Pawlenty’s High-End Tax Cuts Dwarf Even Those of President Bush

June 15, 2011 at 11:32 am

The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center has analyzed the new tax plan of Tim Pawlenty. Using its data, we contrast the Pawlenty plan with President Bush’s tax cuts.

Under both plans, the benefits flow more to those at the top. The difference is that they flow even more heavily to that group under the Pawlenty plan.

Specifically, in 2013 the Pawlenty plan would give people in the top one-tenth of 1 percent on the income scale (i.e., people with incomes above $2.7 million) an average annual tax cut of $1.8 million — which is more than four times what they got last year from the Bush tax cuts.

Note: The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a non-partisan organization and takes no position on political candidates.

Print Friendly

More About Chuck Marr

Chuck Marr

Chuck Marr is the Director of Federal Tax Policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Full bio | Blog Archive | Research archive at

2 Comments Add Yours ↓

Comments are listed in reverse chronological order.

  1. 1

    It would be useful to see the percentage of the tax cuts allocated to each area. The current graphic makes it look as if Pawlenty is also doing more for the lowest-income and median voters–which I doubt is true on a percentage-of-tax-deferment allocation.

Your Comment

Comment Policy:

Thank you for joining the conversation about important policy issues. Comments are limited to 1,500 characters and are subject to approval and moderation. We reserve the right to remove comments that:

  • are injurious, defamatory, profane, off-topic or inappropriate;
  • contain personal attacks or racist, sexist, homophobic, or other slurs;
  • solicit and/or advertise for personal blogs and websites or to sell products or services;
  • may infringe the copyright or intellectual property rights of others or other applicable laws or regulations; or
  • are otherwise inconsistent with the goals of this blog.

Posted comments do not necessarily represent the views of the CBPP and do not constitute official endorsement by CBPP. Please note that comments will be approved during the Center's business hours. If you have questions, please contact

9 − = five

 characters available