Create Account

Username
Password
Remember me
Email
 
7

Top 400 Taxpayers Paid Almost As Much in Federal Income Taxes as the Bottom 50%

22 comments, 249 views, posted 5:39 pm 14/06/2012 in Politics by HariSeldon
HariSeldon has 4246 posts, 2228 threads, 260 points
Uber God


We hear all the time that the "rich don't pay their fair share of taxes" (123,000 Google search results for that phrase).  Here's an analysis using recent IRS data that suggests otherwise.


1. In 2009, the top 400 taxpayers based on Adjusted Gross Income earned $81 billion as a group, and paid $16.1 billion in federal income taxes (see chart above).


2. In 2009, the bottom 50% of taxpayers, a group totaling 69 million, earned collectively more than $1 trillion and paid $19.5 billion in federal income taxes (see chart above).

Bottom Line: A small group of 400 of America's most successful earners in 2009, about the number of residents living in a typical apartment building in Washington, D.C., paid almost as much in federal income taxes as the entire bottom half of America's 138 million tax filers, which is a population equivalent to the combined number of residents living in America's 29 least populated states, plus the District of Columbia.  What makes this disparity possible is the fact that an estimated 47% of individual income tax returns filed in 2009 had a zero or negative tax liability.


When you have only 400 Americans paying almost as much in federal income taxes as the entire bottom 50% of American filing income tax returns, I think we can dismiss any notion of the rich not paying their fair share of taxes.  In fact, the IRS should publish the names and addresses of the Top 400 (or to protect anonymity, agree to provide a forwarding service), so that we can all send them "Thank You" letters to express our gratitude for shouldering such a disproportionate share of our collective tax burden.

Extra Points Given by:

griffin (5)

Comments

0
6:08 pm 14/06/2012

griffin

Funny, I don't see any rotation yet.

But I am sure the spin is coming...

0
6:32 pm 14/06/2012

Viscera

oh Hari, that isn't enough. the redistributers won't accept anything less then punishment for success.

0
6:47 pm 14/06/2012

thecrookedman

The term "successful earner" could be pretty funny.

1
7:08 pm 14/06/2012

backroom

Quote by griffin:
But I am sure the spin is coming...


No need.
The answer is right there to see... for anyone who's eyes are open ...

Quote by HariSeldon:
What makes this disparity possible is the fact that an estimated 47% of individual income tax returns filed in 2009 had a zero or negative tax liability.



Here is another clue:
Not all of those in the 47% were lower income.

1
8:13 pm 14/06/2012

Quaektem

Quote by backroom:
The answer is right there to see... for anyone who's eyes are open ...



We'll make a conservative (or at least a libertarian) out of you yet! You pretty much nailed it, now how to fix it....

0
8:57 pm 14/06/2012

backroom


Nothing personal...
But from what I see of the right...
I prefer to remain sane and human.

2
9:26 pm 14/06/2012

Quaektem

Quote by backroom:
But from what I see of the right...



You can't trust everything on PBS and MSNBC

0
10:16 pm 14/06/2012

backroom

Well then...
I guess i will just have to trust Fox News then.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahah...
Ooops...
I laughed so hard I peed a little.
(Now where did griffin put that bowl of corn flakes?)

2
10:32 pm 14/06/2012

Quaektem

I don't even watch FOX

Told you before, CNN if I watch news but I tend to read the news, either on-line, the NYT, Boston Globe, Boston Harold, or some political Mag or another.

2
10:45 pm 14/06/2012

backroom

Quote by Quaektem:
I don't even watch FOX


I know that.
But if you insist that I get information from PBS and MSNBC just because I identify as a liberal...
Then you watch Fox News exclusively.

2
11:17 pm 14/06/2012

z0phi3l

Quote by backroom:

Nothing personal...
But from what I see of the right...
I prefer to remain sane and human.



Sane you say? Here's "sane" on the Left:

1
11:22 pm 14/06/2012

Quaektem

Quote by backroom:
I know that.
But if you insist that I get information from PBS and MSNBC just because I identify as a liberal...
Then you watch Fox News exclusively.



Sorry if I offended, the retort was intended in jest. We were having rather light hearted banter, I didn't expect it to be taken literally.

2
12:30 am 15/06/2012

backroom


Nothing to be sorry for. This is still light hearted.
I only meant to offend in the same banter driven tone as you because turnaround IS fair play.

2
12:43 am 15/06/2012

djskitzy

I'd love to pay a billion a week in tax... I would I would I would *tapping heels together* there's no place like the bahamas.... there's no place like the bahamas.....

2
12:44 am 15/06/2012

Flee

Granted, the top 400 paid quite a bit in total, but when you look at it, they paid on average 19%. According to wiki, income tax for an income greater than 372k/year is 35%. As a percent, they paid less than someone who makes $33,951 – $82,250/year. The top 400 could pay 35% and still live a life of luxury, where someone making $33,951 – $82,250 and giving up 25% is a large dent in the pocket.

This is not to say that the 25% crowd aren't also finding ways to lower the percent like the top 400 do, but I would think the 25%ers will have a harder time shaving percentage points just based on the cost of accountants, and the fact they own less assets to shift profits around(like having a business that loses money, so you can get a tax break).

1
11:07 am 15/06/2012

griffin

Quote by Flee:
As a percent, they paid less than someone who makes $33,951 – $82,250/year.


It's almost 20%, what they paid. 1.86% is what the bottom 50% paid.

Quote by Flee:
but I would think the 25%ers will have a harder time shaving percentage points


Cash in hand. That will do nicely. Undeclared overtime. And of course not declaring tips. I think a larger percentage of low income income can be off the books.

2
1:26 pm 15/06/2012

Viscera

well, I'll still never understand the idea of a progressive tax. I guess understand is the wrong word, I'll never agree with it. It would seem to me that. if you took away the deductibles, and then just had a flat rate that would be fair, and if you take away the idea that people will shelter their money by not declaring it (happens now and would happen with a flat tax prolly) then the consumption tax is the best way. If the feds got 10% and the state got 5% on each transaction other then food and clothing, then when the rich buy thier boats/cars/go on vacation etc the govt gets theirs, but if you choose not to splurge, then you keep your money

0
3:32 pm 15/06/2012

backroom


How do you think the folks to your north in NH would react to that?

0
5:02 pm 15/06/2012

elsels

Gosh Darn, I still love the Weeping Hippies video, even years later it is still amazing. Thanks Griffin and z0p for that.

I think a nice flat tax 10% for everyone under 200k, 15% for everyone over 200k to 10M, 20 for everyone over 10m, to exclude those with fixed incomes like SS should be the rule, the only reason I would like to exclude fixed income elderly or those handicapped is because taxes are already deducted. Also if there is a comsumption tax across the board for all goods imports/or national goods there would be no loopholes that the "rich" could get through. Putting your money in off shore accounts loophole should be closed as well giving the wealthy folks an incentive to keep their money here by not taxing them up the ying yang. Remember folks a tax credit is NOT a government expense or welfare a tax credit it allowing folks to keep their own money.

Of course I am much too generous here so that would not work in the greedy world we live in.

I guess I didn't read V's post before writing.

0
6:40 pm 15/06/2012

Quaektem

Quote by backroom:
How do you think the folks to your north in NH would react to that?



My guess is they woudn't like it much until they saw their property taxes go away. Yes, they rely a bit on more MA business, but not enough are heading north to hit them too hard.

At least in this senerio, Kerry would have been more likely to buy and register his boat in MA!

0
8:13 pm 15/06/2012

backroom

Quote by Quaektem:
My guess is they woudn't like it much until they saw their property taxes go away.


I believe "go away" is a bit unrealistic.
As we both live in states that have property and school taxes on top of sales tax...
When one goes up the others do not go down.

1
8:56 pm 15/06/2012

Quaektem

Oh I know.... but I can dream

Add Comment

Log in via teoti, or register to add a comment!