|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
08-23-2012, 09:19 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,223
|
|
The Laffer Curve
You guys know the Laffer curve. It is the one that shows that as taxes go up the incentive to earn goes down. It's not rocket science. In fact it's the point of having a progressive income tax structure.
Question for the Republicans on the board. Do you understand how a progressive income tax structure works? For example suppose the following structure:
Income--Tax rate
Up to 20,000 -- 10%
20,001-50,000 -- 20%
50,001-100,000 -- 30%
100,000-1,000,000 -- 40%
Over 1,000,0001 -- 50%
Suppose a person has $20,000 of taxable income. How much tax does he pay and what is his effective tax rate?
Suppose a person has $20,001 of taxable income. How much tax does he pay and what is his effective tax rate?
Suppose a person has $125,000 of taxable income. How much tax does he pay and what is his effective tax rate?
__________________
People like stories.
|
08-23-2012, 10:06 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,908
|
|
Conservatives don't do math. It's too much like science.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
08-23-2012, 10:26 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,223
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
Conservatives don't do math. It's too much like science.
|
Careful. I consider myself conservative. The difference between myself and neocons is that I only go back to about 1789 America. The new class goes all the way back to King George III of 1776.
__________________
People like stories.
|
08-23-2012, 10:31 AM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
The first one $2000. or 10%
The second one $2,000.20 or 10.0005% (with rounding)
The third: $2,000 + $6,000 + $15,000 + $10,000 = $33,000. That's $26.4%, or a considerably higher rate than the GOP candidates.
That is, assuming I got my pluses and minuses and guzintas right.
Actually, one can't really answer the question concerning the effective tax rate without knowing what is subtracted from total income to get to the taxable income. Also, I assume that this doesn't include the 4.2% (temporarily reduced from 6.2%) FICA tax that wage earners pay on the first $100K or so of income. Unlike the other incidences of determining taxable income, this is paid from dollar 1.
Oh, and then we're talking about taxable income, are we talking about passive income or earned income. Then we're changing the effective rate again. Of course, that's how Mitt paid 13%.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
08-23-2012, 10:40 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,223
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
The first one $2000. or 10%
The second one $2,000.20 or 10.0005% (with rounding)
The third: $2,000 + $6,000 + $15,000 + $10,000 = $33,000. That's $26.4%, or a considerably higher rate than the GOP candidates.
That is, assuming I got my pluses and minuses and guzintas right.
Actually, one can't really answer the question concerning the effective tax rate without knowing what is subtracted from total income to get to the taxable income. Also, I assume that this doesn't include the 4.2% (temporarily reduced from 6.2%) FICA tax that wage earners pay on the first $100K or so of income. Unlike the other incidences of determining taxable income, this is paid from dollar 1.
Oh, and then we're talking about taxable income, are we talking about passive income or earned income. Then we're changing the effective rate again. Of course, that's how Mitt paid 13%.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
D-ray,
Are you a Republican?
__________________
People like stories.
|
08-23-2012, 10:43 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebacon
You guys know the Laffer curve. It is the one that shows that as taxes go up the incentive to earn goes down. It's not rocket science. In fact it's the point of having a progressive income tax structure.
Question for the Republicans on the board. Do you understand how a progressive income tax structure works? For example suppose the following structure:
Income--Tax rate
Up to 20,000 -- 10%
20,001-50,000 -- 20%
50,001-100,000 -- 30%
100,000-1,000,000 -- 40%
Over 1,000,0001 -- 50%
Suppose a person has $20,000 of taxable income. How much tax does he pay and what is his effective tax rate?
Suppose a person has $20,001 of taxable income. How much tax does he pay and what is his effective tax rate?
Suppose a person has $125,000 of taxable income. How much tax does he pay and what is his effective tax rate?
|
So we don't get into a gotcha game, please define "effective tax rate" as you use it here. It is a phrase that means different things to different people, including the CBO. They've used it differently on a couple of occasions.
|
08-23-2012, 10:48 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 13,016
|
|
One example of a CBO definition of "effective tax rate":
"Effective tax rates are calculated by dividing taxes by comprehensive household income," where comprehensive household income "equals pretax cash income plus income from other sources. Pretax cash income is the sum of wages, salaries, self-employment income, rents, taxable and nontaxable interest, dividends, realized capital gains, cash transfer payments, and retirement benefits plus taxes paid by businesses (corporate income taxes and the employer's share of Social Security, Medicare, and federal unemployment insurance payroll taxes) and employer contributions to 401(k) retirement plans. Other sources of income include all in-kind benefits (Medicare, Medicaid, employer-paid health insurance premiums, food stamps, school lunches and breakfasts, housing assistance, and energy assistance). Households with negative income are excluded from the lowest income category but are included in totals." This CBO definition includes in income many items, such as employer share of Social Security tax, not considered income for most purposes. "
|
08-23-2012, 10:57 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,223
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
So we don't get into a gotcha game, please define "effective tax rate" as you use it here.
|
The same way d-ray did -- and the only way to calculate it given the way the problem is stated.
I don't play gotcha. That's a game the f*cksticks on teevee and radidio play.
__________________
People like stories.
|
08-23-2012, 11:18 AM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebacon
D-ray,
Are you a Republican?
|
Oops. That's why you have to read the whole question before you answer. In my defense, it's been a year or two since I took a test.
Actually I was registered as a republican for a few months in 1980. I went to the caucuses to vote for John Anderson and try to stop Reagan.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
08-23-2012, 11:31 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebacon
D-ray,
Are you a Republican?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
Oops. That's why you have to read the whole question before you answer. In my defense, it's been a year or two since I took a test.
Actually I was registered as a republican for a few months in 1980. I went to the caucuses to vote for John Anderson and try to stop Reagan.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
To see whether you're still a Republican?
John
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:58 AM.
|