Progressive Taxes for Individuals | Change or No Change?

Hey Fellow Man:

I've been pondering on this for a while and have decided to go through a decent tax policy in terms of progressive taxes for individuals and what I figured out that our current policy for the last twenty years is so half-assed and plain ole' illogical. Have you guys felt this too? You know as an up and coming politician I've decided to create my own tax policy on the likes of progressive taxes for individuals. Take a Look at My Proposal: Progressive Change: A Federalist's Approach on Progressive Taxes. Anyway, I would like to continue this conversation with you guys and hopefully you'll take a read when you have the time.

I favor a smaller flatter Income tax (with some progression to it) and a Consumption tax that Exempts Basic Necessities like Unprepared Food. most Deductions would have to be Removed of course, and there would still have to be an amount somewhere just over the Poverty line, that is exempt for taxing at all for everyone.
 
I'm not saying there's no societal benefit to marriage, or that we should eliminate all tax advantages to getting married. However, our current tax code seems to offer a relatively modest marriage benefit: TurboTax® - Getting Married. Under it, a billionaire pays roughly the same (almost all income in top bracket) whether he or she is married or not. I just don't think that Bill Gates' marriage is worth $14 Billion to society, which is what your plan seems to indicate.
 
I'm not saying there's no societal benefit to marriage, or that we should eliminate all tax advantages to getting married. However, our current tax code seems to offer a relatively modest marriage benefit: TurboTax® - Getting Married. Under it, a billionaire pays roughly the same (almost all income in top bracket) whether he or she is married or not. I just don't think that Bill Gates' marriage is worth $14 Billion to society, which is what your plan seems to indicate.

It's amazing how you call yourself a liberal...
 
I hope to gain signatures soon, this isn't a bad idea and even if my tax code isn't "realistic" to some at least take the initiative to sign the petition to let our government know that we want a balanced tax system.
 
I'm not saying there's no societal benefit to marriage, or that we should eliminate all tax advantages to getting married. However, our current tax code seems to offer a relatively modest marriage benefit: TurboTax® - Getting Married. Under it, a billionaire pays roughly the same (almost all income in top bracket) whether he or she is married or not. I just don't think that Bill Gates' marriage is worth $14 Billion to society, which is what your plan seems to indicate.

Being married has extraordinary benefits especially when you're talking about children and the future of a nation. It keeps us going...
 
I think you're misunderstanding the formula that the original poster is proposing. My understanding is that the idea is that income in the $70,000-$90,000 range is taxed at 24%, so someone who made $70,001 would pay 24 cents more than someone who made $70,000, but their income up to $70,000 would be taxed at the same rate.

That's essentially the way the current income tax system works. The tax rate goes up as income increases, but the higher rate only applies to the income in that bracket. Thus, you can't make earn *more* money pre-tax and somehow end up with *less* money post-tax (unless maybe there's some weird deduction or something).

All I did was use his tax table in his link.

I understand how you're using his tax table, but I don't think the algorithm you're using is the one he intends to communicate. This is my understanding:

Income $70,000:
$20,000 at 4% ($10,000-$30,000),
$20,000 at 8% ($30,000-$50,000),
$20,000 at 12% ($50,000-$70,000),
Total tax: $4,800
Post-Tax Income: $65,200

Income $73,500 ($70,000 plus a 5% raise)
$20,000 at 4% ($10,000-$30,000),
$20,000 at 8% ($30,000-$50,000),
$20,000 at 12% ($50,000-$70,000),
$3,500 at 24% ($70,000-$90,000)
Total tax: $5,640
Post-Tax Income: $67,860

So that post-tax, the $3,500 raise would net an additional $2,660.

Ok, I went back and took a closer look.
The words "marginal tax rate" are in his table. I failed to pay attention to the word "marginal".
That would make your algorithm correct and my flat calculation based upon the same rate for all income incorrect.
Thank you for setting me straight on that. :up:
 
To Mountain Man:

Yes, he's clearly miscalculating the way income taxes are calculated and thank you for clarifying to him or her because the tax rates that I've proposed is fairly good better and provides opportunity for those who earn less. Thanks for the input and if you don't feel like signing the White House.gov Petition then head to the Change.org Petition, you get to sign it instantly without an account.
Yes, she clarified the method. I was calculating them incorrectly by using a flat rat for all income, and not using the "marginal" rates as specified in your plan.
My mistake.
 
To Mountain Man:

Yes, he's clearly miscalculating the way income taxes are calculated and thank you for clarifying to him or her because the tax rates that I've proposed is fairly good better and provides opportunity for those who earn less. Thanks for the input and if you don't feel like signing the White House.gov Petition then head to the Change.org Petition, you get to sign it instantly without an account.
Yes, she clarified the method. I was calculating them incorrectly by using a flat rat for all income, and not using the "marginal" rates as specified in your plan.
My mistake.

Lady Liberal is trying to make me out as a Marxist and I'm clearly not.
 

Forum List

Back
Top