5 ms·

> The top 1% are indeed audited at about the same rate as the working poor, but they also pay higher taxes than everyone else. But they don't. That's the poin

> The top 1% are indeed audited at about the same rate as the working poor, but they also pay higher taxes than everyone else. But they don't. That's the point. Your conventional wisdom is wrong. The USA has a large number of regressive taxes, which tax the poor more heavily than the rich. These have been steadily expanded. And it has one, only one, progressive tax - the federal (not state) income tax - which has been steadily made less progressive in recent years to the point where overall taxation is at best flat and more likely slightly regressive.

kevinwang 7y ago
The actual article contains charts that seem to support the claim that the top 1% pay higher taxes
- zzzeek 7y ago
  barely, and the point of the chart is that over the past 70 years the gap has gone from being being very progressive to almost flat or regressive based on income level.
- dv_dt 7y ago
  I think there is a key language ambiguity here. Whatever your position on what the rich should pay, there is a question of what is being paid as a proportional rate of total income, vs what is being paid in absolute terms. Confounding that difference are also issues of income tax rate, vs capital gains rates and wealth vs income. The wealthy pay in absolute terms, more dollars, but they pay a lower rate than others.
  - joshuamorton 7y ago
    No, according to this article, the 1% continue to pay a larger percent of their income. It is only once you move into the 1% of the 1% that the rate again decreases.
    - mistermann 7y ago
      Total income, or "earned income" from a tax perspective? There's so many technically correct but misleading definitions it's very hard to know what the "real truth" is in these discussions.
    - secabeen 7y ago
      All of this is true, but it's beside the point. The perception in America is that the rich pay more in taxes as a percentage of their income than the middle class do. The marginal tax rates imply that, with middle class people paying either the 22% or 24% marginal rate, and rich people paying at at 35%+ rate. Thus, people think that we have a progressive system. However, if you look at the data in this chart, you can see it's not true any longer. The actual combined rate paid by most Americans is between 22-28%. (It's on the lower end for the poorest Americans, and for the wealthiest as well) Fundamentally, the total taxes paid is flat. I think most people think that the taxes paid chart looks like what it did in the late 70s/early 80s. In that chart, the poorest Americans pay about 20%, and the richest about 45%. That's where we should be, instead of where we are now.
      - refurb 7y ago
        The percent of all taxes paid by the bottom 50% has been going down for the last few decades.
        secabeen 7y ago
        Is that the case if you include payroll taxes? (We could include sales tax too, but those are usually state and local, so we'd then have to add state income tax, and possibly property tax, and that would get complicated)
        ekimekim 7y ago
        That's an indicator of wealth inequality, no? The top 50% are paying less as a % of their income, but because their income is rising faster (relative to the bottom 50%) than their total tax rate is falling, they end up paying more in total, mainly because the bottom 50% have less to give.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
    > The wealthy pay in absolute terms, more dollars, but they pay a lower rate than others. There’s at least one perspective where this makes sense: Everyone expects a discount on goods and services when purchased in bulk. Why should tax be abt different?
    - Jweb_Guru 7y ago
      Paying taxes is not "buying the government" and paying higher taxes is not buying "more" of it, or buying it in bulk. For starters: bulk rates are lower, in part, as an incentive to get people to buy more of a product at once. Since paying taxes is (ostensibly) mandatory, this doesn't apply.
      - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
        Ostensibly being the key word here as there appears to be some scenarios where none of those things are true.
- mcguire 7y ago
  2003: The 99.999%ile (?) pays the highest taxes; the Top 400 and the rest pay marginally lower. 2011: The rate is mostly flat, especially above the 80-90%ile. The 99.99%ile pays the highest. 2018: The 99.99%ile pays the highest, the Top 400 appear to be paying a lower rate than almost anyone. Somewhere between 2003 and 2011, the 0-10%ile began paying more than the immediately higher percentiles.
darawk 7y ago
> The USA has a large number of regressive taxes, which tax the poor more heavily than the rich. These have been steadily expanded. And it has one, only one, progressive tax - the federal (not state) income tax - which has been steadily made less progressive in recent years to the point where overall taxation is at best flat and more likely slightly regressive. Citation needed. Saying the US has "only one" progressive tax is a bit ridiculous. The income tax is by far the largest tax almost anyone pays. It's certainly the largest tax I, and everyone I know, pay. And that only increases as you get richer.
- rdl 7y ago
  Most of the bottom ~50% or so of households pay no (or negative) federal income tax, due to low income, EITC, various offsets for children, etc.
  - altoidaltoid 7y ago
    At the lower end, you need to factor in payroll taxes as well ( FICA )
    - guelo 7y ago
      Also things like sales taxes or even DMV fees can be significant percentages of lower income's taxes.
- 0x0aff374668 7y ago
  > And that only increases as you get richer. Correct. Which is why income is such a miniscule fraction of the 1% (and above's) earnings. It's all out there in the open. Pick any CEO in the top-100 corporations. Look at their income. Then look at their overall earnings. The bulk falls under capital gains due to stock. Then there is deferred compensation, where taxes are lowered even MORE if you agree to postpone being paid. There are so many clever ways for the very very rich to avoid taxes it boggles the mind. So go ahead and keep talking about the income tax, they've got you distracted.

kevinwang 7y ago

The actual article contains charts that seem to support the claim that the top 1% pay higher taxes

zzzeek 7y ago
barely, and the point of the chart is that over the past 70 years the gap has gone from being being very progressive to almost flat or regressive based on income level.
dv_dt 7y ago
I think there is a key language ambiguity here. Whatever your position on what the rich should pay, there is a question of what is being paid as a proportional rate of total income, vs what is being paid in absolute terms. Confounding that difference are also issues of income tax rate, vs capital gains rates and wealth vs income. The wealthy pay in absolute terms, more dollars, but they pay a lower rate than others.
- joshuamorton 7y ago
  No, according to this article, the 1% continue to pay a larger percent of their income. It is only once you move into the 1% of the 1% that the rate again decreases.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    Total income, or "earned income" from a tax perspective? There's so many technically correct but misleading definitions it's very hard to know what the "real truth" is in these discussions.
  - secabeen 7y ago
    All of this is true, but it's beside the point. The perception in America is that the rich pay more in taxes as a percentage of their income than the middle class do. The marginal tax rates imply that, with middle class people paying either the 22% or 24% marginal rate, and rich people paying at at 35%+ rate. Thus, people think that we have a progressive system. However, if you look at the data in this chart, you can see it's not true any longer. The actual combined rate paid by most Americans is between 22-28%. (It's on the lower end for the poorest Americans, and for the wealthiest as well) Fundamentally, the total taxes paid is flat. I think most people think that the taxes paid chart looks like what it did in the late 70s/early 80s. In that chart, the poorest Americans pay about 20%, and the richest about 45%. That's where we should be, instead of where we are now.
    - refurb 7y ago
      The percent of all taxes paid by the bottom 50% has been going down for the last few decades.
      - secabeen 7y ago
        Is that the case if you include payroll taxes? (We could include sales tax too, but those are usually state and local, so we'd then have to add state income tax, and possibly property tax, and that would get complicated)
      - ekimekim 7y ago
        That's an indicator of wealth inequality, no? The top 50% are paying less as a % of their income, but because their income is rising faster (relative to the bottom 50%) than their total tax rate is falling, they end up paying more in total, mainly because the bottom 50% have less to give.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  > The wealthy pay in absolute terms, more dollars, but they pay a lower rate than others. There’s at least one perspective where this makes sense: Everyone expects a discount on goods and services when purchased in bulk. Why should tax be abt different?
  - Jweb_Guru 7y ago
    Paying taxes is not "buying the government" and paying higher taxes is not buying "more" of it, or buying it in bulk. For starters: bulk rates are lower, in part, as an incentive to get people to buy more of a product at once. Since paying taxes is (ostensibly) mandatory, this doesn't apply.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
      Ostensibly being the key word here as there appears to be some scenarios where none of those things are true.
mcguire 7y ago
2003: The 99.999%ile (?) pays the highest taxes; the Top 400 and the rest pay marginally lower. 2011: The rate is mostly flat, especially above the 80-90%ile. The 99.99%ile pays the highest. 2018: The 99.99%ile pays the highest, the Top 400 appear to be paying a lower rate than almost anyone. Somewhere between 2003 and 2011, the 0-10%ile began paying more than the immediately higher percentiles.

darawk 7y ago

> The USA has a large number of regressive taxes, which tax the poor more heavily than the rich. These have been steadily expanded. And it has one, only one, progressive tax - the federal (not state) income tax - which has been steadily made less progressive in recent years to the point where overall taxation is at best flat and more likely slightly regressive. Citation needed. Saying the US has "only one" progressive tax is a bit ridiculous. The income tax is by far the largest tax almost anyone pays. It's certainly the largest tax I, and everyone I know, pay. And that only increases as you get richer.

rdl 7y ago
Most of the bottom ~50% or so of households pay no (or negative) federal income tax, due to low income, EITC, various offsets for children, etc.
- altoidaltoid 7y ago
  At the lower end, you need to factor in payroll taxes as well ( FICA )
  - guelo 7y ago
    Also things like sales taxes or even DMV fees can be significant percentages of lower income's taxes.
0x0aff374668 7y ago
> And that only increases as you get richer. Correct. Which is why income is such a miniscule fraction of the 1% (and above's) earnings. It's all out there in the open. Pick any CEO in the top-100 corporations. Look at their income. Then look at their overall earnings. The bulk falls under capital gains due to stock. Then there is deferred compensation, where taxes are lowered even MORE if you agree to postpone being paid. There are so many clever ways for the very very rich to avoid taxes it boggles the mind. So go ahead and keep talking about the income tax, they've got you distracted.