Senate passes controversial $858 billion tax cut package
December 15th, 2010
01:23 PM ET

Senate passes controversial $858 billion tax cut package

The Senate approved a controversial $858 billion tax cut package Wednesday, overwhelmingly voting to extend the Bush-era tax reductions despite a series of objections from both the left and the right.

The measure, which passed 81 to 19, now advances to the House of Representatives.

Among other things, the package includes a two-year extension of the Bush-era tax cuts set to expire December 31. It also would extend unemployment benefits for 13 months, cut the payroll tax by 2 percentage points for a year, restore the estate tax at a lower level, and continue a series of other tax breaks.

The estate tax - currently scheduled to exempt inheritances up to $1 million and tax amounts above that at a rate of 55% - would be reduced under the tax package to a rate of 35% on amounts above a $5 million individual exemption.

FULL STORY
Post by:
Filed under: Politics • Taxes
soundoff (29 Responses)
  1. Robert Warner

    "Why do we call this a Tax Cut". Because that's what it is. It was a tax cut which was supposed to be temporary. If you make taxes less that is a tax cut. The current tax rate is a cut from it's true level. If a store has a 2 day sale, you don't look at the sale price as normal and accuse them of raising their prices once the sale ends. That would be asinine.

    December 15, 2010 at 11:18 pm | Report abuse |
  2. sharon

    Well..well..well....Thanks to all you foolish people who voted the Republicans inthe house. You have been brainwash to believed these so call tax cuts is going help the middleclass & the poor. Theae tax cuts is going to cost more money and further when we head back to recession more bailout to the rich. You finally got what you wanted! Oh! by the way! Big corporation & Wall Street are giving BIGGER BONUS this year. Oh I forgot to tell you they are not hiringjust recently had layoffs. Looks who crying now!

    December 16, 2010 at 12:58 am | Report abuse |
  3. really?

    Excellent. Now, to benefit from this plan, I need to
    A) ask my boss for a raise to get over that. 250k hump
    Or
    B) inherit a 5 million dollar estate

    Boy that's easier than I thought

    December 16, 2010 at 6:28 am | Report abuse |
  4. Cesar

    @Sharon: Hear hear

    December 16, 2010 at 7:04 am | Report abuse |
  5. Robert

    I just dont get it...it's the rich that caused this maddness we are in and our country decides it's a good idea to give them even more money than they deserve...they caused this ilk we are all in and we give them a break...that means this country deserves to fail and fail bigtime...

    December 16, 2010 at 7:25 am | Report abuse |
  6. texas

    First. Any of you work for poor person. Also, if you think by raising the wealthys taxes will help, most of the wealthy don't even have their money in the US. It is in countrys with no extradition with US. Also there are more Dems that are worth over 10mil – warren beffet, bill gates, if their taxes go up, they won't change their life style, just fire the number of people to insure his lifestyle does not change. And the money collected won't go to the middle class, but in some politician pocket. Why didn't the Dem take care of this when there was a super majority? Because they wanted to cause all the class and race conflicts.

    December 16, 2010 at 10:20 am | Report abuse |
  7. Scotty

    It's called class warfare. It gives them (the politicians) a distractor in keeping us ( the people ) from looking deeper into what they are doing. While we talk about the rich and poor, they just increased thier spending (of our money) by hundreds of billions. Watch my left hand with a cute bunny in it, while my right hand whacks you up side the head with a hammer.

    December 16, 2010 at 10:40 am | Report abuse |
  8. Richard in Texas

    Homer the passing had nothing to do with earmarks you idiot. It passed because the republicans finally decided to vote on something rather than fillibuster or just say no.

    December 16, 2010 at 12:54 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Richard in Texas

    Homer
    The democrats compromised and let the republicans add things to help the rich and increase the debt. That made the republicans happy and now they voted for the bill.

    December 16, 2010 at 1:01 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Richard in Texas

    Homer, What's up with these republican? Voting no on a bill because of earmarks but there are earmarks they themselves put in. Namely Coryn among others?

    December 16, 2010 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Richard in Texas

    To steal your line there Homer... DUHO!

    December 16, 2010 at 3:14 pm | Report abuse |
1 2