this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
359 points (98.6% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2810 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

For the first time in the history of the United States, billionaires had a lower effective tax rate than working-class Americans.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

This is super simple. In 2022 the US federal government brought in $2.18 Trillion in revenue from federal income tax. Roughly %66 percent of Americans make over $50,000 and the median income of that group of people is around $60,000 a year. If it was made illegal to be compensated by anything other than USD (paid with stocks, etc. and those loopholes). $0-$50,000 is not taxed. If you make over $50,000 you pay a flat %17 income tax period. That would bring in roughly $2.24 Trillion in federal income tax revenue. No loop holes, no deductions, just %17 off the top. Then you can disband the IRS which costs $16 Billion a year to run. Don't need the IRS if everyone pays the same. That would be totally fair. You make $60,000 a year you pay $10,200 a year, you make $1 Billion a year $170,000,000 a year.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Under your simplified system a person making 55k brings in less than someone making 49k. Which disincentives getting a raise at that salary range. There is a reason that currently we only tax money over the brackets set.

Progressive taxation isn't really the problem here though, our low tax on investment profit is. We should also probably enforce a 2% wealth tax on anyone making over a billion dollars.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

We mostly don't want to do that — billionaires have a much greater ability to pay and are harmed far less by paying more. So it makes sense to have a progressive tax system, where the more you earn, the higher the marginal tax rate.

And you don't want to allow people to hide personal expenses as business expenses, and the likes, which is where much of the complexity of the tax code comes from.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Right now Billionaires don't have money just lying around to pay taxes with, it's tied up in owned business, properties, stocks, etc. I know, this is a part of the internet that just wants to eat the rich, I'm not one of them. They are just playing the game. The problem is the government allows them to play the game in such a way that is able to make them a lot more money. The problem is, the rules the government has made allows this to happen. If you drastically simplify the tax code, like to be one paragraph and eliminate the loop holes, it will settle itself out. The only way to do that though is to replace every person in Washington because they are taking advantage of it as well.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Billionaires can liquidate assets to pay taxes as needed — particularly income taxes, where that's easy.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you took half of all the billionaires wealth in the US it would be worth 1 year of IRS tax revenue. Or two year's of our deficit. Then what?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The point is requiring them to pay a higher percentage because they've benefitted more from the way society is put together. Not to end all other taxation.