Why bash "the rich" when last reported the top 10% of tax returns paid 68.2% of Federal taxes - is this fair?

Question

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/250.html

Personally, it would seem to me to be appropriate that we give "the rich" a hearty "Hip, hip, hooray!" & a "Thank you very much, sirs & madams, for paying WAY more than your fair share so that I don't have to!" For you fairness police, that is what I would call fair treatment of "the rich" - instead of the lack of gratitude you evince towards your betters (i.e., those paying your taxes for you).

Oh, & for those of you too lazy to look at the data let me hep ya out: the bottom 50% of tax returns paid 3.3% of Federal income taxes. Whattaya fairness police have to say about that one?!?

Lastly, if anyone goes anywhere near "That's a lie!", "This can't possibly be true!", "You don't really believe that, do you?", or any other nonsense that shows that you not only are not open to the truth, you're too lazy to go to the link & get it, YOU WILL BE REPORTED!

That last comment always draws an idiot or two; they'll be reported, too.

Answer 1

that isn't true that is a lie. I watch CNN and the middle class pays most of the taxes. I heard one rich guy admit that his receptionist in his office paid more taxes than he did by owning the company.
It is a war on the middle class so report me all you want that is not true.
Also, don't post a question with threats as to how we many answer. We still have freedom of speech in this country until the rich political leaders take that away.

Answer 2

Well that's not quite fair to say as they create jobs. like the tax attorneys who find the loop holes and the same with the certified accountants, the rich have to pay them "maintenance" every year. You may wonder why the rich in Congress like Kerry or even Clinton were against the Bush tax cuts. Kerry is worth $180 million and his wife what a billion. Well the deal is they know that the tax guys can take a $8 million estate and turn it into a one million dollar one. Thus the estate would owe not taxes. To do this it's not that elaborate. The local attorney firms hire local crooked yokels to say cruise adn appraise the land and building or homes. I am working n one right now that the land is worth minimum of two grand and it has from 2 to 4 thousand in timber on it. What they did was have a crooked forrester adn Realtor appraise the land and timber for $500 an acre, then go back eight years or further when some property sold for $750 or less, goat pasture and use that to show the IrS. If you have 2,000 acres @ $500 that's a million, but wait it gets better. The law firms then set them up in a limited partnership or an LLC and discount it another 20%. What's funny on this one you have hoes and cash worth a million and that didn't even include the land. So once they get the crooked stuff then they send it to the fluff guy. The fluff guy takes the information and puts if up and sharpens it and puts it in a nice booklet. Why do this simple this will further insulate the cpa and law firms. Something comes up they just say "Hey, those guys did it". Then those guys say "Hey the local yokel gave us the info". They the local yokel can say they messed up or got confused. What is even worse is when one fo the IrS agents retires or leaves and goes into private practice they get tons of business shoveled way by the large law firms. Also the CPa firms are able to audit the banks and if you got a crooked bank with crooked lawyers who associate with the larger crooked firm who is hooked up with the crooked cpa firm then you have a su0per elaborate deal going on. I have talked to some of the lawyers that were irs and they say they are best of friends with the law firms. so the Democrats are upset as they know the tax cut deal only gives ore cash, I mean look at the estate of the guy that owned the baseball team. $500 million. So the Dems are mad that as they know it is already discounted down to nothing. That is why they are trying to make a deal and say someone with 5 million can be excluded, which an estate like that might go to several people and they spend some of the cash, where as the old way they only get half that. In closing the firms charge a pretty penny for this and when the person passes on they will normally call the heirs in and tell them there is a tax problem and milk it for more on this one it's up to a million. So hats off to the Democrats for whining about it but not doing anything about it. If someone had five million and is tax exempt that is good more than that do you think they are really going to spend it. I mean kerry bought a boat but docked it in another state. Since lobbyists run Congress by giving them billions * each year and employing their families how hard is it to believe there are crooked law firms, cpa firms that the feds use to audit banks and crooked fed employees and crooked judges and crooked ..................... Have a great 2011.

Answer 3

Actually, before talking about percentage of income tax, you first need to talk about percentage of income. The top 10% make well over 10% of the total income -- according to your own source they have approximately 45% of total income. Thus they pay only 23% more with a progressive tax system than they would with a flat tax system.

In addition, almost all of that 23% gap is attributable to the top 5% who make approximately 33% of all the income.

The more important question is about percentage of gross income that goes to all federal taxes. You have to remember that people making less than $90,000.00 pay 6% on all income to Social Security (and 2% to Medicaid). A person making $1 million pays 0% in Social Security on that last $900,000 and thus effectively is paying only a 0.5% Social Security tax. Your source only talks about income taxes not all federal taxes.

A real comparison would look at effective tax rates. The mean income tax rate, according to your source is 12% When you include Social Security and Medicare, that makes the mean total tax rate 20%. The mean tax rate for the top 1%, those who make over $330,000 a year, is 27%. You give me the added money to put me in the top 1% and I will gladly pay the extra $21,000 in taxes and laugh all the way to the bank.

Answer 4

Wow, that's a pretty extravagant claim! I'll check your source. It would only make sense that those who earn more would pay more in taxes. That's the way it should be, by the way. I think what people get angry about is when Bush comes along and lowers the taxes for the rich and then you don't have any money going into domestic programs. The only thing his taxes can really afford with much clout is the war machine. Billions are being spent each week over in Iraq, and there's no money left for education back home. That's what these taxes do to our country. Also, one must look at the way that many of the rich got rich in the first place, and it's because they took advantage of the poor or those who need to do the nitty gritty. Case in point, the minimum wage is not a liveable wage. Yet, most companies pay employees at their lowest levels this amount or somewhere near to it.

Answer 5

No this is not fair. But the 50% at the bottom are always the first to complain when everyone gets an across the board tax reduction . Those who pay more in taxes get more back. If you only pay 5,000 a year in taxes and you get a 10% cut you get 500 back. If you pay 500000 a year in taxes you get 50,000 back. Why is that so hard to understand?

The IRS needs to be abolished! We need a flat tax or a national sales tax. The underground economy needs to start paying their fair share too.

Answer 6

Well I think that's a great statistic. It makes sense because the more you make, the more you can afford to pay. Our family pays almost 50% income tax. After that, we can still afford to live comfortably. But if a lower income family had to pay 50% tax, they would stuggle to make ends meet. So a graduated tax system make a lot of sence when you think about it.

Answer 7

well... the question is.. how much of the national income do they have?

I think it should be proportional... if they make 68 percent of the income... they should pay 68 percent of the taxes...

sounds fair to me... I'm not going to thank someone for paying their taxes just like I do?

and from what I understand... they make every bit of 68 percent of the income (if not more)... although they do have ways of hiding it, so looking at "taxable income" is pretty much a joke...

Answer 8

They should be ashamed that the only way the poor can get any help from their "betters" is by forcing them through taxation. They should be generous enough to offer it without duress...follow Jesus teachings & Bill Gates example.

Answer 9

Another source, direct from the IRS itself, confirms your statements. See link below

Answer 10

They bash the rich without thinking that those rich people usually employ thousands of other people. Without the rich, most of the people who bash them wouldn't have a job nor would they be drawing welfare.