6 ms·

In the US, the highest marginal tax rate for individuals was 70% as recently as 1981. It was 92% in 1952. Today it's 37%. So it's really the other way around —

by pavlov 4y ago

In the US, the highest marginal tax rate for individuals was 70% as recently as 1981. It was 92% in 1952. Today it's 37%. So it's really the other way around — taxes have never been as low as now in recent history.

jean_tta 4y ago
It's really tricky to compare marginal rates like that. Has the definition of taxable income changed over time? How many people were actually taxed at those marginal rates? And so on.
- bena 4y ago
  You didn't bother to interrogate the other poster on these aspects. Why is it only tricky when looking at the evidence against the claim?
  - jean_tta 4y ago
    It would be tricky whatever the claim
mantas 4y ago
What about tax for a median citizen?
- pavlov 4y ago
  I don’t know. It’s pretty difficult to compare when the median citizen’s circumstances have also changed so much. But in the context of reality’s absurdity reaching escape velocity from parody, it seems fitting that the rich barely pay taxes anymore and are seeking immortality cures like Thiel does. Death and taxes are the postmodern libertarian’s greatest enemies.
ekianjo 4y ago
Taking extremes is a strawman. What matters is what most people pay.
- eesmith 4y ago
  "Average federal tax rates for all households, by comprehensive household income quintile. 1979 to 2018" at https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-averag... "Average Total Federal Tax Rate (percent)" is lower for every percentile from 1979 to 2018. Year 1979 2018 Lowest Quintile 9.3 0.0 Second Quintile 15.0 8.1 Middle Quintile 19.1 12.8 Fourth Quintile 21.7 16.7 Highest Quintile 27.1 24.4 All Quintiles 22.4 19.3 81st - 90th Percentiles 23.6 20.0 91st - 95th Percentiles 25.2 21.9 96th - 99th Percentiles 27.1 24.2 Top 1% 35.1 30.2 So is "Average Individual Income Tax Rate (percent)" Year 1979 2018 Lowest Quintile -0.2 -12.0 Second Quintile 4.1 -2.1 Middle Quintile 7.4 2.2 Fourth Quintile 10.1 5.9 Highest Quintile 15.9 15.4 All Quintiles 11.1 9.4 81st - 90th Percentiles 12.3 9.0 91st - 95th Percentiles 14.1 11.4 96th - 99th Percentiles 16.8 15.5 Top 1% 22.6 23.5 That makes it really hard to accept your claim that "Taxes have never been as high as now in recent history." Now, sure, there are state taxes, and sales taxes, and payroll taxes, and all sorts of other taxes. Still, where do you get the numbers to back your statement that after 40+ years of Reaganism and unending legislative attempts to lower taxes, that the numbers now are higher than ever before?
  - areyousure 4y ago
    In case anyone was curious, United States federal tax receipts were $463 billion in FY1979 and $3.33 trillion in FY2018, a growth of a factor of ~7.2 = ~5.2%/year. The population has grown by a factor of ~1.44 = ~0.95%/year and the effect of inflation has been a factor of ~3.63 = ~3.36%/year, which multiply together to a factor of ~5.2 = ~4.33%/year. The receipts grew faster by a factor of ~1.38 = 0.82%/year. This calculation does not consider the growth of expenditures specifically (as opposed to receipts) and similarly does not consider the growth of GDP (as opposed to inflation).
Dracophoenix 4y ago
In 1952, there were so many carveouts and exemptions that few individuals payed the actual 92%. With fastidious accounting, one's personal tax liability could be zero even if one qualified for the highest income bracket. This was the case until 1970 following Congress's invention and institution of the Alternative Minimum Tax. And while 1981 wasn't the most friendly year for low income taxes, increased globalization meant easier opportunities to set up overseas tax structures for the purpose of reducing one's overall tax burden (what's commonly referred to as tax "avoidance"). To make the claim of highest or lowest tax year for the highest income bracket between 1913 and today is impossible to make without accounting for reductions available in the given year.
sumtechguy 4y ago
That is US federal taxes. Now go grab your check and see how much you are paying in taxes that are not called that. Then remember you also pay taxes when you buy things too. Also remember your must carry insurance (3 of those). Also in some cases just for owning something. Plus state and local. My theory is We did not really lower taxes that much. We just itemized the bill to make it look smaller.
- guhidalg 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - bena 4y ago
    Yes, it is tiring when someone posts something with absolutely no evidence is taken at face value as truth. But when someone offers evidence to the contrary, it gets argued to death. "What are taxes?" "Insurance is a type of tax." "Sales tax counts now." None of these people are making the same arguments to the poster who offered nothing but a claim. Because "of course it's true, everyone knows it". Well, everyone is quite capable of being wrong. As those self-same people will happily tell us when it's time to enact some very mild preventative measures for the health and safety of the country that the vast majority of health professionals recommend.
  - sumtechguy 4y ago
    22 + 12 + 3 + 5 + 10 + 7 Those are my percentages of 'tax/insurance'. Which contains must carry insurance and called by the supreme court as a tax as argued by the DoJ. Three of them contain 'hidden' taxes or as your boss's accountant puts it, 'your total compensation'. That is about ~60% of my incoming going towards 'taxes'. That is just for me where I live and my income level. I also am leaving out some others. In some states that number is more along the lines of 70-75% of your total income. We also play games with the Laffer curve so it is harder for anyone to really know what is going on. My argument is we itemized the bill. All of the individual items look lower. Because we broke them out. The whole number is about the same. I would argue that some are too low for our spend rate but that is a different argument.

by pavlov 4y ago

jean_tta 4y ago

It's really tricky to compare marginal rates like that. Has the definition of taxable income changed over time? How many people were actually taxed at those marginal rates? And so on.

bena 4y ago
You didn't bother to interrogate the other poster on these aspects. Why is it only tricky when looking at the evidence against the claim?
- jean_tta 4y ago
  It would be tricky whatever the claim

mantas 4y ago

What about tax for a median citizen?

pavlov 4y ago
I don’t know. It’s pretty difficult to compare when the median citizen’s circumstances have also changed so much. But in the context of reality’s absurdity reaching escape velocity from parody, it seems fitting that the rich barely pay taxes anymore and are seeking immortality cures like Thiel does. Death and taxes are the postmodern libertarian’s greatest enemies.

ekianjo 4y ago

Taking extremes is a strawman. What matters is what most people pay.

eesmith 4y ago
"Average federal tax rates for all households, by comprehensive household income quintile. 1979 to 2018" at https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-average-federal-tax-rates-all-households https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-averag... "Average Total Federal Tax Rate (percent)" is lower for every percentile from 1979 to 2018. Year 1979 2018 Lowest Quintile 9.3 0.0 Second Quintile 15.0 8.1 Middle Quintile 19.1 12.8 Fourth Quintile 21.7 16.7 Highest Quintile 27.1 24.4 All Quintiles 22.4 19.3 81st - 90th Percentiles 23.6 20.0 91st - 95th Percentiles 25.2 21.9 96th - 99th Percentiles 27.1 24.2 Top 1% 35.1 30.2 So is "Average Individual Income Tax Rate (percent)" Year 1979 2018 Lowest Quintile -0.2 -12.0 Second Quintile 4.1 -2.1 Middle Quintile 7.4 2.2 Fourth Quintile 10.1 5.9 Highest Quintile 15.9 15.4 All Quintiles 11.1 9.4 81st - 90th Percentiles 12.3 9.0 91st - 95th Percentiles 14.1 11.4 96th - 99th Percentiles 16.8 15.5 Top 1% 22.6 23.5 That makes it really hard to accept your claim that "Taxes have never been as high as now in recent history." Now, sure, there are state taxes, and sales taxes, and payroll taxes, and all sorts of other taxes. Still, where do you get the numbers to back your statement that after 40+ years of Reaganism and unending legislative attempts to lower taxes, that the numbers now are higher than ever before?
- areyousure 4y ago
  In case anyone was curious, United States federal tax receipts were $463 billion in FY1979 and $3.33 trillion in FY2018, a growth of a factor of ~7.2 = ~5.2%/year. The population has grown by a factor of ~1.44 = ~0.95%/year and the effect of inflation has been a factor of ~3.63 = ~3.36%/year, which multiply together to a factor of ~5.2 = ~4.33%/year. The receipts grew faster by a factor of ~1.38 = 0.82%/year. This calculation does not consider the growth of expenditures specifically (as opposed to receipts) and similarly does not consider the growth of GDP (as opposed to inflation).

Dracophoenix 4y ago

In 1952, there were so many carveouts and exemptions that few individuals payed the actual 92%. With fastidious accounting, one's personal tax liability could be zero even if one qualified for the highest income bracket. This was the case until 1970 following Congress's invention and institution of the Alternative Minimum Tax. And while 1981 wasn't the most friendly year for low income taxes, increased globalization meant easier opportunities to set up overseas tax structures for the purpose of reducing one's overall tax burden (what's commonly referred to as tax "avoidance"). To make the claim of highest or lowest tax year for the highest income bracket between 1913 and today is impossible to make without accounting for reductions available in the given year.

sumtechguy 4y ago

That is US federal taxes. Now go grab your check and see how much you are paying in taxes that are not called that. Then remember you also pay taxes when you buy things too. Also remember your must carry insurance (3 of those). Also in some cases just for owning something. Plus state and local. My theory is We did not really lower taxes that much. We just itemized the bill to make it look smaller.

guhidalg 4y ago
[flagged]
- bena 4y ago
  Yes, it is tiring when someone posts something with absolutely no evidence is taken at face value as truth. But when someone offers evidence to the contrary, it gets argued to death. "What are taxes?" "Insurance is a type of tax." "Sales tax counts now." None of these people are making the same arguments to the poster who offered nothing but a claim. Because "of course it's true, everyone knows it". Well, everyone is quite capable of being wrong. As those self-same people will happily tell us when it's time to enact some very mild preventative measures for the health and safety of the country that the vast majority of health professionals recommend.
- sumtechguy 4y ago
  22 + 12 + 3 + 5 + 10 + 7 Those are my percentages of 'tax/insurance'. Which contains must carry insurance and called by the supreme court as a tax as argued by the DoJ. Three of them contain 'hidden' taxes or as your boss's accountant puts it, 'your total compensation'. That is about ~60% of my incoming going towards 'taxes'. That is just for me where I live and my income level. I also am leaving out some others. In some states that number is more along the lines of 70-75% of your total income. We also play games with the Laffer curve so it is harder for anyone to really know what is going on. My argument is we itemized the bill. All of the individual items look lower. Because we broke them out. The whole number is about the same. I would argue that some are too low for our spend rate but that is a different argument.