Distributions of Federal Income Taxation

[Lafayette]

Here is the present Household Income-Distribution chart for the US. The chart is not easy to understand - but this helps - that there are three facts worth noting from that chart:
*6% of all American families earn less than 21K annually!
*The mid-point income for ALL AMERICANS is $49.5K a year.
*The top 10% of families earn salaries beyond (and way beyond) $130K per year.

If there is anything worth noting in that chart (which is not easy to understand), it is that most Americans may not be dirt-poor, but with a median*-income of just less than $50K neither are they "very-well-off".

So, it is up to YOU to decide if that distribution is fair or not - and consider that upper-incomes are no longer taxed at

Note that Median Income means not the average but just half-way up the Income Ladder.

Note further this historical distribution of Federal Income Tax By Type of Tax:

Note that:
*Total Income Taxation has remained fairly constant (at around 45% of Total Revenue) ever since the end of WW2,
*Payroll Taxation has largely supplanted both Corporate- and Excise-Taxation

What do you think about the fairness of that tax-distribution evolution shown above? Why should Corporate Taxation shrink? (To give more of the profits made to Upper Management - that's why!)

 

[NatMorton]

Why should Corporate Taxation shrink?

Because for some time now large corporates operate in a global market and can, depending on the situation, literally shop for the best tax rate. So, in a global competition for taxable revenue, which is better: being a tax jurisdiction that attracts businesses or one that causes them to flee?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Because for some time now large corporates operate in a global market and can, depending on the situation, literally shop for the best tax rate. So, in a global competition for taxable revenue, which is better: being a tax jurisdiction that attracts businesses or one that causes them to flee?

So your solution is a race to the bottom with a goal of corporations paying no taxes whatsoever while raking in billions? Your ideology is a cancer.

 

[Luther]

So your solution is a race to the bottom with a goal of corporations paying no taxes whatsoever while raking in billions? Your ideology is a cancer.

Did you know that the Corporate tax is closer to those more democrat socialist countries of Europe?

I know you don't want the HEAR that(LOL)

 

[bluesmoke]

Here is the present Household Income-Distribution chart for the US. The chart is not easy to understand - but this helps - that there are three facts worth noting from that chart:
*6% of all American families earn less than 21K annually!
*The mid-point income for ALL AMERICANS is $49.5K a year.
*The top 10% of families earn salaries beyond (and way beyond) $130K per year.

If there is anything worth noting in that chart (which is not easy to understand), it is that most Americans may not be dirt-poor, but with a median*-income of just less than $50K neither are they "very-well-off".

So, it is up to YOU to decide if that distribution is fair or not - and consider that upper-incomes are no longer taxed at

Note that Median Income means not the average but just half-way up the Income Ladder.

Note further this historical distribution of Federal Income Tax By Type of Tax:

Note that:
*Total Income Taxation has remained fairly constant (at around 45% of Total Revenue) ever since the end of WW2,
*Payroll Taxation has largely supplanted both Corporate- and Excise-Taxation

What do you think about the fairness of that tax-distribution evolution shown above? Why should Corporate Taxation shrink? (To give more of the profits made to Upper Management - that's why!)

If your Federal Income Tax By Type of Tax is a link, it doesn't work for me. Do you have a link to the source info?

 

[bluesmoke]

Did you know that the Corporate tax is closer to those more democrat socialist countries of Europe?

I know you don't want the HEAR that(LOL)

Did you know that even before the Trump corp tax giveaway, the net US corp tax was not the worst the Republicans said it was and was one of the best? Just because the tax rate is higher doesn't mean they actually end up paying that % tax. You can't produce the evidence to prove what you claim in your post as being a net tax that is worse than whatever countries you say are not "democrat socialist countries", let alone list and prove what are and that the US corp tax structure is "closer to those...". Thus, your claim is unfounded and rejected for lack of evidence.

 

[Lafayette]

COMPARABLE BUT NOT EQUAL

Because for some time now large corporates operate in a global market and can, depending on the situation, literally shop for the best tax rate. So, in a global competition for taxable revenue, which is better: being a tax jurisdiction that attracts businesses or one that causes them to flee?

I've worked in Europe for more than three decades selling products/services.

I can assure you that such is NOT HAPPENING to any large extent.

What is happening, however, is that American companies are NOT REPORTING foreign income having it stashed it in European Banks.

I've known Yanks sent here to run US-operations in EU-markets. I have enjoyed wakening them up to the reality of European Business Practices.

I even spent two days consoling the wife of one Management Head who went to jail for not reporting his real income.

Wakey, Wakey, boyz-'n-girlz, the EU is a market of 46 million people with a combined GDP $15 trillion compared to the US at $20 trillion. The economies of both are different but comparable nonetheless (even if per capita GDP of the US is much, much higher*) ...

*The EU swallowed almost whole the eastern-European countries under Communist control and Russian domination. They have not yet improved their per-capita GDP with those western countries that started the EU ...

 

[bluesmoke]

More stats are that about 40% of earners avg $40K/yr; 47% of Americans pay not fed income tax (but do pay SS, etc); 28% of hshlds pay no net fed taxes.

Five Myths About the 47 Percent (brookings.edu)

The reason why so many either pay no net taxes and no fed income tax at the end of the yr is that most of them don't make enough F'n money. If they made a LW based on COL, more would be off govt assistance. Raising the salary floor would raise, somewhat, the higher earners by employee demand (the whataboutme effect) and thus more would be paying taxes.

 

[NatMorton]

COMPARABLE BUT NOT EQUAL


I've worked in Europe for more than three decades selling products/services.

I can assure you that such is NOT HAPPENING to any large extent.

What is happening, however, is that American companies are NOT REPORTING foreign income having it stashed it in European Banks.

I've known Yanks sent here to run US-operations in EU-markets. I have enjoyed wakening them up to the reality of European Business Practices.

I even spent two days consoling the wife of one Management Head who went to jail for not reporting his real income.

Wakey, Wakey, boyz-'n-girlz, the EU is a market of 46 million people with a combined GDP $15 trillion compared to the US at $20 trillion. The economies of both are different but comparable nonetheless (even if per capita GDP of the US is much, much higher*) ...

*The EU swallowed almost whole the eastern-European countries under Communist control and Russian domination. They have not yet improved their per-capita GDP with those western countries that started the EU ...

I've spent most of my career working for large, multi-national corporations and with lines of business that do exactly this. It is a well practiced tax management strategy.

And FWIW, over that time I've had a hand in deciding where jobs for those companies were created and where they were not. I can promise you because of the tax and labor law issues, your country, France, was one we bent over backwards to avoid. Businesses do whatever they can to avoid doing business in expensive countries. That's just a fact of life.

 

[Lafayette]

So, in a global competition for taxable revenue, which is better: being a tax jurisdiction that attracts businesses or one that causes them to flee?

Of course, the correct answer depends somewhat upon "which markets". There are two main markets - the US and the EU. The latter is the more costly of the two, because governments spend a LOT on Health-Care and Post-secondary Education, which they recuperate from national-taxation. Any comparison depends upon answering the question "Which taxation?" Because they can be very different depending upon the nature of the tax.

I am not qualified to answer that knotty-question. It's too complex. Anyway, the question may also be too complex to answer.

There are a great many factors that influence competition, and consumer purchasing-tax is only the most most well known to people. When it comes to setting-up shop somewhere, I'm no longer sure that taxation is a principle question. Europe once produced its own cars in-house. Now they come mostly either from abroad (here in Europe), especially the lower-range cars that are more price-sensitive sales-wise.

NB: It is curious that national car-makers in the US have not fled to Mexico. Cost of manpower too high?

 

[Lafayette]

The reason why so many either pay no net taxes and no fed income tax at the end of the yr is that most of them don't make enough F'n money. If they made a LW based on COL, more would be off govt assistance. Raising the salary floor would raise, somewhat, the higher earners by employee demand (the whataboutme effect) and thus more would be paying taxes.

Yes, because these people vote so you want them to be not terribly, terribly upset with their meager-existence.

Which higher income-taxation would most certainly do and that's not good at election-time ...

 

[mrjurrs]

Because for some time now large corporates operate in a global market and can, depending on the situation, literally shop for the best tax rate. So, in a global competition for taxable revenue, which is better: being a tax jurisdiction that attracts businesses or one that causes them to flee?

There will always be companies leaving the US. Being here means something. Increase corporate taxes.

 

[NatMorton]

There will always be companies leaving the US. Being here means something. Increase corporate taxes.

That's just it. They don't leave in the sense of leaving business behind. Just explained how in another thread: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/bidens-2021-jobs-elimination-act.443637/page-3#post-1073658363

 

[Lafayette]

ANGELA

And FWIW, over that time I've had a hand in deciding where jobs for those companies were created and where they were not. I can promise you because of the tax and labor law issues, your country, France, was one we bent over backwards to avoid. Businesses do whatever they can to avoid doing business in expensive countries. That's just a fact of life.

I'm not surprised. France is a bitch-of-a-country to work in. And that comes from a French Mentality that is more than six-centuries old. And it is based upon the fact that France has had a leadership based upon central control by one person. Aka "kingship".

In the latter part of the 18th century, "the people" tried to dump the king. What took its place was a sad series of individuals who tried to impose "their version" of freedom. To the point that guy called Napoleon started winning wars and became the default leader of the country. France did not regain "democracy" until the end of WW2.

But even in that French democracy, it was a bunch of self-centered French males who fought amongst one another to "lead the country". Restructuring after WW2 was something that the people wanted, but it seems that it was its political-leaders who tried to take the credit. (Demand for goods and services is the heart of any economy. Not the people with their hand on the country's political rudder.)

The French are still in "learning mode" when it comes to democracy, and from time to time on TV there are reminiscences of certain male-leaders. You see, leadership in France is all about Me, Me, Me and how I lead the government. The French are so fixated on "leadership" that they forget that the Real Motor of any economy is Total Consumer Demand.

Having said all that - it's still a damn fine place to live. Just don't get too far embroiled in its economy - because France is one of three major economies of Roman origin. (Spain and Italy are the other two.) These three countries have continuous problems with male heads-of-state that simply do not know how to manage an economy. But more so, most of the voting-public are fascinated by the individuals and not how they manage the economy. And why is that important.

Because all three were run for more than 5-centuries by the Roman Empire and its leadership of entirely male individuals.

And if you think that notion is now historically obsolete then I invite you to think again. Only the northern European states are beginning to vote women into key positions of political power. What Angela Merkel did for Germany also must happen elsewhere in the European Union. That will take time. But time is on your side, ladies ...

 

[mrjurrs]

That's just it. They don't leave in the sense of leaving business behind. Just explained how in another thread: https://debatepolitics.com/threads/bidens-2021-jobs-elimination-act.443637/page-3#post-1073658363

As I see it, all of those tax policies could be changed by changing tax laws...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

 

[Mulefoot]

Essentially, corporations don't absorb tax - they pass it. So, the more tax is levied on corporations, the more they pass in the form of higher prices, lower wages, etc. And proportionally to their income, lower income users purchase more corporate goods and services than do their wealthy counterparts - as wealthy individuals tend to save more. Of course this is because the owners and investors of corporations are the ones that structure the flow of those costs.

Ultimately corporate tax is a regressive tax on the poor.

 

[NatMorton]

As I see it, all of those tax policies could be changed by changing tax laws...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Capital is far more agile then legislation.

 

[cpwill]

So your solution is a race to the bottom with a goal of corporations paying no taxes whatsoever while raking in billions? Your ideology is a cancer.

Interesting that you picture a race to ever-freer human endeavor, with less and less a squashing hand of government, a journey down.

 

[cpwill]

*6% of all American families earn less than 21K annually!
*The mid-point income for ALL AMERICANS is $49.5K a year.
*The top 10% of families earn salaries beyond (and way beyond) $130K per year.

Overall I'd say that's pretty good news - I'll take it!

Out of curiosity, why so interested in another country's income?

 

[Bullseye]

Here is the present Household Income-Distribution chart for the US. The chart is not easy to understand - but this helps - that there are three facts worth noting from that chart:
*6% of all American families earn less than 21K annually!
*The mid-point income for ALL AMERICANS is $49.5K a year.
*The top 10% of families earn salaries beyond (and way beyond) $130K per year.

If there is anything worth noting in that chart (which is not easy to understand), it is that most Americans may not be dirt-poor, but with a median*-income of just less than $50K neither are they "very-well-off".

So, it is up to YOU to decide if that distribution is fair or not - and consider that upper-incomes are no longer taxed at

Note that Median Income means not the average but just half-way up the Income Ladder.

Note further this historical distribution of Federal Income Tax By Type of Tax:

Note that:
*Total Income Taxation has remained fairly constant (at around 45% of Total Revenue) ever since the end of WW2,
*Payroll Taxation has largely supplanted both Corporate- and Excise-Taxation

What do you think about the fairness of that tax-distribution evolution shown above? Why should Corporate Taxation shrink? (To give more of the profits made to Upper Management - that's why!)

The upper 10% pay a share of income tax almost double what their share of the total income is.



Also, a common misconception” Corporations don’t pay tax - their customers do as part of the purchase price of the product or service.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

Interesting that you picture a race to ever-freer human endeavor, with less and less a squashing hand of government, a journey down.

Ah yes, if it isn't Ayn Rand poster child "all taxation is theft" CpWill.

Some of us aren't radical sociopaths and don't believe corporations should be making tens of billions without paying taxes while the rest of us normal people have to pay the taxes required to keep society functional.

 

[Lafayette]

IGNORANCE IS THE BANE OF MODERN CULTURES

Some of us aren't radical sociopaths and don't believe corporations should be making tens of billions without paying taxes while the rest of us normal people have to pay the taxes required to keep society functional.

I'm a radical-sociopath? Wow! (Gotta tell momie that one! ;^)

I could not agree more. Corporations should be highly taxed - starting with a Minimum Tax Law that stipulates 5% on your sales revenue! What's the problem with that one!

And how about a confiscatory-tax on all Wealth more than 10 megabucks. As well as, a maximum OneMegaDollar tax-free inheritance limit (including real-estate valuation). That WILL cut their you-know-whats off - this mega-billionaires who have to show the world "who's got the moulah".

It's a recent history of Replicant Presidents that has wreaked the havoc, starting with Reckless-Ronnie who lowered upper-income taxation. By which he created the Wealth-Crowd that Uncle Sam has today.

I didn't vote for the Wealth-Crowd Funded Ronald Raygun. I was already here in Europe enjoying nearly free post-secondary education and a National Healthcare System. It was when I went back stateside that I saw (really) the comedy of a democracy Uncle Sam had created. The rich get richer and the poorer can survive as best they can on what's left. (Ignorance is the bane of modern cultures. It permits the few to manipulate the many.)

Both low-cost National Health Care and Post-secondary Education are worth the taxation that supports them. Because both are Very Expensive to run. But, so what?

The payoff is worth it. Good but not Great Jobs (money-wise) and a government that is there when you need it most. For tertiary-education that will get you a good-job and national-healthcare that will keep you alive to a decently old age.

Who should ask for more and what more ... ?
Who should need more ... ?

 

[RabidAlpaca]

IGNORANCE IS THE BANE OF MODERN CULTURES


I'm a radical-sociopath? Wow! (Gotta tell momie that one! ;^)

I could not agree more. Corporations should be highly taxed - starting with a Minimum Tax Law that stipulates 5% on your sales revenue! What's the problem with that one!

And how about a confiscatory-tax on all Wealth more than 10 megabucks. As well as, a maximum OneMegaDollar tax-free inheritance limit (including real-estate valuation). That WILL cut their you-know-whats off - this mega-billionaires who have to show the world "who's got the moulah".

It's a recent history of Replicant Presidents that has wreaked the havoc, starting with Reckless-Ronnie who lowered upper-income taxation. By which he created the Wealth-Crowd that Uncle Sam has today.

I didn't vote for the Wealth-Crowd Funded Ronald Raygun. I was already here in Europe enjoying nearly free post-secondary education and a National Healthcare System. It was when I went back stateside that I saw (really) the comedy of a democracy Uncle Sam had created. The rich get richer and the poorer can survive as best they can on what's left. (Ignorance is the bane of modern cultures. It permits the few to manipulate the many.)

Both low-cost National Health Care and Post-secondary Education are worth the taxation that supports them. Because both are Very Expensive to run. But, so what?

The payoff is worth it. Good but not Great Jobs (money-wise) and a government that is there when you need it most. For tertiary-education that will get you a good-job and national-healthcare that will keep you alive to a decently old age.

Who should ask for more and what more ... ?
Who should need more ... ?

I said people who don't believe corporations should pay taxes are sociopaths to cpwill, you got offended that I called you a sociopath then declared you think corporations should pay taxes. How does that make any sense?

 

[Lafayette]

I said people who don't believe corporations should pay taxes are sociopaths to cpwill, you got offended that I called you a sociopath then declared you think corporations should pay taxes. How does that make any sense?

I'm so used to it on this forum that it makes me smile. I assure you that I was not offended.

It's just talk, after all is said and nothing done ...

 

[rickc]

Simple solution to corporations leaving America because of taxes. You want access to the largest consumer base in the world then pay the taxes.

Instead of giving all the money to the top 10% why not try putting more money into that consumer base. The people who spend the majority of their income just making ends meet.

Want to see real economic growth. Give working Americans a raise.