It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Middle-and low-income Americans are facing far higher state and local tax rates than the wealthy. In all, a comprehensive analysis by the nonpartisan Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy finds that the poorest 20 percent of households pay on average more than twice the effective state and local tax rate (10.9 percent) as the richest 1 percent of taxpayers (5.4 percent).
Of course, if you aren’t poor, you may be reading this and thinking that these trends have no real-world impact on your life. But think again: In September, Standard & Poor’s released a study showing that increasing economic inequality hurts economic growth and subsequently reduces public revenue. As important, the report found that the correlation between high inequality and low economic growth was highest in states that relied most heavily on regressive levies such as sales taxes. In other words, regressive state and local tax policies don’t just harm the poor—they end up harming entire economies.
Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid 68 Percent of Federal Income Taxes
Top earners are the main target of tax increases, but the federal income tax system is already highly progressive. The top 10 percent of income earners paid 68 percent of all federal income taxes in 2011 while earning 45 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 3 percent of income taxes but earned 12 percent of income.
In 2009, according to a memo from the Joint Committee on Taxation, a bi-partisan Congressional committee, only 49 percent of Americans owed money on their Federal income tax returns [source: PolitiFact]. So yes, it's true that more than half of all Americans paid no Federal income tax in the tax year 2009, and the number of people who did pay taxes was even lower -- 51 percent, not 53 percent. For tax year 2011, the non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimates that only 54 percent of Americans will pay Federal income tax.
In other words, regressive state and local tax policies don’t just harm the poor—they end up harming entire economies. So if altruism doesn’t prompt you to care about unfair tax rates and economic inequality, then it seems self-interest should.
originally posted by: AlaskanDad
Of course, if you aren’t poor, you may be reading this and thinking that these trends have no real-world impact on your life. But think again: In September, Standard & Poor’s released a study showing that increasing economic inequality hurts economic growth and subsequently reduces public revenue. As important, the report found that the correlation between high inequality and low economic growth was highest in states that relied most heavily on regressive levies such as sales taxes. In other words, regressive state and local tax policies don’t just harm the poor—they end up harming entire economies.
Peter uses the same resources as bill and his wife.
No he doesn't he uses more. He needs more electricity and water to run his business. Not to mention the resources that are used making the products he sells.
you missed andy...he runs a multi billion dollar company and uses loop holes to avoid tax....not only does he have offshore accounts to do this he ships the labor overseas further hurting the economy
The real problem with the taxation system is that companies have so many ways to avoid tax that the average people do not. On the one hand, they have the same rights as citizens except of course when taxation is due.
The biggest shark here are the multinational companies that get Govt grants that they do not need and then manage to pay almost no taxes.
originally posted by: Blaine91555
Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid 68 Percent of Federal Income Taxes
Top earners are the main target of tax increases, but the federal income tax system is already highly progressive. The top 10 percent of income earners paid 68 percent of all federal income taxes in 2011 while earning 45 percent of all income. The bottom 50 percent paid 3 percent of income taxes but earned 12 percent of income.
Source.
Source.
In 2009, according to a memo from the Joint Committee on Taxation, a bi-partisan Congressional committee, only 49 percent of Americans owed money on their Federal income tax returns [source: PolitiFact]. So yes, it's true that more than half of all Americans paid no Federal income tax in the tax year 2009, and the number of people who did pay taxes was even lower -- 51 percent, not 53 percent. For tax year 2011, the non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimates that only 54 percent of Americans will pay Federal income tax.
Source.
Source.
From the source in the OP -
In other words, regressive state and local tax policies don’t just harm the poor—they end up harming entire economies. So if altruism doesn’t prompt you to care about unfair tax rates and economic inequality, then it seems self-interest should.
If true, it would appear inequality in state and local taxes is the problem, while none exist in federal taxes since they are already heavily weighted in favor of the poor.
originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: pheonix358
Peter uses the same resources as bill and his wife.
No he doesn't he uses more. He needs more electricity and water to run his business. Not to mention the resources that are used making the products he sells.
originally posted by: Jamie1
originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: pheonix358
Peter uses the same resources as bill and his wife.
No he doesn't he uses more. He needs more electricity and water to run his business. Not to mention the resources that are used making the products he sells.
Is that really the best you could come up with? Seriously?
What if the business is a consulting business? He just talks on his phone all day and makes $1 million a year? What extra resources is he using? Electrons?
originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: pheonix358
Peter uses the same resources as bill and his wife.
No he doesn't he uses more. He needs more electricity and water to run his business. Not to mention the resources that are used making the products he sells.
Ten years ago, Congress passed a law intended to penalize chief executive officers whose companies shift their legal addresses to tax havens. It hasn’t worked out as planned. Companies have found ways around the law that create new rewards for executives. When Actavis Inc. (ACT) changed its incorporation to Ireland in October, the New Jersey-based drugmaker helped CEO Paul Bisaro avoid the law’s bite by handing him more than $40 million of stock as much as three years ahead of its schedule, then promising him an additional $5 million to remain with the company.
As part of his presidential campaign, the former Massachusetts governor released two years of income tax returns. They showed that in 2010, he paid 13.9 percent of his reported income in federal taxes and in 2011, 15.3 percent. Those rates were a bit less than the national average.
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: Jamie1
originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: pheonix358
Peter uses the same resources as bill and his wife.
No he doesn't he uses more. He needs more electricity and water to run his business. Not to mention the resources that are used making the products he sells.
Is that really the best you could come up with? Seriously?
What if the business is a consulting business? He just talks on his phone all day and makes $1 million a year? What extra resources is he using? Electrons?
If he even thought about the premise, he'd know it makes no sense in terms of resources. Think about how much local and state governments spend on police. Who do you think is filling up the jails? It isn't rich folks. It isn't rich folks filling up the ER rooms at big city hospitals either. Nor is it rich people whose kids are being counseled and taken by DCFS. We can go on and on regarding how much money is spent by cities and states on services who primary beneficiaries are the poor.
originally posted by: Edumakated
originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: pheonix358
Peter uses the same resources as bill and his wife.
No he doesn't he uses more. He needs more electricity and water to run his business. Not to mention the resources that are used making the products he sells.
He pays for those services. You don't think businesses pay utility bills? Phone bills? Property tax bills? Waste disposal bills? Last time I checked, those bills increase with the size of the business. Some corporations spend millions on utility bills alone. The direct resources used to make the product are part of the final cost of production.