SOCIAL SECURITY PLAN ISN'T A SPENDING CUT

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, March 16, 1993                   TAG: 9303160355
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A6   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Short
SOCIAL SECURITY PLAN ISN'T A SPENDING CUT
WHEN IS A tax increase on certain segments of our society a spending cut? How shameful for President Clinton to call the tax increase on Social Security benefits on middle- and upper-income retirees a spending cut. When individual and corporate taxes go up, try telling the people and stockholders that these increases are not taxes but a spending cut.
For a retired couple, who in 1992 paid federal income taxes of $5,014 on a taxable income of $33,400 (including the 50 percent of $14,000 Social Security benefits), the increase to 85 percent of their benefits means an additional tax of $1,049, or a 21.2 percent increase.
Clinton talks about fairness. Is this 21.2 percent increase in taxes fair to these people who have no way to effectively recoup this additional $1,049?
Furthermore, these people already paid Social Security taxes on their full earnings during their working years. This is double taxation.
The fair solution is simple. The government should return Social Security benefits tax-free up to the point of their already taxed contributions. Additional benefits beyond should be taxed at 100 percent.
What right does Clinton have in characterizing a retired couple with $32,000 income as "wealthy?"
The effect of the proposed action is to further divide this country. ROGER and HELEN KOEHLINGER HUDDLESTON

by Archana Subramaniam by CNB