Anonymous wrote:The conversation was about if 200K is wealthy or not, by DC standards. By any standard, it is pretty good. And the article PP quoted above says "local" taxes, as well, not just national.
The article states that taxes, when combined, are at their lowest. It can and does mean some taxes are higher and some taxes are lower, and when averaged, there are more lower taxes than higher taxes. It does not mean residents in DC are paying less in DC taxes. This report is a few years old, but does a good job of summarizing the various taxes in DC.
http://www.dcfpi.org/4-15-04tax.pdf
"Income Tax: The top marginal tax rate was reduced from 11 percent to 9.5 percent in the late
1980s, and all tax rates were reduced further after 2000 under the Tax Parity Act. In recent years,
the District also enacted a substantial Earned Income Tax Credit for low- and moderate-income
workers. On the other hand, DC's personal exemption and standard deduction have not been
adjusted for inflation for more than a decade. Overall, tax liabilities for low-income residents
have fallen substantially since the early 1990s, primarily as a result of the EITC. Income tax
liabilities have remained relatively stable for middle-income families and have declined somewhat
for higher-income families."
If you look at the graph on page 3, it shows Total Tax Revenues as a Percentage of Personal Income, 1973-2004. It was at its lowest in the 70s, highest in the late 80s, small dip in the mid-90s, then back up. Granted, the report is from 2004, but I highly doubt the tax rates are significantly lower to beat out the 70s.