Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

The Carried-Interest Debate Returns
The WSJ's Sarah Lueck seems to say today that the idea of taxing carried interest – forcing private-equity honchos and hedge-fund managers to pay income tax on their income – is back. Two new taxes targeted at hedge-fund managers are being proposed by Charlie Rangel, one on the income-tax front and the other on the offshore-income front. But Edmund Andrews, in the NYT, covers the Rangel proposal as basically an idea for the kind of tax code a future Democratic White House might be interested in implementing, rather than as a real attempt to change the tax code this year.
So my feeling is that hedge-fund managers are going to be able to sleep well at night through all of next year, and that Rangel's proposals have more to do with the ongoing presidential election campaign than they do with changing the taxes we all will pay on our 2008 income. But I may be confusing a narrow proposal on the carried-interest front with a much broader proposal on fiscal policy more generally. Will it be possible for Congress to go ahead and tax hedge-fund managers more, perhaps in an attempt to offset the costs of defraying the alternative minimum tax, while putting to one side the rest of Rangel's proposals? And how much power does Chuck Schumer have to prevent that from happening?






