3 ms·

That is not what progressive taxation means, by definition. When lower income earners pay a higher proportion of their income than higher income earners, that i

• Consultant32452 7y ago
  We're talking about the federal income tax, which is the example given in that article of a progressive tax. The net result of our particular progressive income tax system is nearly half the country pays no income tax. I don't have a problem with that. I believe every reasonable voter understands that when a tax cut comes, it doesn't really benefit the people who aren't paying the tax to begin with.
  • notabee 7y ago
    If the wealthiest are de facto not paying as much tax, proportionally, as the middle or poorest classes, then federal income tax is not truly progressive. It has been increasingly regressive since the peak marginal rates back in the 1950s. This includes the use of numerous loop holes in the tax code to avoid what should otherwise be a large tax, and those primarily benefit the wealthy. The overall tax burden is what counts. For instance, some states do not have income tax for anyone, but they get much of their revenue from sales tax. Sales tax is regressive because the wealthy spend a smaller proportion of their money on sales tax than those who live paycheck to paycheck.