You last visited: Today at 05:54 AM
|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|10-02-2012 04:11 PM|
Would that make you feel less angry?
|10-02-2012 11:51 AM|
try 45% for those making over $1M
60% once over $10M
|10-02-2012 11:46 AM|
Not including my state taxes, SS, etc., of course.
|10-01-2012 04:52 PM|
|10-01-2012 04:49 PM|
If not, kindly don't respond.
|10-01-2012 04:48 PM|
some might think someone has gotten the best of you...
|10-01-2012 04:39 PM|
|09-25-2012 09:05 AM|
Single person, no house, no kids, nothing other than 287K in taxable wages and 20K in itemized deductions (state tax), hits 25%.
If no state tax so no itemized deductions in this highly stylized example, 230k in taxable wages hits 25%.
|09-25-2012 07:34 AM|
Individual Income Tax Rates and Shares, 2009 From figure B "Taxable Returns: Number of Returns, Adjusted Gross Income, and Total Income Tax, by Size of Adjusted Gross Income, Tax Years 2008 and 2009" on printed page number 22 (file starts with printed page 19).
In figure B, the "Average tax rate is "total income tax" as a percentage of adjusted gross income less deficit."
Figure B does not include the impact of the refundable credits: the earned income credit, additional child tax credit, making work pay credit, refundable education credit, first time homebuyer credit, and the prior-year minimum tax credit.
The figure with the impact of the refundable credits is on printed page 23 in figure B1 "All Returns: Number of Returns, Adjusted Gross Income, and Total Income Tax Minus Refundable
Credits [ 1], by Size of Adjusted Gross Income, Tax Years 2008 and 2009". Note that the average return with an AGI of $30,000 or less has a negative tax rate.
In figure B1, the "Average tax rate is "total income tax minus refundable credits" as a percentage of adjusted gross income less deficit."
|09-25-2012 06:50 AM|
Also, this link suggests the effect tax rate on the top 1% is STILL the highest of all. I suspect the few ultra-high net worth individuals are getting the 15% effective rates, while the more numerous high-six, low-seven figure earners with more ordinary income are paying the higher rates, making the effective rate >20% for the 1%.
|09-25-2012 06:36 AM|
|loop610bob||My household is roughly top 5% and my effective this year will be about 18.5%. My marginal is 28%.|
|09-25-2012 05:30 AM|
|09-25-2012 05:17 AM|
The point that I was hoping to make with this thread is simple.
I've heard and read ad infinitum people claiming that their effective tax rate is multiples higher than the wealthy.
Almost every time I've heard that, it was obvious that the person making the claim was incorrect . They were not comparing the same numbers.
Most times they would be comparing their marginal tax rate to the effective rate of, say... a Warren Buffet/ Mitt Romney type.
That's not honest and has been propagated by the news media.
It bugged me and continues to, hence this thread.
|09-25-2012 05:11 AM|
|DJPlayer||I'm waiting for the argument on capital gains factoring into an effective tax rate to enter their thread.. To sum up we'll argue why someone's rate is low.. explain they own dividend yielding stock that have added up. etc.. etc.. Also some people playing IRA/401k catch up will see lower rates (IRA/401k especially as a business owner and older individuals is an extreme "tax haven" by definition). Button line why argue about eachothers' rates when we supposedly all play by the rules of the government?|
|09-25-2012 04:42 AM|
20 years of summaries – shared amid Democratic pressure – show couple's federal tax rate varied between 13.6% and 20.2%Oops....the same article later says the below. So now I am not sure.
Their average federal tax rate over that period was 20.2% and at no time dropped below 13.6%, according to the summary prepared by his accountants PriceWaterhouseCoopers.Here is some more from a different article:
During a live analysis of Romney's release, The Wall Street Journal's Liam Denning pointed out that a "weighted average would give a more accurate picture," but "that is a step Mr. Romney has said he won't take":So apparently Mr. Rmoney has released only the percentages for the least several years and not the actual amount made and actual taxes paid.
Why the manipulation? Why doesn't he simply release all the returns? Or if there are embarrassing stuff in there, at the very least least the income and tax paid for each of those years? I think this is gonna hurt Rmoney and hurt him badly. As more and more people realize that they have paid much higher marginal rates. (I admit people are not that smart. They would not even calculate their won effective tax rate.) And here is the ironic thing....for years Faux News has told them that taxes are high, high I tell you, so in the back of their minds they think they are paying 20, 25% or in taxes. And then as they realize that they have also paid 13% or so in payroll taxes, they would get furious that here have a person who badmouths 47% of people for not paying taxes yet the same people have paid a payroll tax equal to Mr. Rmoney's 2011 taxes.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|