Who Pays Almost All Federal Income Tax?

[fossten]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Monday, Feb. 5, 2007 9:43 a.m. EST

Who Pays Almost All Federal Income Tax?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and fellow Democrats have talked about repealing President Bush’s tax cuts for upper-income Americans. But those who earn the most money – and invest the most in the economy – are already paying almost all federal personal income taxes, a recent report reveals.

Congress’ Joint Economic Committee disclosed that the richer half of the American population pays nearly 97 percent of income taxes. Most of that, 54 percent, is paid by those in the top 5 percent, Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) disclosed.

And the richest of the rich – just the top 1 percent – pay a hefty 34 percent of all personal income taxes collected by the federal government.

Meanwhile, about 14 million lower-income Americans have been removed from the income tax rolls since 2000 due to the earned income tax credit and the per-child tax credit, IBD reports.

Despite Bush’s tax cuts, the overall tax burden has been rising. Americans’ average overall tax burden has risen since 2004 and now stands at 31.6 percent of income, according to the Tax Foundation, due in large part to the alternative minimum tax and increases in property taxes.

"With an already rising tax burden, borne disproportionately by those who are successful, and who invest,” the IBD concludes, "the Democrats’ plans for big tax increases could be more damaging to the U.S. economy than ever before.”

 

[Dereck]

Hi Fossten

Don't know what you guys are whinging about my overall tax burden is 48.7% on my income and I am not even in the higher tax bracket where my tax burden would increase to 68%

Regards

Dereck

 

[fossten]

Hi Fossten

Don't know what you guys are whinging about my overall tax burden is 48.7% on my income and I am not even in the higher tax bracket where my tax burden would increase to 68%

Regards

Dereck

Nobody's whining. It's about education. There's a misconception promulgated by the left in this country that the rich are evil and not paying their fair share of the taxes, and the only way for those not rich to feel better is to sock it to them as hard as possible. That misconception could change and we could really have a fair tax someday, but not as long as the greedy, corrupt politicians in Congress want to hold on to their power.

Our government is supposed to be by the people and of the people, but we are fast becoming ruled by a proletariat backed by the hard left fringe kooks of the Democrat Party.

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

I'll just scratch the surface........

Tax Burden Shifts to the Middle:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61178-2004Aug12.html

Bush's war on the middle class
August 14, 2004 9:13 PM

How has the tax burden shifted since the Bush tax cuts? The Congressional Budget Office just released these figures -- the percentage change in the tax burden by average income:

$1,100,000: -2.1%
$182,700: -0.9%
$75,600: +0.8%
$51,500: +0.2%
$34,200: -0.1%
$14,900: -0.1%

Federal Budget Projections:

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/05/fun_with_graphs.html

The dividend and capital gains tax cuts cost the government tens of billions of dollars every year they are extended. But their benefits flow overwhelmingly to wealthy Americans. The administration tries to obscure this fact by talking about the percentage of Americans who own stock. However, as the CBPP points out, this is misleading:

"In the quote above, the President pointed out that about half of all households own stock. This is consistent with the most recent data from the Federal Reserve Bank’s Survey of Consumer Finance. What this statistic ignores, however, is that nearly two-fifths of this stock is held in retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s and IRAs. This distinction is crucial, because capital gains and dividend income accruing inside these retirement accounts is not subject to taxation, and thus would not receive a tax benefit from the reduction in the tax rates on capital gains and dividend income."

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Who benefits from these tax cuts?? Lets see a show of hands who has 7-digit incomes.

<not me>

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Why are BuSh's tax policies INCREASING the burden on those in the middle ranks (making less than 6-digits)?

 

[JohnnyBz00LS]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Monday, Feb. 5, 2007 9:43 a.m. EST

Who Pays Almost All Federal Income Tax?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and fellow Democrats have talked about repealing President Bush’s tax cuts for upper-income Americans. But those who earn the most money – and invest the most in the economy – are already paying almost all federal personal income taxes, a recent report reveals.

Congress’ Joint Economic Committee disclosed that the richer half of the American population pays nearly 97 percent of income taxes. Most of that, 54 percent, is paid by those in the top 5 percent, Investor’s Business Daily (IBD) disclosed.

And the richest of the rich – just the top 1 percent – pay a hefty 34 percent of all personal income taxes collected by the federal government.

Meanwhile, about 14 million lower-income Americans have been removed from the income tax rolls since 2000 due to the earned income tax credit and the per-child tax credit, IBD reports.

Despite Bush’s tax cuts, the overall tax burden has been rising. Americans’ average overall tax burden has risen since 2004 and now stands at 31.6 percent of income, according to the Tax Foundation, due in large part to the alternative minimum tax and increases in property taxes.

"With an already rising tax burden, borne disproportionately by those who are successful, and who invest,” the IBD concludes, "the Democrats’ plans for big tax increases could be more damaging to the U.S. economy than ever before.”

Like I had said to this pathetic post before it was deleted, this is the cheapest, oldest, most pathetic tactic used by those who advocate "coddling the ultra rich" to confuse the reader into thinking that the ultra rich are the only ones paying taxes and the rest of us folks in the middle are getting off relatively scott free. LAME and DISHONEST.

 

[shagdrum]

...And this tax burden shift is a bad thing? Compare those figures of total federal taxes paid to how much they make. The top 20% of wage earners pay 63% of the taxes!! That's fair?

This only shows federal income taxes too. Most state taxes have gone up under the Bush administration.

Also, just because one set of income earners has to pay less taxes doesn't mean that the burden is shifted to another class (at least in any real monetary amount). This is a tax cut, remember?

 

[MonsterMark]

Johnny,

I can't believe how full of fungi you are. Really.

 

[shagdrum]

Like I had said to this pathetic post before it was deleted, this is the cheapest, oldest, most pathetic tactic used by those who advocate "coddling the ultra rich" to confuse the reader into thinking that the ultra rich are the only ones paying taxes and the rest of us folks in the middle are getting off relatively scott free. LAME and DISHONEST.

Lame and dishonest to "confuse" people to see the truth? The "ultra rich" are the ones who pay the vast majority of the taxes. The "upper one percent" pay more than a third of all federal income taxes. I want to know what is fair in your mind? give me a figure. It is real easy to claim something is unfair, so lets see what fair is to u.

 

[fossten]

Who benefits from these tax cuts?? Lets see a show of hands who has 7-digit incomes.

<not me>

This is the lamest liberal trick in the book. Of course the richest Americans get the largest tax cut - they are the ones paying all the taxes! Only a moron would fall for a trick like that anymore.

If you had half a brain, you would have remembered this thread, but obviously you don't, so here it is again:

Hey, Mr. Congressman ... Where's My Tax Cut?

By Alex Molina

Every once in a while, I find myself pondering the complicated subject of taxation and the economy. Social Security, the deficit, Iraq, oil ... somehow, it's all supposed to make sense. Instead, I get so overwhelmed by all the numbers that I usually just throw my hands up in frustration and forget about it.

Then I came across this little story by David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D., Professor of Economics at the University of Georgia - and it became crystal clear. It's like one of those fables you may have heard when you were a child. The ones that make even the most complex ideas seem very simple.

This story may not leave you with the warm, fuzzy feeling the three little pigs did - but go ahead and read it. See what you think ...

Suppose that, every day, 10 men go out for dinner and the total bill comes to $100. Suppose, too, that they decide to pay the bill the way we pay our taxes. This is what happens:

The first four men (the poorest) pay nothing.

The fifth pays $1.

The sixth pays $3.

The seventh pays $7.

The eighth pays $12.

The ninth pays $18.

The tenth man (the richest) pays $59.

The 10 men are happy with the arrangement. But then, one day, the owner of the restaurant throws them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he says, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." Dinner for the 10 now costs just $80.

The group still wants to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, so the first four men are unaffected. They still eat for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How do they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone gets his "fair share"?

They realize that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtract that amount from everybody's share, the fifth and sixth men would end up being paid to eat their meals.

So the restaurant owner suggests that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount - and he proceeds to work out how much each one should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now pays nothing (a 100% savings).

The sixth now pays $2 instead of $3 (a 33% savings).

The seventh now pays $5 instead of $7 (a 28% savings).

The eighth now pays $9 instead of $12 (a 25% savings).

The ninth now pays $14 instead of $18 (a 22% savings).

The tenth now pays $49 instead of $59 (a 16% savings).

All six of these men are now better off than they were before. And the other four continue to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declares the sixth man. He points to the tenth man, "But he got $10!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaims the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got 10 times more than me. "

"That's true!" shouts the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I get only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute!" the first four men yell in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. This system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surround the tenth and beat him up.

The next night, the tenth man doesn't show up for dinner, so the nine sit down and eat without him. But when it comes time to pay the bill, they make a disturbing discovery. They don't have enough money between all of them to cover even half of the bill.

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may stop showing up. In fact, they might start eating overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

*owned*

 

[Marcus]

What you guys apparently don't understand (besides basic mathmatical principles) is that the numbers you are citing are meaningless without knowing how much wealth is contained in each of those groups. As it turns out, it's almost an exact match. In other words, the top 5 percent are not paying any more AS A PERCENTAGE OF INCOME than any other group. What your "statistics" try to imply is that the top 5 percent should only pay 5 percent of taxes, which is completely misleading not to mention ludicrous. By the way, the stats used by some on the left, showing raw dollar amounts of the tax breaks, are equally useless. Taxes paid as percentage of individual income is the only stat that is comparable.

 

[MonsterMark]

In other words, the top 5 percent are not paying any more AS A PERCENTAGE OF INCOME than any other group. What your "statistics" try to imply is that the top 5 percent should only pay 5 percent of taxes, which is completely misleading not to mention ludicrous.

The following rant is NOT directed at TommyB, just so you know. It is intended for the whole.

I'm glad you lefties are in favor of half of America getting a free ride.

It is so great to see all of you Robin Hood's lurking in the weeds.

How 'bout get a life, get a job and join society instead of worrying how much you can take from the other guy.

This is the land of opportunity. Get off your dead ass and go do something. You can accomplish whatever you set out to do, that is unless, you keep voting for Dems who disenfranchise the whole population with their stupid political and economic agendas.

 

[Dereck]

I'm glad you lefties are in favor of half of America getting a free ride.

It is so great to see all of you Robin Hood's lurking in the weeds.

How 'bout get a life, get a job and join society instead of worrying how much you can take from the other guy.

This is the land of opportunity. Get off your dead ass and go do something. You can accomplish whatever you set out to do, that is unless, you keep voting for Dems who disenfranchise the whole population with their stupid political and economic agendas.

Hi Monster Mark

Dude let me buy you a beer

Regards

Dereck