Bush Tax Cuts - Research Paper Example

Mixed reactions were reported. Some argued that they were only beneficial to the wealthy, while others argued that it was not in the nation’s interest to abolish tax cuts during a recession. Still, others opined that tax cuts were too costly for the government that was in dire need of extra revenue to service budget deficits. Bush Tax Cuts Introduction A tax relief initiative is bound to have different receptions from different economic classes. There has been debate over who benefited the most from the tax cuts.

Supporters of lower taxes have been of the opinion that tax deductions meant a growth to the swiftness of job creation and recovery in economics (Hughes, 2012). For them, lower taxes on all citizens meant that receipts would go up from the wealthier Americans, because their rates of tax would go down with no option for tax shelters. On the other hand, politicians have been of the opinion that the tax cuts favored the wealthy. They were passed in the midst of promises of how they would boost the economy.

But what they claim to have seen is a decade of slow growth. Politicians have a duty to systemize, defend and recommend concepts that are suitable for their subjects and condemn those that fall short of their expectations (Blackburn, 2001). This paper will present views opposing and agreeing to the argument whether it is ethical for politicians to claim that the Bush Tax Cuts were beneficial to the rich and unfair to the poor and also give the writer’s views. One perspective would say yes and agree that it is ethical for politicians to say that the Bush tax cut hurt the poor and unfairly benefited the rich.

This is because when President Bush took office, he had to deal with a recession rooted in the previous presidency in order to fight the economic difficulties and create a strong foundation for the entire nation. However, he implemented the income tax reductions that gradually came into force for the middle and lower class but took effect immediately for the rich, further lowering their marginal tax rates. Among the impacts of the initiative was that it awoke recognition of a lesser recognized item on the Internal Revenue Code, the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).

Although the AMT was designed to ensure that wealthy taxpayers did not abuse the numerous tax incentives by reducing their tax obligation by an unfair margin, there were no adjustments to the applicable rates that matched the lower taxpayers (Burman, 2007). For ethical purposes, the adjustments should have matched the lower rates of the Acts of 2001 and 2003. For example, Estate tax, also known as inheritance tax that imposed on inheritances over one million dollars, was reduced. This meant that someone from a rich family could inherit property worth millions of dollars and still pay marginal tax for it.

Rich investors also benefited as lower tax rates targeting them made it possible to earn higher returns while their taxes on dividends remained below the average most taxpayers submitted (Hughes, 2012). In a free market, it is ethical for politicians to say there is no justification for cutting taxes and providing greater relief to the rich for a decade yet economic growth slows down in the same period. In view of a market-oriented perspective, the tax cuts were not beneficial to the poor because they were implemented in slow,