The Case for Progressive Taxation

Here we go again....what does GE have to do with personal tax rates? Do you want to talk corporate, then talk corporate. You want to talk personal, then talk personal. Don't mix them together.

How much do you think a person (according to the Constitution, we should all be treated equally) should pay in taxes....total? Careful, this question has messed up so many liberal politiicans.

Our tax system is not equally applied to all. Isn't that what the liberals use, the 14th amendment to object to laws that single out some and not others.

Thanks you tricky dick that gave us the redistribution of wealth plan known as the Earned Income tax credit where people that pay no taxes get money from the government. well from the people that pay the taxes.

Typical liberal ideology, punish the successful and reward those that don't do shit.

What most of these oversimplified scenarios do not account for is the thousands, and thousands, of small business owners who work their asses off not only making their business work, but employing millions.

Is it fair to tax them at at a 50%+ rate for their efforts?

By the way, Sassy, I would be more than glad to just pay 30% in total taxes. True, when you add it all up, my federal income tax bill comes to just over 30%, but add in all of the other taxes that are implemented by all of the various taxing entities, and I am paying close to 50 cents on every dollar I earn to some taxing authority.

How much is enough? Every time one of these taxing entities calls for a rate hike, whether it's a school district, metro, the city, the county, the Feds, etc, they say, "It's just a penny"

Well, there are only 100 of those pennies in a dollar. Do they want them all?

Did you see you this article? What about the fact that GE paid zero in income tax on enormous profits and then received a return of millions of dollars on top of that. This is a fact.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2016/06/tw...te-the-racket/

Progressive tax is calculated percentage wise (in other words, according to the amount). The more a person makes, the higher the amount. You didn't tell me the amount of the capital gains, so I have no idea why the tax rate was that high. Same thing for the dividends amount. In other words, if I make $2 million, the rate would be higher percentage wise. I'm sure there is a cap at one point, but I don't know what it is. The thing that really infuriates me is the above article and the fact that corporations like GE paid zero dollars in income tax and made enormous profits. They even received a return of at least a million or so. I saw the article on another board, but don't have it on hand right now. It's actually true. I don't understand why this practice is even legal.

Those are the taxes I'm really concerned with. Maybe Clinton can ease the taxes a little more on higher income people, but cut out loopholes for these multi-national corporations. That would really help with national deficit and build up our safety net at the same time. Here is a list of those corporations that I mentioned, the worst offenders:

https://berniesanders.com/wp-content...ateDodgers.pdf Originally Posted by SassySue

Sorry for the lack of courtesy. This is a subject I'm passionate about. Crony capitalism has resulted in lots and lots of tax dodges for SOME corporations and SOME super wealthy individuals, who have armies of lobbyists, tax accountants and tax lawyers. As such, you end up with some companies paying very low tax rates, even though the United Arab Emirates is the only country in the world with a higher marginal tax rate. But you have many more companies in the USA paying tax rates among the highest in the world. This adversely effects economic growth, jobs and wages in the USA. The rest of the world has lower tax rates and less complexity in the way they tax corporations.

You're taking examples like GE and Boeing and applying them to all of American business and that's just not right. See this for a more complete list:

https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/inve...tax-rate-paid/

And as JackieS points out, add property taxes, sales taxes, state income taxes, alcohol, gasoline, tobacco, communication, medicare and social security, severance taxes, etc., and the rate in many instances is way above 50%. Governments are in many instances taking over 50% of the pie. It's crowding out the private sector, which no longer generates the economic, job and wage growth that it used to.

The rates I provided in the earlier post are the maximum marginal rates on investment income, NOT including state income tax. I don't know where the rates kick in, but it's certainly at less than $1 million/year.

Again, the U.S. tax system is the most progressive in the OECD. The reason it's so progressive is because that makes it easier for the politicians to grant special favors to special interests, like your example of GE, and still raise enough money to keep us from going bankrupt for the time being. There's a strong argument for a flatter, fairer, simpler less progressive tax system based on lower and fewer tax rates, or replacing part or all of the income tax with a value added or sales tax (with mechanisms to reduce or eliminate the tax on the poorer among us). You do that, you'll see better economic growth, better private sector wages and more jobs, and more prosperity for more people, and very possibly less inequality as the crony capitalists are put out of business.

The USA already has the most progressive tax system of any developed country in the world. Google something like OECD and progressive tax and you'll see I'm right. You don't know as much as you think you do about taxes on multinational corporations. Some corporations do pay at low tax rates. The marginal corporate rate in the USA however is the highest in the developed world, and some U.S. corporations are greatly handicapped versus foreign competitors because of high taxes and very burdensome and illogical tax regulations. The system encourages U.S. corporations to keep cash overseas because if they bring overseas profits back to the USA to invest here, in ways that would create jobs, they pay high taxes on the repatriated funds.

You say "The taxes on capital gains have also been cut, as well as taxes on investment income." What a load of crap. Obama has taken taxes on interest income and short term capital gains from 35% to 43.4%. And taxes on long term capital gains and dividends from 15% to 23.8%. And these numbers don't include state income tax, which can add 10+ percentage points in places like California and New York. Originally Posted by Tiny

I looked up the U.S. Corporate Tax rates because I was interested in how high the rates actually were. I found a couple of articles.

The bottom line: The conclusion reached by the CRS report is more accurate than that of the Business Roundtable. On average, the foreign effective tax rate is not much lower than the U.S. domestic tax rate.


Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanaly.../#63c8e53f20a5

I looked up the U.S. Corporate Tax rates because I was interested in how high the rates actually were. I found a couple of articles.

The bottom line: The conclusion reached by the CRS report is more accurate than that of the Business Roundtable. On average, the foreign effective tax rate is not much lower than the U.S. domestic tax rate.


Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanaly.../#63c8e53f20a5 Originally Posted by SassySue

Please note the following,

1. The Avi-Yonah study, which indicates the US weighted average effective tax rate is 4% less than the rest of the world, includes only companies from the EU and the USA, and none from dynamic Asian economies. It's also the oldest of the studies, with data back to 2001.

2. While the table in the Forbes article indicates Markle and Shackelford indicate the U.S. weighted average is 2% less than the rest of the world, the authors say that U.S. multinationals are "among the highest taxed," with only Japan having a higher effective tax rate. See their table 2 in http://www.nber.org/papers/w16839.pdf, the column labeled total ETR. In fact, only Japan is higher.

3. The newer studies indicated the U.S. weighted average tax rate is higher than the rest of the world. There in fact has been a trend in recent years for countries to lower their tax rates on businesses, with the USA being a notable exception. The most recent of the studies, Chen-Mintz, done in 2013, indicates the U.S. weighted average effective tax rate is 10.9% higher than the rest of the world. Based on a 30 minute look and what I know from other reading, this result appears to me to be the most accurate, with respect to the current situation, that is, the situation in 2016, not in 2005. I suspect the other studies are too old to be meaningful and it's possible they excluded income taxes levied by states in the USA. That the USA effective tax rate is 35.3%, versus 24.4% for the rest of the world, is a huge difference.

In any event, if you still believe the Forbes article, please note that the larger difference between the statutory, marginal tax rate and the effective tax rate in the USA compared to other countries just shows that the rest of the world recognizes that what I said is true: a flatter, fairer, simpler less progressive tax on business based on lower and fewer tax rates, and replacing part of the income tax with a value added or sales tax, produces superior outcomes.

SassySue, You might take a look at the following,

https://home.kpmg.com/xx/en/home/ser...tes-table.html

The five largest economies in the world are the USA, China, Japan, Germany and the United Kingdom. Please note that since 2006 the corporate tax rate has gone down in all these countries except the USA.

I'm still waiting on your answer SS. How much tax should someone pay total?

I looked up the U.S. Corporate Tax rates because I was interested in how high the rates actually were. I found a couple of articles.

The bottom line: The conclusion reached by the CRS report is more accurate than that of the Business Roundtable. On average, the foreign effective tax rate is not much lower than the U.S. domestic tax rate.


Source: http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanaly.../#63c8e53f20a5 Originally Posted by SassySue

You conceded the point, little girl.

Thanks you tricky dick that gave us the redistribution of wealth plan known as the Earned Income tax credit where people that pay no taxes get money from the government. well from the people that pay the taxes.
Originally Posted by The2Dogs

yes, but if you want to really boil it down.. they are not receiving the money from tax revenue.. we don't have near enough tax collections to pay for the EITC and the myriad of other programs.. they ARE receiving fiat currency, if you will, created money.. but so do the multi-national banks, that lend accounting entry money they don't have, but are allowed to lend based on the reserve requirement of 4% or less. and the point of both receiving the created money, is to spur spending and economic activity.

Well, there are only 100 of those pennies in a dollar. Do they want them all? Originally Posted by Jackie S

"now my advice to those who've died.. declare the pennies on your eyes".. George Harrison

speaking of George Harrison, he, McCartney, Lennon and Ringo were paying a 95% marginal tax rate in England, as was Eric Clapton, Mick Jaggar and other British Musicians.. all of them left to reside in other countries.. obviously that was an outrageous, back-breaking tax rate.

btw, one point on Companies that pay zero income tax.. many companies, especially in economically-sensitive areas like airlines and energy, may lose money for a year, 2, even 3 years.. the loss can carry forward to offset future years tax liability.. fair deal.. without that stipulation, Boeing, Exxon, and many others would shut operations, or move to a friendlier country.

Here's the problem with progressive and corporate taxation. You are asking politicians who are owned by these wealthy people and corporations to tax them more. Sure, they may raise rates, just for show, but they will always throw in loopholes to get around it. The rich can afford tax lawyers to find and use those loopholes. The corporate tax is a joke. Who cares what the corporate tax rate is? GE pays no tax. Why? THEY ARE PART OWNERS OF THE CONGRESS! Only the smaller corporations pay corporate tax. And there are still plenty of ways to pull money out of a corporation tax free.

We don't have a capitalist society. We have a crony capitalist (fascist) society. Congress and the President, members of BOTH political parties have caused this problem. They are not going to fix it. If they even try, they lose their power, title, and invitations to the cool parties on Capitol Hill and in New York.


Neither Hillary nor the Donald give a damn about you. Elect either one, and the rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer. Few people get truly rich because of their ingenuity, creativity, or intellect. To reach that level what matters is what connections you have. That's not capitalism, in the traditional sense. It's statism, and it benefits the few at the expense of the rest. Yes, a lot of people have made good money using their wits and having good ideas, but in the world of big wealth, they are small timers. And when they die, the government wants a good share of that money back. That helps keep the club small.


So go ahead. Raise taxes.

Here's the problem with progressive and corporate taxation. You are asking politicians who are owned by these wealthy people and corporations to tax them more. Sure, they may raise rates, just for show, but they will always throw in loopholes to get around it. The rich can afford tax lawyers to find and use those loopholes. The corporate tax is a joke. Who cares what the corporate tax rate is? GE pays no tax. Why? THEY ARE PART OWNERS OF THE CONGRESS! Only the smaller corporations pay corporate tax. And there are still plenty of ways to pull money out of a corporation tax free.

We don't have a capitalist society. We have a crony capitalist (fascist) society. Congress and the President, members of BOTH political parties have caused this problem. They are not going to fix it. If they even try, they lose their power, title, and invitations to the cool parties on Capitol Hill and in New York.


Neither Hillary nor the Donald give a damn about you. Elect either one, and the rich will get richer, and the poor will get poorer. Few people get truly rich because of their ingenuity, creativity, or intellect. To reach that level what matters is what connections you have. That's not capitalism, in the traditional sense. It's statism, and it benefits the few at the expense of the rest. Yes, a lot of people have made good money using their wits and having good ideas, but in the world of big wealth, they are small timers. And when they die, the government wants a good share of that money back. That helps keep the club small.


So go ahead. Raise taxes. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yes, I do agree with a lot of what you said. Yet, if we don't have some type of government, then how would we run things in our communities? We need some type of leadership. Another problem with the gap between rich and poor is stagnant wages. They have been stagnant since 1973. That is actually a fact. Yet, the cost of living has grown astronomically.

I really don't think taxes should be raised for small businesses and the smaller corporations. I just don't like the fact that the larger multi-national corporations are evading taxes by moving overseas and moving jobs overseas, as stated in Bernie's article. Seems like corporate fascism at its best to me. In a way, it seems like these huge multi-nationals are taking over the economy or monopolizing the economy more and more, not just in America, but the entire world. They seem to be smashing out the little guy or smaller businesses and maker it harder and harder for them to compete. And, yes, the large multi-national corporations seem to be running the White House, as well as big bankers, insurance companies, Wall Street, and, of course, the Fed.

Sassy,

Please read and fully understand Tiny's posts before you respond further.

Like another poster said, a major reason US companies are shipping jobs overseas is because of the taxes here.

BTW, before you "retired" how much of your revenue did you claim on your 1040?

And make me a sammich.

BTW, before you "retired" how much of your revenue did you claim on your 1040? Originally Posted by gnadfly

And how much did you pay into that Social Security pool you're mooching off of?

yes, the large multi-national corporations seem to be running the White House, as well as big bankers, insurance companies, Wall Street, and, of course, the Fed. Originally Posted by SassySue

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...on-greece.html

we are beginning to realize that, but I fear we are going to elect Clinton this Fall.. despite Trump and Sanders garnering large support, we still aren't there.. not enough people realize or care.. it will come down to the fact that Clinton will pass out more money, will promise more to the same people she and Obama have fucked over for 8 years.