BREAKING: Leaked chart shows planned tax increases under Bernie Sander's plan

[Bubzer]

[Bubzer]

1. ...

[lovemydog]

81. Haha!

[LittleGirl]

97. Love that!

saved! Thanks!

[Kip Humphrey]

2. Yeah, I can live with this.

[pugetres]

3. What??

You'd think he was actually pushing for a progressive tax rate.

Rather than the regressive one that is in place now.

[bjobotts]

74. Meaningless because it does not show the benefits, money saved which is more than any tax increases

[pugetres]

98. It all comes out in the wash...

is the expression that I heard as a child. It all comes out in the wash is a fundamental that I learned as I grew up.

There is a difference and I think that you see it too.

[Broward]

4. The horror, nt.

[onecaliberal]

5. This is fair.

[Cheese Sandwich]

6. Marginal tax rate

Some people don't know that. They think you pay that tax on the whole amount. You only pay the higher rate on earnings above the amount.

[kristopher]

13. I don't think so. Those are brackets.

If your income falls within the bracket you pay that rate on the entire amount.

[Cheese Sandwich]

23. No those are marginal rates. That means income in a bracket gets taxed at the rate for that bracket.

So for example if you made just over $250,000, you would pay a 37% rate only on that small part of your income that is over the $250K. That's what a marginal tax rate means.

Progressive income tax rates.
Revenue raised: $110 billion a year.Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:
37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)

https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/

[Bubzer]

30. Yeah...this is correct.

[kristopher]

34. I stand corrected. Thanks to all. nt

[Bubzer]

39. No harm, no foul!

[Cheese Sandwich]

53. Most people do think what you were thinking

That's an extremely common misunderstanding even among very well informed people.

Thanks

[Mnpaul]

122. and the misunderstanding is planned

no one explains this when they talk about these rates.

[aidbo]

124. I find charts like this useful to visualize it.

The red line represents the marginal tax rate and the blue is the effective tax rate.

[JDPriestly]

40. Right. Plus you still get to take deductions.

[rickford66]

24. Sorry. Cheese is correct.

[angstlessk]

25. No you don't...you pay into each bracket

if you pay tax on the first 50,000
the next bracket is that amount OVER 50,000
etc

[Recursion]

35. No. You pay it on everything above the bottom of the bracket

You'll never end up actually making less money by getting a raise.

[JonLeibowitz]

38. Not always -- there is some funny business with the tax rates involving Social Security.

Also when it comes to the tax treatment of qualified dividends and long term capital gains you have to be careful with raises because they can screw you.

But generally, you are correct.

[Recursion]

49. Well your default withholding can get screwed up in corner cases

Also, for reasons that still are opaque to me, we don't consider SS and Medicare levies "taxes" (if we did, it would show all tax rates going up in this chart).

[JonLeibowitz]

55. SS at least isn't counted because it is more of a mandatory retirement system

Of course, this assumes that benefits are not cut, as many expect them to be for those who are young today.

I should have mentioned in my previous comment that I was speaking to distribution of SS benefits, not the withholdings.

As for medicare, yeah, no clue.

[JDPriestly]

73. If Bernie manages to get Congress to raise the cap on payroll taxes and also raises

the minimum wage to $15 (which will increase the amount of revenue subject to the payroll tax), Social Security will be a lot safer for a lot longer time. I wouldn't worry about Social Security taxes. Worry more about the job market.

The taxes that go into Social Security are related to the prosperity of low-wage earners. If they are doing well, Social Security is, well, secure.

Also, the cap should be raised on the payroll taxes. If all income were subject to it, who knows, they might be able to lower the rate of that tax. That seems fair to me.

[JoeyT]

66. Yep. Where the idea comes from is they'll withhold more from your check sometimes,

but you'll get it back at the end of the year. I've had some truly atrocious withholdings from a paycheck on contract jobs, then the government gave it back.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

42. That's incorrect as others have pointed out.

It's a common misconception that makes all the whining about those poor "middle class" professionals (and Joe the plumbers) who make "250k" and are supposedly getting screwed really fucking silly.

The increase is only on money earned OVER $250k. Furthermore, anyone in that income bracket is going to have write offs - 401ks, mortgages on first and second homes, property taxes, children, mortgages on boats etc. etc. - so any increase isn't really going to affect much under $300k.


Even at $300,000 in taxable income with no deductions the increase is $2000 or $166 per month.

[Barack_America]

7. Will someone please think of the poor multimillionaires?

Oh wait, never mind, Hillary does.

[Bubzer]

8. ...

[mindwalker_i]

22. Ouch

[Yallow]

27. Bam!

[appalachiablue]

51. That's right, and stop picking on Wall Street. Those good bankers will be poor as

church mice if this continues, C'mon. Bernie folks just learned they're too stoopid and poor to even DEFINE Wall Street as the poster of the recent OP noted. So lighten up, wise up and show respect to your betters, or else. Cuz WEALTH is what matters most..

[VulgarPoet]

112. One could posit they'd be "dead broke". nt

[Triana]

9. I have ZERO problem w/ this at all. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

10. Oh, my god, how AWFUL!

[Enthusiast]

52. I am so fearful. Hold me.

[kristopher]

11. Thanks for the reminder. K&R

[kgnu_fan]

12. Going back to pre-Regan, right?

[Bubzer]

14. By just a smidge, yes.

In 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=highest+tax+rate+during+reagan+administration

[NRaleighLiberal]

15. how can I now go to sleep after seeing the carnage in that chart?

Go Bernie!

[Kittycat]

17. Oh the horror!

[appalachiablue]

56. +1 The shock of it!

[liberal_at_heart]

18. K&R

[MrMickeysMom]

19. I freakin LOVE this!!!

I'll now have some nice dreaming to do tonight....

[olddots]

20. Oh no Muffy & I won't be able to afford the Hamptons this summer

there goes the Porsche G.T. 3 and the dog's therapist .

[Hydra]

21. Zomg! Noes!!!

What will we ever do!

[Lorien]

26. I seem to recall that they were all higher under Reagan...nt

[Yallow]

28. But What About The 90% Tax All The Republicans Scream He Wants?

And all their mouthpieces in the media?

I saw 3 different assholes claim Bernie wants to tax "people" 90%.

Assholes.

Liars.

Wait, they are Republicans, of course they are liars.

Almost forgot.

[Ccarmona]

41. They are afraid

Bernie is going to institute a sin tax of 90% for being a Republican, which seems reasonable and justified.

[killbotfactory]

29. ... and? nt

[Bubzer]

44. That's not enough for you?

To each their own I guess.

Have a great day!

[killbotfactory]

47. I just see absolutely nothing wrong with it.

But I guess that all depends on if you make over 250k a year.

[Bubzer]

54. I see nothing wrong with it either!

You might want to take a close look at my signature line!

[Dem2]

31. Seems reasonable to me

[Ccarmona]

32. While I agree these tax rates are more than fair

What about deductions? What stays and what goes, if anything?
Don't get me I wrong I love Bernie and have all the faith in him, but it's those deductions that allow the most wealthy to avoid paying their fair share.

[Enthusiast]

48. It must be addressed. eom

[FailureToCommunicate]

33. Tax rates like these...could make American great again!

[Recursion]

36. Only if you pretend payroll levies aren't taxes, which they are

But we all pretend they aren't, for some reason.

[stevenleser]

57. Not to mention, this seems to be "leaked" by the Sanders campaign themselves.

That's why the small print is so small you almost need an electron microscope to see it.

[Bubzer]

62. Thanks for the Kick!

[stevenleser]

72. Sorry whoever responded, I can't read your post. nt

[Bubzer]

84. LOL

Awesome! Proud to be on your ignore list!!!!!

[Electric Monk]

121. Yet somehow you read the OP. Guess what, they're the same person, and you're still you, too.

nt

[rpannier]

37. Speaking as a former member of Billionaires for Bush

J. Ingles McMoneybags finds this outrageous tax hike out of the question
I will be organizing with the other members of the elite 0.0001% and fight this absurdity gold tooth, golden spike and with the vigor that only a large trust fund worth the value of the GNP of Chile could mount

[Zynx]

43. To be fair, this ignores what he's doing with payroll taxes.

[Bubzer]

46. Care to provide a link to that?

[Zynx]

70. Page 4 here talks about it.

http://taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/2000639-an-analysis-of-senator-bernie-sanderss-tax-proposals.pdf

Since it's how he pays for UHC, I think it's worth noting.

[Bubzer]

75. Fascinating! Have you seen this?

The DC establishment’s latest attack on Bernie Sanders’ tax plan has just been thoroughly debunked.

On Friday afternoon, the Tax Policy Center (TPC) — a project of centrist think tank Brookings Institution — published a thoroughly-flawed analysis of Bernie Sanders’ tax plan. The TPC claimed that by raising $15.3 trillion in new revenue over ten years to fund Sanders’ proposals for free public college, universal health care, paid family and medical leave, and millions of new infrastructure jobs, the overall income of the average American would drop by approximately 12 percent.

However, the analysis was fundamentally disingenuous, as it analyzes the tax increases in a vacuum and does not account for the tremendous amount of savings that would be realized by families using public health insurance and colleges. It also does not account for the overall economic benefit of 13 million new public sector jobs and the resulting flow of new money into the economy.

“We do not account for the effects of the new government programs on income,” TPC co-founder Leonard Burman told Politico, in a revealing quote buried thirteen paragraphs below Politico‘s misleading headline. “We’re not really experts on the spending component.”

Neither Politico nor the TPC bothered to compare Sanders’ new tax rates, which most adversely affect the richest 0.1 percent of Americans, with the amount of money families would save should Sanders’ proposals become reality.

http://usuncut.com/news/sanders-shoots-down-tpc-analysis-of-tax-plan/

[Enthusiast]

45. Kicked and recommended! That is entirely reasonable. eom

[creeksneakers2]

50. Chart does't include

2.2% premium tax on all taxpayers. It also doesn't include whatever part of the carbon tax would filter down to consumers. It also doesn't include what other taxes could do to 401Ks.

[Bubzer]

60. You mean all the things we're already paying for in different ways? You're absolutely right!

You'll have to prove the 2.2% tax premium for me to buy off on that though. Got links?

[creeksneakers2]

76. From Bernie's website

https://berniesanders.com/issues/how-bernie-pays-for-his-proposals/

Its under Medicare for all.

There's also a 0.2 tax to pay for family leave.

We aren't paying a carbon tax now so we aren't paying for it in a different way. Ditto with taxes on investments.

[Bubzer]

82. Uhuh. We already pay additional money in taxes and out-of-pocket fees for emergency room visits.

Due in part to the externalities thrust upon the public by polluting companies. Just look to Flint Michigan for proof of that.
The clean-up effort will come out of our taxes. Any fines leveraged onto companies that pollute, get written off as a cost of doing business. So, yes...we're already paying for it all. As for investments, they SHOULD be heavily taxed. HEAVILY!

[creeksneakers2]

91. If that's the point

then the OP should say Bernie's taxes are worthwhile. It doesn't. It says taxes will be the same and they won't be.

[Bubzer]

103. "It says taxes will be the same and they won't be." - It says nothing of the sort.

Have you actually looked at the chart? I mean more than a glance?
The chart shows those making $250k or more will have their taxes increased. Something you should have been able to easily pick up on.

[The Traveler]

65. Ocean acidification threatens fisheries world wide

How much will the collapse of fisheries, predicted to be complete by 2050, cost the taxpayer?

Trav

[Bubzer]

71. Right?!? Can't spend savings that are spent on sand-bags and land-mass remediation!

[creeksneakers2]

77. Maybe more

but the chart doesn't talk about taxes being worthwhile. It says they will be the same and they won't.

[Bubzer]

85. It says no such thing. It ONLY addresses incme tax... and it shows tax increases for those...

that are earning over $250k.

[creeksneakers2]

86. It doesn't specify income tax

Here's the headline: Leaked chart shows planned tax increases under Bernie Sander's plan

[Bubzer]

104. Are you serious? Look at the damn chart!

It has three columns... look at the header for the first column! What some it say?!? It bloody well says INCOME don't it?!?

In all seriousness, you might want to visit an optometrist to get your eyes checked out.

[The Traveler]

95. It will cost everything

The oceans contribute over 70% of the oxygen to the atmosphere. If you think they will keep doing that after becoming an acidic plastic filled dead fish bowl, you don't science much.

The chart does refer to the Sanders income tax plan. You use words to obscure rather then clarify meaning. Who else does that? Anyone up for parsing the word "is"?

Trav

[Barack_America]

67. Or alleviating the burden of healthcare, childcare and college education....

...overall just really screwing over middle class families.

[creeksneakers2]

78. The chart isn't about that.

[putitinD]

58. OMG business owners will be forced to treat their employees better (profit sharing, more paid time

off etc.) just like they did in the Eisenhower days to avoid paying more taxes

[Uncle Joe]

59. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Bubzer.

[Bubzer]

64. ...

[Rosa Luxemburg]

61. OMG we are going to pay the same! How ghastly!

[SoapBox]

63. Absolutely no problem with that!

Of course, remember that "she" said that $250,000 is Middle Class!

[PowerToThePeople]

68. He may have lost my support.

Those upper percentages need to be much higher imho.




(JK, he did not lose my support.)

[Gwhittey]

69. No wonder Hillary is trying to beat SAnders

Her taxes would go up to 52%. Though if Sanders does win I guess she was not have to worry about that chart any longer. OR do think the Wall Street banks would still give her money for nothing as she claims now even if she no longer has any power?

[jfern]

79. The average family can't afford that $0 in new taxes

[kstewart33]

80. Gotta be a dream chart.

He won't raise $15 trillion with those numbers.

[Bubzer]

105. If he were planning on that being his sole source of revenue generation, you'de ben right.

However, he's spoken repeatedly on how he'll find the funds for each of his programs. I expect only someone who's completely new to politics, or who has never watched a debate/town-hall with Bernie in it would be substantively clueless about what he has proposed... that or someone being completely disingenuous. How long has your account been around again?

[tomm2thumbs]

83. Holeeeee Sh*t !!!!

[jmowreader]

87. Add in the surtaxes to get to the real numbers

http://fiscalfactcheck.crfb.org/analysis-of-the-sanders-single-payer-offsets/

A 2.2 percent “income-related premium” for individuals – Under this policy, households would pay a 2.2 percent tax, which based on the description would be the equivalent of a 2.2 percentage point increase in all ordinary income tax rates. As with the ordinary income tax, significant earnings would be exempt from this tax, particularly for low and moderate earners. For example, a family of four taking the standard deduction would not pay taxes on their first $28,800 of income.

A 6.2 percent employer-paid “income-related premium” – Under this policy, employers would pay a tax equal to 6.2 percent of their workers’ income. Practically speaking, this would likely have to take the form of a payroll tax, like the one already paying for Social Security and Medicare.

An increase in income tax rates for high earners – Currently, household income is taxed at 33 percent above $250,000, 35 percent above $413,000, and 39.6 percent above $467,000. Sen. Sanders would tax income at 37 percent above $250,000, 43 percent above $500,000, 48 percent above $2 million, and 52 percent above $10 million.

Or, in plain English...

Before: 10%
After: 18.4%

Before: 15%
After: 23.4%

Before: 25%
After: 33.4%

Before: 28%
After: 36.4%

Before: 33%
After: 41.4%

[Bubzer]

106. Hey, would ya look at that? Yet another "policy institute" that fails to take into account savings..

... that would be realized by families using public health insurance and colleges.

I'm Shocked! Shocked I tell you!!!

[questionseverything]

114. so basically he wants to raise payroll taxes 8.4 % to pay for medicare for all

since the aca premiums are 8% of income plus whatever subsidy is needed

if we get real healthcare people can afford to use,i am all for it

to use the aca i would have to have 30% of my income available...which i don't

[jmowreader]

118. He won't get "healthcare for all" with the money he's asking for

Current government spending levels are circa $3 trillion per year, and that's close to the taxes we bring in.

Which, coincidentally, happens to be the amount Americans spend on healthcare. About a third of that is paid for by the government, so add the two together and you get $5 trillion per year.

Then account for people currently not going to the doctor that will when it's free. That'll add another $1 to $2 trillion to the bill...let's be nice and say it's only $1 trillion. So, $6 trillion a year.

Then kick in the rest of his spending program and we'll add ANOTHER trillion...so, $7 trillion.

Let's then add a little "Galt spending." No one likes to pay taxes, and if you double them people will figure out how to get out of paying them. Let's be kind and say this is another trillion. We're up to $8 trillion.

Bernie wants $1.4 trillion per year in increased taxes - less than a third of what he needs.

I would feel better about Bernie if he'd come clean about this shit: "if you elect me I am going to have to double your taxes at the very least."

[dchill]

88. Makes Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon look like REAL...

Socialists!

[Matariki]

89. And yet, I've heard folks squarely in that 15% bracket

complain bloody murder about the 'unfairness' of a 50% tax on > $10 million

[Matt_R]

90. Hi, thanks for the reminder.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280103298
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280100383

similar posts, best I could find on google.

[john978]

92. Useful chart enhancement, showing percent of population

This image was posted several months ago reddit:

https://imgur.com/CInsQsD

[noiretextatique]

108. Excellent enhancement

This really shows how the plan would affect most people.

[Feeling the Bern]

93. I'll be in the top or second to the top bracket within the next year

when I earn my backended producer money on three movies in production.

The tax rate is still too low for the upper brackets. And I'm part of that bracket soon.

[TBF]

100. ...

We're doing well too. And willing to pay our share.

[Feeling the Bern]

123. If it gets someone off the shitheap, tax me!

I don't mind. We're all in this together! Tax me and put it to good use, not into the pockets of the Prison Industrial Complex, MIC, Education Industrial Complex (McGraw Hill, PEarson, etc) or the Police Industrial Complex.

Put it into schools, libraries, parks, infrastructure and universial, single payer health care.

[highprincipleswork]

94. Anybody who has a problem w this can vote for someone else. Will be a minority.

[VulgarPoet]

113. Looking at the popular vote counts, we ARE the minority

Which only points out the necessity for a third party that progressives/independents can get behind, rather than the corporatist menace.

[shireen]

96. looks perfectly reasonable to me. nt

[TBF]

99. From my perspective -

(and we are professional - we make some $$) I can live with this. I also would like to see defense and foreign aid cut a bit while we get our house in order, but I am willing to pay higher taxes to accomplish the many goals we have.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

101. Foreign aid in general is actually pretty tiny.

But I think we could seriously cut off military foreign aid. We should be building hospitals and roads and schools, not supplying or paying for missiles, rockets, and guns.

[TBF]

102. I love this -

"We should be building hospitals and roads and schools, not supplying or paying for missiles, rockets, and guns."

That's exactly how I see it as well.

[MadDAsHell]

107. What is the point of keeping so many of us from having to pay higher taxes?

If we're all benefiting from these new programs, why are so many of us excluded from sharing the burden of paying for them

I don't make much, but I'm perfectly willing to pay more for education for all, health insurance for all, etc.

This chart seems like a perfect illustration of the "us vs. them" i.e. the 1% vs. the 99% world that we're trying to END, not EXACERBATE??!!

[Hiraeth]

109. Thank you. I can afford that !!

[Orsino]

110. I was told I would have to pay 15 trillion dollars!

This is a big relief.

[harun]

117. I can't believe the anchors on CNN making > 1 mill a year would lie like that

about this tax plan.

[Yuugal]

111. This is just plain cruel!

Many of us are barely getting by on a quarter of a mill a year!

[salinsky]

115. TPC analysis ...

[img][/img]

[Nanjeanne]

119. Center for Tax Justice analysis

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
And that's just for the healthcare part.

So, why do people focus on the TPC analysis which is an organization run by an ex-George W and ex-George HW Bush tax experts as well as by Leonard Burman - a man who was brought back into the Treasury by Bill Clinton? (Rhetorical question).

People could easily read the Center for Tax Justice analysis of the healthcare part - http://ctj.org/pdf/sandershealthplanfull.pdf if anyone actually wanted to figure things out for themselves.

Oh, and once again - let's remind ourselves that the TPC analyzes all the ramifications of the Sanders plan which includes the following:

HealthCARE (not insurance)
Paid Family Leave (maternity, childcare, eldercare)
Expanded Social Security
Tuition free college
Jobs Bill (creating millions of jobs)
Youth Program
Pollution control through Carbon Tax

But hey, that is a pretty blue/green chart - so there is that!

[harun]

116. Remember that % is only on income above the bracket. Someone making > 10 mill

still pays only 10% on their first 18,450.