4 ms·

This comes up a lot in a discussion about taxes, and there's a big logical problem with it. We have a much higher wealth gap than those countries. So tax bur

This comes up a lot in a discussion about taxes, and there's a big logical problem with it. We have a much higher wealth gap than those countries. So tax burden as a percentage isn't a useful metric. If we had a healthier lower and middle class, they would be paying more in taxes, which would ease the burden on the wealthiest considerably. But our middle class is shrinking, and the rich are becoming extraordinarily rich. So of course their tax burden as a percentage of the whole is going to be more. The concern people have is about the taxes that individuals in the top brackets pay in relation to the middle and lower brackets, but also this acts as a proxy for concern about infrastructure, safety nets and an ever shrinking middle class.

rayiner 10y ago
> We have a much higher wealth gap than those countries. So tax burden as a percentage isn't a useful metric. Which is why I compared tax burden as a percentage of total taxes to income as a percentage of total income. In Sweden, the top 10% make roughly a quarter of the income and pay roughly a quarter of the taxes. In the U.S., they make about a third of the income, but pay almost half the taxes.
- michaelchisari 10y ago
  As pointed out above, though, top 10% is not a very useful metric.
  - dogma1138 10y ago
    Are the bottom 10% a better statistic? In the UK the bottom 10% pays 43% of the tax burden, many of them do not pay income tax at all. This is what you get when you have both direct and indirect taxes, income tax in the UK is only 29% of the total Tax Revenue corporate tax revenue is on the other hand only 8%, capital gains taxes are <1% of total tax revenue while things like VAT ~15%, National Insurance at ~19%, Fuel (both gas and heating) and Local taxes at 5% suck the poor, the working, and the middle classes dry. People always claim Europe this Europe that look at how well they tax the rich, well sorry but they aren't taxing the rich well, and the European taxation system isn't progressive it's regressive. The majority of the tax revenue in virtually every EU country does not come from progressive taxation, it doesn't come from taxing the rich via capital gains or corporations it's done by taxing nearly every item you buy and every service you use at a flat percent that doesn't cares if you are rich or not.
    - nicky0 10y ago
      Bottom 10% pays 43% of tax burden - are you sure? That doesn't sound like it can possibly be right.
      - dogma1138 10y ago
        My wording wasn't optimal, I meant to say that the tax burden on the bottom 10% is 43%, that's the percentage of income they lose to taxes while the top 10% only lose 35%. https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/unfair_and_unclear.pdf https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/unfair_...
    - jomamaxx 10y ago
      I think you meant to say - the top 10% pay 43% of the tax burden.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
dogma1138 10y ago
The US's "poor" have a higher purchasing power then the median income of not only the EU average but the rich EU member states. Income inequality means squat when your middle class has more wealth than some of the last decimal point percentiles in Europe. Europe doesn't have income equality it has income stagnation and it assures that through taxing both you and your employer not only that your income would be on average lower that your post tax income would be considerably lower. You can be making 100-150k $ in Europe and have almost no ability to accumulate wealth due to the taxation this is not equality this is enforced wealth caps. If you are old money or corporations on the other hand you enjoy some of the lowest corporate tax rates in the developed world as well as tax heavens and low capital gain taxes all from within the EU or one of its "territories".

rayiner 10y ago

> We have a much higher wealth gap than those countries. So tax burden as a percentage isn't a useful metric. Which is why I compared tax burden as a percentage of total taxes to income as a percentage of total income. In Sweden, the top 10% make roughly a quarter of the income and pay roughly a quarter of the taxes. In the U.S., they make about a third of the income, but pay almost half the taxes.

michaelchisari 10y ago
As pointed out above, though, top 10% is not a very useful metric.
- dogma1138 10y ago
  Are the bottom 10% a better statistic? In the UK the bottom 10% pays 43% of the tax burden, many of them do not pay income tax at all. This is what you get when you have both direct and indirect taxes, income tax in the UK is only 29% of the total Tax Revenue corporate tax revenue is on the other hand only 8%, capital gains taxes are <1% of total tax revenue while things like VAT ~15%, National Insurance at ~19%, Fuel (both gas and heating) and Local taxes at 5% suck the poor, the working, and the middle classes dry. People always claim Europe this Europe that look at how well they tax the rich, well sorry but they aren't taxing the rich well, and the European taxation system isn't progressive it's regressive. The majority of the tax revenue in virtually every EU country does not come from progressive taxation, it doesn't come from taxing the rich via capital gains or corporations it's done by taxing nearly every item you buy and every service you use at a flat percent that doesn't cares if you are rich or not.
  - nicky0 10y ago
    Bottom 10% pays 43% of tax burden - are you sure? That doesn't sound like it can possibly be right.
    - dogma1138 10y ago
      My wording wasn't optimal, I meant to say that the tax burden on the bottom 10% is 43%, that's the percentage of income they lose to taxes while the top 10% only lose 35%. https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/unfair_and_unclear.pdf https://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/unfair_...
  - jomamaxx 10y ago
    I think you meant to say - the top 10% pay 43% of the tax burden.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]

dogma1138 10y ago

The US's "poor" have a higher purchasing power then the median income of not only the EU average but the rich EU member states. Income inequality means squat when your middle class has more wealth than some of the last decimal point percentiles in Europe. Europe doesn't have income equality it has income stagnation and it assures that through taxing both you and your employer not only that your income would be on average lower that your post tax income would be considerably lower. You can be making 100-150k $ in Europe and have almost no ability to accumulate wealth due to the taxation this is not equality this is enforced wealth caps. If you are old money or corporations on the other hand you enjoy some of the lowest corporate tax rates in the developed world as well as tax heavens and low capital gain taxes all from within the EU or one of its "territories".