"Tax the Rich"

[Anonymous]

Flat tax of 15 across for everyone no deductions or credits

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly think the tax code should be significantly less progressive than it is. The vast majority of people in this country pay almost no federal taxes at all. They have no skin in the game! They literally could not care less if the pentagon wastes trillions or we fund stupid unnecessary projects.

I've love to see a flat tax on ALL americans and on ALL incomce (including capital gains and dividends)

The vast majority of people in this country have no money, ya dingbat. But sure, let’s try the blood from a stone route so you can buy another overpriced “luxury” vehicle.

Tax them so there is an incentive to not be poor

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly think the tax code should be significantly less progressive than it is. The vast majority of people in this country pay almost no federal taxes at all. They have no skin in the game! They literally could not care less if the pentagon wastes trillions or we fund stupid unnecessary projects.

I've love to see a flat tax on ALL americans and on ALL incomce (including capital gains and dividends)

The vast majority of people in this country have no money, ya dingbat. But sure, let’s try the blood from a stone route so you can buy another overpriced “luxury” vehicle.

Tax them so there is an incentive to not be poor

You’re not very bright, are you sweetheart?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Flat tax of 15 across for everyone no deductions or credits

Nah. I’m fine with paying my fair share. The level of income inequality in this country is a much bigger problem than greedy rich people needing to hang on to as many dollars as they possibly can.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do well. I am not complaining and feel very fortunate to have two very good paying careers. But we just did our end of year tax analysis with our CPA and our effective tax rate when adding federal plus DC taxes is 45% (36% federal, 9% DC and DC is only "low" because a lot of our income is through a DC C-Corp which is taxes slightly lower at 8.5%).

45% of our income going to taxes. Nearly half of what we take home. And yes -- we are utilizing every single tax strategy under the sun available to us and work with a very good CPA.

So let's change the complaint from "tax the rich" to "tax the billionaires" because the regular rich are playing PLENTY in taxes already. Sigh.

Flatten the tax code.

The top 50% of earners do not need to pay 97% of the entire yearly income tax, while the bottom 50% pay the remaining 3%.

It creates a whole class of people who pay for nothing, and demand everything.

This is such a disingenuous argument. Why do you never point out that 99% of the country’s wealth is also concentrated in the top 50% of earners?

I mean, you may have an argument if the wealth was spread throughout all rungs of society, but it’s not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The wealthy need to pay more on investments - a wealth tax if you will.

People who earn money through labor, of whatever kind, are taxed more than enough already.

I'm also pretty certain that many people roll the social security/medicare cut of their check into what they think are income tax or "taxes". Despite them paying no income tax.

This is not a wealth tax. It is a more equitably assessed income tax. Which I agree with - but it isn't a wealth tax. A wealth tax is akin to property tax, where at some point each year you are required to pay a small percentage of the value of an asset, whether it be real property, an investment account, or whatever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do well. I am not complaining and feel very fortunate to have two very good paying careers. But we just did our end of year tax analysis with our CPA and our effective tax rate when adding federal plus DC taxes is 45% (36% federal, 9% DC and DC is only "low" because a lot of our income is through a DC C-Corp which is taxes slightly lower at 8.5%).

45% of our income going to taxes. Nearly half of what we take home. And yes -- we are utilizing every single tax strategy under the sun available to us and work with a very good CPA.

So let's change the complaint from "tax the rich" to "tax the billionaires" because the regular rich are playing PLENTY in taxes already. Sigh.

If you are married filing jointly, in 2025 you will pay $202,155 on income up to $751,601, for an effective federal income tax rate of less than 27%. Above that threshold, income is taxed at 37%. To get to an effective rate of 36%, your income would have to be well into the seven digits. For example, at $2m in *taxable* income, the effective federal income tax rate is 33.2%. And that's just taxable income, not taking into account the tax avoidance strategies available to the rich. And sure, I know one of you probably is a biglaw partner, so there are some extras thrown in there, but they are rounding errors at that level (although maybe not, since you only reference paying taxes in one state).

All this is by way of saying, (i) yes, billionaires should be taxed more, but (ii) no, your tax "burden" is not the least bit unfair, and really should be increased. FFS.

Also, your cute "we do well" was a nice try at making others assume you made $500k or so. But in reality, you are in the top 0.1% of HHI in the country, as is readily apparent to anyone who can do 5th grade math.

Finally, you are most definitely complaining. If you must, do it at the country club among your fellow travelers.

OP here — I never said I make $500k. Someone else did. We made $3.7M last year. Can still complain about taxes…even if I do it at the country club.

I know you didn't "say" it, but the way you worded your initial post indicates that you wanted to obscure your HHI, likely because you knew what the reaction would be if you disclosed it. It was pretty transparent.

At least you appear to have abandoned the "I am not complaining" nonsense. That's something, I guess.

But, let me be clear - you are netting more than $2m each year after taxes. I am fine with that, and I expect most other people would be too. In fact, I'd be OK is you netted $1.5m each year, and I doubt your life would change one bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do well. I am not complaining and feel very fortunate to have two very good paying careers. But we just did our end of year tax analysis with our CPA and our effective tax rate when adding federal plus DC taxes is 45% (36% federal, 9% DC and DC is only "low" because a lot of our income is through a DC C-Corp which is taxes slightly lower at 8.5%).

45% of our income going to taxes. Nearly half of what we take home. And yes -- we are utilizing every single tax strategy under the sun available to us and work with a very good CPA.

So let's change the complaint from "tax the rich" to "tax the billionaires" because the regular rich are playing PLENTY in taxes already. Sigh.

1. Don't live in DC.
2. Nope.

-- someone who works in tax policy

“Nope”?

Great, glad our tax policy folks have such great arguments as to why people should be giving away half their income in taxes. I feel a lot better now.

You're certainly free to go to country that provides fewer services to its residents. You've already made your millions, so you can afford your private security. While you can insulate yourself to a a large degree, you'll still get some exposure to the impacts of living in a low-tax country.

After a kidnapping or two, or some shakedowns for bribes, perhaps you'll have greater appreciation for the substantial benefits you receive from government services in the US. You don't seem to understand that you're getting a very good deal. Taxes and policies are just enough to maintain a moderate degree of social stability, but they don't get in the way of your ability to get filthy rich. Quite the opposite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do well. I am not complaining and feel very fortunate to have two very good paying careers. But we just did our end of year tax analysis with our CPA and our effective tax rate when adding federal plus DC taxes is 45% (36% federal, 9% DC and DC is only "low" because a lot of our income is through a DC C-Corp which is taxes slightly lower at 8.5%).

45% of our income going to taxes. Nearly half of what we take home. And yes -- we are utilizing every single tax strategy under the sun available to us and work with a very good CPA.

So let's change the complaint from "tax the rich" to "tax the billionaires" because the regular rich are playing PLENTY in taxes already. Sigh.

1. Don't live in DC.
2. Nope.

-- someone who works in tax policy

“Nope”?

Great, glad our tax policy folks have such great arguments as to why people should be giving away half their income in taxes. I feel a lot better now.

You're certainly free to go to country that provides fewer services to its residents. You've already made your millions, so you can afford your private security. While you can insulate yourself to a a large degree, you'll still get some exposure to the impacts of living in a low-tax country.

After a kidnapping or two, or some shakedowns for bribes, perhaps you'll have greater appreciation for the substantial benefits you receive from government services in the US. You don't seem to understand that you're getting a very good deal. Taxes and policies are just enough to maintain a moderate degree of social stability, but they don't get in the way of your ability to get filthy rich. Quite the opposite.

A number of EU countries have flat income tax, as well as great social services, and much lower violent crime rate than the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The wealthy need to pay more on investments - a wealth tax if you will.

People who earn money through labor, of whatever kind, are taxed more than enough already.

I'm also pretty certain that many people roll the social security/medicare cut of their check into what they think are income tax or "taxes". Despite them paying no income tax.

This is not a wealth tax. It is a more equitably assessed income tax. Which I agree with - but it isn't a wealth tax. A wealth tax is akin to property tax, where at some point each year you are required to pay a small percentage of the value of an asset, whether it be real property, an investment account, or whatever.

I've written pretty extensively on the concept of a "wealth tax." You don't know what you are talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do well. I am not complaining and feel very fortunate to have two very good paying careers. But we just did our end of year tax analysis with our CPA and our effective tax rate when adding federal plus DC taxes is 45% (36% federal, 9% DC and DC is only "low" because a lot of our income is through a DC C-Corp which is taxes slightly lower at 8.5%).

45% of our income going to taxes. Nearly half of what we take home. And yes -- we are utilizing every single tax strategy under the sun available to us and work with a very good CPA.

So let's change the complaint from "tax the rich" to "tax the billionaires" because the regular rich are playing PLENTY in taxes already. Sigh.

Flatten the tax code.

The top 50% of earners do not need to pay 97% of the entire yearly income tax, while the bottom 50% pay the remaining 3%.

It creates a whole class of people who pay for nothing, and demand everything.

This does not logically follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The wealthy need to pay more on investments - a wealth tax if you will.

People who earn money through labor, of whatever kind, are taxed more than enough already.

I'm also pretty certain that many people roll the social security/medicare cut of their check into what they think are income tax or "taxes". Despite them paying no income tax.

This is not a wealth tax. It is a more equitably assessed income tax. Which I agree with - but it isn't a wealth tax. A wealth tax is akin to property tax, where at some point each year you are required to pay a small percentage of the value of an asset, whether it be real property, an investment account, or whatever.

I've written pretty extensively on the concept of a "wealth tax." You don't know what you are talking about.

Really? Please point to some literature where a tax on investment gains is considered a wealth tax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We do well. I am not complaining and feel very fortunate to have two very good paying careers. But we just did our end of year tax analysis with our CPA and our effective tax rate when adding federal plus DC taxes is 45% (36% federal, 9% DC and DC is only "low" because a lot of our income is through a DC C-Corp which is taxes slightly lower at 8.5%).

45% of our income going to taxes. Nearly half of what we take home. And yes -- we are utilizing every single tax strategy under the sun available to us and work with a very good CPA.

So let's change the complaint from "tax the rich" to "tax the billionaires" because the regular rich are playing PLENTY in taxes already. Sigh.

1. Don't live in DC.
2. Nope.

-- someone who works in tax policy

“Nope”?

Great, glad our tax policy folks have such great arguments as to why people should be giving away half their income in taxes. I feel a lot better now.

You're certainly free to go to country that provides fewer services to its residents. You've already made your millions, so you can afford your private security. While you can insulate yourself to a a large degree, you'll still get some exposure to the impacts of living in a low-tax country.

After a kidnapping or two, or some shakedowns for bribes, perhaps you'll have greater appreciation for the substantial benefits you receive from government services in the US. You don't seem to understand that you're getting a very good deal. Taxes and policies are just enough to maintain a moderate degree of social stability, but they don't get in the way of your ability to get filthy rich. Quite the opposite.

A number of EU countries have flat income tax, as well as great social services, and much lower violent crime rate than the US.

Do you think OP would be making $3.7M/year now if she was living in Bulgaria?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The wealthy need to pay more on investments - a wealth tax if you will.

People who earn money through labor, of whatever kind, are taxed more than enough already.

I'm also pretty certain that many people roll the social security/medicare cut of their check into what they think are income tax or "taxes". Despite them paying no income tax.

This is not a wealth tax. It is a more equitably assessed income tax. Which I agree with - but it isn't a wealth tax. A wealth tax is akin to property tax, where at some point each year you are required to pay a small percentage of the value of an asset, whether it be real property, an investment account, or whatever.

I've written pretty extensively on the concept of a "wealth tax." You don't know what you are talking about.

DP, but I've also only heard "wealth tax" used to describe taxes of the value of assets, not on gains in those values. What you described just sounds like a higher capital gains tax.

[Anonymous]

OP you are pathetic. Honestly.