tax avoidance is the problem

[Star]

Add It Up: Taxes Avoided by the Rich Could Pay Off the Deficit | NationofChange

Conservatives force the deficit issue, ignoring job creation, and insisting that tax increases on the rich wouldn't generate enough revenue to balance the budget. They're way off. But it takes a little arithmetic to put it all together. In the following analysis, data has been taken from a variety of sources, some of which may overlap or slightly disagree, but all of which lead to the conclusion that withheld revenue, not excessive spending, is the problem.

1. Individual and small business tax avoidance costs us $450 billion.
The IRS estimates that 17 percent of taxes owed were not paid, leaving an underpayment of $450 billion. In way of confirmation, an independent review of IRS data reveals that the richest 10 percent of Americans paid less than 19% on $3.8 trillion of income in 2006, nearly $450 billion short of a more legitimate 30% tax rate. It has also been estimated that two-thirds of the annual $1.3 trillion in "tax expenditures" (tax subsidies from special deductions, exemptions, exclusions, credits, capital gains, and loopholes) goes to the top quintile of taxpayers. Based on IRS apportionments, this calculates out to more than $450 billion for the richest 10 percent of Americans.

2. Corporate tax avoidance is between $250 billion and $500 billion.

✄snip>


3. Tax haven losses range from $337 billion to $500 billion.


✄snip>


4. That's enough to pay off a trillion dollar deficit. Reasonable tax changes could pay it off a second time:


(a) A non-regressive payroll tax could produce $150 billion in revenue.

✄snip>

(b) A minimal estate tax brings in another $100 billion.

✄snip>

(c) A financial transaction tax (FTT): up to $500 billion.

✄snip>

Add it all up, and we've paid off the deficit, almost twice. More importantly, the avoided taxes and a few other sensible taxes could provide sufficient revenue for job stimulus without cutting the hard-earned benefits of middle-class Americans.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Add It Up: Taxes Avoided by the Rich Could Pay Off the Deficit | NationofChange

Conservatives force the deficit issue, ignoring job creation, and insisting that tax increases on the rich wouldn't generate enough revenue to balance the budget. They're way off. But it takes a little arithmetic to put it all together. In the following analysis, data has been taken from a variety of sources, some of which may overlap or slightly disagree, but all of which lead to the conclusion that withheld revenue, not excessive spending, is the problem.

1. Individual and small business tax avoidance costs us $450 billion.
The IRS estimates that 17 percent of taxes owed were not paid, leaving an underpayment of $450 billion. In way of confirmation, an independent review of IRS data reveals that the richest 10 percent of Americans paid less than 19% on $3.8 trillion of income in 2006, nearly $450 billion short of a more legitimate 30% tax rate. It has also been estimated that two-thirds of the annual $1.3 trillion in "tax expenditures" (tax subsidies from special deductions, exemptions, exclusions, credits, capital gains, and loopholes) goes to the top quintile of taxpayers. Based on IRS apportionments, this calculates out to more than $450 billion for the richest 10 percent of Americans.

2. Corporate tax avoidance is between $250 billion and $500 billion.

✄snip>


3. Tax haven losses range from $337 billion to $500 billion.


✄snip>


4. That's enough to pay off a trillion dollar deficit. Reasonable tax changes could pay it off a second time:


(a) A non-regressive payroll tax could produce $150 billion in revenue.

✄snip>

(b) A minimal estate tax brings in another $100 billion.

✄snip>

(c) A financial transaction tax (FTT): up to $500 billion.

✄snip>

Add it all up, and we've paid off the deficit, almost twice. More importantly, the avoided taxes and a few other sensible taxes could provide sufficient revenue for job stimulus without cutting the hard-earned benefits of middle-class Americans.

By "tax avoidance" do you mean cheating on taxes or using legal means to shelter income?

 

[kwc57]

You might want to check your math.

 

[Ariux]

Consider of Romney and the super rich, who pay about 13% now had been paying the 25% of the middle class, year after year. All other things being equal, the debt would be much smaller. But, all other things wouldn't be equal. The super rich would be demanding smaller government.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Consider of Romney and the super rich, who pay about 13% now had been paying the 25% of the middle class, year after year. All other things being equal, the debt would be much smaller. But, all other things wouldn't be equal. The super rich would be demanding smaller government.

I know a guy who works 100 hour weeks on a regular basis and spent his adult life building up his business.

He makes a better living than most of the people in this country - but his income still pales in comparison to the likes of Mitt Romney. Yet this wealthy person that I know has to pay 35% on his last dollar - earned by work - while mittens gets to pay a cool 15%.

But I'm sure the wacko right would just phrase that as "wealth envy". Apparently working you balls off for 3 decades only to pay a tax rate over twice as high as the guy who makes 100 times what you make is "envy"

 

[Mad Scientist]

No. "Tax Payance and Government Stealance" are the problems.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Consider of Romney and the super rich, who pay about 13% now had been paying the 25% of the middle class, year after year. All other things being equal, the debt would be much smaller. But, all other things wouldn't be equal. The super rich would be demanding smaller government.

I know a guy who works 100 hour weeks on a regular basis and spent his adult life building up his business.

He makes a better living than most of the people in this country - but his income still pales in comparison to the likes of Mitt Romney. Yet this wealthy person that I know has to pay 35% on his last dollar - earned by work - while mittens gets to pay a cool 15%.

But I'm sure the wacko right would just phrase that as "wealth envy". Apparently working you balls off for 3 decades only to pay a tax rate over twice as high as the guy who makes 100 times what you make is "envy"

You might like this:


1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the “East Africa Journal” the following: “We need…to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the “commercial” or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights “We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.”

2. In an article from 1965 entitled “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Barack Obama’s father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

 

[California Girl]

Consider of Romney and the super rich, who pay about 13% now had been paying the 25% of the middle class, year after year. All other things being equal, the debt would be much smaller. But, all other things wouldn't be equal. The super rich would be demanding smaller government.

I know a guy who works 100 hour weeks on a regular basis and spent his adult life building up his business.

He makes a better living than most of the people in this country - but his income still pales in comparison to the likes of Mitt Romney. Yet this wealthy person that I know has to pay 35% on his last dollar - earned by work - while mittens gets to pay a cool 15%.

But I'm sure the wacko right would just phrase that as "wealth envy". Apparently working you balls off for 3 decades only to pay a tax rate over twice as high as the guy who makes 100 times what you make is "envy"

So it's Romney's fault that the tax rate for capital gains is lower than income tax?

What a very strange opinion.

 

[Politico]

Tax avoidance is not a problem. They're quite easy to avoid.

 

[Wiseacre]

Add It Up: Taxes Avoided by the Rich Could Pay Off the Deficit | NationofChange

Conservatives force the deficit issue, ignoring job creation, and insisting that tax increases on the rich wouldn't generate enough revenue to balance the budget. They're way off. But it takes a little arithmetic to put it all together. In the following analysis, data has been taken from a variety of sources, some of which may overlap or slightly disagree, but all of which lead to the conclusion that withheld revenue, not excessive spending, is the problem.

1. Individual and small business tax avoidance costs us $450 billion.
The IRS estimates that 17 percent of taxes owed were not paid, leaving an underpayment of $450 billion. In way of confirmation, an independent review of IRS data reveals that the richest 10 percent of Americans paid less than 19% on $3.8 trillion of income in 2006, nearly $450 billion short of a more legitimate 30% tax rate. It has also been estimated that two-thirds of the annual $1.3 trillion in "tax expenditures" (tax subsidies from special deductions, exemptions, exclusions, credits, capital gains, and loopholes) goes to the top quintile of taxpayers. Based on IRS apportionments, this calculates out to more than $450 billion for the richest 10 percent of Americans.

2. Corporate tax avoidance is between $250 billion and $500 billion.

✄snip>


3. Tax haven losses range from $337 billion to $500 billion.


✄snip>


4. That's enough to pay off a trillion dollar deficit. Reasonable tax changes could pay it off a second time:


(a) A non-regressive payroll tax could produce $150 billion in revenue.

✄snip>

(b) A minimal estate tax brings in another $100 billion.

✄snip>

(c) A financial transaction tax (FTT): up to $500 billion.

✄snip>

Add it all up, and we've paid off the deficit, almost twice. More importantly, the avoided taxes and a few other sensible taxes could provide sufficient revenue for job stimulus without cutting the hard-earned benefits of middle-class Americans.

First off, I think those numbers are way overblown. Second, you'll never get enough politicians to make those kinds of changes, on both sides of the aisle. Third, if you did, the wealthy people would leave in droves, and we wouldn't be getting much in the way of foreign investment in US businesses. Fourth, you'd wind up with another great depression rivaling the 1930s, maybe worse. Fifth, we ain't Europe. The sooner you realize that, the better. You can engage in ridiculous flights of fancy all you want, but there's no way on God's green earth you will ever be able to finance all the spending you want with higher effective tax rates. We'd be the bggest banana republic on earth.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Consider of Romney and the super rich, who pay about 13% now had been paying the 25% of the middle class, year after year. All other things being equal, the debt would be much smaller. But, all other things wouldn't be equal. The super rich would be demanding smaller government.

I know a guy who works 100 hour weeks on a regular basis and spent his adult life building up his business.

He makes a better living than most of the people in this country - but his income still pales in comparison to the likes of Mitt Romney. Yet this wealthy person that I know has to pay 35% on his last dollar - earned by work - while mittens gets to pay a cool 15%.

But I'm sure the wacko right would just phrase that as "wealth envy". Apparently working you balls off for 3 decades only to pay a tax rate over twice as high as the guy who makes 100 times what you make is "envy"

So it's Romney's fault that the tax rate for capital gains is lower than income tax?

What a very strange opinion.

yes!! the liberals make the tax rules and then they roundly attack Republicans for following them as if they don't follow them themselves!! Do they want everyone to volunteer to pay more than the law requires or just Republicans?

See why we are positive liberals will be slow??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

since the rich create the goods and services that got us from the stone age to here it is obviously best to incent them with lower or no taxes so they have more and more money with which to develop new goods and services.

Let the poor people pay the taxes since they make no similar contribution to society.

 

[kwc57]

Consider of Romney and the super rich, who pay about 13% now had been paying the 25% of the middle class, year after year. All other things being equal, the debt would be much smaller. But, all other things wouldn't be equal. The super rich would be demanding smaller government.

I know a guy who works 100 hour weeks on a regular basis and spent his adult life building up his business.

He makes a better living than most of the people in this country - but his income still pales in comparison to the likes of Mitt Romney. Yet this wealthy person that I know has to pay 35% on his last dollar - earned by work - while mittens gets to pay a cool 15%.

But I'm sure the wacko right would just phrase that as "wealth envy". Apparently working you balls off for 3 decades only to pay a tax rate over twice as high as the guy who makes 100 times what you make is "envy"

You might like this:


1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the “East Africa Journal” the following: “We need…to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the “commercial” or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights “We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.”

2. In an article from 1965 entitled “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Barack Obama’s father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

Funny how one can find things written by his father, but all of his records are sealed and his past a mystery.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I know a guy who works 100 hour weeks on a regular basis and spent his adult life building up his business.

He makes a better living than most of the people in this country - but his income still pales in comparison to the likes of Mitt Romney. Yet this wealthy person that I know has to pay 35% on his last dollar - earned by work - while mittens gets to pay a cool 15%.

But I'm sure the wacko right would just phrase that as "wealth envy". Apparently working you balls off for 3 decades only to pay a tax rate over twice as high as the guy who makes 100 times what you make is "envy"

You might like this:


1. In 1965, Barack Obama, Sr. wrote in the “East Africa Journal” the following: “We need…to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” How? Well, the state can take over large segments of the “commercial” or private sector. And, he said, there is no reason to worry about economic freedom or individual rights “We have to look at priorities in terms of what is good for society and on this basis we may find it necessary to force people to do things they would not do otherwise.”

2. In an article from 1965 entitled “Problems Facing Our Socialism,” Barack Obama’s father stated: Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed. . . It is a fallacy to say there is a limit (to tax rates), and it is a fallacy to rely mainly on individual free enterprise to get the savings. Barack Obama Sr. "Tax 100% of income." Like Father, Like Son? | Peace . Gold . Liberty | Revolution

Funny how one can find things written by his father, but all of his records are sealed and his past a mystery.

To the liberal MSM Romney's tax history is more important than Barry's communist history.