Raise taxes

[Angry Dragon]

Pick the top marginal tax rate

Curious about any votes below the 35% rate

[ThomWV]

1. 42%

[MADem]

2. And no loopholes! nt

[Angry Dragon]

4. Could you expand on that??

Just trying to get a feel for what you consider loopholes................

[MADem]

5. Anything that reduces one's taxes to LEONA HELMSLEY

"Only the little people pay taxes" levels.

[Angry Dragon]

6. Maybe it is just me but

that does not even come close to answering the question

Get rid of the home mortgage deduction??

[MADem]

7. How much are you making?

I like progressive as opposed to regressive taxation.

[Angry Dragon]

10. Less than you

I also am in favor of progressive taxation
I am just searching for concrete ideas
Most consumer taxes are regressive

What loopholes would you close??

[MADem]

13. No--I meant generically "How much are (the generic you) making to cause an

elimination of the mortgage deduction to kick in?"

Or are you suggesting that it be eliminated across the board, which could disincentivize home ownership at a time when the housing market is already in a slump?

[Angry Dragon]

15. I agree if the mortagage deduction was eliminated it

would cause most people not to by homes, it would dry up the housing market
and cause undue harm to this country.

Perhaps there should be caps on it.
I only asked because I was not sure which loopholes you wanted eliminated.

[Rebubula]

30. Self Delete

N/T

[geckosfeet]

3. No problem with 70% + for those in the top .1 - .5%

[MADem]

8. People will leave in droves if you go that high.

Other countries will lower their rates to attract 'em.

[Angry Dragon]

11. And this would be a bad thing??

When a person cares more about money than their country
they would just find any excuse to leave anyway.

Very un-American of them

[MADem]

12. Well, economic flight of that sort has had a negative effect on other nations.

I wouldn't advise it.

Most people aren't terribly nationalistic when they have to give away too much of their lucre to the government. It's why the US has so many rich people who come here to be citizens.

[Angry Dragon]

14. The tax rates used to be 70% and above and we had a strong

country.

I was thinking maybe the top rate would kick in about $5 million
at least above where the top bracket is now

And the rich have homes in other countries now.
The Bushes have huge amounts of land in South America
along with others

[MADem]

16. There were rock solid Swiss bank accounts back then.

Money was hidden offshore.

It wasn't "really" a 70 percent rate. People could cheat.

I think we don't have to go that high, so long as we have enforcement and not a lot of bullshit "I bought a Lexus SUV and it qualifies as a farm vehicle" type deductions.

[Angry Dragon]

19. Any concrete loopholes you would close or reduce??

I am sure you have some floating around you would like to talk about...........

[MADem]

21. I just gave you one--the Lexus SUV that qualifies as farm equipment.

Here are a few more: http://www.999ideas.com/tax-loopholes.html

Now, you may wonder how the wealthy get to pay a lower rate than the rest of us. They get it by using their wealth to lobby for laws that change the rules to favor them. These tax loopholes for the rich are usually justified as being for some good purpose (and they often do serve some good purposes despite their unfairness). Of course, given that many in congress are in the ranks of the rich, their is an element of self interest at play in the law making too.

For example, capital gains rates are lowered to "encourage investment," and they probably do that. But should a government be trying to influence how money is used by citizens? In any case, this is the primary reason Warren Buffet pays a lower total tax rate than his secretary. He gets much of his income in the form of capital gains.

Then there are the myriad of laws that try to alter behavior in other "good" ways. Deductions for charitable contributions, for example, allow a wealthy family to deduct from income the value of a painting they give to a museum. Here's how to play this game, if you're interested: Buy a painting for $10,000, hold it for a year or two, get a friendly appraiser to say it's worth $60,000, and you deduct that from your reported income. That saves you more on taxes than the $10,000 you actually paid.

Of course all these tax loopholes and deductions are available to all citizens in theory. But then who would they help the most? Which poor families have the money or connections to play the "revalued charitable contribution game?" In any case, the largest federal tax most poor pay is social security and Medicare taxes, for which (surprise) there are no deductions allowed....


A few more: http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-06-30/news/29737307_1_ethanol-tax-tax-loopholes-special-tax

Oil: Giants like Exxon and BP get subsidies that cost taxpayers $4 billion.

- Corporate jets: Special writeoffs cost taxpayers $3 billion.

- Rum: Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands get huge rebates on the per gallon tax, costing taxpayers $235 million.

- Speedways: Auto race tracks get writeoffs worth $40 million.

- Movie and TV production companies: Special writeoffs cost taxpayers $162 million.

- Dog and Horse race tracks: Eliminates withholding tax when foreign gamblers win at US tracks costing taxpayers $3 million.

- Coffee: Coffee roasters like Starbucks qualify for manufacturing tax breaks. Cost not calculated.

[Angry Dragon]

23. That is what I was looking for................ thank you

[ThomWV]

22. That would certainly be novel, the last time they were that high we had record immigration

Try looking at our tax rates and our immigration rates immediately following the second world war.

[MADem]

25. Apples and oranges, Thom. Back then we didn't have electronic bank transfers.

We had offshore banking with no records, Swiss bank accounts, and a cash economy. It was way easier to evade paying taxes entirely, or to misstate one's income. Agencies didn't talk to each other, and no one overseas was wired in to Uncle Sam's tax system.

It's way harder to hide money these days. Not everyone can buy a shitty little car wash in the middle of nowhere and pretend it makes a fortune to launder their meth money like the guy in Breaking Bad.....

[TBF]

31. Anybody who can afford to leave that easily already has a residence in Dubai -

even though I am in the top 5% in terms of income I voted for 70% - and that better not come with loopholes. The other place to hit is capital gains - that is really where George W did most of the damage - by lowering those taxes substantially.

If we would do this and lower our defense costs we could provide a much better standard of living for all, and I support that.

[TheKentuckian]

9. 64% for top earners is where I think the sweet spot is but I also think we need bracket reform

Probably that creates more levels.

[BKLawyer]

17. Doesn't Help

Raising the "rate" doesn't get you that far if the deductions that are allowed still allow you to reduce your taxable income to $0.00. Multiplying 70% x $0.00 taxable income still yields no taxes. So, you will punish those who don't have the political clout to get their favored deductions. Eliminating deductions really will yield a better result as the tax becomes unavoidable and the rate can stay lower.

People will scream about the mortgage interest deduction ... but why should mortgage interest be favored? What about the renter with credit card debt? If interest is to be deductible, why not allow a deduction for credit card interest? Why are homeowners favored over renters? Should the amount of deductible mortgage interest be capped? Tough questions.

[Angry Dragon]

18. Then I say let's talk about them because no one in DC

is talking about them.
All they can talk about is tax cuts and cut spending
Why not present a plan that might work instead of
listening to a do nothing Congress

[BKLawyer]

26. Lift the Cap

on Social Security taxes if you want to raise revenue. Lifting the cap will affect those who make over 106,800. So, not hitting the poor. There are no loopholes - cannot be avoided. The FICA taxes are horribly regressive. A person's social security tax hit is maxed out at $4485.60 for anyone over $106,800. Thus, a person making a $100,000 salary will pay 4.2% of their income in FICA tax, while a person with a $500,000 salary will pay only 0.89% of their salary in FICA tax. A person making a $1,000,000 in salary pays only 0.45% in FICA tax.

I know it's been mentioned here, but not to great fanfare, but social security really needs to be means tested. We cannot have well off senior citizens collecting social security. My friend relayed a story to me several years ago about a 70 year old designer at Ford who was still at his job making his $200,000 salary, while collecting his investment income of another $200,000 per year. No reason to pay out max benefits to this guy who insisted on collecting his social security. What justification can there be? The wage earners of today are paying for this guy. A guy making $400,000 at age 70 doesn't need social security. Even then, if he quit his job, rolling in $200,000 per year should render him ineligible.

JMHO.

[bemildred]

24. It works fucking great, I've seen it here in the 1960s. nt

[bemildred]

20. You need confiscatory inheritance and gift taxes at the high end too. nt

[ZenaD]

27. Capital gains need to be taxed more.

Warren Buffet put it best when he explained how his secretary has a higher rate than he does.

[TBF]

32. That is really the key - when you hear Repubs talking about George W being the best

president ever they are thinking about the capital gains taxes he lowered.

[Angry Dragon]

28. kick

[NeedleCast]

29. I Don't Think It's About The Rate So Much As Actually Making Them Pay

It doesn't matter what the top marginal tax rate is when mega-corporations are essentially paying zero taxes thanks to various loopholes and tax incentives.