Hey, here's another tax proposal, a little bit harder:
Take all households in the US, divide in half.
If your household is in the lower half, no extra taxes.
If your household is in the top half, pay 10% of the rate above the median.
Take the top half, divide in half.
If your house is in the lower half, no extra taxes.
If your household is in the top half, pay an extra 10% on the amount above the median.
... etc until we get to a 100% tax rate.
Which'd be on the ... I'm pretty sure 5 households out of 10,000 would be within the 100% rate. A maximum annual income.
Fully 50% would be at 0%
25% would be at 10% marginal.
12.5% at 20%
6.25% at 30%
3.125 at 40%
1.5625 at 50%
0.78125% at 60%
0.390625 at 70%
0.2% at 80%
0.1% at 90%
0.05% at 100%
Go ahead. Call me a commie. I'd love it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There's a board game in here...
ReplyDeleteAnd, to be clear: My tax rate should probably be higher.
ReplyDeleteAnd spent on a socialist agenda, not the fascist one.
So, what's your corporate tax proposal to go along with this?
ReplyDeleteMatt Johnson I dunno, that's hard and there don't seem to be good answers: a lot of American businesses find ways to pay zero dollars in income taxes, and there's a whole bunch of dollars staying oversees for the foreseeable.
ReplyDeleteSo, I really don't know. I'm pretty sure sole proprietorship should be taxed like individual income, and probably partnerships and that sort of thing, but beyond that I'm really not sure.
I thought the top 0.05% of household incomes were basically "all incomes above around $600K/year." No? Washington Post just published that figure.
ReplyDeleteDunno. Got a link, John Jainschigg?
ReplyDeleteThere is some facetious part of me that is going "If they want to call corporations people. then treat them like people and apply the same tax rate above...".
ReplyDeleteI have no moral issue with that, Matt Johnson. I have pragmatic concerns, but not ones I have any desire to defend.
ReplyDeleteI don't follow much financial news so I don't /really/ know what is reputable sources and what is not... but what I'm seeing is that anything beyond "top 1%" is hard to pin down and of dubious quality due to how the data is collected and scrubbed for anonymity. Most places just seem to stop bothering to break it down past 1%.
ReplyDeleteBut... according to this IRS report from early 2018 (reporting on 2015, the last year in the report) the gross income percentages (for an individual) were...
.001% $152 million
.01% $35 million
.1% $7.3 million
1% $1.48 million
$600K would fall somewhere between 5% ($518k) and 2% ($933k).
irs.gov - www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/soi-a-ints-id1801.pdf
Edit to add that, again, I'm not a financial person so I could be totally misreading this report.
William Nichols I mostly don't like the idea of companies being treated as individuals in political senses. Tax wise, I don't know enough to say if it would be good or bad but don't inherently object. Mostly, I just think people would flip at the idea of a company having a theoretical maximum income due to it hitting a 100% tax rate. But if someone whats to argue a corporation is a person for political stuff, then fuck it, it's a person all the time. Though that does pose some weird legal issues...
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry ... it was the WaPo. But 0.05% is households earning over $10 million/year. washingtonpost.com - washingtonpost
ReplyDeleteSounds right, then. Fuck it, let's eat the mother fuckers. They are lizard people*, afterall.
ReplyDelete*by which i mean capitalistic pig dogs.
Which just goes to show: our new representatives are rather conservative in there tax policy.
ReplyDeleteWilliam, you're a commie. I hope you are proud of yourself and your anti-capitalist idea that the rich have a social responsibility and no right to endless income.
ReplyDeleteNow how do we get you into a position of authority where you can implement these ideas?