A fair tax would have each and every citizen pay approx. 9000 dollars to washington, not including state and local. Mr. Buffet seems to be a bit better at investing than philosophizing, and is quickly becoming an election year bullhorn for the socialists.

Thompson, Elizabeth City, NC

Buffet's comments reflect the deep sense of guilt he must have for hiring the best tax lawyers in the business to shield income, otherwise he would clearly be at least a 30% payer. He talks out of both sides of his mouth. In his documents to shareholders he often talks about the tax efficiencies his investments represent to shareholders. If he wants to pay higher taxes i don't think anyone is stopping him. Please pay more !

r.allen Smith, bernardsville, nj

Has anyone noticed that most of the comments calling B.S. on this notion are from the U.S. while most of the comments agreeing with with preposterous notions that Buffet spouts are from the Socialist States.

Steve Campbell, Wichita Falls, Texas, USA

Mr Buffet is good at playing the "benevolent rich man". He set up his business at Bershire Hathaway to minimize tax impact. Over the years he has discussed this, and even bragged on it, in his reports to shareholders
All these remarks are designed to get him good press, a game all rich Democrats play. In public they decry wealth, but privately they do all they can to get and hoard more and more of it. One prime example are the charitable remainder and lead trusts both Buffet and the Clinton's use to avoid paying taxes.
Aat fundraiser for the rich on Hillary's behalf, did anyone question Warren on Hillary's plan to take excess profits. Or does he think, if enacted, he and his rich friends will be exempt and get one of those loopholes our friends in Washington always give out, to their big campaign contributors.
Incidentally I have great admiration for Buffet's investing strategy. I just can't take his politically correct pr nonsense. He has made billions thanks to the estate tax.

David Corsi, Oceanport, New Jersey

The House Bill to consider the "Fair Tax" (a roughly 23% nationwide sales tax to end users...similar to the UK VAT) would take care of this problem. A new Bentley for Paris would carry a 23% tax. As would her new materials for a new house, or a gold faucet in the bathroom, etc.

The IRS would be aboloished, no more personal income tax, no more witholding from pay packets. The rich who spend more will pay more tax. The poorest will get refunds every year so they effectively will have no tax.

Brian Neilson, Orlando, FL

He is free to give all his money to charity if he wants. Or does he need someone to take it from him.

Craig, SJ, CA

I can't believe a billionaire only pays his secretary $60,000 per year.

Chris, Houston, TX

The idea isn't to pay more taxes. The old man's focus is how should everyone else pay less taxes. His secretary should also pay 17%.

Give everyone more incentive to save and invest. Give bigger tax breaks to those who give money away. Cut government spending and entitlements.

guy, monterey park, ca

There is no way his secretary has an effective tax rate of 30%. Buffet is simply quoting her tax bracket. The actual percent of income paid in taxes would be much lower.

JD, Dallas, TX

There is nothing keeping Warren from donating to the U.S. Treasury.

This guy gets weirder as he gets older. At the very least he should be aware that capital is put to more effective use in the private sector than in the public sector.

Gregg Baker, Orlando, FL, USA

A little response to the flat tax proponents that have commented. Flat tax would furthur the gap between the wealthy and the poor. A simple example: 10% flat tax issued and no breaks to anyone. Subject A makes $10,000 per yr, so they pay $1,000 in tax. Subject B make $100,000 per yr, $10,000 paid in taxes. Is the $10,000 really that important when you still have $90,000, no it is not. Comparatively is the $1,000 that important when all you have is $9,000 - hope you think so. Flat tax adds more wealth to the high wage people by putting them in the same bracket as someone who mops floors for a living. It sounds nice and fair and equal and all that flower power talk but in reality it is a flawed concept.

A comment to Mr. Buffett: find your secretary a better accountant. You can afford it.

Tom, St. Louis, MO

Warren is worth billions and yes he does give alot of money away. Don't people get tax breaks for donating to charities? Does he write the donations off? If Warren and his fellow billionaires feel they pay to little to Uncle Sam, why nothing is stopping them from over paying their taxes. It goes to a good cause according to Buffett. One other thing, if Warren thinks the government handles money so well why doesn't he let them pick his next 20 investments?

Tim , North Platte, NE, USA

Folks: Just look who made the law? Lawyers and politicians. Who benefits. Lawyers and politicians and their friends.
Our Congress is but a lot of lawyers and politicians and that is where our problems come from. They give our money away as if there is no tomorrow to their pet projects as if the money is their's to give.
Mr. Buffett's money is his, not ours so he could do what he pleases. The politicians and lawyers are the problem.
G. Cheng, Santa Calra, CA..

George Cheng, Santa Clara, Santa Clara, Ca.

I think what he is really refering to is how "passive" income is taxed versus taxes on labor. The wealthy have money to place into various investments, the profits are usually taxed at just 15%, as opposed to people who work for a living, who see their income eaten away by SS (who knows if you will ever see that money again!) FICO, State (9%+ in CA!) and Federal taxes. The people who are really creamed on taxes are high income WAGE EARNERS., as opposed to the wealthy.

Deb, Agoura, CA

Most commentators don’t seem to understand Mr. Buffet’s opinion. His main point is that there is a systemic failure in tax gathering if the super-wealthy get away with paying less of their private income in tax than a cleaner. This is undemocratic, harmful for society, and harmful for the US. I’m sure he would agree that finding a solution is complex, as nobody wants to discourage enterprise. But to launch insults at Mr. Buffet is like insulting a doctor for correctly diagnosing cancer.

Richard, London, UK

Nigel, as you can see, not only is there huge disparities between classes and race in the States, but there's also a country-wide problem with education, more specifically, reading comprehension ;-)

I agree with you 100%, although I don't hold out much hope that folks here will push our government to do what is right. I had a very similar experience as yours in Ft. Lauderdale this spring. It was especially uncomfortable as I am Black and was on vacation, laying over for a day.

I think that it's too easy for people to not understand how this truly affects families. Many of the comments are from folks that aren't from large cities, which may translate to living in areas where most of their neighbors are of the same class/economic status. In the city, you get to see a broad spectrum in a very small area; it's hard to ignore all these social economic issues - they're in your face everyday. To have a real tax reform could literally change so many families' lives. Here's hoping...

Ella , Philadelphia, PA

The lower income 50% only pay 4% of all income taxes, and data show that the top 1 percent of taxpayers, ranked by adjusted gross income, paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes in 2003. The top 5 percent paid 54.4 percent, the top 10 percent paid 65.8 percent, and the top 25 percent paid 83.9 percent.

Recent data show the trend continues for the wealthy to pay even more of total income taxes.

To have tax fairness for all, the best approach would be a national sales tax to replace the income tax. Then even the criminals and tax cheats would pay their fair share, and the resulting savings on tax preparation costs and time wasted would add enormous growth and productivity to the economy.

Michael B. Combs, Gualala, California, USA

The only fair way to tax the populous, is to do away with the income tax and adopt a flat sales tax. This would mean if you buy 10 million dollars in good or just 1,000 dollars in goods you would pay equal percentage rates for both.

c gude, New Port Richey, USA/FL

He is welcome to pay more taxes, but he chooses instead to invest his money into charities he has faith in. He is smart enough to know his money is better spent by private charities than government run programs. But somewhere along the way his logic gets warped.

Garo, San Francisco,

I'm sorry that Mr. Buffet feels that successful people are simply "lucky or fortunate." I work hard for my salary and don't believe that luck has anything to do with it.

He and John Kerry are exactly alike. They think people are simple dolts who gain success only by luck, not by their merits or hard work. Kerry once said the rich were "society's lucky lottery winners."

I guess socialism is alive and well in America hidden in a liberal closet.

John, orlando, fl

God help us! One of the world's wealthiest points out the obvious unfairness of a system that requires him to pay at a tax rate one half that of his employees. The comments (mostly from the US) seem to be running 10 to 1 that he has lost his sanity! I am not a socialist, but the man has a point! The people commenting can't all be so wealthy that the system, though unfair, is to their advantage. I suspect the organized right is sending their bloggers here. Either that, or most of us are already brainwashed.

Michael, Hanford, CA

A bigger question is - why doesnt he pay his secretary more? 60G to work for a big money earner like him? HE IS THE ONE keeping her "poor" not the gov't. And he is comparing labor income vs probably what he made off investments - that is not a valid comparison. I believe in LOW taxes as the gov't is basically corrupt and politicans get RICH off us (see Clinton's rise to wealth) but if Warren wants to pay more - go ahead and waste it and send it to the govt or why doesnt HE go out and find some poor families and directly give them some money instead of these stupid charity middlemen?
I dont believe in inheritance tax as that money was already taxed - enough already!!!!!

Crystal, NYC,

A rough calculation tells me that we could raise Warren Buffet's tax rate to 33% if we charged him the full 15.5% Social Security rate on all his income--with no increase in the current maximum benefit, of course.

Does he want us to satisfy his conscience by taxiing all those other multimillion dollar per year CEO's?

We could, but, then again, maybe they wouldn't work so hard at generating profits and Warren Buffet would suddenly be making a lot less--along with everyone else with a 401k.

Bob Ralston, Carrolloton, Ohio

fairtax.org - treating all americans as equals under the law.

Michael Miller, Atlanta, GA

First he should take his reported 53 Billion and send a $1,000 check to the 52,000 poorist families in the US, then he can shut up!

He shouls also ask Ted Kennedy why his (Kennedy Family) 500 million Trust fund is not in the US... maybe to avoid those same taxes.... what a phony!

Bob, Torrington, CT

Must be nice to earn enough to reduce this argument to numbers. Maybe if the people equation came into it it would be different. The rich and poor divide is getting greater in the US, the American Dream is a dream with little basis in reality anymore plus the millions of people who are uninsured or watching their loved ones die because they can't afford medical bills.

So instead of arguing this percent and that percent, why not look into your hearts and see that people need help, need a safety net, and no-one is providing it. But it's easy to not see these people in the US if you drive from sterile suburban enclave to sterile suburban enclave happily protected from poverty and crime and with a brick wall in your mind where being a decent human being looking out for society = pinko liberal.

Lindsay, England,

Buffett has shown himself to have as little regard for stating the facts regarding taxation as the democratic candidates themselves. If Buffett paid as little as 17%, it is because of capital gains tax rates and not income tax brackets (or maybe tax exempt institutes as pointed out by someone else). Todays AMT, and tax brackets prevent a typical (rich) person from avoiding taxes as Buffett claims. Besides the true revenues from taxes are as follows:

The top 1% of taxpayers pay 35% of all taxes collected.
The top 5% pay 55%.
The bottom 50% of taxpayers pay an astounding 4% of income taxes collected.
(These numbers come from the CATO Institute, the Washington Post published the a similar statistic for the top 1% in 2004)

Bryan, Littleton, Colorado

Its great that Buffett wants give his wealth to charity, but isn't this just another way for him to not pay taxes that he says he believes in. Why doesn't he pay his share of the inheritance tax which he supports and then give the rest to charity? I would begin respecting the Buffetts/Gates of this world if they didn't spend so much time avoiding paying taxes they publicly support and expect others to pay.

Clay Smith, Pilot Rock, Oregon

Thurston in Salt Lake City suggested that the cleaner should set up a cleaning company. Oh yes - and how does she afford the accountants and lawyers to set all this up? Yes, there are tax breaks but most people cannot afford to either research them, be advised about them, pay for such schemes or companies to be set up and so on and so on. Tax breaks have become a plaything of the rich. It is time to add a higher rate tax for IT/IHT/CGT when the figures are in the millions and the rates can be as much as 75% and still not be a disincentive. But it will take governments to agree to do this en masse otherwise wealth merely packs its bags and moves elsewhere. But if this current situation continues, there will be a reaction - delayed by the drug of TV and consumerism - but a point will come when those at the poorer levels will just have to react - and when the downtrodden and inarticulate rise up it is almost always with violence.

Andrew, London, England

WHY in the world do people continue to make derogatory comments concerning Mr. Buffet's observation of the amount of tax paid by his secretary. The most egregious thing this could indicate is that Mr. Buffet isn't totally familar with the percentage tax paid by individuals in various tax brackets. However this lack of knowledge is barely relavent to the correct premise of his argument-- that in many cases those with lower incomes pay less tax than those with the highest incomes. Every time you call him names because he didn't seem to calculate his secretary's tax burden correctly, you sound ridiculous--like you missed the entire gist of his argument and the article. Are you just looking for every conceivable opportunity to put him down, even if what you say hardly makes sense. I wonder.

F.D., Alex., VA

How about a ten percent flat tax for everyone and call it a day.

Morgan, Clearwater, FL

If Mr Buffet is so concerned, why doesn't he just volunteer to pony up a few more billion in taxes. Perhaps it would help the poor strapped government treasury.

Don Howard, Auburn, Washington, USA

Marcus,

Unfortunately your notion that investment translates directly to jobs is misguided, particularly in this age of outsourcing when those jobs are going for pennies on the dollar to workers out of the country. Investments are going over seas, and the trade deficit climbs. This is not enrichment, it is bankruptcy. Back to economics 101 you go.

Charles, Olympia WA, USA

A progressive tax system is the essential underpinning of an capitalist economic republic, in such that the daunting belief of capitalism is that "all ships rise with the rising tide". Gross monetary values are inept valuation measures under a progressive tax system. Seventeen percent of a wage earner's income earning $30,000 as compared to $30,000,000 is a vast difference. I pose the question, which wage earner is more effected by the taxes paid, assuming only a 17% tax rate? If relinquishing the marginal tax rates on the upper-wage earners is truly effective, why has the long-term effects not been seen in gold paved streets and record local surpluses. Instead local governments are increasingly stressed for financial resources. As a member outside of the lower income bracket, I do feel a certain moral obligation to care and aid those less fortunate that I, either thourgh my tithes or through the numerous local public programs.

Richard Camp, Nashville, USA / TN

I do not necessarily disagree with Mr. Buffet regarding disparity in tax responsibility but his secretary should contact a reputable accountant who will most certainly help reduce her tax liability. The 2006 marginal tax rate for $60k AGI is 25% for 2007 (assuming her filing staus is single). The combined tax rate is 20% assuming no deductions or credits (including standard deduction).

Dennis K, Tulsa, OK

If the inheritance tax is the great leveling agent of the government as Mr. Buffett claims, than why are the successive generations of Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and the Johnsons, Whitneys or any other famous family from the gilded age multimillionaires upon birth? If you are wealthy enough to higher the attorneys & accountants, there is a loophole for everything. Those who claim otherwise are just going for the populists spin and the idiot voters.

Chris , Tallahassee, FL

How does he say the government is stifling opportunity and motivation, when he then claims the wealthy get the tax break? Isn't the lower tax a motivation to do better and move up in the world? If one wants to work hard enough to earn 10 BMW's, that individual should be able to. You stifle investment and motivation once you put a cap on people's earning ability. I suspect Warren didn't have this view when he was a young man trying to make his way in the world.

Stephen, New York, NY

If Mr Buffet was to tell all of the companies that he owns, or owns share in to give their employees raises and full insurance benefits, he could distribute all that wealth back t o the people who made the products that made him rich. By raising their pay and benefits he would do it much more efficiently than the government. By the way, why doesn't Warren pay his secretary or cleaning lady more?

Brad Entwistle, Ottawa, Illinois

I am not going to comment on the moral statement Mr. Buffett is trying to make; he may be right, he may be wrong. But he is clearly applying a double standard on his calculations. He is taking his high tax rate and subtracting out all of the deductions and loopholes to give his effective tax rate. He is failing to do the same for his secretary.

My last year in the federal government (2004), I made $60,000. I did not pay a dime in federal tax--in fact the IRS paid ME $1500. The State of Maryland took their 3% and my town took 1%, but the feds took NEGATIVE 2.5%.

Granted I had two kids and my wife is a stay-at-home mom and I had student debt and several other deductions, but there is NO WAY this person is paying $18,000 to the Feds.

Jake, Brussels, Belgium

I can’t help but see the parallels between the much revered American hero Paul Revere and Warren Buffet. The former warned of the British Aristocrats coming to tax the American people into subjugation, and Mr. Buffet warning of the new American Aristocrats doing the very same thing. No taxation without representation. It sounds like the representation isn’t looking out for the American people but trying to preserve the ruling elite that seems to be calling the shots in the current administration..


To all you Yankee doodles who’ve just criticised Buffet’s comments, think about what he’s saying.. he’s saying that he should be paying MORE on his massive earnings…think people, think.

Adam, Luxembourg,

I've been considered to be in the upper income bracket for tax purposes and have paid plenty of taxes over the years. We need to simply the Tax Code and consider the benefits of leaning towards a type of "flat tax", that would alleviate many of the existing loop-holes. Having lived to London for several years, I know that a simplified tax system works and shares the burden of taxes more equally among all people. Until something like this is done, Mr. Buffett can pu his money where his mouth is...There is nothing that does not prohibit him from paying additional taxes, if he choses to, or that would prohibit him from paying his secretary's taxes. Focus really should be more on wasteful spending and the lack of true stewardship on the part of the government, rather than the Tax Code. If better controls are in place, then possibly we wouldn't even be having these sort of discussions.

K. Fisher, Dallas, Texas

For an English paper we Yanks sure have a lot to say. Thank you to the English readers for a calmer read on the story. It sure fired people up over here

I say, "Thank you, Mr. Buffett." I'll take it at face value and as a first step.

Valentin mentions the French Revolution. Let us not forget starving peasants at the gates and the mistress of the house saying, "Let them eat cake." It could happen here.

Dave, P'burg, NJ US

Warren Buffet needs to invest in Fred Thompson for our next president -- I would think Hillary Clinton would remind him of his own mother. We need a flat tax of 10% (that include state and federal). It's funny he was not accepted to Harvard University.

susan, Tulsa, OKlahoma

For starters, the headline is misleading at best. Warren Buffet did not pay "less" tax, he paid a lower rate. Purportedly.

And how in God's name someone making 60k per year got themselves into a 30% tax bracket is beyond me. For starters, her deductions should have easily put her down near $50k taxable [particularly if she's wise enough to have a 401k]. And income between $30k and $74k is taxed at 25% [plus the "progressive" amounts from the lower tax brackets]. But assuming she didn't even tax her personal deduction [highly unlikely and quite foolish], a flat $60k income would pay $11,557.50, which is 19.3%. A far cry from the 30% Mr. Buffet is try to fool us with.

I suspect Mr. Buffet made sure to count every possible tax for her while excluding those same taxes for himself. Purely to try to make a point. Which, of course, completely obviates his point.

Skeptical, Phoenix, AZ

Warren is correct, yea, we should take people's money and give it to other people, then we can start taking their things and give them to other people that want them and it just continues from there. That is what makes him a democrate. It is not just the billionaires money that the democrates want to take.

Ward P, Charleston, USA/WV

Mr Buffett, let me get this straight you earn $ 46 million and you only pay your secretary $ 60,000. Wow you're cheap paying your staff that little, I assume you pay all your other employees Federal minimum.

Philip D, S Orange, NJ

Anyone who uses the agruement that Buffet is a fat cat and wonders "What's stopping Mr. Buffet and other super-wealthy liberals from donating to charity?" is really showing their ignorance as Warren Buffet has already pledged to give 85% his fortune (around $37billion) to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/5115920.stm

John F, Dublin,

Liberals should understand that there is no obligation for a person to help another. Income taxation is simply a liberal's way to force high earners to help low earners by subsidizing their lives. Such compulsory charity is completely unjust, because no one is obligated to lift a finger to help anyone else.

What we need is libertarianism in its purest form, or anarcho-capitalism. A just world would not require anyone to help another, and we'd have a social darwinistic Hobbesian jungle with a ruthless survival-of-the-fittest form of capitalism. Everyone for himself. Ban welfare, social security, medicaid, and all other social welfare programs that constitute redistribution (i.e. forced charity). All taxes should be replaced with user fees for government services, so that people only pay for the resources they USE, and not for what ANYONE ELSE uses. No one gets more from the govtthan they pay for, and no one pays more to the govt than they receive in services. THAT'S justice.

Ben, New York, USA/New York

Hey Warren if you think you need to pay MORE taxes just write out a BIGGER check next time. You can cover my taxes anytime you want. I pay way way too much in taxes and so does your poor secretary.

Instead of sitting around with your wealthy friends pontificating about how so called "rich people" need to pay more taxes think about this............ We all need to PAY LESS taxes and our illustrious government thieves need to STOP voting big pay raises and perfect medical care for themselves while squandering the remainder of the taxes the government steals from its citizenry.

And let the dead rest in peace. They've paid taxes all their life. The government doesn't need to rip into them one last time.

NOW THAT ol' buddy is a concept!

Mary M., Uniontown, OH, USA

If Mr. Buffet was genuine, he would have given additional taxes to the government and not the Gates foundation. Obviously he believes non government agencies are better at taking care of people. Does he deduct any of that contribution as a tax write- off?

He is right on part; "you owe it to the rest of humanity to think about the other 99 per cent." Let's all think about the 99 percent and not give that job to our government. Our government should worry about national defense, not feeding the hungry.

His secretary earned $60,000 and paid 30 percent? She either needs a new accountant or Mr. Buffet is making intentionally misleading statements. Probably the latter.

Dan, Vienna, VA

I'm getting a little tired of reading about Warren crying about the very system that allowed him to get to the top.
He now wants to change that system without it ever hitting him in his comfortable lifestyle. Many of the super rich are guilt ridden and "feel" better if they profess to be in favor of a socialist style redistribution of wealth, knowing full well that they (their life styles) are not likely to be impacted by any new tax or earnings/salary cap laws.

bernard, Parker, USA

The only fair tax is the flat tax. The rich should pay exactly the same percentage of their income as the poor. Entitlements should be given to no one. Why is this concept so hard to understand?

One of the comments actually suggested that social security is not a tax. Social security is a tax; not a savings plan. Do not be a fool and rely on social security for retirement.

Sing, Columbia, Missouri

Everyone, stop complaining about how much someone else has. If you want more, you have to do the same as many people have - get off your can and figure out how the rich people did it. Most have made their money by getting someone else to do the work, and then taking part of the money that someone pays. Or by finding a product that people need and charing them more than you bought it for.

Wm. J. Korpecki, St. Louis, MO, USA

Well, why not lower the rate at which the secretary is taxed?

Mike Kemp, St. Petersburg, FL USA

Thank you Mr Buffet for giving your fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation and NOT the folks running the federal government.

Your voice carries greater weight than my own. Am so happy to hear we are in agreement.

Let's hope 'we the people' wakes up soon. Thanks

S Schmit, Saint Louis,

There is no good way, within the US Based Tax System to make it fair. Rather than taxing income, tax consumption. The "Fair Tax" plan proposed by Congressman John Linder, seems to be the best way to do this. In addition to being equitable for all residents, we can also collect taxes from tourists and illegal aliens,(Gasp, I meant to say Undocumented Workers)

Ken, ALPHARETTA, GA

Why doesn't Buffett just pay the difference voluntarily and set an example for the rest of us.

Bob Ehrlich, Ft Smith, Arkansas

F@%# you Buffett!

Your only paying 17.7% because your money comes from long term Capital gains.

The rest of the Rich are already paying about 50% of their earnings in taxes.

Alex Brown, Los Vegas, NV

Mr. Buffett makes an excellent case for a flat tax. Why didn't he support Steve Forbes for President? Let's see if he campaigns for a flat tax of say 15%. Of course he won't, because he's a hypocrit. Like other Democrat liberals, rich or poor (mostly rich), what they really want to do is to tell us what to do, while they do the opposite.

Mike Ramsey, Plano, TX, USA

Hey Warren,

Do us all a favor and don't put your money in tax shelters. I am sick of the wealthy people and their guilt. WE ALL ARE OVER TAXED.

Ken, Detroit, mi

Take $30 billion and give it to the poor? What a really stupid thing to do! History shows time and again you can't lift someone out of poverty by simply giving him money. Look at the studies of sudden lottery multi-millionaires. Within five years, they are almost always worse off than when they started.

Giving money away can't possibly solve poverty, but Mr. Buffett is certainly welcome to give his away if he desires. Just keep him away from mine.

E. Fix, Dayton, Ohio

well done WARREN BUFFET if you lived in the uk you would
be SIR WARREN BUFFET or LORD BUFFET, you really deserve the title money genius ,but maybe you will make some
of the more wealhy THINK that there is more to humanity
than money if you dont belief me check out miniture world on youtube ,but once again thankyou for the donation to world healh.

george william taylor, hull, uk

This is why we need the "Fair Tax", (read the book) where the present U.S. Income Tax system and the IRS is replaced by a consumption tax of 26% on all NEW items purchased. It would raise the same or even greater amount of money than the current system, and the rich would pay much more than the average person due to greater $$ purchases of goods & services.

The average person & everyone would get an immediate pay increase and everyone would get to choose how much they pay, by the choices one would make.

And yes this is a partisan idea- being supported & co-sponsored by both Republicans and Democrats. The present system is unmanageable, too hard- (you shouldn't have to go to an accountant to decipher a tax code of 1,500 pages), and takes up too much of our lives filling out income tax forms.

Mark M, Kansas City, MO

Wow, what a lot of hissy fits from people who've not bothered to read or understand the article!

I point you to the section "rate of tax that private equity and hedge fund staff pay on their share of the profits, known as carried interest, from the 15 per cent capital gains rate to about 35 per cent"

Mr Buffett's income we can deduce is primarily from the profits of his fund, and hence his tax rate of 17.7% without making any efort to minimise it.

And yes of course he could volunteer to pay more, but that won't resolve the underlying issue of rich men paying a smaller proportion of their income than those on more average salaries do.

The point he makes is that if the going rate is 30% then the rich should be paying it as well. That's not a definition of Socialism!

Mark Price, Manchester, UK

This is a VERY simple way to understand the tax laws.

Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men - the poorest - would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $18, and the tenth man - the richest - would pay $59.

That's what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement - until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language a tax cut).

Hm... maybe we should go to a flat tax? Why doesn't congress stop trying to play with tax brackets and just tax everyone the same. Fair? Yes. But that would still mean the poor still get taxes instead of being helped by government hand outs.

Nick, Lynchburg, VA

If he is so concerned with the government getting money from wealthy individuals like himself, why did he and his buddy Bill protect the majority of their money by putting it in foundations? If they left it in their estates, the government could have had a lot more when they die. Now the government doesn't get anything.

Jon, Traverse City, MI

I think the point of this article is that our government does not treat people of different incomes fairly. There is a difference between tax cuts and tax fairness. Tax cuts make you feel good when you get to keep more of your hard-earned money. But the fact still remains that the rich are keeping a larger percentage of their money than the poor. Let the government work on tax fairness first to show that they care about the majority of people and are not leaving them in the dust for their business partners.

Miles, St. Louis, USA

Has anyone read the fair tax book? That would solve all of the problems. One does not pay taxes unless one buys a new item. Provisions are made for all us working class to get prebates (a check each month) for what the fair tax would cost , up to the poverty limit. But you can bet that the politicians in Washington want nothing to do with that because they want ALL your money.

Leo Lo, Decatur, Alabama

Will pretty much all respondents to this article stop for a minute before they jump on their high horses and consider what the man actually said? He said that it is wrong that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. That's it. He didn't call for higher taxes on his own income, nor did he call for lower taxes on his secretary's income. He left that for others to think about and decide on the right balance. As for those he suggested he write a cheque - come on, that is not the point. It would only apply to him, not to all others in his income bracket.

Tim, London,

I don't view seriously much what he says anymore. I have concluded he is starting to suffer from senility in his old age after his decision to give his money to Bill Gates foundation. I promptly sold all Berkshire Hathaway I owned at that point. I use to revere the man, but he has getting more and more flakey every passing year.

Fred, Madison, WI

"With greater power comes greater responsibility."
-Ben Parker (Spiderman's uncle)

I believe this in part. But that doesn't mean that you give more money to a thoroughly corrupt and inefficient bureaucracy like a government. With the advent of mass communications, ideas can be shared and weighed by the whole culture. Now granted, most of us don't have the proper tools to know what is truly best for ourselves or for the group (on a long enough time scale that is). But I believe that there are a few people who walk among us that do. Let those who are "powerful" be accessible by these.

Jason Usborne, Eugene, Oregon

I can only hope that the three comments below by "Americans" are jokes. I hate what is happening to this country -- we've gone, in a matter of only a couple of generations, from a nation willing to sacrifice for and contribute to the "common zeal" to one built on greed. If the comments below are real, these idiots don't even realize that the Republicans have nothing but contempt for them -- everyday people who've swallowed the party line are only a means for the party fat cats to get and keep even more.

Todd, Vienna, VA

It's amazing that someone this ignorant could be so wealthy. According to the 2006 official IRS tax rate schedules, the most a taxpayer with $60,000 in income could possibly pay in tax is 19.26%. If he really wants tax fairness, he should support those Republican candidates who advocate a flat tax. Hey Warren, call Steve Forbes for the facts, that is, if you care about facts.

taxgeek, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA

Typical Democrat!
If he feels he is not paying enough then he can always send in more!
Hey Warren, if it bugs you so much, go ahead and send in a couple of extra Billion!!! But keep your damn hand out of my back pocket.
It's always amazing to me! Dems see the Wealthy as "LUCKY"
...never Smart, Productive, Hard working, as if they were walking down the street one day and bam a few million laying at their feet!
It's always struck me a funny how you can have a socialist Billionaire. Don't they realize that socialism and private wealth are mutually exclusive?

Mikie, Phoenix, AZ

Everyone who says Buffett is doing more by donating his money to charity is missing the point. By donating to charity he receives a write-off now (lower income tax rate) and the money he donates drops off his estate. Also, because it's at a charity (non-profit), the money's ability to generate more taxable income in the future is less. He has effectively cut his estate tax in half (even though he's for the estate tax) when he dies. This is another way for him not to pay Uncle Sam, but he wants everyone else to pony up. Nothing new for tax & spend happy liberals.

Rob Jankowski, Kingston, NY

Is he stupid? Punitive taxes will halt any type of growth for the USA. Why is our unemployment rate 3% lower than the EU? Even with the Illegal aliens coming across the border by the truckload our economy is growing because rich people have money to spend since the tax rate is low. Not sure what he was promised to make his remarks, but when you sell your soul to the devil (liberals) you have to live with your actions, don't involve those of us working to get rich.

Then again, maybe he's losing his mind in his old age. The day he goes to a college and pays for a year of tuition for all of it's students I'll believe a word out of his mouth. When he puts up, I'll shut up.

Brian, CR, IA

There is more than one way to equalize the tax rates. How about this: lower the tax rate on the poor - make it match the tax rate of the rich. Problem solved. Everybody pays the same rate. And before the liberals whine about where the money will come from - it's been proven many times that lowering the tax rate raises revenues.

Stephen Daniels, Nashville, TN

It is amazing how many people seem to think their understanding of economics is better than a man who, using merely his intellect, became the third-richest person in the world.

I am certain Berkshire Hathaway will have no problems replacing Mr. Buffet with the more vocal commentators herein.

That should also help you transition to the financially least accountable portion of the population.

Jordan, New York,

Warren is trying to compare earned income taxes to capital gains. He fails to mention that he was already taxed on the original money he invested. I agree with the above post, if Warren wants to pay more then he should cut a check and send it in.

Ryan, Austin, Texas

What Buffet fails to mention is how someone making 60k gets taxed at 30% when the top marginal rate at that income lever if you are single is 25%. If you average it out through the progression it's less than 20%. I think she needs a new accountant. And Warren can always pay her more since it seems he's so ready to give other peoples money away. What a joke.

Ryan, Philadelphia, PA

Buffet doesn't put his money where his mouth is, instead of leaving his multi-billion dollar estate to the state which allowed him to become fabulously wealthy simply by investing, instead he's leaving it to a private foundation which will no doubt use it to advocate higher taxes for secretaries and cleaning ladies.

He didn't recommend lowering the income tax rate to 17% either.

Smitty , West Hills , CA, USA

I don't believe Buffet's premise for one second. Buffet, like the woman he is supporting, is playing slight-of-hand with the truth. If Buffet has sheltered his income so it is not taxed, then it is probably based on tax law that preceeds the Bush administration.

The fact is the Bush tax cuts have kept unemployment low and is a big factor in the rise of the stock market. This has helped Buffet's bottom line, to be sure, but why cry about that? Soaking the rich has never helped the middle class - it usually comes back to bite the middle class - like the alternate minimum tax.

Buffet should run his company and keep his hand out of my pockets!

David Oberholtzer, Springfield, VA

Buffet says: “You could take that $30 billion and give $1,000 to 30 million poor families. Or should you favour the 12,000 estates and make 30 million families pay an extra $1,000?”

Is Buffet saying that this is a zero sum game? From what I was taught in finance 101, taking money from these estates reduces that which is available for productive investment.

Jack Barnett, East Meadow, USA NY

What Mr. Buffet fails to tell you is
the crippling effect increasing taxes would have
upon the "little" millionaires who have successful
small businesses;

The millions of people who work for these small businesses
across the country would be the hardest hit,
with layoffs, less benefits, etc., as small business owners would have to ante up extra money to pay for their increased tax burden;

Ever heard of the old saying, Give a man a fish
(or $1000) and he eats for a day, teach a man how to
fish (or wisely invest his $1000) and he eats for a lifetime?

Steve, Arlington, Tarrant Texas

Warren Buffett and the actions of Congress and the Clinton and Bush administrations have exported all of the good jobs previously held by our middle class to China, Mexico, and elsewhere. Now they want even lower wages here by allowing cheap immigrant labor to drive wages down even more. They even have the gall to tell us it is good for us. I say shut up Buffett.
Give your secretary a raise for putting up with you. Go home and take Hillary with you. Leave us alone. Let us try to make some money too

Donald Miskelly, Ellicott City, Maryland

A Flat tax might solve Mr. Buffetts problem, or to ease his guilt he could pick several hundred struggling "working" families and personally gift them $12,000 a year. The receiving family wouldn't have to pay taxes, of course there isn't any significant tax advantage for Mr. Buffett. Don't look for your checks in the mail anytime soon.

Cindy Saling, Surprise, AZ

what is the point of him getting taxed more. Is there some point to that? If he felt the government was a charitable organization that needed money I think his assesment is absolutely wrong. He should shut up about paying more taxes and be happy that he has the option. As the billionare he has the ability to donate significant monies to charities and leave the gov't bureacracy out of it therefore getting more good done in the world. Government isn't the solution, its usually the problem.

Bevan, Des Moines, IA

"Didn't Mr Buffett arrange to give away 85% of his asset to charity? Thats around $30 BILLION."

Yes he did, this is a common estate planning move among the ultra-wealthy. "Give away" the money to a Foundation (in this case the Gates Foundation) and have your kids, your wife, buddies etc etc serve on the board. As board members they get a salary, expense account, prestige of giving all that money away and, perhaps most importantly, business quid pro quo for helping our someone's "favorite charity."

So...don't saint him just yet

Michael, Houston, Texas

Warren,
If you want to pay more in taxes, please give up all your trusts, foundations and an army of tax advisers you use to hide money from the IRS.
What a hypocrisy. You know that after your passing, the Treasury won't get a dime because all the money will be shielded from taxes through a well-designed scheme of trust and foundations that are tax-proof.

Wojtek, Charlotte, NC

Thank you Mr Buffet for helping raise this critical issue and for showing your concern. To all those who say "there's nothing to stop him paying more", please understand that his point is to highlight the inequality of a system that legitimises the schemes for the rich and super-rich to avoid their responsibility for paying their share. Don't forget that Buffet has previously donated huge amounts of his personal wealth to charity. Unfortunately its all too rare to hear from a man in his position who sees the importance of fairness in our world today.

mike, athens, greece

Warren, if you are so guilt ridden over your wealth, nothing prevents you from voluntarily increasing your tax payments to the Federal government.

Jay, Honolulu,

US tax policy is part of what's known as the American Dream - many make it but the vast majority can only dream about it and are taxed while they dream. Dream on. It's the same dream that leads them to believe that they have the finest fighting force in the world and that they fight for their "values" which are somewhat different values than those held by the rest of the world and the UK in particular.

CRL Child, Ajaccio, Corsica, France

Shouldn't Buffett live by his own stated ideals. If he believes that he should be taxed at, say 70%, what is preventing him from adding to his tax payment an amount that brings his effective rate up to 70%? Lead by example! Anyway, taxes will go up in the U.S., and, as usual, when the politicians claim they are aiming for the rich they'll just hit middle class strivers again. Buffett will keep his billions and the sucker working 80 hours a week to earn 150k will get further pillaged.

Edub, New York,

If you give $1000 to 30 million poor families, in 1 month it will be back in the net worth of Berkshire Hathaway and 30 million poor families will have put $1000 down on a big screen TV.

Warren, if it bothers you so much, just let your consience be your guide and write a check to the gov't for what you think is fair. I'm sure that the bureaucrats can find something to waste it upon.

Fred D., Juliette, GA, USA

It's true that the rich provide a portion of the total tax base that is disproportionate to their percentage of the population.

However, that criticism is disingenuous, or at least incomplete. I don't know if any studies attempt to quantify the amount, but one can safely assume that the rich consume a disproportionate share of public resources. (Not to mention, a disporportionate share of public funds is probably also spent simply maintaining and protecting the assets of the rich.)

Viewed in this light, their contribution to total tax revenues does not seem so unfair, if at all.

S. Ratcliff, Orange County, California, USA

I think the point that Mr Buffett was trying to make was that in comparison, his receptionist is paying more of her income % wise than he was, despite b