Taxes- What's "Fair"?

[BLAZER PROPHET]

A lot of banter and news press about taxes. Especially taxation on the "rich".

But what is "fair"?

Is 30% fair? 40%? 60%? 75%? And what about states and local taxes as well on top of federal taxes? So, it total, should a person characterized as "rich" pay a total of 90%?

And what is "wealthy"?

Is it $100K per year? $250K? $500K? $1 million? $5 million?

And what about people who have $1 million in investments or the bank or a 401K. Is that not being rich? Should they have to give up a percentage of that money every year? Is that fair? I mean, there are people who do not have a 401K or investments.

So what is fair in all this?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Taxes should always be high enough that you aggressively look for ways to cheat on them.

 

[barfo]

A lot of banter and news press about taxes. Especially taxation on the "rich".

But what is "fair"?

Is 30% fair? 40%? 60%? 75%? And what about states and local taxes as well on top of federal taxes? So, it total, should a person characterized as "rich" pay a total of 90%?

And what is "wealthy"?

Is it $100K per year? $250K? $500K? $1 million? $5 million?

And what about people who have $1 million in investments or the bank or a 401K. Is that not being rich? Should they have to give up a percentage of that money every year? Is that fair? I mean, there are people who do not have a 401K or investments.

So what is fair in all this?

Fair is whatever we as a society decide is fair.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

If you have to ask, you don't know.

 

[Ed O]

If you have to ask, you don't know.

Isn't that true of any honest question?

Ed O.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

That's what I like about this place. Good old fashioned debate.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/top-1-percent-earn.aspx

The 1.4 million Americans in the IRS' top taxpayer category in 2009 reported nearly 17 percent of all the country's taxable income. From those filers, the IRS collected $318 billion or almost 37 percent of all the individual taxes paid in 2009.

 

[crowTrobot]

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/top-1-percent-earn.aspx

The 1.4 million Americans in the IRS' top taxpayer category in 2009 reported nearly 17 percent of all the country's taxable income. From those filers, the IRS collected $318 billion or almost 37 percent of all the individual taxes paid in 2009.

does that factor in payroll taxes?

 

[Denny Crane]

Nobody's talking about payroll taxes, tho the govt has cut those for the last year+.

I'm quite sure Buffett and his secretary both paid the max and will not get much to show for it.

 

[Masbee]

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/top-1-percent-earn.aspx

The 1.4 million Americans in the IRS' top taxpayer category in 2009 reported nearly 17 percent of all the country's taxable income. From those filers, the IRS collected $318 billion or almost 37 percent of all the individual taxes paid in 2009.

So?

The debate over progressive taxation of income ended over 100 years ago.

Progressive taxation won. The debate is over how progressive. The fact that high income earners paid a big chunk of the taxes is not particularly relevant. They would pay a large portion even under a flat tax, especially now that the middle class in this country has been hollowed out.

 

[HailBlazers]

HOW EXCESSIVE GOVERNMENT KILLED ANCIENT ROME

http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cjv14n2-7.html

In conclusion, the fall of Rome was fundamentally due to economic deterioration resulting from excessive taxation, inflation, and over-regulation. Higher and higher taxes failed to raise additional revenues because wealthier taxpayers could evade such taxes while the middle class--and its taxpaying capacity--were exterminated.

seems were heading that way

 

[crowTrobot]

Nobody's talking about payroll taxes

then your example is misleading propaganda, like when fox news talking heads say "half the country doesn't pay taxes" 18 times a day. that's false.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

give to cesar what is cesar, give to god what is god. :MARIS61:

 

[Denny Crane]

then your example is misleading propaganda, like when fox news talking heads say "half the country doesn't pay taxes" 18 times a day. that's false.

There's no such thing as a payroll tax. There are withholdings to cover people's SS, Medicare, etc.

So it is true 1/2 don't pay (income) tax. The top 1% makes 17% if the income and pays ~40% of all the income tax.

If the govt takes your money and puts it in a trust fund (SS and Medicare), it's not income tax.

 

[BoBoBREWSKI]

15%

 

[magnifier661]

I think it's fair that there is a flat federal tax of 25%; with the ability to write off up to 10% on charities, investment loss and home (interest, insurance and property taxes). That will encourage people to invest and buy homes; which will boost the economy. The people with more money (1%) will use their funds more for investing and giving to charities; which will only boost the economy.

The bullshit that some people making less than 20k, don't have to pay a lick of income tax. If they even paid 15%; our government economy would increase drastically. But whatever assholes. Just mooch off those that worked hard to get tons of money. Let them assume all the liability and pay the highest tax to be that 1%. LOL

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I think it's fair that there is a flat federal tax of 25%; with the ability to write off up to 10% on charities, investment loss and home (interest, insurance and property taxes). That will encourage people to invest and buy homes; which will boost the economy. The people with more money (1%) will use their funds more for investing and giving to charities; which will only boost the economy.

The bullshit that some people making less than 20k, don't have to pay a lick of income tax. If they even paid 15%; our government economy would increase drastically. But whatever assholes. Just mooch off those that worked hard to get tons of money. Let them assume all the liability and pay the highest tax to be that 1%. LOL

I think a flat tax of 15% without any deduction whatsoever is the way to go.

 

[speeds]

I should pay less and you should pay more to make up for it.

 

[Denny Crane]

I should pay less and you should pay more to make up for it.

Exactly.

 

[crowTrobot]

There's no such thing as a payroll tax. There are withholdings to cover people's SS, Medicare, etc.

So it is true 1/2 don't pay (income) tax. The top 1% makes 17% if the income and pays ~40% of all the income tax.

If the govt takes your money and puts it in a trust fund (SS and Medicare), it's not income tax.

federal (and state) income taxes withheld from paychecks are considered part of payroll taxes. "the 50% don't pay any federal income tax" thing spread by FNC for propaganda purposes conveniently ignores all the income tax people are paying through payroll taxes. i think the actual number that don't have to pay is closer to 17%.

i don't really give a crap about the actual issue here, i just hate propaganda.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.politifact.com/virginia/...antor-says-almost-50-percent-americans-dont-/

Eric Cantor says almost 50 percent of Americans don't pay income taxes

But because the U.S. uses the tax system to distribute money, it reduces the tax liability for 51 percent of tax filing units to, or below, zero.

Williams said that’s largely due to popular tax breaks, or tax expenditures.

"There are lots and lots of them. We estimate they total more than a trillion dollars a year in reduced taxes and in fact the bulk of those go to the top end of the income distribution," he said.

Even so, because high earners have so much income liability, the breaks still don’t bring them down to zero. But popular lower and middle income breaks like earned income tax credits, child credits and mortgage interest deductions do get a majority of the population off the hook.


Not only are we nearing that situation, but as the Joint Committee on Taxation pointed out shortly after Cantor’s statement, we moved beyond it. So we find the Majority Leader’s statement True.

 

[crowTrobot]

you are correct, sorry. study that i've been looking at that says 17% don't pay includes SS tax, FICA, state income tax etc.

 

[Denny Crane]

you are correct, sorry. study that i've been looking at that says 17% don't pay includes SS tax, FICA, state income tax etc.

Well, I think the republicans are a bit hypocritical for complaining about the situation. The reagan tax cuts removed the bottom 6M taxpayers from the tax rolls altogether, and each succeeding set of tax cuts removed even more lower income earners.

I personally think nobody should pay $1000 in taxes and get back $2000 in credits. In fact, everyone, IMO, should pay at least something, just so they have a sense that govt. is taking their money and spending it. Or to have a vested interest in what govt. spends on.

That study says $1T in tax breaks to everyone. Eliminate those and we're pretty close to balanced budget. But I'd prefer we cut $1T in spending instead. I'm not seeing that govt. needs to be 2x bigger than it was (spending wise) than 10 years ago.

And technically, we have a workforce of ~120M and a population of ~310M, so there's 190M who don't work at all or pay income taxes or SS or anything...

 

[PapaG]

Well, I think the republicans are a bit hypocritical for complaining about the situation. The reagan tax cuts removed the bottom 6M taxpayers from the tax rolls altogether, and each succeeding set of tax cuts removed even more lower income earners.

I personally think nobody should pay $1000 in taxes and get back $2000 in credits. In fact, everyone, IMO, should pay at least something, just so they have a sense that govt. is taking their money and spending it. Or to have a vested interest in what govt. spends on.

That study says $1T in tax breaks to everyone. Eliminate those and we're pretty close to balanced budget. But I'd prefer we cut $1T in spending instead. I'm not seeing that govt. needs to be 2x bigger than it was (spending wise) than 10 years ago.

And technically, we have a workforce of ~120M and a population of ~310M, so there's 190M who don't work at all or pay income taxes or SS or anything...

Shhh...

Mitt Romney hates women. Focus on that one, because it's what is important.

 

[barfo]

And technically, we have a workforce of ~120M and a population of ~310M, so there's 190M who don't work at all or pay income taxes or SS or anything...

Let's get those kids and old folks into the mines, pronto!

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Let's get those kids and old folks into the mines, pronto!

barfo

What makes you think it's kids and old folks that make up 2/3 of the population? Link please.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

so because they dont make enough money at their multiple minimum wage jobs to have any tax liability, it is their own fault denny? what do you propose? raising their liability?

america needs a middle class for revenue....and taxing the poor and asking them to make up for it is so fucking stupid its not even worth talking about

 

[Denny Crane]

so because they dont make enough money at their multiple minimum wage jobs to have any tax liability, it is their own fault denny? what do you propose? raising their liability?

america needs a middle class for revenue....and taxing the poor and asking them to make up for it is so fucking stupid its not even worth talking about

1/2 the people who earn wages aren't poor.

I'd propose at least $10/month in federal tax for anyone with a paycheck.

Taxes is the price of GSA trips to Vegas, you know. Or better yet, it's the price of "society."

 

[Blaze01]

In fact, everyone, IMO, should pay at least something, just so they have a sense that govt. is taking their money and spending it. Or to have a vested interest in what govt. spends on.

This really is the crux of the issue, well stated. If you don't have a vested interest (ie govt taking taxes from you) then there is no incentive\reason for concern over what gov't spends all the tax money on. Everyone should have to contribute, even if it is only a little bit.

 

[Ed O]

This really is the crux of the issue, well stated. If you don't have a vested interest (ie govt taking taxes from you) then there is no incentive\reason for concern over what gov't spends all the tax money on. Everyone should have to contribute, even if it is only a little bit.

I was thinking about this in a slightly different context recently: college towns.

College students get to vote where they go to school, quite often, and in towns that have large student bodies and/or smaller non-college communities, a population that turns over ever four or five years could establish laws and ordinances that hurt the people that are permanent residents. It's a pretty significant moral hazard that I'm surprised isn't a bigger deal than it is.

I think that there's a similar moral hazard when people vote who have no investment in the larger system and income taxes, in particular. If there is no reason for someone to fear increased taxes (because they won't pay them), then that person will very often vote in favor of them... or if a person gets benefits with no costs, it's unlikely they will vote against their own interests.

I don't know what the answer is.

Ed O.