So the rich do actually pay more taxes. MUCH more

[JEDI]

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2014/04/08/taxes-save-your-outrage/?source=cnn_bin

I keep hearing Mitt Romney's 15% tax rate, or Warren Buffett's 4% tax rate (ala deferred compensation).
and, yes, apparently those making $10M+ do pay less taxes than lower millionaries.

but for the other 99.4% of the population, the tax system is progressive.

 

[senseamp]

As expected from this sort of publication, it looks at income tax only, ignores regressive payroll and sales taxes.
And STILL regressive at the very top.

 

[nehalem256]

As expected from this sort of publication, it looks at income tax only, ignores regressive payroll and sales taxes.
And STILL regressive at the very top.

So then I assume you are in favor of eliminating Social Security. :hmm:

 

[Strk]

These topics are always a bit misleading. Yes, a family of four making around $50k doesn't really pay income tax, but say they own a home, they could easily be paying 10% of their income on property tax, among other things.

 

[senseamp]

So then I assume you are in favor of eliminating Social Security. :hmm:

I am in favor of funding it out of income taxes.

 

[zinfamous]

YAMisleadingGraphic

 

[Genx87]

As expected from this sort of publication, it looks at income tax only, ignores regressive payroll and sales taxes.
And STILL regressive at the very top.

So add payroll taxes to each column. Sales tax is difficult to track as everybody has different spending habits. But there also isn't a national sales tax so that is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Sea Ray]

As expected from this sort of publication, it looks at income tax only, ignores regressive payroll and sales taxes.
And STILL regressive at the very top.

Good point. If you include payroll taxes you'll see that the most heavily taxed American is the guy making about $100K who's in a 28% tax bracket and paying Social Security to a tune of a little more than 12%. Why is that guy the most heavily taxed in America today?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

The biggest issue is capital gains tax. If you look at the truly wealthy (the billionaires of this world), literally every one of them has massive wealth through their ownership stakes of prominent companies. They can draw a symbolic $1 salary and make billions through their investments, yet that investment income is taxed at a lower rate to "encourage investment" (as though wealthy people would withdraw all their money from investments if capital gains taxes were increased at the top end). If it's money people are earning and using to pay for their lifestyles, why should it be taxed differently if it's from selling labor than investing?

 

[kia75]

As expected from this sort of publication, it looks at income tax only, ignores regressive payroll and sales taxes.
And STILL regressive at the very top.

++

The problem is that it's rather easy to hide income. The majority of the extremely wealthy don't have an "income" they have "Capital Gains" which are taxed much less then income. This really targets the working rich (i.e. highly-paid actors and sports stars). Anyone who's truly rich knows many dodges to avoid earning income. Here is a list of accounting tricks extremely rich people use to avoid incomes

Remember, Mitt Romney paid 30% in Federal Income taxes when he was running for president and still managed only a 14% effective tax rate.

 

[ElFenix]

++

The problem is that it's rather easy to hide income. The majority of the extremely wealthy don't have an "income" they have "Capital Gains" which are taxed much less then income. This really targets the working rich (i.e. highly-paid actors and sports stars). Anyone who's truly rich knows many dodges to avoid earning income. Here is a list of accounting tricks extremely rich people use to avoid incomes

Remember, Mitt Romney paid 30% in Federal Income taxes when he was running for president and still managed only a 14% effective tax rate.

and that was only after voluntarily not taking deductions available to him

 

[postmortemIA]

do you have one where rich ppl pay much more in charity
leave better tips
support our economy?

 

[QuantumPion]

We don't have a wealth tax in this country, we have an income tax. So logically the super wealthy pay proportionally less taxes because once you're wealthy you no longer need a taxable income. If you want rich people to pay more taxes regardless of income level or source, replace all taxes with national sales tax ala the fair tax.

 

[bshole]

We don't have a wealth tax in this country, we have an income tax. So logically the super wealthy pay proportionally less taxes because once you're wealthy you no longer need a taxable income. If you want rich people to pay more taxes regardless of income level or source, replace all taxes with national sales tax ala the fair tax.

Screw that, tax them a Raping the Poor Tax. I figure it would be 2% of their entire estate yearly, followed by a 95% death tax.

 

[Zaap]

LOL! "This sort of publication...!!!" ..CNN.

Some people just kneejerk on auto-pilot.

Unless you post some chart showing all those dastardly rich people paying zero and the govt funding itself based on talking trillions of dollars from people who have no money (which of course makes perfect sense) then *anything* posted on this subject from any other source but batshitinsaneleft.com is going to be kneejerked as "NUH UH!!" by tax and spend sycophants.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

We don't have a wealth tax in this country, we have an income tax. So logically the super wealthy pay proportionally less taxes because once you're wealthy you no longer need a taxable income. If you want rich people to pay more taxes regardless of income level or source, replace all taxes with national sales tax ala the fair tax.

If you're truly in favor of equality in taxes, how would you feel about a 100% estate tax? After all, what's less fair than someone being rich through absolutely no work of their own, but because they were born to wealthy parents? The truly rich would still get around it of course (Sam Walton already involved his children in the business, so they'd still own enough shares to control the company in the event of his death, for example), but if we're after true equality, it should be based on individual merit, not family heritage.

Please note that I'm not actually in favor of a 100% estate tax, I'm just curious how the "fair tax" proponents feel about such a measure.

 

[Incorruptible]

do you have one where rich ppl pay much more in charity
leave better tips
support our economy?

I doubt it, way too many people just want to steal from the rich and attack them.

The tax system needs to be fixed by bringing in a flat tax.

 

[Zaap]

We don't have a wealth tax in this country, we have an income tax. So logically the super wealthy pay proportionally less taxes because once you're wealthy you no longer need a taxable income. If you want rich people to pay more taxes regardless of income level or source, replace all taxes with national sales tax ala the fair tax.

That sounds good to some, but the reality is that an ultra wealthy single person doesn't really have to go buy 500 toasters instead of just the one he needs, nor does he have to buy enough food for a family of 25 every time. And if you were able to tax his one toaster at an inflated rate vs the poor persons toaster, he'll simply bypass you and go do his toaster shopping outside your insane toaster-tax-for-rich people zone.

The idea that consumption always scales in proportion to income is a fantasy.

This whole "issue" is based on two fallacies of stupid people:
1. The fantasy that they are going to fund themselves via enslaving some ultra rich people to pay for everything (and that the ultra rich would.actually sit still and take it) and
2. The sycophantic belief that their precious govt. doesn't have enough money (infact perpetually so) and so must extract it by any means nessisary from those deemed to have "too much".

 

[OverVolt]

No one makes 10 million on income. They are taxed at capitals gains tax rates, which are 20% up from 15% not long ago.

 

[Zaap]

No one makes 10 million on income. They are taxed at capitals gains tax rates, which are 20% up from 15% not long ago.

Not true.
If it was a capital gain (from a stock or sale of property, then of course.) If its a sallary then no, that's not a capital gain. (I work for and with people who make salaries in excess of 10 mil.)

Of course those people are taking advantage of every tax break they can, but then so are you, me and anyone else that isn't a total idiot. But you don't get an automatic capital gain rate just because you have a gargantuan income.

 

[Sea Ray]

No one makes 10 million on income. They are taxed at capitals gains tax rates, which are 20% up from 15% not long ago.

That's gotta be news to many professional athletes

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Not true.
If it was a capital gain (from a stock or sale of property, then of course.) If its a sallary then no, that's not a capital gain. (I work for and with people who make salaries in excess of 10 mil.)

Of course those people are taking advantage of every tax break they can, but then so are you, me and anyone else that isn't a total idiot. But you don't get an automatic capital gain rate just because you have a gargantuan income.

No, but the vast majority of CEO compensation in this country comes in the form of stock options, and those aren't taxed the same as traditional income. Larry Ellison has had a symbolic salary of $1 for the past few years; how come he isn't starving in the street? Because along with that pittance of a base salary, he's collected over $60 million in stock options every year for the past few years (not to mention his original ownership stake of Oracle worth over $40 billion). When he chooses to sell off shares of stock, he won't be taxed on it that same as he would be if he were selling his labor. Why is that?

 

[spidey07]

No, but the vast majority of CEO compensation in this country comes in the form of stock options, and those aren't taxed the same as traditional income. Larry Ellison has had a symbolic salary of $1 for the past few years; how come he isn't starving in the street? Because along with that pittance of a base salary, he's collected over $60 million in stock options every year for the past few years (not to mention his original ownership stake of Oracle worth over $40 billion). When he chooses to sell off shares of stock, he won't be taxed on it that same as he would be if he were selling his labor. Why is that?

Non qualified options are taxed at regular income rates, not capital gains.

Stock options are also counted as income for alternative minimum tax.

So for all intents and purposes, yes they are taxed the same as traditional income.

 

[Lepton87]

One thing that have always puzzled me about America is how the rich can legally influence the policy makers and thus enforce lower taxes for themselves by political campaign donations. Doing the same thing in Europe is considered bribery. The rich still buy legislature but it's all done illicitly.

 

[MrPickins]

We don't have a wealth tax in this country, we have an income tax. So logically the super wealthy pay proportionally less taxes because once you're wealthy you no longer need a taxable income. If you want rich people to pay more taxes regardless of income level or source, replace all taxes with national sales tax ala the fair tax.

Sales tax is a regressive tax...