Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are in the same situation. We live in Rockville so we pay taxes for Rockville, Montgomery County, Maryland, as well as the federal government.

I think the thing is the billionaires need to be taxed. And not have all those loop poles. It would not make one difference in their lifestyle to increase their taxes and it would make such a difference to America's budget.

You also pay MD state income taxes, don't forget those. Those are particularly annoying because there are few tax-efficient strategies at the state level.

As for billionaires, a lot of their money is in wealth not income, and our tax system is based on income.

They also happen to be highly mobile, so they will move to better tax jurisdictions. Higher taxesin MD and MoCo have caused the wealthy to leave and decimate the tax base:
https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/11/marylands-wealth-drain-part-six/

Buh-bye! Don't let the door hit you in the way out.

Sure, here's some details about how the wealthy left MD after tax increases:

https://montgomeryperspective.com/2025/04/11/marylands-wealth-drain-part-six/


That attitude is exactly why many of the wealthy left.. and the result is putting more of the tax burden on everyone else.

It's why everyone in MD now pays about double what they used to in car registration fees, and emissions testing fees, and why people in MoCo have to pay for parking garages on Saturdays, for example. It's also why everyone in MD now pays a 3% "digital services tax" on their Netflix subscription, for example.

Let's see some evidence for these claims.

When Massachusetts enacted a "millionaire's tax" on the wealthy (4% surtax on income over a million dollars), lots of spoiled rich people threatened to leave. And probably some did. But it hasn't been the exodus that some thought it would be, and 2 years later, the revenue generated by the tax has been more than twice what had been expected. In the first year alone, $2.5 billion was collected.

TAX THE RICH. Make them squeal like the pigs they are.

https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/04/28/massachusetts-millionaires-tax-institute-policy-studies-newsletter

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)

^^posting from Russia, just like many Xitter accounts.

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.

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.

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.

I need to understand this better as I’m not sure I agree with this.

For example, I work and get paid $100. I get taxed and take home $75. I’m ok with that. Of that $75, I decide to take a portion and save/invest. Why should I pay additional taxes on any earnings I make from that? I invested with money I already paid tax on.

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.

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.

I'm curious OP. Sounds like you and your partner make over $500k. Why not move to VA and save some money?

You don’t really end up saving all that much by moving to VA once you account for county, state, and property taxes. Maybe 1%? And for a lot of people that’s just not worth it.

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.

The mention of a C-Corp in OP’s post means that they are obfuscating the issue and aren’t comparable to regular wage earners.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you end up at 36? It is either 35 or 37, I thought.

Plus, it is marginal.

So are you saying you are in a kuch higher tax bracket but ending up paying the marginal rate of 36%?

That is not bad at all. As PP noted, you have more than enough income to grow your wealth if you choose.

OP is talking about *effective* tax rate. So after applying the progressive brackets and looking at the real percentage of all income. They must make several million though to hit 36% effective rate for federal.

More than that as another poster calculated. OP is either a troll or doesn’t understand how taxation works.

Anonymous wrote:There is a graduated income tax rate, so you may pay 45% on some of your income but not all of it. And, as a former DC resident, I think the city’s taxes are low because state, county, and city taxes are all rolled into one instead of being separated out.

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)

Some countries have done that and it works well. The problem here is:
1. The CPAs and tax software companies would all complain because they are no longer needed.
2. Congress likes to legislate behavior through the tax code. That's why we see tax breaks for getting married, having kids, donating to charity, saving money for college (529), etc. I doubt they'll want to give that up.

Many years ago, Russia lowered the income tax rate and made it simpler. Tax revenues went UP. The reason is that so many people were dodging taxes when the rates were high, but they figured at a more reasonable rate, they might as well pay up and not have to always be looking over their shoulder.

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)

Anonymous wrote:I feel your pain. We don’t make that much by “rich standards”. But do fine. The amount of taxes we pay is absolutely crazy. 40 percent. I sold a property I owned for 10 years and paid almost 40 percent of profits in taxes. It is beyond crazy. I need to get smarter.