It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# A new and simple way to tax

page: 1
5
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 07:57 PM
Taxes and tax time tend to vex people. So often these days we hear about the 1%, and financial discrepancies between the everyday worker and CEOs etc.

This is a thought experiment. I welcome people to disagree, and tell me where my logic is flawed. I also hold no grand illusions it is a perfect plan.

I took literally 5 minutes to come up with a federal tax system that to me would limit the wage gaps we see now, and I believe collect more taxes for the government (not sure if that's a good thing).

All numbers are based on individual or household profits, and also business profits. No deductions given, except by investing back into the company (for businesses).

For the first \$70,000 earned you would pay 10%
So if you made \$70,000 you would pay \$7000 in taxes.

From \$70,001- \$150,000 you would pay 20% on what you earned over \$70,000.
At \$150,000, you would pay \$7000 plus \$16,000 or \$23,000 total in taxes, or just over 15% total

At \$10 million per year you would be paying 5,803,000 in taxes or about 58%

At \$50 million you would be paying around 68% total, and still bringing home over \$16m

The tax tables I used:

10% up to \$70,000 - 7,000
20% from \$70,001 to 150k- 16,000
30% from \$150,001-250k- 30,000
40% from \$250,001-500k- 100,000
50% from \$500,001-1m- 250,000
60% from \$1,000,001-10m- 5,400,000
70% from \$10,000,001--50m- 28m
80% from \$50,000,001 on

Historically the highest tax rate in the USA was over 90%
en.wikipedia.org...

Obviously this is a rushed model, but it would cap the highest rate to less than 80%.
It is also close to our current (USA) rates but doesn't stop at 40% at \$400,000
www.bankrate.com...

It also seems some in higher wealth brackets would be willing to pay more
www.theguardian.com...

With the elections, political issues seemed the proper place for this. If it needs to move, I'm sure it will.

I'm not sure what this would do to the stock market.
Let me know what you all think.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:05 PM
How about just taxing every bank transfer or credit movement at.5%
The more money you move the more you pay

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:15 PM

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

At \$50 million you would be paying around 68% total, and still bringing home over \$16m

That's a ton of money lost. I would not keep my \$50 million in the US if I had to give up \$34 million. Ridiculous to take more than half of someone's money no matter who they are. I do not think anyone should be telling anyone else what is "enough."

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:15 PM

They are supposed to tell us what each and every dollar is paying for.

Taxes will always be as high as they can collect without major problems.

edit on 10-2-2016 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:56 PM

Is it lost or is it paying for the government of the country, and various thing that they support, like healthcare and education.

If you move it out of country, it's still on the books and you will be taxed under my example.
A better way to shelter your money would be spending it on your employees through bonuses and salary (assuming you have employees when making 50m a year).

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 08:57 PM

Agreed.
What is a better solution?

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:02 PM

Because then every time you or I withdraw cash, or move money from one account to another, we loose money just for trying to keep our finances in balance.
The whole idea of banking fees frustrate me. It should frustrate you as well, think about it. A 3rd party entity has control of your money, and charges you for access to YOUR money. You don't see anything wrong with that?

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:05 PM

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

Is it lost or is it paying for the government of the country, and various thing that they support, like healthcare and education.

If you move it out of country, it's still on the books and you will be taxed under my example.
A better way to shelter your money would be spending it on your employees through bonuses and salary (assuming you have employees when making 50m a year).

Who knows what it is going for. When is the last time the federal government has been audited? I cannot trust they are spending the money in the way I think is best for the country or in general.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:11 PM

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

Agreed.
What is a better solution?

Less and less governmental action to be replaced by more and more business activity.

If Trump doesn't get rid of Obamacare, then freedom and prosperity will have been set back by at least one generation.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:17 PM

I do not know the last time it has been audited, but I know they release a budget yearly. I also know the budget is not beholden to the money they have, hence the deficit.

Would you benefit in the tax plan I suggested?

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:17 PM

I think I have a better idea.

How about we eliminate income taxes altogether.

First off, please understand that your income is one of the few things you are actually ENTITLED to. Thats right. NO ONE else is entitled to the fruits of your labor.

NO ONE, especially not the Gestapo like IRS which can garnish your wages, seize your assets, your bank accounts, your future earnings and even IMPRISON you for not paying taxes... That is NOT freedom.

You would think that at MINIMUM, our government overlords would take away the IRS' ability to throw us in jail. But they cant do that. Have to keep those slaves in line.

But how would we survive without federal income taxes?

Easy. We CUT SPENDING.

As you can see, income taxes account for less than half of all government revenue.

In 2011, the govt took in 2.5 trillion and only 1.1 trillion came from income taxes. So in order to get rid of the income tax and the IRS, we need to cut spending by 1.1 trillion.

Lets see, national "security" gets \$1.4 trillion a year. Thats way too much. Lets say they get only \$300 billion a year.

Done. No more income taxes, no more IRS.

edit on 10-2-2016 by gladtobehere because: wording

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:20 PM

Solution to what, exactly? Overspending or wage gap? What is it you are trying to fix?

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:20 PM

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

I do not know the last time it has been audited, but I know they release a budget yearly. I also know the budget is not beholden to the money they have, hence the deficit.

Would you benefit in the tax plan I suggested?

The budget is amorphous. Benefit personally as in my wallet or as in what do I think is best for this country?

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:21 PM

I think I have a better idea.

How about we eliminate income taxes altogether.

First off, please understand that your income is one of the few things you are actually ENTITLED to. Thats right. NO ONE else is entitled to the fruits of your labor.

NO ONE, especially not the Gestapo like IRS which can garnish your wages, seize your assets, your bank accounts, your future earnings and even IMPRISON you for not paying taxes... That is NOT freedom.

You would think that at the MINIMUM, our government overlords would take away the IRS' ability to throw us in jail. But they cant do that. Have to keep those slaves in line.

But how would we survive without federal income taxes?

Easy. We CUT SPENDING.

As you can see, income taxes account for less than half of all government revenue.

In 2011, the govt took in 2.5 trillion and only 1.1 trillion came from income taxes.

So lets see.

How do we pay for the military, roads, infrastructure? Yeah I know you built all of that Mr. Gates.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:22 PM

I like the cut of your jib.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:29 PM

First you assume "Business" will regulate itself. We continue to see this is not the case through polluted waterways, computer programs that defeat regulations, and overall a attitude that these rules do not apply to me.

Second you offer no alternative solutions, meaning I can safely assume you have none. I stated in my OP is was 5 minutes to come up with my plan. I invite you to do the same. Like you I am worried about where my country is. I however am attempting to find solutions that don't rely on a possible figurehead.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:39 PM

I am not opposed to no income tax. But I would favor the income tax (as I laid out) if we could do away with all other taxes.

As my plan includes business/ corporate income taxes, its closer to 1.4 trillion, and based on profits, that would rise as companies couldn't hide offshore accounts. OR at least might make it easier to account for them

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:41 PM

In the short term, the tax code and loopholes.

Long term, all of the above.

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:42 PM

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme

But I would favor the income tax (as I laid out) if we could do away with all other taxes.

What other taxes are you looking to eliminate?

posted on Feb, 10 2016 @ 09:42 PM

In your wallet. I cannot claim I believe my suggestion is the best for the country over all.

new topics

top topics

5