Federal Income Tax Data 2021 Update: Very Progressive (bankrupt, 2015, purchase)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem is defense spending and tax cuts. The trust fund programs, SS and Medicare, aren't running the huge deficits.
About 40-45% of Medicare spending ($250-300 billion) is funded via general tax revenues. I'd say that's a deficit. Federal support for Medicaid ($600-650 billion) is also funded with general tax revenues.
S/S is currently supported by S/S tax, but the SSA will soon begin redeeming the debt they hold after Congress spent all the prior overcollections. That money will have to come from somewhere.
Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2021 Update
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has released data on individual income taxes for tax year 2018, showing the number of taxpayers, adjusted gross income, and income tax shares by income percentiles.[1] The new data shows how taxes changed in the first tax year after passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) in December 2017.
The data shows that the U.S. individual income tax continued to be progressive, borne primarily by the highest income earners.
In 2018, 144.3 million taxpayers reported earning $11.6 trillion in adjusted gross income (AGI) and paid $1.5 trillion in individual income taxes.
Tax year 2018 was the first under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). The number of returns filed and the amount of income reported grew in 2018 yet average tax rates fell across every income group and total income taxes paid decreased by $65 billion.
The share of reported income earned by the top 1 percent of taxpayers fell slightly, to 20.9 percent in 2018 from 21 percent in 2017. Their share of federal individual income taxes rose by 1.6 percentage points to 40.1 percent.
Since 2001, the share of federal income taxes paid by the top 1 percent increased from 33.2 percent to a new high of 40.1 percent in 2018.
In 2018, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.1 percent of all individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.9 percent.
The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (40.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (28.6 percent).
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a 25.4 percent average individual income tax rate, which is more than seven times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.4 percent).
I'm glad to hear all that. The progressive income tax is necessitated by the fact that most other taxes in this country are regressive. The sales tax on food is a tax that exists in many if not most of the states in this country. Since everyone has to eat, this tax hits the poor and poor families hardest of all. The property tax tends to be regressive because property values rise while the income for many people declines as they reach their senior years. The property tax can be a particularly difficult tax for those who lose their jobs and experience periods of unemployment and for the poor elderly. Many states have an income tax, but often it is a flat rate tax that affects the working poor more than other groups because they have little discretionary income after meeting all their expenses.
One criticism I have heard of the progressive income tax is that it supposedly "redistributes income". I don't see it that way at all. I see it as the only practical means to pay for a government provides for health care for the poor and elderly, pensions for its oldest citizens, a defense second to no other country in this world, and endeavors like Operation Warp Speed. The poor cannot afford to pay for this kind of government. Only those with large incomes can afford to pay for the kind of government we need. Those who advocate for a "flat rate income tax" are, in effect, advocate for a very weak and limited government. That may not be wrong, but they should make it clear that a flat rate income tax would inevitably lead to that type of government.
Sure, that $40 billion we spend on foreign aid is going to make a real difference in the budget.
Yes, it would make a difference, even cutting a million would. By saying it's "only a billion", etc. is how we got into this deficit to begin with. . But the biggest problem is that governments don't EARN any money, they just print it and take it from working people. They don't produce anything that earns money. Remember that pallet with 1.7 billion that obama gave the Iranians ? There is a heck of a lot more money going to other governments and places than we know about.
If you run your personal money with that same attitude you're probably in debt yourself.
OMG! No wonder bridges aren't being repaired, wildfire prevention measures can't be carried out, unemployment benefits have run dry during the Covid crisis, Vet hospitals and clinics are struggling, medical R & D at this crucial time have been cut, Medicaid is not available in some states, and our formerly great country is going down the drain! This is not the way to MAGA! Thank heaven we were able to put a stop to continued severe hatchet jobs done to the federal budget! Hopefully, Congress can do something to stop this phased-in train wreck.
Untrue, of course. You managed, once again, not to get a single point correct.
1) That revenue number is for personal income tax revenue - it says nothing about other forms of revenue
2) At the Federal level, there is no connection between revenue and expenditure. The government spends as much as it likes without regard to personal income tax revenue.
3) It is not the job of the Federal Government to fix most bridges - it is the job of States such as California.
4) Wildfire prevention measures are the root cause of California's wildfires. Everyone agrees - California's wildfires are fueled by an excess of, well, forest debris that California allowed to accumulate in the first place.
5) It is not the job of the Federal Government to invest in medical R&D.
6) Medicaid expansion was/is an option for States.
7) The Federal Budget has not had a hatchet taken to it. It continues to expand. It is bloated. Everyone agrees.
8) Congress won't do a darn thing about your pet peeves. Nancy Pelosi's objectives are political, not economic. HR1 is loaded with things to cement a permanent Democratic majority.
The key takeaway is that the TCJA actually raised taxes on the wealthy - despite the trope that comes from the progressive left.
But thanks for playing.
Last edited by RationalExpectations; 02-06-2021 at 04:40 PM..
I'm glad to hear all that. The progressive income tax is necessitated by the fact that most other taxes in this country are regressive. The sales tax on food is a tax that exists in many if not most of the states in this country. Since everyone has to eat, this tax hits the poor and poor families hardest of all. The property tax tends to be regressive because property values rise while the income for many people declines as they reach their senior years. The property tax can be a particularly difficult tax for those who lose their jobs and experience periods of unemployment and for the poor elderly. Many states have an income tax, but often it is a flat rate tax that affects the working poor more than other groups because they have little discretionary income after meeting all their expenses.
One criticism I have heard of the progressive income tax is that it supposedly "redistributes income". I don't see it that way at all. I see it as the only practical means to pay for a government provides for health care for the poor and elderly, pensions for its oldest citizens, a defense second to no other country in this world, and endeavors like Operation Warp Speed. The poor cannot afford to pay for this kind of government. Only those with large incomes can afford to pay for the kind of government we need. Those who advocate for a "flat rate income tax" are, in effect, advocate for a very weak and limited government. That may not be wrong, but they should make it clear that a flat rate income tax would inevitably lead to that type of government.
An income tax is a poor choice for a tax, period. The last thing we need is a tax system that provides a disincentive to create value and hence earn money.
A far better system is a progressive consumption tax. The more you consume, the more tax you pay. Make it as progressive as you like.
Untrue, of course. You managed, once again, not to get a single point correct.
1) That revenue number is for personal income tax revenue - it says nothing about other forms of revenue
2) At the Federal level, there is no connection between revenue and expenditure. The government spends as much as it likes without regard to personal income tax revenue.
3) It is not the job of the Federal Government to fix most bridges - it is the job of States such as California. 4) Wildfire prevention measures are the root cause of California's wildfires. Everyone agrees - California's wildfires are fueled by an excess of, well, forest debris that California allowed to accumulate in the first place.
5) It is not the job of the Federal Government to invest in medical R&D.
6) Medicaid expansion was/is an option for States.
7) The Federal Budget has not had a hatchet taken to it. It continues to expand. It is bloated. Everyone agrees.
8) Congress won't do a darn thing about your pet peeves. Nancy Pelosi's objectives are political, not economic. HR1 is loaded with things to cement a permanent Democratic majority.
The key takeaway is that the TCJA actually raised taxes on the wealthy - despite the trope that comes from the progressive left.
But thanks for playing.
Husband involved in lawsuit involving wildfires. Brush not being trimmed properly due to onerous environmental regs on PG&E.
Yes, it would make a difference, even cutting a million would. By saying it's "only a billion", etc. is how we got into this deficit to begin with. . But the biggest problem is that governments don't EARN any money, they just print it and take it from working people. They don't produce anything that earns money. Remember that pallet with 1.7 billion that obama gave the Iranians ? There is a heck of a lot more money going to other governments and places than we know about.
If you run your personal money with that same attitude you're probably in debt yourself.
Every debt starts with $ 1 !
On the bolded? Did he give them American tax dollars or simply released their money that was frozen because we can push around less powerful countries?
I suspect that most or all of these problems could be fixed with just the money we waste on foreign aid and payments to non-citizens.
No, they can't. You know why? Because foreign aid was already slashed to the bone in the mid-90's, during the Gingrich Contress! ALL the government foreign aid agencies were cut loose, and told to fend for themselves. They are now non-profit organizations, going begging annually for their operating budgets!
The implications of that are rather intriguing. Since they're no longer government agencies, they could in theory, wage their own foreign policy; they're no longer beholden to the government, so they could pursue policies that are contrary to the government's interests. They could undermine the government's efforts abroad, if they wanted. They no longer have to share intelligence with the CIA, either. (They were a major source of intel back when they were on the gov't payroll.)
This really shows how little you and most other people know about foreign aid.
Anyway, there's no more "waste". There's nothing left to cut. And that news piece about "foreign aid" going to make payments to non-citizens was fake news. That was covered in another concurrent thread. Look it up; there was a whole thread devoted to that topic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
