the 400 highest income taxpayers.
In 1995, their average tax rate was 29.93% and their average income was $50,863,000
Then in 1996, President Clinton "triangulated" with the Republican House to cut taxes for rich people, and their average tax rate droppped to 22.02% by 1999 while their average income rose to $133,858,000
Still Honest George thought taxes should be even fairer, and so by 2007 their average tax rate was cut to 16.62% while their average income rose to $344,759,000.
Of course, the fact that they got average tax cuts of $18,617,000 was just an unintended consequence. Honest George was not trying to give rich people huge tax cuts. He was just trying to create jobs, give everybody a tax cut, and make the tax code fairer. It was pure blind luck that rich people got huge tax cuts from his plan. There is just no other, better way to create jobs. Or a fairer way.
I mean it is just not fair that people who slave every day for dividend income should pay the same rate as people who just have money fall into their lap by going to work every day. Bush tried to remedy that by making the tax rate on dividends be zero. That would have been the fairest solution, but Senate Democrats made him settle for just cutting the tax rate in half for dividends.
Honest Mitt will try to make things even fairer, especially if he gets a Republican House and Senate.
It will just be an accident if his plan results in the Fab 400 paying an average tax rate of less than 10%. A pure fluke.
There's just no better way to create jobs than by throwing money at rich people and letting it trickle down.
= new reply since forum marked as read
