3 ms·
That contra articles is very deceiving. The cited data most certainly do not say that “Texans actually pay more in taxes than Californians do”. This is very muc
by xyzzyz 4y ago
That contra articles is very deceiving. The cited data most certainly do not say that “Texans actually pay more in taxes than Californians do”. This is very much false, so false and contrary to common knowledge in fact that you should have went back and asked yourself “wait, is it actually true, or is someone trying to pull a fast one on me?”.
Here is the crux of the issue: the graphs and the source do not say that the non-wealthy Texans actually pay more money in taxes. Instead, they contribute higher share of total tax revenue. This is not the same thing as actually paying more in taxes.
Imagine a state where every single residents pays exactly one penny in taxes. In that state, bottom 20% pay exactly 20% of the tax revenue, and top 1% pay only 1% of the tax revenue. By the article’s logic, in that state the non-wealthy residents would pay even more taxes than the ones in California. It is, of course, absurd.
You cannot look only at the shares in the revenues, you need to also look at the size of the revenues to judge. As it turns out, Texas pulls in around $8.6k per capita in state and local taxes, compared to California’s $13k. That means that even though middle 60% of Texans contribute 10% of the revenues, compared to 9% of revenues contributed by middle 60% of Californians, they actually pay a third less in taxes in actual dollars.
In short, the article is pure misinformation, deceiving people for political gain, typical for today’s media. Where are the fact checkers?
- scifibestfi 4y agoThat article and the OP are an example of gaslighting and motivated reasoning. "This claim is sloppy, but not this other one that confirms my bias". But really both are sloppy.
- tristor 4y agoIt's even worse than that, nearly the entire difference cited is based on property taxes but they use a property for comparison that doesn't exist in California, but does in Texas. As a percentage of home value, property taxes /are/ higher in Texas, but home values are also massively lower (1/3rd or less) in almost all of the state, which means that /actual taxes paid/ for property tax are nearly identical to sometimes less in Texas, /and/ because housing is cheaper, it's more affordable to actually own a home instead of renting forever at lower income quintiles. Anyone who actually looked at the data and concluded that living in California instead of Texas was a better financial deal for someone who is not a high income earner is either stupid or lying.
- gamblor956 4y agoDefinitely true. As a tax lawyer I've met plenty of Californians moving back to CA from TX because the promised land of tax salvation was actually more expensive, and plenty of Texans who moved to California excepting tax shock and were pleasantly surprised when their total tax bills were several thousands lower in CA. In addition to paying more in taxes in TX, they got less in government services for the taxes they did pay, insanely invasive government, and had to pay more for generally everything except beef (which is great if you love steak).
- xyzzyz 4y ago> and plenty of Texans who moved to California excepting tax shock and were pleasantly surprised when their total tax bills were several thousands lower in CA. Can you explain to me how is this possible? Like, an realistic example scenario.
- gamblor956 4y agoHousing in Austin is the same price as it is in the LA area but our property taxes are way lower in CA thanks to Prop 13, so even with state income tax you come out ahead in SoCal. This is true even with the SALT cap, though single income earners will not see as much of a benefit moving to CA. Also, the FUD about CA income taxes always ignores the calculation of tax liabilities in a progressive scheme, so the tax burden is always wildly overstated. OTOH, if you're willing to move to less nice parts of TX you will save money on taxes compared to CA. But you'll find out pretty quick why housing is cheaper there.
- wbsss4412 4y ago> Here is the crux of the issue: the graphs and the source do not say that the non-wealthy Texans actually pay more money in taxes. Instead, they contribute higher share of total tax revenue. Did we read the same article? Because that isn’t what it said, look at the graph again: https://i.redd.it/7pdcf4q65kg91.jpg https://i.redd.it/7pdcf4q65kg91.jpg Subtitle: total state and local taxes as a share of family income by income group