Check your US tax rate for 2012—and every year since 1913
qz.com
qz.com
The US does not have a taxing problem, it has a spending problem. Even if the President got his wishes his tax increase on the "rich" would not net more that the US deficit spends in ONE month. If you tax 400K+ it only returns a possible 70 billion more PER YEAR!.
Worse, instead of using these taxes to reduce the deficit they already have new spending lined up.
So, sorry I feel that even twenty percent is pretty bad. It means for over a fifth of the year I am not working for myself. Since my effective is near thirty percent I spend an incredible amount of time working for someone else.
Ah, see, that's the problem.
First, you pay federal income tax. Second, you pay state income tax. Third, you pay payroll taxes/fees. Fourth, you pay property taxes for your residence. Fifth, you pay state/county sales taxes on whatever you decide to buy.
Oh, did I mention that widget you bought that came from China probably had some tariffs on it?
Made in the USA? No worries. You paid for some of the federal/state payroll taxes/fees the manufacturer was responsible for.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dof/html/services/business_tax_nys_i...
The only difference is it doesn't use silly accounting to hide the tax from the employee.
It does seem to be the case that the chart omits the ~15% tax that goes to social security and medicare (well, 15% for people earning under the limit). So even the federal taxes on $100,000 are quite some more than 21%.
Does anyone have links to articles that review this in more depth? A quick Google search didn't yield anything relevant.
Don't forget state income tax, sales tax and various other embedded tax. Realistically, taxes are around 40% - 50%.
Also keep in mind that we get very little benefits for those tax dollars compared to Europe for example. Our healthcare costs and higher education are not covered by that tax the same way most European countries are. The only thing we do get for that money is perpetual war and bank/industry bailouts. Kind of a raw deal.
Preferably, I'd love to see a mixed system. A VAT tax, a flat income tax and capital gains tax. Something like 13/13/13 across the board (or maybe less if the US could get unnecessary spending down - not likely). This has worked brilliantly for several eastern European countries ever since they implemented them.
Also keep in mind that we get very little benefits
for those tax dollars compared to Europe for example.
I'd always assumed that US taxes were lower than European taxes due to this (no national health service for example) but from what you and others have pointed out that seems not to be the case. Using the example provided by mikiem of California I would be paying more tax in the US than I do in England (according to this calculator: http://www.paycheckcity.com/calculator/netpay/us/california/...).And you get much more for your money in Australia.
That's why a lot of US-ians are anti-tax. I think it has a lot to do with not seeing any benefits to paying it -- so they'd rather keep their money and fund private institutions. Of course, that's lose-lose and the country has almost no new infrastructure, terrible health care and no safety net and 8% unemployment. So there's that.
But most of these people choose to ignore the elephant in the room, which is military spending. But I presume you can't just say "divert all military spending to Euro-style 'socialist' paradise spending" because then a lot of people would no longer have jobs in the military-industrial complex.
TL:DR: nothing is going to change.
Flat tax is never going to happen.
Property taxes are 3% of my income.
Throw in sales taxes paid throughout the year.
I pay 40% in taxes out of $65,000 - not counting indirect effects of taxes raising the cost of everything I buy.
A government based on individual rights is small enough (i.e., just police, military, courts) that it can be funded through voluntary donations.
Well golly, let's not let facts get in the way of a good story. The federal government had a huge debt to pay down after the war. The debt as a fraction of GDP spiked to an all-time high after WWII, and steadily declined until the late 70s. The higher taxes were going toward that debt.
Then we dramatically cut taxes in the late 70s, and the debt started climbing again.
Granted, but if spending had otherwise returned to the previous levels then that debt would have gone away entirely and then the new taxes along with it. That rather obviously didn't happen. :)
A now-deleted sibling comment linked to the corresponding spending levels, which confirm the continued spending (note that this graph doesn't even include the debt): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/05/Us_gov_spendi...