Well, deficits wouldn't be so high if the rich paid their taxes....Very interesting read. I guess the question is can unrealized gains really be taxed as wealth? It's pretty much speculative value that serves to earn investors trust. That billionaires get to game the system by borrowing against their stock isn't without fault of the central banks who flood the financial markets with 'free' money and suppress the interest rates. The covid crisis have proven that theory; the central banks have opened the money presses yet the only ones who are profiting are billionaires and the stock/financial market. I think it's actually a snowball effect; billionaires hold on to their inflated stock so they get richer and richer(atleast on paper) while credit lines are free inflating the stock prices even further. At what point is the unrealized gains 'wealth' and at what point is it simply inflation? Another adverse effect would be if billionaires' unrealized gains are taxed that they would dump their stock and plummet the stock price so other investors(including pension, insurance and mortgage funds) would take massive losses on their portfolios with mostly middle income clients.
Unrealized gains are so embedded into the financial system that they would need to be untangled first before they could even be taxed. Indirectly their massive wealth also facilitates inflated stock prices, 'free' debt, housing bubbles and investors trust so I think ultimately much more people simply profit from the status-quo than just the handful of billionaires. Governments need the cheap credit to keep the state deficits manageable so what are they going to do.
It's unfair but at this point the government(any government) have dug themselves so deep in the hole that they would be the last to advocate a tax on unrealized gains. The system is just completely stuck at this point. There would need to be some giant breakthrough in robotics/A.I. to move past it. Anything really that breaks the monopoly of financial wealth.
You know when I typed the OP, I originally just had 'taxes' by itself. But then I realised I misrepresented what they were talking about. Because they only really discussed income taxes (at least with concrete evidence. They had that section about limitations of what they were reporting on.) So I edited itNo, I'm cranky that these journalists don't report honestly. "The income taxes that we can access for these people is this low, and the rest of their taxes are hidden in a mire of nonsense policies full of loopholes" is perfectly valid. They chose instead to give "federal income taxes/wealth" the title "true tax rate", which is just nonsense.
You cannot make that argument with the data they provided. You cannot say the tax system needs to change while ignoring most of the tax system. It would be just as valid to say "Look at how little capital gains taxes the lower middle class pays relative to their wealth. The system must be broken." Which is dumb. That's dumb. Who cares how much sin taxes are paid by people practicing temperance? Who cares how much gas tax is paid by someone who rides their bike everywhere? If you focus on the part of the tax system that doesn't apply to a particular individual, you can make anyone out as a villain.Wrong.
They're putting the numbers together in a way that doesn't make sense in terms of the current tax system. But if the point of the article is to argue that the current tax system needs to change because of the truly stupendous amounts of wealth people are amassing whilst incurring barely taxes, they're justified in doing so.
Large corporate tax bills aren't really low too. Corporate income tax bills are sometimes really low, because they are only a tax on net profit, so they won't pay that tax if they don't profit. But corporations have payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes (depending on the purchase). Sometimes there are gross receipts taxes on certain industries. And there's all sorts of government fees for doing business in the first place. Corporate income tax is only a slice of the taxation pie, so every time you see an article say something like "Amazon paid no income taxes", you need to understand that Amazon paid a crap-ton of taxes in other categories.You know when I typed the OP, I originally just had 'taxes' by itself. But then I realised I misrepresented what they were talking about. Because they only really discussed income taxes (at least with concrete evidence. They had that section about limitations of what they were reporting on.) So I edited it
Yes. I'm aware this is not their full tax bill. No, I'm not offended. I could read and not jump to conclusions
I'd also point out that large corporate tax bills are really low too. I wouldn't be suprised if capital gains tax bills are low, since the rate is low. I would not be suprised if the rich don't actually pay that much at all. I would love evidence that proves this one way or the other
Villain? Jeff Bezos is more a villain for treating Amazon staff like shit on low pay.You cannot make that argument with the data they provided. You cannot say the tax system needs to change while ignoring most of the tax system. It would be just as valid to say "Look at how little capital gains taxes the lower middle class pays relative to their wealth. The system must be broken." Which is dumb. That's dumb. Who cares how much sin taxes are paid by people practicing temperance? Who cares how much gas tax is paid by someone who rides their bike everywhere? If you focus on the part of the tax system that doesn't apply to a particular individual, you can make anyone out as a villain.
I know Jeff Bezos has kids, and I am a bad person, but I hope that rocket doesn't make it back here.How many people can say they are going to space in their own rocket?
Jeff Bezos will fly to the edge of space with his brother next month
Bezos Bros in spacewww.theverge.com
Not just ''someone else'', their children. What else is Junior going to do? Get a job?
Payroll taxes? Yah whatYou cannot make that argument with the data they provided. You cannot say the tax system needs to change while ignoring most of the tax system. It would be just as valid to say "Look at how little capital gains taxes the lower middle class pays relative to their wealth. The system must be broken." Which is dumb. That's dumb. Who cares how much sin taxes are paid by people practicing temperance? Who cares how much gas tax is paid by someone who rides their bike everywhere? If you focus on the part of the tax system that doesn't apply to a particular individual, you can make anyone out as a villain.
Large corporate tax bills aren't really low too. Corporate income tax bills are sometimes really low, because they are only a tax on net profit, so they won't pay that tax if they don't profit. But corporations have payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes (depending on the purchase). Sometimes there are gross receipts taxes on certain industries. And there's all sorts of government fees for doing business in the first place. Corporate income tax is only a slice of the taxation pie, so every time you see an article say something like "Amazon paid no income taxes", you need to understand that Amazon paid a crap-ton of taxes in other categories.
I'm just looking for less loopholes. The tax rate would be fine if they couldn't claim buying everything including the kitchen sink as a deductibleWould taxing the uber rich at a much higher rate be some sort of panacea? Absolutely not.
Does this mean we shouldn't raise their taxes? Also not. I think they'll be fine.
The tax rate should be 100% over a million dollars. In wealth.I'm just looking for less loopholes. The tax rate would be fine if they couldn't claim buying everything including the kitchen sink as a deductible
So do I, but that's really beside the point.I really doubt that's real
This is my point. This sort of articles misleads you on what those structures and institutions are doing with the goal of making people villains.Turning this into simple moralistic fables of heroes and villains isn't very useful. It's about the structure and institutions of society that permit these things to come about.
Yes. Payroll taxes. Payroll taxes in the US fund social security and medicare, and 50% of that tax comes from the employer.Payroll taxes? Yah what
Jeff Bezos doesn't need articles like this to make him look like a villain, he does that all on his own.This is my point. This sort of articles misleads you on what those structures and institutions are doing with the goal of making people villains.
Are these the US version of income taxes? Serious question, terminology isn't interchangeable so I wanna be sure.Yes. Payroll taxes. Payroll taxes in the US fund social security and medicare, and 50% of that tax comes from the employer.
Then why make this article!?Jeff Bezos doesn't need articles like this to make him look like a villain, he does that all on his own.
No, these are different. These are fixed rate taxes, split evenly between employees and employers to fund entitlements, much like the taxes that fund unemployment insurance. And flipping the argument around, ignoring things like this for the poor when discussing taxes is equally dishonest. Something like half of everyone is paying net zero federal income tax, but a big chunk of every paycheck is still going to all these other taxes, which makes it sort of slimy to focus on the one type of tax.Are these the US version of income taxes? Serious question, terminology isn't interchangeable so I wanna be sure.
To encourage discussion of tax policy..?Then why make this article!?
with caps...These are fixed rate taxes
It really doesn't. It simply points out that they can do this so they do, how it works, and how it came about. It is, broadly, extremely non-judgemental.This is my point. This sort of articles misleads you on what those structures and institutions are doing with the goal of making people villains.
Corporate income taxes are very low b/c huge companies don't write off the profit where they actually make them. They look where taxes are lowest then write those profits off from some sister company or supplier. Properties keep ballooning in value yet huge loans can be deducted from the little profit that is actually reported to the IRS. The remaining sales tax is transferred to the end user. That is the problem that the article highlights: corporations make billions of dollars yet on paper they make almost nothing. Shareholders meanwhile sit on billions of stock that are borrowed against credit so billionaires have such monumental debt on paper that their income tax is also next to nothing. The problem is not so much these companies or individuals(who can really blame them for wanting to pay as few tax as possible) but rather the systemic flaws that are a result of outdated legislation and a general unwillingness or inability to modernize them. It's similar to the gun laws we don't live in the 1800s anymore yet any attempt to modernize this legislation to prevent accidents, killing sprees and avoidable deaths that continue year on year are always shot down with the same politically spinned platitudes that has zero bearing on the actual reality of the situation and only serves to further established interests. Those in power really don't give a fuck about anybody but themselves.Large corporate tax bills aren't really low too. Corporate income tax bills are sometimes really low, because they are only a tax on net profit, so they won't pay that tax if they don't profit. But corporations have payroll taxes, property taxes, sales taxes (depending on the purchase). Sometimes there are gross receipts taxes on certain industries. And there's all sorts of government fees for doing business in the first place. Corporate income tax is only a slice of the taxation pie, so every time you see an article say something like "Amazon paid no income taxes", you need to understand that Amazon paid a crap-ton of taxes in other categories.
Do what? Gain their wealth in ways that don't fall under income tax?It really doesn't. It simply points out that they can do this so they do, how it works, and how it came about.