Do you find progressive tax rates fair?

Answer 1

You would think that a flat tax would seem more amiable.

But the higher income bracket is against this method as they would actually pay more in taxes. Why? Because there are so many tax advantages for the more wealthy that they really do not pay more in taxes.

The breaking point becomes one the line between making enough money to just be able to cover living expenses with perhaps a little toward retirement, and that of having real disposable income.

Once you get to the point of disposable income, there are many ways to shelter that income for tax sakes. Once you have so much disposable income that you run out of tax shelters, the real taxation begins. That seems to be the point of wealth when people tend to complain the most. Oddly, that is who is better able to afford taxes.

I'd be in favor of a flat tax up to that breaking point, (say 15%), followed by a slightly lower flat tax for above that point, (say 10%).

If the top 5% of the wealthy actually only paid a flat 10% rate on their income, (say above $200,000), it would more than make up for revenue issues to date. However, since they are the people in power, and since they have tax shelter laws working in their favor, they really don't pay more in taxes compared to others.
The upper middle class does.

In fact, the middle class is who pays for most everything in America.

Funny thing is, they are the group with the greatest voting power.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Answer 2

The marginal propensity to devour is going down as income is going up. The adverse ought to pay a more effective percentage of their income in basic terms to get by employing. The wealthier you're, the added of your funds you may have the funds for to not pump again out into the gadget. This, between different causes, provide capitalism a wealth-conglomeration effect. The extra funds you've, the better in a position you're to do the economically optimal issues at the same time with your funds, so that you've a tendency to receive extra. once you've little funds, you need to spend, even if this is an monetary climate that favors spending or saving. you may not make investments. The modern tax resolves this difficulty, regardless of the reality that how modern it will be is a a lot tougher question that calls for rigorous monetary prognosis. Provision of particular taxpayer funded needs are also part of this, permitting extra human beings to spend their income a extra smart style. This has been an major part of any nicely functioning capitalist gadget for over 70 years.

Answer 3

no system is fair to everyone, this is a reasonable compromise.

I was talking to an MP's wife the other day and she said the untaxable pay amount (freepay) should be increased but when I told her the first rate was only 10% she was surprised.

back in the 1960's the top rate was, I believe, over 80%. In France now it is 50%. Our 40% seems OK.

Answer 4

No, it punished people for hard work and success. Its sad when a pay raise puts you into the next higher tax bracket and you essentially bring home the same amount as you did before the raise.

As far as deductions go, I also find it sad that we have to spend money on "approved" expenses in order to not have to send it in as taxes.

Basically it makes the hardest working people support the rest.

Answer 5

No, I think a flat tax rate on everyone would be the most fair.

Answer 6

The only FAIR tax is a SALES tax.

Answer 7

No. I feel that I am 'rewarded' for hard work by paying more taxes. Granted, that is what deductions are for...

Answer 8

NO not fair why should I pay for the lazy and dumb I don't even do that for my adult children.

Answer 9

Not hardly. The harder you work and the better decisions you make, the more the government takes.

Answer 10

poverty in Africa