E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSSuper investor Warren Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, speaks with TODAY's Matt Lauer about Cyber Monday sales figures, consumer confidence and the future of the American economy.
Raising taxes on the rich won't dampen economic growth and would "raise the morale of the middle class," billionaire investor Warren Buffett told the TODAY show Tuesday.
Echoing a theme he has stressed often, Buffett downplayed the idea that higher taxes for the wealthy, as proposed by the Obama administration as part of a deal to resolve the "fiscal cliff," would scare off critical investment for job creation. Republicans argue that raising taxes on people in higher tax brackets would choke off investment and slow the economy at a time when it can ill afford it.
Buffett disagrees. "No, and I think it would have a great effect on the morale of the middle class," said Buffett, in the first of two live interviews with TODAY's Matt Lauer. "They've had to watch guys like me pay below the rate by that paid by the people in my office."
Also known as the "Oracle of Omaha" for his investing acumen, Buffett's views on the economy are widely followed, including on whether we're really going to go off the "fiscal cliff" of $500 million in tax hikes and spending cuts.
The CEO of Berkshire Hathaway has been vocal on the economy lately, proposing in a New York Times op-ed Monday that there be a minimum tax for the wealthy.
"I'm confident," said Buffet when asked about how he was feeling about the economy. "I can't speak for others, but at Berkshire Hathaway, we buy and sell stocks every day. America's a winner."
Lauer brought up a recent quote from Honeywell CEO David Cote who told Meet the Press that he and others like him were feeling a lack of confidence in the political process, so much so that the uncertainty was making them keep their money on the sidelines and preventing them from making additional investments, including hiring.
"At Berkshire Hathaway, we're investing 9 billion in plant equipment, a record, breaking last year's record. It's always uncertain," said Buffett.
"December 6th 1941 was uncertain," said Buffett, referring to the day before the attack on Pearl Harbor. "We just didn't know it."
When asked whether Congress would really enact a strong proposal such as the one Buffett made in his Times op-ed, which suggested setting a minimum 30 percent tax for millionaires, Buffet said, "I wouldn't be surprised. They're going to make a deal."
Now there's a new Buffett book, "Tap-Dancing to Work" that trace his career through 80 different FORTUNE Magazine articles over the years. If there's one thing that stuck out from the timeline, Carol Loomis, FORTUNE editor, who collected and expanded the articles for the book, told TODAY, it's "how consistent he's been in his thinking. He's never changed."
"I couldn't be more boring," said Buffett. "I just look at the facts and wherever they lead me, I go."
Is this the secret to Buffett's success? Lauer asked Loomis. It's hard, she said, because other investors "get emotional."
Buffett is known for finding undervalued companies with strong fundamentals and good management. "It's simple, but not easy," said Loomis. "That's why other people can't do it. He's thinking about business 24/7."
Lauer asked if this book was a goodbye letter of sorts. "What's it going to mean to the world when he hangs up his investing shoes?" he asked.
Loomis said, "He will be remembered. His role in life will be remembered for the next century. I don't know whether investing or philanthropy is going to be the lead item. People are going to be reading about Buffet 100 years from now."
About that retirement... "Got a date in mind?" Lauer asked the 82-year old businessman.
Buffett just laughed.
Read a free excerpt from the book Tap-Dancing to Work.
More money news:
- Cowabunga, dude! Retro toys are hot this holiday season
- Dangers on toy shelves: Dora's guitar, balloon launcher
- Check out the 2013 toy of the year nominees
- Video: Say 'no' to debt: Give holiday gifts that matter
- Sign up for our TODAY newsletter
Follow TODAY Money on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
We don't have a spending issue, we have a jobs/tax revenue issue. Google Robert Reich and what we should do about the deficit.
The Bush tax cuts need to expire, and the tax code needs a major overhaul to eliminate the loopholes the uber-wealthy take advantage of. Buffett has been saying for years now that trickle-down is BS, and the jobs that it supposedly creates never materialized. (they didn't all go overseas)
It's been ten years now since W cut the tax rates - where are all the jobs? I think we may have to raise the tax rates on the middle too, if the spending cuts and the expiry of Bush tax cuts aren't' enough. It won't be popular with anybody, but it might be necessary to un-**** the current state of the economy.
So how does taxing middle class families another 3 - 4k create jobs? That's 3 or 4 k less a family has to spend. Less demand for products, less money for home down payments, cars, etc...
Wiley, raising taxes on the middle class would hurt the economy and not reduce the deficit. Since the middle class spends 99% of their incomes they ARE the economy stimulators. The rich do NOT spend 99% of their incomes, if they did we would have an economy problem, so their wealth is stockpile in bank and the stock market. EVERYTIME a dollar is spent the economy is getting a boost. We need to keep the middle class spending.
There is only so much wealth, it is not something you can go home a print off on your printer when you run out. If the rich are hoarding their wealth then that is money taken OUT of the economy! So the wealthy need to be paying higher taxes to get their money BACK into the economy. Believe me we could tax the wealthy 99.9% and the wealthy would still endeavor to get more money. It is greed that drives them and NO amount of taxes, in fact the opposite, is going to quench their need to "Have it all!!".
Once again the folks who created the problem want the problem they created fixed overnight. Sorry but it doesnt work that way dimwits.
Raising taxes on the middle class would hurt the economy and not reduce the deficit. Since the middle class spends 99% of their incomes they ARE the economy stimulators. The rich do NOT spend 99% of their incomes, if they did we would have an economy problem, so their wealth is stockpile in bank and the stock market. EVERYTIME a dollar is spent the economy is getting a boost. We need to keep the middle class spending.
blue - Some middle class like myself would gladly be willing to pay more in taxes (our "fair share"), then there are some like you that are looking for someone else to pick up the tab.
Everyone needs to feel the pain.
sdc.clark
I agree 100% let all the cuts expire. Those that pay NO taxes can pay some. If it is only 10 dollars. We can't have millions with their hands out paying no taxes. We ALL got into this mess. We can ALL work to get out of it. When everyone has a little skin in the game , then we will get somewhere. I can't understand the mentality of hating people that have more money than others. People need to understand that hard work gets you wealth & prosperity, not trying to take other peoples money.
Raising taxes on the middle class would hurt the economy and not reduce the deficit. Since the middle class spends 99% of their incomes they ARE the economy stimulators. The rich do NOT spend 99% of their incomes, if they did we would have an economy problem, so their wealth is stockpile in bank and the stock market. EVERYTIME a dollar is spent the economy is getting a boost. We need to keep the middle class spending.
Washington wants to "Tax the Rich" because they have a small voting block. The rich can not hurt a re-election bid. Corporation don't vote so let's tax them.
Flat tax is the only thing that will get us out of this mess. Cutting spending mean making government smaller and that is not going to happen. So they raise taxes on the rich to make the base feel proud. Not solving the problem, but kicking the can down the road.
Oh MY GOD, that gbob2 is the MOST ridiculous thing I have heard today! The rich BUY and SELL OUR elected officals all the time.
Example, the Mormon church spent millions in California to get one man/and one woman bill passed.
Look how close Mitt Romney came to winning, really if he had kept his mouth shut, he would have won, with the backing of several billionaires. People with money can "afford" to get laws written in their favor. What the keck do you think LOBBYISTS do?
When Congress overhauled the bankuptcy Bill who do you think was in the closed door meetings? Average people, NO, lobbyists and Corporate big wigs, same with Obamacare, it was the insurance companies who got invites. Doctors and regular people weren't even allowed!
I can believe YOU think the wealthy are some sort of victims who are being OPPRESSED by the working class!! Turn off Fox News (who is owned by a Saudi Prince with terrorist ties, so I wouldn't trust ANYTHING they say!) get out and pay attention!!
By the way, the Kock Brothers spent $34 million dollars on Romney to win, how many middle class households combined have that money just laying around to contribute to a political campaign?
Lower taxes and that raises the morale of everybody! That's a win-win situation. Stop blaming taxpayers for government over-spending no matter what tax rate the taxpayer is at.
The deficit has not come down under Obama. When he took office is was at 10 trillion, now its over 16 trillion. It has gone UP by 50%
What an idiot. Understand the deficit at all? Apparently not
Generally, the "deficit" refers to a one year budget shortfall, which cumulatively add up to the "debt." But, of course, broadly the "debt" is a deficit in itself.
What a liberal hypocrite. Hey Warren, how about we hire an accounting firm and let them retro back 20 years of your income and apply the new rate, eliminate the capital gains tax for you so you can pay on all your past income. It's easy for these jacka$$es to say this when they are so wealthy a few more million here and there is nothing.
Don't know if you've heard about this:
President B.H.O. has recently appointed a Golf Czar.
Major rule changes in the game of golf will become effective
January 1, 2013.
This is only a preview as the complete rule book (expect 2716
pages) is being rewritten as we speak.
Here are a few of the changes:
Golfers with handicaps:
- Below 10 will have their green fees increased by 35%.
- Between 11 and 18 will see no increase in green fees.
- Above 18 will get a $20 check each time they play.
The term "gimmie" will be changed to
"entitlement" and will be used as follows:
- Handicaps below 10, no entitlements.
- Handicaps from 11 to 17, entitlements for putter length putts.
- Handicaps above 18, if your ball is on the green, no need to putt, just pick
it up.
These entitlements are intended to bring about fairness and, most importantly,
equality in scoring.
In addition, a player will be limited to a maximum of one birdie or six pars in
any given 18-hole round.
Any excess must be given to those fellow players who have not yet scored a
birdie or par.
Only after all players have received a birdie or par from the player actually
making the birdie or par, can that player begin to count his pars and birdies
again .
The current USGA handicap system will be used for the above purposes, but the
term "net score" will be available only for scoring those players
with handicaps of 18 and above.
This is intended to "re-distribute" the success of winning by making
sure that in all competitions every player above an 18 handicap will post only
"net score" against every other player's "gross score".
These new rules are intended to CHANGE the game of golf.
Golf must be about fairness. It should have nothing to do with ability,
hard work, practice, and responsibility.
This is the "right thing to do."
So, please remember; if you shot a round of golf under par, you
didn't shoot it yourself. Someone else built that
course, and someone else cut the grass so that you could play on it. Someone
else built the clubs and the cart.
You need to share with everyone and anyone who made you a successful
golfer.
No more flying first class. Everyone must flys coach to make it equal.
All future football games must end in a tie. All football players will be paid the same. We must be fair.
And the high school dropout who works at McDonalds will be paid just as much as a heart surgeon and a nuclear physicist. He works just as hard at the grill, the fry-o-later, and the drive-through as the other two guys in their professions...it's not his fault he's not as smart and dropped out of school. He deserves to live as well as everyone else. We must be fair.
True. And I think all college students who work and study hard and make A's and B's should be forced to give half of their good grades to students who don't study or try as hard and are making D's and F's. That way all students can graduate with a C average.
brewzky23. Good analogy! Now since 1% of the students in that class will get 90% of the teachers time, that leaves 99% of the class to struggle on their own. If the teacher could spend more time with each student instead of just teaching to the one student everyones grades would come up, if they whole class's grades came up they would be a top school.
But one student getting the most of the teacher's time screws everyone. If that continues, that 99% of the class only get 10% of the teachers time, how many will graduate? How many will get good jobs when they can't read or write because the teacher spent all of her time educating ONE student? Hence they WHOLE school will fail!
That is where we are now, the whole economy is failing because we have let all the wealth concentrate at the top!
That's why you eliminate the Dept. of Education. If a teacher is spending that much time with so few students, they're doing it for good reason. When 99% of the class doesn't want to be there, and is disrupting the rest of the class they ruin it for all. Why not take those that want to learn and want to try and put them with good teachers and take those that don't want to try and don't care and put them with disciplinary teachers to watch them until the bell rings? At least those that want to learn will have a chance in life.
You, said "That is where we are now, the whole economy is failing because we have let all the wealth concentrate at the top!"
Where do you get this from. How did "we" let this happen. People are responsible for making their way in life and not having to feel entitled that someone else should pay their way. What do you suggest, just taking more and more away from the "top" and giving it to the bottom. At what point does the top say F it, and then there's nothing to take to gvie away anymore.
Check out the Laffer curve. Just Google it. Very good bell curve that shows how taxing, like Obama wants to do will actually return less and less the higher he goes.
This article is not about Jimmy Buffet? Darn.
Perhaps what we need in America is a wealth tax on billionaires like Buffett. Something like a 3% tax on his wealth [no shielding of wealth by donating to charities].
It's called class warfare, and it's a redistribution of wealth no matter how you look at it. It's more Marxist Leninist dogma, but with a black face on it.
Bruce haven't YOU noticed there has been a redistribution of wealth upward over the last 30 years? Hasn't the price of everything gone up, while your paycheck doesn't go as far? Remember the days of 10% raises being average, and now the best we can hope for is a 3% raise. Where DO you think that money went? To the poor? No, it has gone from YOUR pocket upwards! When gas goes from $2.50 a gallon to $4.00 in a year's time do you think the poor and needy are getting rich from that?No, silly rabbit!!
It when into the pockets of the oil barons, like the Kock Brothers who turned around and spent your money to try to elect another guy who would have supported their gouging us at the pumps!
Your looking to blame someone below you, those victims who just sit around taking handouts, while corporations and CEO's have both hands in your pockets stealing you blind! Even the CEO of Shell oil testified that the increase in gas prices had NOTHING to do with the cost of refining it or the demand, at least $.70 of every gallon was due to oil speculation on the stock market. When Dems tried to correct this, Republicans blocked it!
So those good ole RED boys and girls ya all love so much scr$wed you, and you didn't even know because FOX News never aired the CEO testimony on Fox, they thought you cared more about the Casey Anthony story more.
Why doesn't Warren Buffett just pay his back taxes he owes?
It is not a question of raising taxes "chilling" the economy .. how do you chill something that is already pretty much frozen .. it is a question of doing something that will HELP. I am not certain it will hurt much more than this administration has already hurt the economy .. but it sure won't start a fire under it if we raise taxes. Give me a break Buffett, who would have thought you were this dense.
Tell us exactly how this administration has hurt the economy.
Regulating coal and other energy sources to the point of closure .. no keystone pipeline .. NLRB suing Boeing .. adding Obamacare costs to small business (have you not seen the articles about Papa John's, Denny's franchise in Florida, or others, even health care companies laying off due to Obamacare.)
Geez .. do a simple search or apply just a little common sense.
Just, you need to do your research at other than right-wing sites. The coal industry has known for years the EPA guidelines they would have to meet - that the may have chose to hope they would go away has nothing to do with the Obama administration. Boeing is attempting an illegal runaround of their employee's union, something ay literate person is aware of. "Obamacare" has not added costs to any business, the Papa John's and Denny's blustering has been "walked back", and nobody is being laid off due to "Obamacare" because it is not even in effect yet.
A tax hike to anyone earning under $500k will hurt this country and the people in it. I believe it will especially harm, our younger taxpayers. These 20 to 30 something’s have recently bought their first homes for far more than they are now worth and their beginning savings have also withered in this dismal economy. Besides spending less on all fronts, they will not be able to save appropriately. They need to save for their future retirement and for their children's education. This tax hike will punish a group of people trying their hardest to do right for themselves and their children. Their future is dim and as they struggle it will only further put a greater strain on our social safeguards.
Funny to see folks who would not be affected by the proposal to raise taxes on the rich defend the rich. They cut off thier noses despite thier faces just to be anti Obama. They like to say why go after the wealthy? The point they are missing is that the wealthy have been getting away with murder for yrs as far as taxes go. Get it? The time has come for them to pay thier fair share of taxes instead of skating thru taxation like they have been.
.Johnny-3621820
It sounds like we ALL have . Let them expire & go back to what we were all paying. The thing is, back then we didn't have half of the Country paying NO taxes , un-employment was 6 months, not 2years & how many had their hands out then? We probably have twice as many on Welfare & food stamps as back then. We have spent ourselves into this. Raise taxes on all of us.
EZ for Buffet to say raise taxes, he has GOT MORE $ THAN god ! The fact is average net worth in the US has declined 40% over the last few years and the baby boomers are coming to retirement with very little saved. Just because someone made 200k this year does not make he or she a millionaire or billionaire ! Also, last time I checked Berkshire Hathaway owed over a billion $ in back taxes ! Put up or shut up Warren ! As an investor I made significant $ dumping California bonds before the sheeple realized the paper was junk. Now i am looking to get out of US based paper since it has become junk as well ! The US is going down but the majority just does not get it. Like John Lennon said " Keep you doped with religion, sex, and TV and you think you're so clever, classless, and free but you're still f'n peasants far as I can see" What a pity the country is being led down the primrose path by the fools that think Obama is their savior !
How about a FLAT TAX RATE - the wealthy would then pay more because they earn more. A FLAT TAX RATE gives no deductions to anyone. How can the country survive if almost 50% of our people pay NO TAXES at all?
If they made more money, they would pay more in taxes. Accusing the 47%'ers (i.e. the approximate half, who pay no taxes) of being "freeloaders," is, to a large extent, accussing them of working for low wages and benefits, which is an excellent argument for the return of organized labor.
But, that's OK...Romney didn't get it either.
Flat rate taxes are regressive, in that it does not account for the differences in "disposable income" - i.e. the after tax and necessities income. Consequently, a "flat rate" system tends to favor the upper income levels.
A flat tax would crush the middle and lower class. A 25% flat tax would leave me with 75% of quite a bit. For the lower and middle class, 75% of what they would have left is nothing. They don't pay squat in taxes now.
Goodtimesbadtimes
What planet have you been on? The unemployment rate hasn't changed
since Obama has been in office. Are 12 million jobs just going to fall from
the sky?
The problem is NOT JOBS! The problem is the DISPARITY OF WEALTH! The 99% American People CAN'T SPEND WHAT THEY DON'T HAVE! Only the ONE-PERCENTERS WITH 77% of the American People's OWN COUNTRY'S WEALTH can spend and THEY ARE NOT SPENDING IT HERE IN THE UNITED STATES!!!
jobs aren't the problem? have you been living in another country? or a parents basement?
Most everyone is right. The tax increase Obama wants is a drop in the bucket. For all you liberals who think this will solve the problem you are wrong. There will be plenty more tax increases on everyone and entitlements will have to be reformed. Those taxes on the wealthy will only run the government for 4 days each year at the present spending rate. Guess where the rest will come from. Listen to your head and not your political beliefs. I do not like the idea of tax increases but everyone should have a dog in this fight. Everyone should pay something according to the amount you earn. I have paid over $1,500,000.00 in taxes in the past 10 years and do not have a heartburn with that. Also it was at the 35% tax rate. That does not include Social Security and State taxes so that means around 50% of my earned income went to taxes.
Point is the Bush tax cuts will keep hurting the defcit problem yr in and yr out if not done away with. Simple Math
Johnny,
So do away with them. I have been ready for that since 2008, but Obama refused to let them die. All he would have had to do is what he is good at, nothing.
DieHardCentrist
johnny, your math is off.
spending is the problem, not revenue.
but you're a white guy...
your opinion doesn't matter.
If it came down to reducing goverment spending versus raising MY taxes, I would be for reducing goverment spending. Everyone's on the bandwagon as long as it involves OTHER PEOPLE's money. I'm all for raising the taxes by 100% on everyone making $1 more than I do (it should be a moving threshold always based on my income). If Buffet ran our government like he did his businesses, he would fire everyone in power, disarm the government worker unions and start with a clean slate that would start with spending less than how much we bring in.
Taxing the rich more will not fix the deficit without entitlement reform and other cuts. The rich will not even contribute the amount expected because they will move their money around and hide it from the increased taxes (they are willing to pay their tax lawyers more than they are willing to pay taxes). Time to cut the budget (like any sensible person would), but not with a scalpel, use a hacksaw, better yet a chainsaw and get rid of the unsustainable bloat in the US budget. The government needs to shrink, period.
DieHardCentrist
There enlies the problem. Legal wrangling to avoid paying taxes has to be pinched. That and cutting Govt wherever it can be done. Simple Math
Johnny,
But Congress (both parties) put those "loopholes" into the tax code to benefit themselves and their buddies, so unless the "loopholes" are closed, the legal wrangling wil continue unabated. This is why I favor closing as many loopholes as possible instead of raising rates. Regardless, the cutting must start soon or we will end up like Greece.
i thought old white guys were the problem.
we need to stop listening to old white guys.
and this clown is the old white guys leader.
ignore this idiot.
The GOP and some of their financial contributors don't care what Warren Buffet thinks. They don't want to pay more taxes. When the people with the votes to make these decisions don't want to pay, things won't change, we go on and on, blah, blah, blah..........
Beware of the double-edged sword of cuts and tax increases for all income brackets that some are proposing. This kind of 'austerity' is what is killing Greece.
I think those who make above $250K, which by the way is the adjusted income - after all deductions, loopholes, etc. (so in reality the gross income is much higher), can stand to return to Clinton-era tax brackets. FWIW, I am in that higher income bracket. I didn't suffer during the Clinton years and I won't suffer.
Loopholes must be closed - for instance, the hobby loophole - which Gov. Romney himself used for his horse Rafalca - is a way many people can legally deduct thousands of dollars. Other loopholes on investment income must be closed.
The defense budget must decrease - no doubt. Subsidies to multinationals for corn or oil or agricultural products need to be drastically reduced or curtailed. We must have some sort of punitive action against companies moving overseas and then re-importing these products or services to the U.S.
Government - state and federal - however must be investing in infrastructure. Roads, bridges, water/wastewater treatment facilities - these are multi-year projects that bring jobs and pay off for everyone in the long run.
The infrastructure in the U.S. is in dire need of improvement. Many places are finding out the hard way what it means to have water and sewer distribution systems from the early 20th century.
We must invest in science and research, aside from private companies whose sole motivator is profit (not that I blame them, but advancements in pharmaceuticals and medicine should not be 'for profit'). This means getting over religious objections to research including stem cells and the teaching of evolution in science classes in public schools.
There needs to be a paradigm shift in our cultural mores as well. We must stop and think about our wasteful lives - we don't need four 52" plasmas, we don't need all gaming systems out there, nor do we need the latest sneakers or cars. We don't need to live in 3000 sq. ft. homes which consume more water and power, thus adding more to our decaying infrastructure. We don't need to drive gas guzzlers to go get groceries or take kids some place. We need to change our attitudes toward having children - having children does not define men or women. We don't have to pop out kids to have fulfilling lives. There is birth control - free or otherwise. Use it.
We must come up with a better public education curriculum, one which does not depend on the whims of states or fringe school board members trying to impose their religious dogma.
Barack is that you?
LaDolceVita1 = Dyed In The Wool Democrat/Liberal. Why? No mention of entitlement reform. The current system(s) are hideously unsustainable and need reform but you do not mention them. BTW: We need our big plasma TV for our failing eyes, we drive fuel efficient cars and have no children. The public education system is broken and has been since its inception, it need replacement since decades of trying to fix it and throwing money at it has producing only declining results.
LaDolceVita1 Very well said!
I work with small business owners every day and $250,000 is NOT rich anymore. Make it $1 million and I'm onboard. No matter what you do, the rallying cry the following day of a tax increase will be that the rich must pay their "fair share". The major issue will be reductions to the size and scope of government. And not just a reduction in the rate of increase! Real cuts! The scum in Washington (both parties) will never go for that. Why start and sweat to run a business to be successful when you can just go out and get elected and then enrich yourself on the backs of taxpayers.
Because not just anyone can "go out and get elected."
Yeah you're right, that $250,000 is NOT rich. When you figure in expenses in today's world, it's not cheap to pay for daycare/schooling, insurance on your home and cars and other bills.