4 ms·

> I pay a far higher percentage of my income as tax to the society I live in than the people in the panama papers. Well you absolutely don't know that. And whi

by retube 11y ago

> I pay a far higher percentage of my income as tax to the society I live in than the people in the panama papers. Well you absolutely don't know that. And whilst no doubt some people _are_ avoiding tax, many are not. And btw overall the rich pay a far higher portion of their income in tax than the poor. In the UK for example the top 1% of earners account for 30% of the total tax take (up from 20% 10 years ago). The top 3,000 pay more than the 9m bottom.

dsharlet 11y ago
We absolutely do know that. Even without any aggressive tax avoidance schemes, if you have a significant investment income, you probably pay an effective ~15% tax rate [1] [2]. I can pretty much guarantee you that most of the people named are in this bucket. If you earn a salary that puts you in the literal 1%, you probably pay an effective tax rate of 30-50%. I don't know how low your income needs to get to reach a 15% tax rate on income, but it's really low. 1. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-... 2. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/0119/Unlocking-the-mystery-of-Romney-s-15-percent-tax-rate.-Yes-it-s-legal http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/0119/U...
- pc86 11y ago
  Since I graduated college my income has increased from ~$28k to over $100k. My effective tax rate has only increased. When I was earning in the mid $30k's it was about 4%. Last year was 12%. > I don't know how low your income needs to get to reach a 15% tax rate on income, but it's really low. I was below 15% in the low $70k range for sure. We'll see what it is this year.
TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
The top 3000 also benefit from a much greater percentage of the assets of the national economy than the millions at the bottom, so that seems entirely fair. Some people are so rich they don't even appear on the rich lists. I don't know how much tax they pay, but I suspect it isn't much. Generally, if you can literally fit the people who own most of the economic assets of a country into a small hall, you have a serious democratic deficit.
- sievebrain 11y ago
  How does that work? What assets are they benefiting from more than others? If you're in the top 3000 people by income in the UK, you get to ride the same crappy trains as everyone else, drive the same crappy roads (unless you try go everywhere by helicopter - hardly practical), get the same government services, have access to the same markets and the same products in those markets; how many companies produce luxury goods these days? Unless you're an idiot and buy diamond encrusted iPhones, the stuff in your house is going to be similar to other people's. You'll be eating similar meat, drinking the same water. You could collect rare art or something, but that's hardly a meaningful part of the national economy. The top 3000 get pretty similar benefits from the economy as everyone else, they just pay a lot more in absolute terms for the privilege.
  - gnaritas 11y ago
    > How does that work? What assets are they benefiting from more than others? Um you're confusing equal access with equal benefit... > you get to ride the same crappy trains as everyone else, drive the same crappy roads (unless you try go everywhere by helicopter - hardly practical), get the same government services, have access to the same markets and the same products in those markets Yea, except by being the super rich, you're benefiting far more from all those same crappy assets. Think about a rich person in retail.... their millions/billions depend on the existence of all those crappy roads to bring them customers and products to sell them. When said roads disappear, you both lose access to them, but the rich person loses far more as his access to customers also depends on those roads. Equal access and equal benefit are vastly different things. The rich benefit more from infrastructure than the poor because their businesses are built upon and depend upon them.
mikeash 11y ago
How much of the total income do the top 1% of earners account for? And when you say 30% of total taxes, is that all taxes or just some subset? In the US, it's extremely common to make such comments which only refer to income taxes, ignoring payroll and sales taxes which are regressive. I don't know if it's similar for UK figures, but it has left me wary.
- kspaans 11y ago
  UK figures get kind of messed up by NI (National Insurance). It's basically income tax + pension payments + etc. rolled up into one, but billed separately from "income tax". For most people it's around 8-12%.
Malarkey73 11y ago
That's wrong. The top 1% pay 30% of income tax. But this is only about a third of UK tax revenues. There is then NI, council taxes, property taxes, business taxes, VAT and duties. The poorly paid actually spend a much higher % of there income in tax than the top 1%. And their contribution has been rising as the income and wealth based taxes are cut and the consumption based taxes have risen. I don't blame you for thinking that is the case though as this canard has been pushed heavily by the UK press.

by retube 11y ago

dsharlet 11y ago

We absolutely do know that. Even without any aggressive tax avoidance schemes, if you have a significant investment income, you probably pay an effective ~15% tax rate [1] [2]. I can pretty much guarantee you that most of the people named are in this bucket. If you earn a salary that puts you in the literal 1%, you probably pay an effective tax rate of 30-50%. I don't know how low your income needs to get to reach a 15% tax rate on income, but it's really low. 1. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-... 2. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/0119/Unlocking-the-mystery-of-Romney-s-15-percent-tax-rate.-Yes-it-s-legal http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/0119/U...

pc86 11y ago
Since I graduated college my income has increased from ~$28k to over $100k. My effective tax rate has only increased. When I was earning in the mid $30k's it was about 4%. Last year was 12%. > I don't know how low your income needs to get to reach a 15% tax rate on income, but it's really low. I was below 15% in the low $70k range for sure. We'll see what it is this year.

TheOtherHobbes 11y ago

The top 3000 also benefit from a much greater percentage of the assets of the national economy than the millions at the bottom, so that seems entirely fair. Some people are so rich they don't even appear on the rich lists. I don't know how much tax they pay, but I suspect it isn't much. Generally, if you can literally fit the people who own most of the economic assets of a country into a small hall, you have a serious democratic deficit.

sievebrain 11y ago
How does that work? What assets are they benefiting from more than others? If you're in the top 3000 people by income in the UK, you get to ride the same crappy trains as everyone else, drive the same crappy roads (unless you try go everywhere by helicopter - hardly practical), get the same government services, have access to the same markets and the same products in those markets; how many companies produce luxury goods these days? Unless you're an idiot and buy diamond encrusted iPhones, the stuff in your house is going to be similar to other people's. You'll be eating similar meat, drinking the same water. You could collect rare art or something, but that's hardly a meaningful part of the national economy. The top 3000 get pretty similar benefits from the economy as everyone else, they just pay a lot more in absolute terms for the privilege.
- gnaritas 11y ago
  > How does that work? What assets are they benefiting from more than others? Um you're confusing equal access with equal benefit... > you get to ride the same crappy trains as everyone else, drive the same crappy roads (unless you try go everywhere by helicopter - hardly practical), get the same government services, have access to the same markets and the same products in those markets Yea, except by being the super rich, you're benefiting far more from all those same crappy assets. Think about a rich person in retail.... their millions/billions depend on the existence of all those crappy roads to bring them customers and products to sell them. When said roads disappear, you both lose access to them, but the rich person loses far more as his access to customers also depends on those roads. Equal access and equal benefit are vastly different things. The rich benefit more from infrastructure than the poor because their businesses are built upon and depend upon them.

mikeash 11y ago

How much of the total income do the top 1% of earners account for? And when you say 30% of total taxes, is that all taxes or just some subset? In the US, it's extremely common to make such comments which only refer to income taxes, ignoring payroll and sales taxes which are regressive. I don't know if it's similar for UK figures, but it has left me wary.

kspaans 11y ago
UK figures get kind of messed up by NI (National Insurance). It's basically income tax + pension payments + etc. rolled up into one, but billed separately from "income tax". For most people it's around 8-12%.

Malarkey73 11y ago

That's wrong. The top 1% pay 30% of income tax. But this is only about a third of UK tax revenues. There is then NI, council taxes, property taxes, business taxes, VAT and duties. The poorly paid actually spend a much higher % of there income in tax than the top 1%. And their contribution has been rising as the income and wealth based taxes are cut and the consumption based taxes have risen. I don't blame you for thinking that is the case though as this canard has been pushed heavily by the UK press.