Right. Because what we do is we cap the payroll at $120,000. And so it ends up being $12,000 an employer would pay. But when I was speaking of someone with 500 employees, they would pay $21,000 salary, they pay 5.25, 5¼ percent of payroll. It gets up to, if they're making $83,000 on average, and that would be quite a company, then they would be paying the 10 percent rate. And the key is that when we drafted this legislation, we had the input of private foundations and experts. But in the end, this still is an estimate of what we think brings in the revenue needed to provide the services. And the challenges you just don't know until you get more into it. That's why the hearings are so necessary.
Christopher Shays: “Right. Because what we do is we cap the payroll at $120,000. And so it ends up being $12,000 an employer would pay. But…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of payroll caps and revenue estimates in proposed legislation.
Share
More from Christopher Shays
I rise in support today of H.R. 6003, the Passenger Rail Investment Improvement Act, because we can't afford our Nation's rail service to fail. Our economy depends on it, and the September 11 terrorist attacks made clear that our country…
Rather than focusing on destroying elements of the Syrian government forces and choosing sides in a truly brutal civil war, our focus should be on how do we get these chemical weapons out of Syria.
It's kind of a mouthful to hear this is a bipartisan bill when 42 amendments go to Democrats and 14 go to Republicans. That's one Republican amendment for every three Democratic amendments. But it's a bipartisan bill? It's kind of amazing…
The conclusion by the President and his administration and leaders on both sides of the aisle that the United States needs to take decisive military action with or without support from other countries would be a serious mistake with…





