4 ms·
> Because income taxes are generally progressive Except that assumption is wrong. State taxes are typically not progressive, even though they should be. The la
by quadrangle 9y ago
> Because income taxes are generally progressive
Except that assumption is wrong. State taxes are typically not progressive, even though they should be. The lack of progressive brackets at the state level is one of the sources of biggest economic injustice in our tax system in this country.
- tomjakubowski 9y agohttps://taxfoundation.org/state-individual-income-tax-rates-brackets-2017/ https://taxfoundation.org/state-individual-income-tax-rates-... Forty-three states levy individual income taxes. Forty-one tax wage and salary income, while two states—New Hampshire and Tennessee—exclusively tax dividend and interest income. Seven states levy no income tax at all. Of those states taxing wages, eight have single-rate tax structures, with one rate applying to all taxable income. Conversely, 33 states levy graduated-rate income taxes, with the number of brackets varying widely by state. California and Missouri each have ten brackets, the most in the country. Some states have absurdly narrow banding in their brackets, "Missouri taxpayers reach the state’s tenth and highest bracket at $9,072 in annual income". Alabama's highest bracket starts at $3,000 for single filers.
- quadrangle 9y agoThanks for adding those details. Some brackets are absurd not only in the top being very low income level but the difference in rates being negligible. Oregon has 4 brackets but they are 5%, 7%, 9%, and 9.9%. But the 9% kicks in at $8400, so even those at poverty-level incomes are paying that high. The fact that the next bracket starts at $125,000 would be notable if the jump weren't so pathetic. But the extra less than 1%? Come on… absurd. This does NOT count as progressive taxation by any real measure.