Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Thailand Expat AntRobertson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    34,415

    U.S. billionaires paid a lower tax rate than the worki

    For the first time in history, U.S. billionaires paid a lower tax rate than the working class last year



    By Christopher Ingraham



    Oct. 9, 2019 at 4:01 a.m. GMT+7



    A new book-length study on the tax burden of the ultrarich begins with a startling finding: In 2018, for the first time in history, America’s richest billionaires paid a lower effective tax rate than the working class.



    The Triumph of Injustice,” by economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman of the University of California at Berkeley, presents a first-of-its kind analysis of Americans’ effective tax rates since the 1960s. It finds that in 2018 the average effective tax rate paid by the richest 400 families in the country was 23 percent, a full percentage point lower than the 24.2 percent rate paid by the bottom half of American households.




    In 1980, by contrast, the 400 richest had an effective tax rate of 47 percent. In 1960, their tax rate was as high as 56 percent. The effective tax rate paid by the bottom 50 percent, by contrast, has changed little over time.

    AD





    The analysis differs from many other published estimates of tax burdens by encompassing the totality of taxes Americans pay: not just federal income taxes but also corporate taxes, as well as taxes paid at the state and local levels. It also includes the burden of about $250 billion of what Saez and Zucman call “indirect taxes,” such as licenses for motor vehicles and businesses.



    The analysis, which was the subject of a column in the New York Times on Monday, is also notable for the detailed breakdown of the tax burden of not just the top 1 percent but also the top 0.1 percent, the top 0.01 percent and the 400 richest households.

    The focus on the ultrarich is necessary, Saez and Zucman write, because those households control a disproportionate share of national wealth: The top 400 families have more wealth than the bottom 60 percent of households, while the top 0.1 percent own as much as the bottom 80 percent. The top 400 families are a “natural reference point,” Zucman says, because the IRS publishes information on the top 400 taxpayers as a group, and other sources, such as Forbes, track the fortunes of the 400 wealthiest Americans.




    The relatively small tax burden of the super-rich is the product of decades of choices made by American lawmakers, some deliberate, others the result of indecisiveness or inertia, Saez and Zucman say. Congress has repeatedly slashed top income tax rates, for instance, and cut taxes on capital gains and estates. Lawmakers have also failed to provide adequate funding for IRS enforcement efforts and allowed multinational companies to shelter their profits in low-tax countries.



    But the tipping point came in 2017, with the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. That bill, championed by President Trump and then-House Speaker Paul D. Ryan, was a windfall for the wealthy: It lowered the top income tax bracket and slashed the corporate tax rate.



    By 2018, according to Saez and Zucman, the rich were already enjoying the fruits of that legislation: The average effective tax rate paid by the top 0.1 percent of households dropped by 2.5 percentage points. The benefits the bill’s supporters promised — higher rates of growth and business investment and a shrinking deficit — have largely failed to materialize.


    Not all economists accept Saez and Zucman’s analysis. It is based in part on their previous work, along with French economist Thomas Piketty, on the distribution of wealth and income in American society. Other economists have generated estimates of that distribution that show smaller disparities between the country’s haves and have-nots. Saez, Zucman and Piketty have defended their research and maintain that their methods are the most accurate.



    On the question of tax burdens, Jason Furman, an economics professor at Harvard who chaired the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Barack Obama, noted that Saez and Zucman did not include refundable tax credits, such as the earned-income tax credit (EITC), in their analysis.



    The credit, which is intended to encourage low-income families to work, “is part of the tax code,” Furman said. A person who paid $1,000 in federal income taxes and then received a $1,500 credit would have a total federal tax burden of -$500, but Furman said that under Saez and Zucman’s analysis, that person would instead show a burden of $0. That result would make total tax burdens at the lower end of the income spectrum appear higher than they are.




    “The best estimates indicate that the tax system is progressive — with the rich paying a higher tax rate than everyone else,” Furman said.



    Zucman countered that his and Saez’s analysis considers the EITC and other credits like it as transfers of income, akin to food stamps or jobless benefits, rather than tax provisions.



    “If you start counting some transfers as negative taxes, it is not clear where to stop,” he said via email. “Do you treat the EITC as a negative tax? veterans’ benefits? medicaid? defense spending?... There’s no clear line and the results become arbitrary.”

    There is general agreement among economists, however, that the tax burden of the rich has fallen considerably in recent decades.

    “The rich definitely pay less in taxes than they did in the past and less than they should,” Furman said.



    The bulk of Saez and Zucman’s new book explores how that happened, and how the trend might be reversed.

  2. #2
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    18,910
    Well the US is an oligarchy so that is no surprise.

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:17 PM
    Posts
    12,344
    again the mass poor is more profitable in terms of tax than the very rich,

    sadly, the middle class pays for everyone

  4. #4
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    18,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    again the mass poor is more profitable in terms of tax than the very rich,
    Jeezus fuck you are a short sited moron.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    sadly, the middle class pays for everyone
    Precisely why it needs to be expanded by taxing the oligarchs.

  5. #5
    Thailand Expat
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:17 PM
    Posts
    12,344
    taxing the rich doesn't improve things, that's why it's more profitable to tax the middle class and the poor

    it's the same in every country,

    the real question is how much social benefit is returned to the poor or the middle class,

    in the US not so much, in Europe a little bit more

  6. #6
    Thailand Expat
    bsnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    18,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Dragonfly View Post
    taxing the rich doesn't improve things

  7. #7
    Thailand Expat
    VocalNeal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 02:20 PM
    Location
    Bangkok
    Posts
    11,298
    Maybe the US could emulate Switzerland( or is it Sweden ) where things like traffic fines are indexed to the offenders income or net worth.

    Would be a start.

  8. #8
    disturbance in the Turnip baldrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:45 PM
    Location
    Heidleberg
    Posts
    21,671
    ^there seems to be a wee bit of a problem finding tax returns in seppoland

  9. #9
    Your local I.Q. Monitor
    Hugh Cow's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Last Online
    Yesterday @ 09:29 AM
    Location
    Qld/Bangkok
    Posts
    2,333
    Nice to see the swamp has been drained

  10. #10
    Thailand Expat
    jamescollister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Last Online
    Today @ 04:22 PM
    Location
    Bunthrik Ubon
    Posts
    4,735
    Quote Originally Posted by VocalNeal View Post
    Maybe the US could emulate Switzerland( or is it Sweden ) where things like traffic fines are indexed to the offenders income or net worth.

    Would be a start.
    Was tried in the UK, think I was still still a cop at the time, problem was non payments of fines carry jail time.
    Joe Smith gets done for speeding, on the dole, no money, court gives a 10 pound fine, percentage of income, 2 hours jail time for non payment.
    Peter Smith is a high roller, fine on percentage of income, is 20,000 pounds, 6 months for the same offence.

    Higher courts through out the law, you can't put people in prison because they richer for the same offence.

    Law is suppurated to be equal on to all, for those who steal bread and sleep under bridges.

  11. #11
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:45 PM
    Posts
    61,222
    Quote Originally Posted by jamescollister View Post
    Was tried in the UK, think I was still still a cop at the time, problem was non payments of fines carry jail time.
    Joe Smith gets done for speeding, on the dole, no money, court gives a 10 pound fine, percentage of income, 2 hours jail time for non payment.
    Peter Smith is a high roller, fine on percentage of income, is 20,000 pounds, 6 months for the same offence.

    Higher courts through out the law, you can't put people in prison because they richer for the same offence.

    Law is suppurated to be equal on to all, for those who steal bread and sleep under bridges.
    The fines are means related.

    Not the jail time.

  12. #12
    Thailand Expat jabir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    8,814
    Quote Originally Posted by jamescollister View Post
    Was tried in the UK, think I was still still a cop at the time, problem was non payments of fines carry jail time.
    Joe Smith gets done for speeding, on the dole, no money, court gives a 10 pound fine, percentage of income, 2 hours jail time for non payment.
    Peter Smith is a high roller, fine on percentage of income, is 20,000 pounds, 6 months for the same offence.

    Higher courts through out the law, you can't put people in prison because they richer for the same offence.

    Law is suppurated to be equal on to all, for those who steal bread and sleep under bridges.
    Equality is a myth for the naive and the gullible.

    If the higher courts rule that you cannot put people in prison for the same offence because they are richer, how come they are silent when crims avoid jail time for the same offence because they are richer?

  13. #13
    Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Online
    14-10-2019 @ 12:32 PM
    Posts
    122
    And the top 400 riches and corporations are responsible for about 80% of the total revenue received by the IRS annually. Amazing how the hopelessly naïve cling to political myths.

  14. #14
    Thailand Expat AntRobertson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    34,415
    Quote Originally Posted by CalEden
    And the top 400 riches and corporations are responsible for about 80% of the total revenue received by the IRS annually
    Which even if true completely misses the point.

  15. #15
    Thailand Expat
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:17 PM
    Posts
    12,344
    indeed, the point is the middle class and the poor are getting fooked all time time, simply because they have the numbers

  16. #16
    Member
    harrybarracuda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:45 PM
    Posts
    61,222
    Quote Originally Posted by CalEden View Post
    And the top 400 riches and corporations are responsible for about 80% of the total revenue received by the IRS annually. Amazing how the hopelessly naïve cling to political myths.
    I suspect it's bollocks.

    https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/stat...all-households

    They certainly owe the most back taxes though.

    But...

    Instead of going after the wealthy, the IRS has been under fire for targeting lower-income taxpayers with audits – which the agency now says is partially because it is easier and can be accomplished by less-skilled employees.
    When questioned by Oregon Democrat Sen. Ron Wyden as to why a large proportion of lower-income taxpayers were being audited, IRS commissioner Charles Rettig admitted it is a much easier and less costly task when compared with auditing higher-income tax returns.
    https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/ir...xpayers-easier
    I suppose that particular IRS policy is no surprise with baldy orange cunto in charge.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •