Ryan's Tax Rate

[Anonymous]

"Effective tax rate" is just meaningless. It can be defined a lot of ways. Without a definition, it like say my tax is q2j.

"The term effective tax rate has significantly different meanings when used in different contexts or by different sources. Generally it means some amount of tax divided by some amount of income or other tax base. In International Accounting Standard 12,[2] it is defined as income tax expense or benefit for accounting purposes divided by accounting profit. In Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (United States), the term is used in official guidance only with respect to determining income tax expense for interim (e.g., quarterly) periods by multiplying accounting income by an "estimated annual effective tax rate," the definition of which rate varies depending on the reporting entity's circumstances.[3] In U.S. income tax law, the term is used in relation to determining whether a foreign income tax on specific types of income exceeds a certain percentage of U.S. tax that would apply on such income if U.S. tax had been applicable to the income.[4] The popular press, Congressional Budget Office, and various think tanks have used the term to mean varying measures of tax divided by varying measures of income, with little consistency in definition.[5] An effective tax rate may incorporate econometric, estimated, or assumed adjustments to actual data, or may be based entirely on assumptions or simulations.[6]"

A better measure would be, (total gross earnings - all government payments)/total gross earnings= x, 1-x= taxrate. I think people really care about the total amount taken.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Effective tax rate" is just meaningless. It can be defined a lot of ways. Without a definition, it like say my tax is q2j.

"The term effective tax rate has significantly different meanings when used in different contexts or by different sources. Generally it means some amount of tax divided by some amount of income or other tax base. In International Accounting Standard 12,[2] it is defined as income tax expense or benefit for accounting purposes divided by accounting profit. In Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (United States), the term is used in official guidance only with respect to determining income tax expense for interim (e.g., quarterly) periods by multiplying accounting income by an "estimated annual effective tax rate," the definition of which rate varies depending on the reporting entity's circumstances.[3] In U.S. income tax law, the term is used in relation to determining whether a foreign income tax on specific types of income exceeds a certain percentage of U.S. tax that would apply on such income if U.S. tax had been applicable to the income.[4] The popular press, Congressional Budget Office, and various think tanks have used the term to mean varying measures of tax divided by varying measures of income, with little consistency in definition.[5] An effective tax rate may incorporate econometric, estimated, or assumed adjustments to actual data, or may be based entirely on assumptions or simulations.[6]"

A better measure would be, (total gross earnings - all government payments)/total gross earnings= x, 1-x= taxrate. I think people really care about the total amount taken.

No, they don't. You are obfuscating. The term "Effective Tax Rate" in this context is really quite simple: What percentage of your total income did you pay in federal income taxes? Or, more simply, on Form 1040, use the total of lines 8b and 22 as the numerator and line 61 as the denominator. What's the percentage? http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf

Any attempt to say, "well, you need to use line 38 instead of line 22 (which is AGI) is bogus b/c it doesn't capture municipal bond income.

This really isn't that hard.

And, no, people aren't impressed by the amount her paid. They want to know what share of his income he paid and how that compares to their own and to their expectations for how people with more wealth should give back to the country that helped enrich them.

[Anonymous]

Why is this all focused on Ryan OP? Out of Obama, Biden and Romney he has the least amount of money. The only actual money he has is from his mother in law passing away. So when you started this all you focused on one guy, and then mentioned a 50% tax rate -- which he never claimed to pay. I don't understand your motives.

If you want numbers find the numbers yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this all focused on Ryan OP? Out of Obama, Biden and Romney he has the least amount of money. The only actual money he has is from his mother in law passing away. So when you started this all you focused on one guy, and then mentioned a 50% tax rate -- which he never claimed to pay. I don't understand your motives.

If you want numbers find the numbers yourself.

Whoa, Biden is BY FAR the lowest next worth. No contest.