
This article about how tax rates have changed over the past 35 years, and what effect that has, is interesting:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/02/should-tax-rates-be-more-gradual/ The JCT report linked from the article also makes for very interesting reading, and puts into context many of the ongoing tax debates between Rs and Ds. |
So basically, when you add all federal taxes in, the average person pays about 25% of their income in taxes. And rich people pay about 35% of their income in taxes. Seems fair, as one of the 35% types. |
To emphasize your point, you actually pay about 27% of the first $370,000 of TAXABLE income, and 35% of the rest of your taxable. Even with a taxable of a half mil, I don't think you reach 30% -- of the taxable. And since the ability to protect your income from taxes tends to rise, I don't think anyone comes close to 35%. Recall that OP paid less than 27% of HHI of 460K. |
Sorry, that was OP of the previous tax thread. |
the taxes are much higher than that, you need to include the sales taxes, the property taxes, the fees and license costs, etc, etc. much closer to 50%. |
I don't see what the problem is with extending the tax cuts for $250K and over. They should end up paying the AMT like those of us making $200K won't they? |
One way of looking at it is if the rate didn't matter, they wouldn't be fighting over it. There would be no calculated revenue saved or lost but they are definitely showing a real money impact. |