I think the real thing is that Buffet knows that wiring your fortune to the IRS is a perilously stupid way to do good with your money; just statistically such a huge chunk of that will go to, say, bombing children halfway around the world, bureaucracies that spend money better than actually provide healthcare, and anti-poverty programs that are better at lining the pockets of 'social entrepreneurs' that are better at writing grants than providing services to the poor.

If you do actually believe that the federal government is the most efficient way to redistribute wealth, at least earmark it to killing the debt, which is an unethical institution (you cannot go back in time and vote against spending that your generation is forced to pay off; it's taxation without representation)

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm

It’s fine if he thinks it’s stupid, but then he shouldn’t complain that he doesn’t pay enough either as if only he could pay more then he would do so. BS!

I don’t have a problem with the guy or with his wealth, but the whole “oh but if they’d only tax me” thing is infuriating.

Hell, he could just endow any number of non-Ivy League schools and pay for kids to go to college.

I have a genuine question do you know what Buffets philanthropies do or his plans with his wealth? Or are you just reacting to talking points?

I'm reacting to his talking points - I'm not sure what his philanthropies will do with his wealth, but I assume not give it to the IRS so I think the point still stands.

Anybody who wants to pay more taxes can write the IRS a check. It's very easy to do.

Exactly this. I don't even make nearly as much as warren Buffett and I'm actively contributing to an unrelated kid's (single mom, service worker, spotty job reliability) college fund.

You just have to step up and do it one day, or, if you're warren buffet, tell your personal assistant to set it up.

This argument gets played frequently but it misses the a point. Buffet is not complaining that he has not been able to send enough money to the government he is complaining that the system has no way to take the money from people like him. It’s is meaningless to send more money as the complaint is about the system and how it deals with the overall group he is a part of.

The consistent criticism is that Buffet has not put in enough lobbying to change the system. He could afford building of lobbyists and not farms and burned out influencers manipulating public consensus. Now that’s a a decent criticism. But no one should ever have to pay more than they must, just to have an opinion on their own government.

I think by the very nature of saying that he should be taxed more is sufficient enough. Why would anyone pay money to lobbyists to then have to pay more taxes. He provided political cover and conversation around it. Sufficient enough IMO. Ridiculous to think he would spend money to increase his own tax burden - if people can't get it done themselves than that's on them.

I’m sorry what?

Buffet shouldn’t have just cut the IRS a check for $2B because it’s “meaningless to just send the money”?

So unless all the pieces are in place there is no value in paying the amount in taxes you publicly claim you should pay?

That’s like saying alcohol should be illegal, but drinking all the time. “Well, there is no point in me not drinking, the point is to change the law”.

That makes zero sense.

Buffer should've done same but opposite what Koch brothers do: fund powerful think-tanks, but left of center, to promote progressive tax and eliminating loopholes and limitation of business taxes and capital gains taxes, I guess also promoting estate taxes for a good measure.

Disagree. Why would you arbitrarily pay the IRS money if you didn't owe them anything. It would put himself in a weaker competitive position against his competitors and for what benefit?

I completely disagree with you. The move should be to change the system.

You pay them because your argument is “i should be paying more”.

It’s hard to take someone seriously when they say they should pay more tax, have every opportunity to pay more tax, yet choose not to pay more tax.

He's arguing that the system should charge him more and his class of citizens more. Why would he arbitrarily pay more if noone else in his cohort is paying more? Doesn't make any sense.

What you are saying is he should make a donation to the US government.

No, those are just weasel words. It’s setting an example by doing what you’re saying others should be doing.

It’s why we have the phrase “put your money where you mouth is”.

And it’s not a donation. It’s intentionally paying more taxes because that what you think you should be doing. If the law changed he’d be paying the extra money anyways.

Well maybe you could consider it 'paying more taxes' internally but in reality it would be classified as a donation otherwise the US government would give him a refund for overpaying his taxes. And to my prior point I don't see how that gets anyone else on board.

The law won't change retroactively so I don't see "If the law changed he’d be paying the extra money anyways." makes any sense.

Your argument is illogical because it implies that people should be able to alter the tax law by intentionally overpaying taxes.

The argument is usually that you personally making the change isn't significant. Even $2B from Buffet isn't significant on a "US government" level. So making that change would "hurt" Buffet a lot for not much gain.

Changing the law, on the other hand, is significant, because it impacts every millionaire/billionaire.

No, this is bullshit. “Hurt” Buffet? Hurt him how? Wouldn’t the higher tax rate “hurt” home too.

This is just a bullshit billionaire who won’t do what he’s asking others to do.

>Buffett always complains that he did not pay enough tax. He could simply wire 50% of his fortune to the IRS. His secretary had no choice. (End of sarcasm)

Wealth is competitive. Over time, having a higher rate of return than someone else results in substantial differences in overall wealth. Everyone in his position being on the same playing field and chipping in equally is not the same as him martyring himself and letting more selfish peers acquire more resources and sway.

Said better than I in fewer words

Frankly if I was a billionaire and had the means to setup my own charity that I had complete visibility into so I knew exactly where every penny was spent I would do that over giving it to another foundation.

Agree. Unfortunately today a Foundation is mainly a optimisation structure. Most of the countries have usually other structures (in their fiscal code) to encourage people to help.

Sticking your nose in "where every penny was spent" is not great and I imagine for most people it would lead quickly to micromanagement. What do you know about charities, about running charities? Anything? Give anonymously. To people who already know what they're doing. You're a billionaire, you can afford list price for benefit events.

millions of Americans struggle with basic expenses. Such expenses are recurring. even if he gave half, it would not last long enough to fix those problems.

Agree - which is why he says it's a systemic problem that needs fixing.

All of these, frankly, stupid arguments that he should just give the IRS money for no reason because they don't tax him high enough is ridiculous. Literally a drop in the bucket. Full year budget - $4.89 Trillion in 2019.