If you disagree with someone, just claim she/he is a sockpuppet spreading propaganda

[hfojvt]

164. the health care tax simply is NOT relevant to ATRA

because it was NOT part of ATRA

thus it is not part of the question - does ATRA increase inequality or decrease it?

The math, however, is impossible to do. What for example, were the standard deduction and personal exemption in 2001? How much of the $500,000 income is from dividends? How much from capital gains? How much do they itemize deductions? Then there is the bracket creep. Rates have gone down because of inflationary adjustments. Should I compare $27,000/$500,000 in 2001 to the same nominal dollar figures or the same real (inflation adjusted) dollar figures?

Since I know that the rich got bigger tax cuts than the poor from ATRA, to even attempt to do the math is a waste of time.

But okay, let's take away standard and itemized deductions and personal exemptions and child tax credits and dividend income and just compare taxable income as wages to taxable income as wages. 2001 to 2013

taxable income 2001
$27,050 ***** $500,000
taxes (federal income)
$4,057.5 ***** $172,610.15
after tax income
$22,992.50 ****** $327,389.85

2001 gap - $304,397.35

taxable income 2012
$27,050 ***** $500,000
taxes
$3,611.25 ***** $155,763.75
after tax income
$23,438.75 ***** $344,236.25

2013 gap - $320,797.50

gap has increased by $16,400.15

tax rates here

2013
10% on taxable income from $0 to $8,925, plus
15% on taxable income over $8,925 to $36,250, plus
25% on taxable income over $36,250 to $87,850, plus
28% on taxable income over $87,850 to $183,250, plus
33% on taxable income over $183,250 to $398,350, plus
35% on taxable income over $398,350 to $400,000, plus
39.6% on taxable income over $400,000.


in 2001 tax rates for singles were
15% on first $27,050
27.5% up to $65,550
30.5% up to $136,750
35.5% up to $297,350
39.1% for the rest

and the gap would be even bigger if the rich person had some dividend income, once taxed at 39.6%, now taxed at only 20%.

Even if you take away the bracket creep, the richer person is STILL
saving 2.5% on their first $400,000 of income past $27,050 - a savings of about $6,750 that poorer people do not enjoy - but Mitt Romney and Rush Limbaugh (and Paul Krugman) all enjoy it.

You simply do not close a gap by giving bigger tax cuts to richer people than you do to poorer people.

And that's what ATRA did.