5 ms·
Not sure where GP got his/her numbers, but the $3 to $1 ratio is way off. Maybe it was describing the marginal rate for additional collection of unpaid taxes? U
by evancox100 8y ago
Not sure where GP got his/her numbers, but the $3 to $1 ratio is way off. Maybe it was describing the marginal rate for additional collection of unpaid taxes? US federal income and payroll tax receipts for 2018 was approx $3,000 billion, while the IRS budget for 2018 was only $11.7 billion, a ratio of approx 256 to 1.
It makes sense that the rate at the margin would be much higher than the overall rate, you've already collected all the low-lying fruit, now you're going after the scofflaws trying to avoid paying anything.
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago> Not sure where GP got his/her numbers, but the $3 to $1 ratio is way off. Maybe it was describing the marginal rate for additional collection of unpaid taxes? US federal income and payroll tax receipts for 2018 was approx $3,000 billion, while the IRS budget for 2018 was only $11.7 billion, a ratio of approx 256 to 1. That's including all the taxes paid by people with unchallenged tax returns. That's basically just the cost of processing the checks. It's quite a lot more expensive to get money from someone who filed a fraudulent return and you have to do an audit to get them to pay. Especially when a lot of the audits you do won't turn up any real fraud.
- evancox100 8y agoYes, that's exactly what I said in the paragraph after that.