Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Progressive proposal for a “true” flat tax

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 01:25 PM
Original message
Progressive proposal for a “true” flat tax

Those in the "higher tax bracket" will almost invariably promote the "flat tax" as the only "fair" tax, they then ramble off a couple of ridiculous statistics they claim demonstrate they pay "more then their fair share"

The fact of the matter is completely opposite;

Even with a true progressive tax, and even if we did not consider how easy it is for the wealthy to find tax haven and deductions, they still pay a far LOWER percentage of their wage to "over all" tax then the middle and lower class as we can see as we find demostrated here


Who Pays Taxes?

The short answer is this: you and I pay the taxes that rich and powerful people ought to pay, but don’t.

In the year 2000, at the height of the last economic boom and before the most recent round of tax cuts were enacted, IRS data shows that the richest 400 taxpayers paid 27% of their income in federal, state, and local taxes. On average, these 400 taxpayers each had taxable income of $151 million. All other taxpayers had average taxable income of only $34,600, and yet their tax burden was 40%.

Using that reality, a "true" flat tax would result in a far higher progressive matrix then anything we have or have even considered

I believe the only way we can really facilitate a "true" flat and continue the services necessary for proper governance would look something like this;

Remove personal payments for all government services, for instance sales tax, park fees, tolls, road tax that's added to gasoline, etc.

However the government would still "bill" for that revenue, the bill from local government will of course go to the federal government, the federal government will then "collect" those fees through a universal and flat income tax

Bing, a "true" flat tax

Now, you get a progressive talking like this and I guarantee the wealthy will stop immediately asking for a flat tax
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/7595
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Salviati Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 01:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. and don't forget to treat all income the same...
Forget about "investment income" or "capital gains", or even "corporate income". All income subject to the same flat tax, regardless of of source or individual. That would also go a long ways towards shutting up the wealthy carping for a "flat tax".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mudplanet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Not sure I understand
Are you suggesting that we don't have a progressive income tax?

I definitely for eliminating tax deductions for everything except municipal bonds and the like.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I'm sympathetic to the idea that we shouldn't use the tax code...
...for social/moral engineering.

Tax income progressively, though more flatly than our nominal tax rates currently.

Have no exceptions or loopholes. 0. None. Money received is taxed as income. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Social Engineering with the tax code got us to where we are today
The system is more complex that we can handle. Tax avoidance is a lucrative business. Starting over, even if its not highly progressive will be a step in the best direction.

The other key area that many do not understand is that the truly wealthy own not earn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mudplanet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I agree. But from a practical standpoint, this is my experience.
In 1980 I was making about $14000 a year (and eating a lot of beans) and the total withholding on my check (state income tax, fed income tax, Social Security) was nearly $4000. Typically, I would get back about $400 of that when filing. What it works out to is approximately one quarter to one third of my income. And I would continuously read about "how high taxes in European (socialist) countries are." I spent about two months in England in 1987 and discovered that their income taxes at my level weren't any higher, but that taxes on purchased goods (except groceries, medicine) were much higher. I began to smell a rat.

The basic issue was that wealthy and middle class people paid a higher tax rate, and that's what Americans don't like. Having lived on a reasonably limited income most of my life, I know what it's like to be poor, and I believe it's fair to have a progressive income tax that taxes all income, with few exceptions. I've never been able to even consider buying a house, yet the tax system allows people that make three, four, a hundred times as much as I do to write off the interest on their homes. It seems unfair to the 30%+ of us that are stuck being tenants.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Yes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-28-09 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Which states the need of a tax on accumulated superwealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DirtyJersey Donating Member (129 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
4. I like this idea...
Have a flat tax that applies to all income (wages, capital gains, corporate profits, etc.) and exempt the first 40K or so. That would be both economically efficient and fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
verges Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-29-09 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
19. Well then....
what's the incentive to make more than 40k? :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. same incentive
with 90% top rate

$$$$$$$$$$$$ more $$$$$$$$$$$$$

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #4
21. I like this one
28% takes Santa Claus from very rich.

Never overlook GREAT MIDDLE CLASS of 1946 to 1980.

huge top tax rate

GDP GREAT--ALL GAINED

Reagan + Bush transferred to top.
2500 Billion In Tax Cuts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
5. Flat taxes are unfair by definition. Adam Smith, admittedly a fairly extreme Socialist,
at least, got it right about tax being paid as closely in proportion to income as possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-28-09 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. That's a flat tax
tax being paid as closely in proportion to income as possible

If someone making twice as much as me pays twice as much in taxes, that's a flat tax.

If everyone pays $1000, regardless of how much they make, that's a head tax. Thatcher tried that and got rioted out of 10 Downing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-28-09 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Open this link, and you will see that you are quite wrong.
Edited on Fri Aug-28-09 05:39 PM by Joe Chi Minh
http://selectdebtrelief.com/glossary.html

In any case, why would the word, "flat" relate to a rates of taxation that are variable in terms of different level of income.

The "poll tax" or "head tax" signifies a "flat tax". It's why the very rich favour them so enthusiastically, and the left reject them outright. Flat taxes are iniquitous.

The first official who introduced it in England ended up with his head on a pole. Thatcher was lucky. Of course, NuLab's so-called Council tax is not much better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-29-09 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. No. "Flat tax" as advocated by Kemp, Paul, etc. is just what I said
Don't know where you got this idea, but the conservatives have at least in this case been very clear about what they mean: a single-rate income tax (say, 10%).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. 10%
.10 X 10,000=1000

spend 4000 get 1000

borrow 3000

huh reagan trickle down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
23. flat 40%
no deductions

schools-churches-charities-homes-

0 deductions

all pay 40% that is required to cover 4000B annual spending

try that one!

Think Health Care Reform is Violent?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daveparts still Donating Member (614 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-27-09 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. FDR
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle. (FDR)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Excogitator Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-28-09 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. The "rich" already pay . . .
The "rich" already are the ones that pay the majority of the taxes. In 2007, the top 50 percent of tax payers with positive AGI paid 97.11 percent of all taxes.

From the Internal Revenue Service:
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in01etr.xls
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-29-09 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. That's only true if you claim the top FIFTY percent bracket!
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Pull your head out of your ass, and look at the top 1% or 5%, who control about 87% of the nations wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
26. agi not a fair analysis
rich have tax lawyers to get deductions

total income best analysis

top 50% paid 96.4% in 2005 but took 86% of Total Income.

INCOME TAXES IN YOUR ANALYSIS

PAYROLL TAXES OMITTED--per usual with pro rich analysis

glad you listen to limbaugh?

the lower income pay a much much much greater share of income in payroll taxes than rich.

52.5% of wage earners pay More in payroll than income tax

warren buffet paid paid est 1/100th of 1%
of his income in payroll taxes in 2007.

remove CAP on Payroll Tax and let Rich pay FAIR SHARE.

Largest income in 2007 would have paid $120 million in payroll taxes not $100,000.

RICH HAVE TAKEN MOST OF OUR WEALTH INCREASE SINCE 1980 IT IS TIME FOR FLUSH DOWN SOME OF IT.

$$$$$$$$ own all of Government.

[email protected]
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #12
29. So?
They also have a majority of the wealth and the income.

The numbers you think mean so much mean nothing unless compared to that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. FDR THE MAN
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Yes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-28-09 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
10. What we need is a tax on accumulated super wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #10
27. amen amen amen
we had but conservatives took it away in order to deja' vu 1920's and Great Depression into Great Recession.

Our nation's best years were with top rate hi and economic growth was great for all.

Today Mfg is absent. Decent Pay Jobs are absent.

Since 1980. Conservatives were banned into the wilderness after Great Depression but came back after 50 years with Reagan then Bush II.

A brain dead affable dunce and a brain dead recovering drunk

wow that is harsh. shame shame.

[email protected]
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rally2xs Donating Member (107 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #10
30. Its Called Marxism
Wealth redistribution. Add it all up, divide by the number of people, hand it out in equal proportions.

Ruin the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-28-09 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
13. I am too late to K & R this abt the progressive tax and how to
Arrive at the best answer.

I do know that the current situation is truly repressive. Especially in places like california, where even know with the fall in prices of homes, most people in large cities cannot ever afford a home and so they lose the mortgage deduction.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-29-09 01:16 AM
Response to Original message
15. I would support a flat tax if people were taxed like businesses--only on PROFITS
Then most of us in the middle and lower class would never be touched.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-29-09 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
18. I've got a flat tax for the whiney rich.
TAKE IT ALL!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clarence swinney Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-31-09 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
20. boortz 23% flat tax
I will take it.
But I do not like Debt.

NUMBERS FACT CHECK(ROUND NUMBERS)

TOTAL NATIONAL INCOME=10,000 BILLION

TOTAL NATIONAL CONSUMER SPENDING =9000 BILLION

2009 FEDERAL SPENDING=4000b (CLOSE)

SAME INCOME TAX FOR ALL=40% INCOME TAX

WANT TO PAY THIS?

23% TAX ON 9000 OF CONSUMPTION=2070 B

WANT TO BORROW 2000B?

READ THIS CAREFULLY--IMPORTANT

TOTAL FED + STATE + LOCAL PAID IN 2008 AS PERCENT OF INCOME

LOWEST 20%=18.7% OF INCOME
SECOND 20%=22.3%
MIDDLE 20%=27.0%
FOURTH 20%=30.0%
NEXT 10%=31.5%
NEXT 5%=31.5%
NEXT 4%=32.1%
TOP 1%=30.9%

CITIZENS FOR TAX JUSTICE
APRIL 13. 2009
BOB MCINTYRE

YOU CAN SEE THERE IS NOT MUCH DIFFERENCE
YET RICH PAY "MOST" SINCE THEY HAVE MOST OF THE INCOME.

WHEN WARREN BUFFETT PAYS 17% IN 2007 AND HEDGE FUND MANAGER WHO MADE 2000 MILLION PAYS 19% THERE IS A PROBLEM.

IT IS THE 15% ON UNEARNED INCOME.

A GIFT TO THE RICH GAMBLERS ON WALL STREET.

WHY SHOULD GAMBLER PAY 15% RATE AND MY GARBAGE TRUCK MAN PAY 28% RATE?

IT IS RIDICLOUS AND IS RUINING THIS NATION.

SAME TREND LINE GOT ROME-SPAIN-HOLLAND AND BRITIAN IS USE NEXT?

[email protected]
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rally2xs Donating Member (107 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. There Is No Boortz 23% Flat Tax
That's because a "flat tax" implies an income tax. The tax Boortz advocates is a consumption tax.

The income tax is the 2nd worst idea the USA has ever had, right behind slavery. It is the reason our corporations have largely fled overseas and continue to flee overseas. Locally, we had a Belden Wire And Cable factory close and move to Mexico. Several weeks ago, I was driving through Indiana and heard WIBC, Indianapolis announce that the Whirlpool factory in Evansville, Indiana was closing at the end of 2010, throwing 1100 workers out on the street. Probably half of those won't even find another job, but sit home on a spouse's income or some other mechanism. The rest will likely find a crappy-paying "service sector" job. Both groups will be virtually untaxable due to their low income. Think that's going to help the Nation? No, no, no. We need good jobs, strong unions, making the businesses share the profits. But we can't do it if we have no businesses and no profits to share, and both are going or have gone overseas.

Its this simple: Repeal the income tax, institute a consumption tax as the founding fathers intended, or become a 3rd-world country. That's where this is going. Prosperity is leaving the country, and there's nothing we can do about it as long as the income tax makes doing business here too expensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
31. kicked... great read
sorry I didn't see it soon enough to recommend it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rally2xs Donating Member (107 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-18-09 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
32. Income Tax a Brain-Dead Way to Raise Revenue
Those in the "higher tax bracket" will almost
invariably promote the "flat tax" as the only
"fair" tax, they then ramble off a couple of
ridiculous statistics they claim demonstrate they pay
"more then their fair share"

The fact of the matter is completely opposite;

-------------------------------------
Correct!  Why is that?  Because:

1) The rich have their ways of avoiding ANY income tax.  Swiss
bank accounts, captial gains that aren't collected until
they're actually realized by sale of the capital, etc.

2) Lotsa "rich" people don't even HAVE an income!!!!
  They have a PILE!  Of MONEY!  They sit on the pile, live off
it piecemeal, and just don't have anything reportable to the
IRS.

3) Lotsa other "rich" people have a pile and invest
in tax-free financial instruments like municipal bonds. 
Doesn't matter if they made 100 million dollars on the
interest from municipal bonds, Uncle Sam has no conduit to
that money - it is NOT TAXABLE!

What a bonehead method of taxation.  It is BROKEN.  It DOES
NOT WORK.  Fewer than half the citizens even filed income
taxes:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07in13ms.xls

The link show 142 million individual tax returns.  There's
maybe 305 million citizens?  How stupid is that?  But we
continue with a broken methodolgy for raising  money!!!   Duh,
wonder why things don't get better?  Any ideas?  Hmmmm???
-------------------------------------


Even with a true progressive tax, and even if we did not
consider how easy it is for the wealthy to find tax haven and
deductions, they still pay a far LOWER percentage of their
wage to "over all" tax then the middle and lower
class as we can see as we find demostrated here


Who Pays Taxes?

The short answer is this: you and I pay the taxes that rich
and powerful people ought to pay, but don’t.

-------------------------------------
Yep.  It's 'cuz we're boneheads, that don't have the gumption
to see a broken system for what it is.

Aaaaandddd.... of course the even more insidious reason that
it doesn't work is the CORPORATE income tax.  Hint:
Corporations don't pay a dime of corporate income tax.  The
Corporation's customers do!!!  And... via this bonehead tax
system, we end up TAXING OUR EXPORTS!!!!   Is that the most
stupid thing you've ever heard?  We wonder why nobody buys
American cars overseas.  Duh! They're expensive, that's why.  
 And, they're expensive because they have about 22% of their
price that is soley going to Uncle Sam, not to workers, not to
corporate executives, not to stockholders.  This is not the
way to generate wealth within the nation. 

So, were STUPID enough to try to tax the rest of the world via
an embedded corporate income tax, but guess what?  The rest of
the world is smarter than we are.  While our own people can't
see the lack of functionality of the income tax as a way to
fund the nation, foreigners can very easily see that it is an
idiot-test for them to flunk if they buy American products. 
Duh... buy an American car, fund the US Gov't to the tune of
22% of what you paid for the American car.  if you don't
happen to like the USA, it's even more of an idiot test...
-------------------------------------

In the year 2000, at the height of the last economic boom and
before the most recent round of tax cuts were enacted, IRS
data shows that the richest 400 taxpayers paid 27% of their
income in federal, state, and local taxes. On average, these
400 taxpayers each had taxable income of $151 million. All
other taxpayers had average taxable income of only $34,600,
and yet their tax burden was 40%.

-------------------------------------
Average taxable income of only $34,600?  Why do you suppose
that is?  Could it be that ITS TOO EXPENSIVE TO DO BUSINESS
HERE and that corporations have moved, and continue to move
overseas?  Y'think?  Locally (Fredericksburg, Va.) we had a
Belden Wire & Cable plant close and move to Mexico.  While
I was on a holiday about 3 weeks ago, I was listening to WIBC,
Indianapolis, Indiana which had a news item that the 1100
workers at the Whirpool plant in Evansville, Indiana were
going to lose their jobs at the end of next year because the
plant was closing and moving operations to Mexico.  Yay,
NAFTA!  What a crock!  Do I sound mad as hell?  You bet I am. 
And, guess what, I normally vote Republican ('cuz the
opposition has been obsessed with collecting up all the guns
for a very long time), but my parents were both US Army
veterans and UAW members, and this stuff just sickens me.  But
anyway, the corporations moving overseas, or to Mexico or
Canada, means those 1100 workers in Evansville, along with
thousands and hundreds of thousands of workers all over the
country that are in the same boat, get to replace their
good-paying factory jobs with crappy-paying service-sector
jobs, if indeed they all even get jobs at all, which some
won't.  Some will go back to living on a spouse's income, move
back home with parents, move in with grown children, etc.

This is the end-time, folks.  If we don't do something about
the income tax making manufacturing to be a "too
expensive" thing to do in our country, we are looking at
an economic train wreck.  More and more people will fall into
the category of either having no income, or having such a
meager income that it cannot be taxed.  There will not be
enough "rich" folks to tax to bring prosperity to
the country even if you take everything they have.  Prosperity
comes from making things, gowing things, mining things. 
Without that, we're screwed, its that simple.
-------------------------------------

Using that reality, a "true" flat tax would result
in a far higher progressive matrix then anything we have or
have even considered

-------------------------------------
Forest / trees stuff.  Its not who pays the income tax, its
the income tax that is a poison on the American landscape. 
Its the 2nd worst idea in the history of this country, right
behind slavery!
-------------------------------------

I believe the only way we can really facilitate a
"true" flat and continue the services necessary for
proper governance would look something like this;

Remove personal payments for all government services, for
instance sales tax, park fees, tolls, road tax that's added to
gasoline, etc.

However the government would still "bill" for that
revenue, the bill from local government will of course go to
the federal government, the federal government will then
"collect" those fees through a universal and flat
income tax

Bing, a "true" flat tax

Now, you get a progressive talking like this and I guarantee
the wealthy will stop immediately asking for a flat tax
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/7595 
"The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein

-------------------------------------
Fergiddaboudit!  Just get rid of the income tax, and run the
country on a consumption tax like we did from its inception up
until the great mistake in 1913, when the income tax was
passed.  Repeal the 16th amendment, run the country on a
National Sales Tax, and realize prosperity once again.  Fail
to do it, and watch the country continue to decline.  Its that
simple.
-------------------------------------
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC