6 ms·

Large grain of salt required. But, at least they were honest enough to state (in the middle of the article), that the information on which this is based is sus

Large grain of salt required. But, at least they were honest enough to state (in the middle of the article), that the information on which this is based is suspect: "We do not know the identity of our source. We did not solicit the information they sent us. The source says they were motivated by our previous coverage of issues surrounding the IRS and tax enforcement, but we do not know for certain that is true. We have considered the possibility that information we have received could have come from a state actor hostile to American interests."

itsoktocry 5y ago
>Large grain of salt required. What exactly do I need to "take" with a large grain of salt? Have you been in seclusion for the past 20 years? I'm pretty sure we're at the point where the burden of proof is on the billionaires to demonstrate they aren't funnelling away their money, not vice versa.
- eplanit 5y ago
  Evidence isn't necessary for one who is already convinced. However, there is a lot that says that the 1% actually pay the vast majority of taxes collected: https://www.publishedreporter.com/2021/04/05/op-ed-top-1-income-earners-pay-majority-of-taxes-benefits-other-99-of-americans/ https://www.publishedreporter.com/2021/04/05/op-ed-top-1-inc... https://howmuch.net/articles/high-income-americans-pay-majority-of-federal-taxes https://howmuch.net/articles/high-income-americans-pay-major... https://taxfoundation.org/top-1-percent-pays-more-taxes-bottom-90-percent https://taxfoundation.org/top-1-percent-pays-more-taxes-bott...
  - Analemma_ 5y ago
    "The top earners pay the majority of tax already!" is a smoke and mirrors argument to try and distract you, especially when they've been collecting all the income gains. Consider that if there are income gains which go exclusively to the wealthy but the tax code stays the same, by definition they will end up paying an increasing percentage of total tax revenue, even though this situation does not mean their taxes need to be decreased - precisely the opposite.
  - jdlshore 5y ago
    The next article in the series states that the mass of citizens with equivalent wealth pay about 100x the tax. The billionaires may pay more tax individually, but they don’t pay a fair share, if that’s true. Given what we know about Trump’s taxes and what Buffett has been saying, I found it entirely believable.
  - mtberatwork 5y ago
    > Evidence isn't necessary for one who is already convinced. I suppose that cuts both ways then: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics/ https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics...
    - bpt3 5y ago
      That article fails to address a key point: the vast majority of those "regressive" taxes are really forced savings for retirement, where you get a return based on your contributions. FICA taxes are capped because the benefits are as well.
  - bpt3 5y ago
    > However, there is a lot that says that the 1% actually pay the vast majority of taxes collected: Yes, that's an argument against people who want Europe-style social programs while simultaneously making the US tax code even more progressive than it already is (it's generally considered the the most progressive in the world). It's true that the top 1% to pay most of the taxes, and it's also true that the top 0.1% or so pay a significantly lower tax rate than those in the income ranges just below that level.
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    > , there is a lot that says that the 1% actually pay the vast majority of taxes collected: What a strange argument. I will personally pay 95% of all taxes in the US if I somehow make me make 99% of all income. Which seems fairly equivalent to your point, except both of my numbers are slightly exaggerated.
    - bpt3 5y ago
      Right now, the top 20% pay a significantly higher share of the federal income tax collected than their share of income.
      - HWR_14 5y ago
        Now you're shifting the goalpost. You're revising it now to income taxes. It's most certainly not true of all taxes, and I don't even believe of all federal taxes.
        bpt3 5y ago
        I'm not shifting the goalposts, this conversation is about federal income taxes and every reference in the post you originally replied to is discussing federal income taxes. On top of that, the top 20% of income earners do pay a larger share of taxes overall than their share of revenue, even according to organizations advocating for higher taxes on the wealthy: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics/ https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics...
runjake 5y ago
OTOH, ProPublica reached out to Bezos, Musk, etc with this info and they essentially had no comment.
zepto 5y ago
> we do not know for certain that is true. We have considered the possibility that information we have received could have come from a state actor hostile to American interests If they have no way to verify or at least assure themselves that it isn’t this, then they have no business publishing it. Also, many of their statements are just lies in that context: E.g. We are disclosing the tax details of the richest Americans … Is a lie. “We are disclosing what an unknown source who could be a hostile foreign agent has told us are the tax details of the richest Americans.” Is true. It will be interesting to see whose secrets are included and whose are not. For example if they have Bloomberg’s details, do they have Trumps?
- dougmwne 5y ago
  They also state: "We have gone to considerable lengths to confirm that the information sent to us is accurate. We compared the tax data in our possession to other sources of the same information wherever we could find them, some of which were public (a tax return for a candidate for national office), others of which were private. In every instance we were able to check — involving tax filings by more than 50 separate people — the details provided to ProPublica matched the information from other sources."
  - zepto 5y ago
    Sure, but it’s likely that a state actor had this information too. Any credible attempt at deception would use as much corroboratable data as possible.
    - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
      I find it unlikely that even a state actor would have access to literally all the same private data that ProPublica has acquired over the years, and that they'd know what data ProPublica has and what can be safely manipulated.
      - dougmwne 5y ago
        Yes, state actors have a lot of resources and capabilities, but omniscience is not one of them.

itsoktocry 5y ago

>Large grain of salt required. What exactly do I need to "take" with a large grain of salt? Have you been in seclusion for the past 20 years? I'm pretty sure we're at the point where the burden of proof is on the billionaires to demonstrate they aren't funnelling away their money, not vice versa.

eplanit 5y ago
Evidence isn't necessary for one who is already convinced. However, there is a lot that says that the 1% actually pay the vast majority of taxes collected: https://www.publishedreporter.com/2021/04/05/op-ed-top-1-income-earners-pay-majority-of-taxes-benefits-other-99-of-americans/ https://www.publishedreporter.com/2021/04/05/op-ed-top-1-inc... https://howmuch.net/articles/high-income-americans-pay-majority-of-federal-taxes https://howmuch.net/articles/high-income-americans-pay-major... https://taxfoundation.org/top-1-percent-pays-more-taxes-bottom-90-percent https://taxfoundation.org/top-1-percent-pays-more-taxes-bott...
- Analemma_ 5y ago
  "The top earners pay the majority of tax already!" is a smoke and mirrors argument to try and distract you, especially when they've been collecting all the income gains. Consider that if there are income gains which go exclusively to the wealthy but the tax code stays the same, by definition they will end up paying an increasing percentage of total tax revenue, even though this situation does not mean their taxes need to be decreased - precisely the opposite.
- jdlshore 5y ago
  The next article in the series states that the mass of citizens with equivalent wealth pay about 100x the tax. The billionaires may pay more tax individually, but they don’t pay a fair share, if that’s true. Given what we know about Trump’s taxes and what Buffett has been saying, I found it entirely believable.
- mtberatwork 5y ago
  > Evidence isn't necessary for one who is already convinced. I suppose that cuts both ways then: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics/ https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics...
  - bpt3 5y ago
    That article fails to address a key point: the vast majority of those "regressive" taxes are really forced savings for retirement, where you get a return based on your contributions. FICA taxes are capped because the benefits are as well.
- bpt3 5y ago
  > However, there is a lot that says that the 1% actually pay the vast majority of taxes collected: Yes, that's an argument against people who want Europe-style social programs while simultaneously making the US tax code even more progressive than it already is (it's generally considered the the most progressive in the world). It's true that the top 1% to pay most of the taxes, and it's also true that the top 0.1% or so pay a significantly lower tax rate than those in the income ranges just below that level.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  > , there is a lot that says that the 1% actually pay the vast majority of taxes collected: What a strange argument. I will personally pay 95% of all taxes in the US if I somehow make me make 99% of all income. Which seems fairly equivalent to your point, except both of my numbers are slightly exaggerated.
  - bpt3 5y ago
    Right now, the top 20% pay a significantly higher share of the federal income tax collected than their share of income.
    - HWR_14 5y ago
      Now you're shifting the goalpost. You're revising it now to income taxes. It's most certainly not true of all taxes, and I don't even believe of all federal taxes.
      - bpt3 5y ago
        I'm not shifting the goalposts, this conversation is about federal income taxes and every reference in the post you originally replied to is discussing federal income taxes. On top of that, the top 20% of income earners do pay a larger share of taxes overall than their share of revenue, even according to organizations advocating for higher taxes on the wealthy: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics/ https://theintercept.com/2019/04/13/tax-day-taxes-statistics...

runjake 5y ago

OTOH, ProPublica reached out to Bezos, Musk, etc with this info and they essentially had no comment.

zepto 5y ago

> we do not know for certain that is true. We have considered the possibility that information we have received could have come from a state actor hostile to American interests If they have no way to verify or at least assure themselves that it isn’t this, then they have no business publishing it. Also, many of their statements are just lies in that context: E.g. We are disclosing the tax details of the richest Americans … Is a lie. “We are disclosing what an unknown source who could be a hostile foreign agent has told us are the tax details of the richest Americans.” Is true. It will be interesting to see whose secrets are included and whose are not. For example if they have Bloomberg’s details, do they have Trumps?

dougmwne 5y ago
They also state: "We have gone to considerable lengths to confirm that the information sent to us is accurate. We compared the tax data in our possession to other sources of the same information wherever we could find them, some of which were public (a tax return for a candidate for national office), others of which were private. In every instance we were able to check — involving tax filings by more than 50 separate people — the details provided to ProPublica matched the information from other sources."
- zepto 5y ago
  Sure, but it’s likely that a state actor had this information too. Any credible attempt at deception would use as much corroboratable data as possible.
  - Wowfunhappy 5y ago
    I find it unlikely that even a state actor would have access to literally all the same private data that ProPublica has acquired over the years, and that they'd know what data ProPublica has and what can be safely manipulated.
    - dougmwne 5y ago
      Yes, state actors have a lot of resources and capabilities, but omniscience is not one of them.