The rich aren't paying enough tax.

[ballpeen]

THE RICH AREN'T PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE

By Neal Boortz

 

Well, folks. The figures are out. The latest numbers from the IRS have hit the mean streets --- and guess what? The rich still aren't paying their fair share! Well .. that will be the liberal line, but since you're reading the Nuze YOU are going to know the truth. So here it is .. the latest figures from the year 2007, according to the Tax Foundation.

 

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

 

The top 1% of taxpayers officially paid 40.4% of total federal income taxes. This is the highest percentage in modern history. Compare that number to twenty years prior (1987) when the top 1% of taxpayers paid 24.8% of income taxes. Now if you're not initiated into the Church of the Painful Truth you're probably thinking that the evil top 1% probably earn way over 40% of the income. Well .. you would be wrong. These nasty, disgusting and oh-so-easy to hate high-achievers actually earned about 22.8% of total adjusted gross income. And just how much does some crook have to earn to be in this top 1%? Try $410,000. Remember now .. many, if not most, of these wretched people are small business owners and their adjusted gross income is really their business income. Still .. they're nasty. Right?

 

Ok .. more painful truth. The share of taxes paid by the top 1% of taxpayers now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95% of taxpayers. Again, the top 1% paid 40.4% of incomes taxes while the bottom 95% paid 39.4% of the income tax burden. For those of you who are government educated, that means that the top 1% of taxpayers (which is just 1.4 million people) paid a larger share of the income tax burden than the bottom 95% of taxpayers (which is comprised of 134 million people). This means that the evil rich are carrying the road.

 

The key to these numbers is that over 9 out of 10 Americans will never see them nor will anyone ever share these numbers with them. So the Democrats will, in spite of these numbers, be able to continue to demonize the evil rich and spread the lie that somehow they aren't "paying their fair share." To make things worse ... Democrat demagogues will continue to promote the idea that all of their vote-buying social welfare programs can easily be funded with additional taxes on the rich. Where do they start? When the top 1% is paying about 80% of all income taxes?

 

Well .. it gets worse. Now for the first time, the IRS decided to break things down even further. It presented data on the super rich, the top 0.1% of tax earners. We are talking about the top 10% of the top 1% of earners. About 141,000 taxpayers fit into this group. Those 141,000 people account for 12% of the adjusted gross income earned but they pay 20% of all federal income taxes.

 

 

http://boortz.com/nealz_nuze/index.html

 

[Chicopee John]

I've known this for sime time, 'Peen - maybe the % has moved a point or two.

 

Fact is, the top 1% pay way more than their fair share.

 

Regardless of the facts, this remains political fodder. Not only has their relative % doubled since 1987, the size of the pie has grown by a significant amount.

 

PS Don't worry, my family isn't even in the same universe of the top 1%ers.

[calfoxwc]

But, it will continue to be used as a class struggle voter manipulative tool.

 

Leftists just have to hope a lot of Americans don't take the time to

 

find out the truth about stuff like this for themselves.

 

 

[Chicopee John]

But, it will continue to be used as a class struggle voter manipulative tool.

 

Leftists just have to hope a lot of Americans don't take the time to

 

find out the truth about stuff like this for themselves.

 

Some misinformation is simply crammed down our throats to the extent that a majority comes to believe the misinformation to be truth.

 

Not unlike the fallacy that women make 64-cents on the dollar compared to men doint comparable work. Not true. But try to convince folks who have swallowed the bait, line, and sinker.

 

[osusev]

Ok so if you "wealthy" and have CPA's and Financial planners/managers deal with your "wealth" what advantages do you hold?

 

If you can bury your Health care costs into a LLC or corp, maybe you can also drive a vehicle(s) leased/insurance/maintenence and paid for by the company, That pesky cell phone paid in full by the company, your "business" lunch(s) and golf outings? yup you guessed it paid for and written off by the company, what about clothing allowances? you bet depending upon job types percentages paid for by your company, other related travel and entertainment/dining expenses? Company memberships to gyms and other related social clubs because of network Marketing?

 

now those are non aggressive costs most CPA's can help you use your corp or llc to pay for... Those are not taxed as income but expensed toward the company, but for a lot of people those costs can easily reach a few thousand dollars a month that dont count toward income that is taxed.

 

You think that tax deferment for investment gains is not HEAVILY managed by the wealthy? that is only possible because they can afford the professionals who manage the funds and proper methods/paperwork? What about all of the other vehicles financially like all of those off shore investments that have exploded over the last 20 years?

 

The gulf of difference between the lifestyles and what each group is worried about is vastly different in terms of basic costs to sustain basic necessities.

 

I do agree the Left demonized the concept of "wealthy" however the also notable left out fact is inflation and value of the dollar...... which VASTLY affects the relationship of how much the "wealthy" are taxed

 

 

 

[Mr. T]

But to many, even the middle class are deemed rich in the eyes of liberals, and they play the Envy game to increase taxes and take away more benefits.

 

The way things are set up allready dont make since. My sister and her husband have been laid off all year, but because they both worked hard in 2008 and made a decent wage they wont be able to send their daughter to college. when the Awards letter came around they were told that they can afford to pay 100% of her tuition because they were rich.?? huh?

 

I dont want to here that old Socialist democrat battle cry that they are going to cut taxes for the poor and increase taxes on the rich. Hell, most people making under 24K dont pay taxes. They get it all back on their returns.

 

But then again that is all we get out of the Obama white house, Class envy speeches and a new payroll Czar for executives.

 

And what is Obama's networth? And how much money has Obama recieved from Saudi prince's?

 

Is this another Pot calling the kettle black here?

 

 

[Orange Dog Democrat]

Boortz' numbers are pretty misleading. The tax burden on the richest is as low as it's been in many, many years. Highest marginal tax rates, a sampling -- per Wikipedia:

 

1932-'33 63%

1941 81%

1944-'45 94%

1954-'63 91% (supposedly the great prosperous era everyone wants to return to)

1964 77% (AFTER the Kennedy tax cuts)

1982 50%

1987 33%

1993-'00 39.6%

Currently 35%

 

The reason the rich are paying more as a total is that the very rich are even richer than before. Income inequality is throwing everything off.

[nobuo]

For some reason, Liberals seem to think that there is a set amount of wealth. They feel like its up to the government, and good folks like them to "distribute" the wealth so that everyone gets their "fair share". If you ever talk to Obama or any of the other Liberals who make substantially more income than the people they claim they want to help, ask them how much of their pay check will be distributed to those in need. What these folks don't realize is that life is not a big piece of pie. Life is a kitchen where you can make as many pies as you want.

 

Conservatives understand this simple fact: The government can't make poor people wealthy. It can make wealthy people poor, though. You don't make a nation wealthy by taking from the producers and giving to the non-producers. If you were to sit down and study any of the communist nations, you would learn very quickly that when the government controls everything, life is pretty bad for those people.

 

Do I believe our country is going to turn into a communist nation? No way. There are enough people out there who understand what I'm talking about to make sure it doesn't.

[Guest mz.]

But, it will continue to be used as a class struggle voter manipulative tool.

 

Leftists just have to hope a lot of Americans don't take the time to

 

find out the truth about stuff like this for themselves.

 

I always love the humor in folks like cal defending the top 1% tooth and nail.

[Chicopee John]

The reason the rich are paying more as a total is that the very rich are even richer than before. Income inequality is throwing everything off.

 

Huh?

 

[Pumpkin Eater]

The top 1% control most of the money in the US, so it only makes sense they would be paying a large portion of income taxes.

 

Is it really that surprising?

[Westside Steve]

The top 1% control most of the money in the US, so it only makes sense they would be paying a large portion of income taxes.

 

Is it really that surprising?

 

They already do.

And the bulk of the investing.

So?

WSS

[Pumpkin Eater]

They already do.

And the bulk of the investing.

So?

WSS

 

 

So how does it not make sense that they would pay a lot of taxes?

 

I'm not understanding the anger that people who control most of the money also pay a lot of taxes.

 

It only makes sense.

[Westside Steve]

So how does it not make sense that they would pay a lot of taxes?

 

I'm not understanding the anger that people who control most of the money also pay a lot of taxes.

 

It only makes sense.

 

Again they do.

WSS

[osusev]

Lets really put this into perspective and not try to expand the argument into class vs class.

 

IF you are "wealthy" (the numerical determining factor depending upon IRS tax rates or social definitions are not the same) for the sake of argument here 500k+/year of REPORTED AGI.

 

If you "report" that as claimed income their is an awful lot of expensed income and tax deferred investment vehicles that they do use via financial professionals. That income class of people are not worried about paying utilities or health care. They also are not worried about their houses being over run by lower level income mobs.

 

They have more than likely attained those levels of income because of skill sets and money management skills or professionals.

 

In all likelihood people who do attain levels of REPORTED income are not going to stop investing and expanding their wealth no matter the income tax levels or capital gains they are hit with. In fact they are strategizing with other financial professionals on other vehicles to move and invest the money with.

 

Taxing the top 1% is not going to stop their investment strategies, they will just adjust and find other loopholes or take in account the cost to invest and pass on the costs or plan for them in business acquisitions or expansions.

 

Whats funny is the conservative right has in effect using fear pr tactics mobilized a significant percentage of their voting bloc who are not even affected by these possible raises by political talking points.

 

the government is invading and taking over.... The government by taxing the top 1%(trickle down economic theory has obviously been proven to be quite useless) will cause growth contraction... BS the socialism monster.... blah blah blah. On one hand you have massive bonuses and ceo salaries and the public hating it and on the other you have the same party talking about how taxing those same people is bad..... sure that makes sense. So you dont want topend wealth concentration and dont want the government to mandate private pay options but you want to say those bonuses are not examples of how trickle down economics does not work anyways.... the more money people have at the top the more they pay themselves, they are at the top because they use their money to make money because they have money in the first place.... they are not going to stop because of potential taxes.

[Chicopee John]

Lets really put this into perspective and not try to expand the argument into class vs class.

 

1% of our population pays over 40% of federal income tax revenues.

 

All these discussion about 'hidden income', adi, financial professionals is nice and dandy.

 

Let's do some grammar school arithmatic: 1% contributes 40%. Does this constitute a 'fair share'.

 

 

 

[osusev]

1% of our population pays over 40% of federal income tax revenues.

 

All these discussion about 'hidden income', adi, financial professionals is nice and dandy.

 

Let's do some grammar school arithmatic: 1% contributes 40%. Does this constitute a 'fair share'.

 

Really grammar school arithmatic.... interesting because our tax and financial system is anything but that but since you brought it up....

 

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2004, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.3% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.3%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.2%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2007).

 

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

 

So the top 1% WHO OWN 34.3% OF ALL PRIVATELY HELD WEALTH CONTRIBUTIN 40% is pretty comensurate to what they own in terms of total wealth.....

 

15% of the total U.S. wealth for the bottom 80% of the entire working population...... Yes I dont have a problem with the top end paying a fair share for fair benefits they do recieve.

 

thats pretty grammar school arithmatic in my book..... Like I said this right wing PR bs attack about the left and its nefarious taxing stops investments on the top scales is ridiculous just like your grammar school mathematics. When that small population gain massively they also have to pay massively.... you know top end market dynamics that a few consolidated movers can change a given market by just sneezing? IT DOES EXIST.

 

How about lets bring up trickle down economics again or laissez faire business deregulation I hear that worked well also in theory.... or that almost depression and financial system debacle must not have happened. Sure those at the top need the million dollar bonuses when their salaries already exceed millions.... of course it must be wrong to tax those who control 85% of all the income concentration in the u.s.

 

sure

[Westside Steve]

 

 

How about lets bring up trickle down economics again or laissez faire business deregulation I hear that worked well also in theory.... or that almost depression and financial system debacle must not have happened.

 

And we're still alive.

Amazing. If only we could be always in the shitter like the Russians!!

 

 

 

 

 

sure

 

Heh. Sure.

WSS

[Pumpkin Eater]

1% of our population pays over 40% of federal income tax revenues.

 

All these discussion about 'hidden income', adi, financial professionals is nice and dandy.

 

Let's do some grammar school arithmatic: 1% contributes 40%. Does this constitute a 'fair share'.

 

 

Um... yes, especially when they hold MORE than 40% of the wealth in the US.

[Westside Steve]

Um... yes, especially when they hold MORE than 40% of the wealth in the US.

 

So, PE, would it be better to just take it all?

Divide it equally amongall American citizens?

Why or why not?

WSS

[choco]

its hard to argue any point when facts are not facts.....and the wiki is source.

[Orange Dog Democrat]

>>So, PE, would it be better to just take it all?

>>Divide it equally amongall American citizens?

>>Why or why not?

>>WSS

 

You're creating a false choice here -- either "total redistribution" or "freedom." Give me a break. In fact, let me turn the question around: Would you have no taxes of any kind? Or a flat dollar tax that results in $1000 in taxes on incomes of $10,000... $100,000... and $10,000,000?

 

If not, then we already agree on the core concept of some sort of progressive taxation. We're just haggling about the details.

 

These are moral issues to me. Ironic that in a so-called Christian nation, we don't heed Matt 25's call to lift up "the least of these."

[calfoxwc]

But we can't afford to pay for all this.

 

The information I've repeatedly seen, is that

 

20 million folks will STILL NOT HAVE HEALTH INSURANCE under

 

Obamahedoesn'tcare.

 

How is that solving the problem? And MILLIONS of those Americans would be those

 

who HAVE FINE HEALTH CARE NOW.

 

So, it is not going to be a utopian solution to current problems...

 

but total government control of the entire new system, and over millions and millions and millions and... millions

 

of Americans.

[Westside Steve]

>>So, PE, would it be better to just take it all?

>>Divide it equally amongall American citizens?

>>Why or why not?

>>WSS

 

You're creating a false choice here -- either "total redistribution" or "freedom." Give me a break. In fact, let me turn the question around: Would you have no taxes of any kind? Or a flat dollar tax that results in $1000 in taxes on incomes of $10,000... $100,000... and $10,000,000?

 

If not, then we already agree on the core concept of some sort of progressive taxation. We're just haggling about the details.

 

These are moral issues to me. Ironic that in a so-called Christian nation, we don't heed Matt 25's call to lift up "the least of these."

 

Correct enough.

So I guess it's up to us to decide just how much is a proper amount to be confiscated and will that be better used by the investments of the owners or politicians.

 

Should that 1% pay 50% of the US bills? 60? 70? They'd still be richer than you or me right?

 

But I agree it's a false choice though I do think unbridled capitalism will eventuually work a lot better than completely egalitarian sharing of the wealth.

 

As for the Christian thing, well that's one reason I'm unable to get on that Bus completely.

 

I'l let the board theologians figure out what "helping" or "supporting" the poor means.

And how much they are aslked to do in return.

 

WSS

[Mr. T]

Maybe the best thing would be to get rid of the income tax and go to a flat tax system.

 

 

 

I dont see the Liberals being in favor of this in the near future, if they did then they wouldn't be able to play the class envy song over and over again.

[Chicopee John]

As for the Christian thing, well that's one reason I'm unable to get on that Bus completely. I'l let the board theologians figure out what "helping" or "supporting" the poor means. And how much they are aslked to do in return.WSS

 

One example:

 

(1 Timothy 5:8) “But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

 

 

[Westside Steve]

One example:

 

(1 Timothy 5:8) “But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

 

Excellent qualifier brother John.

WSS

[calfoxwc]

Excellent qualifier brother John.

WSS

**************************

 

Brother John is our Friar Tuck. I just haven't figured out who the Sherrif of Nottingham is...

[WPB Dawg Fan]

Ok so if you "wealthy" and have CPA's and Financial planners/managers deal with your "wealth" what advantages do you hold?

 

If you can bury your Health care costs into a LLC or corp, maybe you can also drive a vehicle(s) leased/insurance/maintenence and paid for by the company, That pesky cell phone paid in full by the company, your "business" lunch(s) and golf outings? yup you guessed it paid for and written off by the company, what about clothing allowances? you bet depending upon job types percentages paid for by your company, other related travel and entertainment/dining expenses? Company memberships to gyms and other related social clubs because of network Marketing?

 

now those are non aggressive costs most CPA's can help you use your corp or llc to pay for... Those are not taxed as income but expensed toward the company, but for a lot of people those costs can easily reach a few thousand dollars a month that dont count toward income that is taxed.

 

You think that tax deferment for investment gains is not HEAVILY managed by the wealthy? that is only possible because they can afford the professionals who manage the funds and proper methods/paperwork? What about all of the other vehicles financially like all of those off shore investments that have exploded over the last 20 years?

 

The gulf of difference between the lifestyles and what each group is worried about is vastly different in terms of basic costs to sustain basic necessities.

 

I do agree the Left demonized the concept of "wealthy" however the also notable left out fact is inflation and value of the dollar...... which VASTLY affects the relationship of how much the "wealthy" are taxed

 

OSU, you do a good job of pointing out the 'hidden wealth', but you fail to point out the 'hidden taxes' of owning a corporation:

 

Unemployment tax

Licensing (state/local)

The corporation itself also pays income tax (unless it is an LLC, sole proprietor or partnership, but then you lose a lot of liability protections)

Permits

 

I am sure there are more...but those are just to start. I wonder if THAT is part of those numbers...probably not as like I said...they are 'hidden'.

 

 

[osusev]

WPB hidden corporate costs? I have a few entities and other partners that have many more in some large income scales.

 

One thing a business does not do is hide cost from itself or lack to portray them to their stock holders.

 

Those are all costs but certainly not hidden nor not taken into account immediately on any projections.

 

Also LLC does give the same corporate liability protection but allows pass thru income like a partnership which is why they are so wildly popular.

 

As for S or C corps paying taxes on the reported incomes.... these entities use loans and money management to defer as much income to pay out on dividends on a quarterly basis massively and can because they can afford to hire full time professionals to do that whereas the rest of the population can not.

 

No matter how you portray the "wealthy" the scale is still massively tilted in their favor. 85% of the population can not afford to have financial/legal professionals doing these strategies and using all of these mechanisms to manage wealth.

 

One of the first things people should do to take advantage of LLC and INC financial management tools to not pay taxes is to form one of these in the first place. a w-2 earner is at a massive disadvantage in terms of expensing deductions that they dont pay federal or state income taxes to.

 

The three top end bush tax cuts MASSIVELY bonuses the top 1% and the level under them. It is impossible to dispute the wealth concentration figures and the benefits/tax base gdp reduction this has cost our system.

 

Trickle down economics was BS because of the dynamic that investing and wealth management is the exact vehicle the top 1% use anyways and does not take into factor personal human greed IE: corporate bonuses even in the face of crazy losses.