Robert J. Samuelson is generally well-informed and sensible, which is odd given that he writes for The Washington Post and the insufferable Newsweek. But, in embracing the “Buffet Rule” shamelessly advanced by President Obama and his acolytes (The ‘Buffett Rule’ does damage to a good cause) Mr. Samuelson displays an alarming ignorance.

First to give credit where due, Samuelson does note that the President is using the issue of taxing the rich as a distraction from real national finance problems; that the rich do pay substantial taxes; and imposition would do little to raise any truly significant revenues or in any way limit government over-spending.

But, where he fails is in the notion that Mr. Buffett pays substantially all of his taxes at the 15% rate reserved for capital gains and dividends.  In fact, Mr. Buffett receives his income from distributions made after the corporation has recognizes profits and paid tax at the 35% corporate rate. Because Mr. Buffett is a substantial shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway his effect tax rate is about 43%! Ironically, if Mr. Buffett were to take a large salary and the corporation didn’t pay dividends, he be taxed at a lower effective rate! And, he could live extravagantly borrowing against his shares forever and pay NO income taxes at all.