White House Correspondent
Illegal immigrants will receive huge payments from American taxpayers under rules now being imposed by President Barack Obama’s unilateral amnesty.
The illegals will get work-permits and Social Security cards, and will be required to pay taxes, according to Cecilia Munoz, the former immigration lobbyist who is now a top Obama aide.
That means they’re part of the tax system, she said, when she was asked if the illegals would get annual payments under the Earned Income Tax Credit program.
“They are subject to our tax law,” she said, carefully.
Most households of illegals have very low income, and pay little in taxes. For example, in 2011, roughly 22 percent of immigrant households — both legal and illegal — were classified as living in poverty. In contrast, only 13 percent of American households were in poverty.
However, once illegal immigrants are enrolled in the tax system, they’re would be entitled to EITC payments
The payments may be huge, and will rise each year.
According to the Internal Revenue Service, two parents with three or more children would receive up to $6,143 in 2014 if they earn less than $46,997.
A family with two kids, and an income of $20,000, would receive $14,590 in taxpayer funds this year alone.
Parents who earn less than the threshold would get $3,305 if they have one child, and $5,460 if they have two children.
The EITC program is already poorly monitored and may be subject to large amounts of fraud, according to critics.
Another study says that 47 percent of legal and illegal immigrants and their children are classified as living in poverty or in near-poverty, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors reduced annual immigration.
The Rev. Al Sharpton has made a remarkable rise to national prominence, from community organizer to President Obama’s consultant, amid a long and lesser-known history of debt and tax obligations totaling millions of dollars.
Sharpton and his for-profit businesses owe more than $4.5 million in state and federal tax liens, according to The New York Times.
And his influential nonprofit group, National Action Network, the Times said, appears to be in a similar situation, saddled with years of unpaid travel and hotel expenses while apparently staying afloat by not paying federal payroll taxes for employees.
The newspaper also suggested that Sharpton is not paying enough or fast enough to reduce his obligation to the state of New York, a situation he sharply refuted Tuesday.
The 60-year-old civil rights leader told FoxNews.com that he has an agreement with the government to repay his personal and business-related taxes and that his payments are on time.
“We have a signed agreement,” he said. “And what is in the agreement has been kept. We’ve been up to date. This is the most bogus story in the world.”
He also made clear that the roughly $1 million raised at New York event to celebrate his 60th birthday, on which The Times reported, will go toward repaying his debts.
Sharpton also argued that his work ethic and determination are above reproach but acknowledged his shortcomings as an administrator.
To be sure, Sharpton has come a long way since his days as a robust preacher and activist working the streets of Brooklyn in a jogging suit.
The low point in his career likely came in the late 1980s when he accused a New York prosecutor of being part of a group of white men that abducted and raped teenager Tawana Brawley, an allegation that proved to be false.
The much slimmer and well-tailored Sharpton now has a show on MSNBC. He appeared on the streets of Ferguson, Mo., to appeal for justice and calm in the aftermath of a white police officer in August fatally shooting unarmed black teen Michael Brown.
More recently, Sharpton was at the White House when Obama announced that Loretta E. Lynch, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, who is black, would be his nominee to be the next U.S. attorney general.
And he has served as an informal adviser to New York Mayor Bill de Blasio.
“I have the support of the black community,” said Sharpton, who was on standby to fly back to Missouri should a grand jury announce whether to indict the officer in the shooting. “President Obama and (New York Gov. Andrew) Cuomo aren’t doing me a favor.”
He said that his rise to prominence has also increased his pay and that he is negotiating a deal with government officials to clear his debt by offering them 50 cents on the dollar.
“I’ll write a check tonight,” Sharpton said.
The Time also reported that Sharpton, a Democrat and former mayoral and Senate candidate, also had a history of delinquent rent payments to his friend, Bishop E. Bernard Jordan.
Sharpton asked why he would be responsible for back payments at the Jordan’s Brooklyn rental home in 2006 when he had separated two years earlier from his wife, who remained in the home while he lived in a Manhattan apartment.
“What is new is this story?” Sharpton asked.
BY MICHAEL HAUSAM
How many times have you heard some version of “the wealthiest Americans should be paying their fair share?” But does anyone actually know what that means and, more importantly, what the highest-earning Americans are currently paying in taxes?
Now, thanks to the American Enterprise Institute and the Congressional Budget Office’s latest report on income and taxes, we know whom is paying what. And the picture painted by reality is very different than what one would expect.
You can decide for yourself if they are already paying “their fair share.”
The top 1% of households earned 15% of income but paid 35% of federal income taxes.
The top 20% of households earned 52% of income but paid 69% in federal income taxes.
The bottom 20% of households income tax rates dropped from 9% to 1.9% since 1984.
40% of households get more than half their income from federal transfer programs.
When government transfers are included, 60% of Americans had net negative tax rates — meaning they received more than they paid in.
The most interesting statistic is best shown by this graph:
It’s basically saying this: the highest quintile (top 20% of households) paid an average $46,500, far and away the greatest in percentage and dollars.
In other words, when federal income taxes are reduced by the amounts those households received from the federal government, only the top 20% contributed any meaningful amount. Bottom line: the top fifth of households basically paid for everyone else, in addition to everything else.
While there is certainly disagreement over what things the government should be paying for, it’s clear that as of right now, it’s the top 20% of households that are putting in the vast majority of the money.
Furthermore, when it comes to whom should be paying their fair share and whether the highest earners should be paying more, perhaps a better question might be to ask if the rest of Americans are paying theirs?