Are taxes in the US too high

[ugonow]

or too low?economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/are-taxes-in-the-u-s-high-or-low/ Bruce Bartlet is hardly a lib nor new to economics. -----"Bruce Bartlett has had a long career in Republican politics. He worked for Ron Paul and Jack Kemp. He was a fellow at the Heritage Foundation. He was a senior policy analyst in the Reagan White House, working for Gary Bauer, later a Treasury official under Bush I. He worked at the Cato Institute.

Starting in 1993, he was with the right-wing National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas… until it fired him for being too critical of Bush II. As he puts it himself, he was fired “for writing a book critical of George W. Bush’s policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D.”

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

There are so many invalid assumptions in the article that I do not have time to address any of them at the moment.

The point in the next to last paragraph about the tax code was on target, but quoting percentages relative to what the wealthiest 400 Americans paid is a dishonest statement.

Every time tax rates and marginal brackets have been lowered, an economic boom has followed, which raised the standard of living for everyone. One of the issues facing us now is the uncertainty coming out of Washington. Long range planning is nearly impossible.

[ugonow]

When Reagan lowered income tax rates,the deficit soared.This led to many tax hikes and new taxes,some pretty large.

[ugonow]

Every time tax rates and marginal brackets have been lowered, an economic boom has followed,

When Clinton raised them,there was a boom.You can not prove a cause and effect.Every bust is followed with a boom.

[ugonow]

One of the issues facing us now is the uncertainty coming out of Washington.

Isn't that is what they said about the Bush tax cuts? Everyone was supposedly waiting to see if they would be extended or not before they start hiring.

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

...imo, asking if taxes are too high is the same as asking if a 900 calorie frappacino is too much... for what?

...I wanna pay less in taxes because I don't like how they're spending the money... meanwhile, I am vocal about spending... when spending is apealing to me, I'll feel less territorial over my dollars... well, maybe not...

[b2r]

Tax Rates Around the World

Country Corporate Individual VAT

Argentina ..35%....... 9-35% .....21%
Australia ....30%....... 17-45% ..10%GST
Austria ......25% ......21%-50% ...20%
Barbados.. 25% ........20/35% ....17.5%
Belarus ...26.28% .......12% .......20%
Belgium ..33.99% .......25-50% .....21%
Brazil ........34% .......7.5-27.5% ....17-25%
Bulgaria .....10% ...........10% ........20%
BVI - - -
Canada 16.5%(federal) 15-29%(Federal) 5%(gst)
China .......25% ...........5-45% ........17%
Croatia .....20% ..........15-45% .......23%
Cyprus .....10% ............20-30% ......15%
Czech Rep. 19% ............15% ..........20%
Denmark .....25% .........38-59%........ 25%

Egypt .........20% ..........10-20% .....10%gst
Estonia .......21% ..........20%.......... 20%
Finland ........26% .........6.5-30% ......23%
France ......33.33% .......5.5-40% ......19.6%
Germany30-33%(effective) ..14-45% ..19%
Gibraltar ......10% ..........0-40% -
Greece ........23% ............0-40% ..........23%
Hong kong 16.5% ...........2-17% -
Hungary 10/19% ......17% and 32% ......25%
India ......30-40% ............10-30% .......12.5%
Indonesia ..28% ...............5-30% .........10%
Ireland ......12.5% ............20-41% ........21%
Israel .........24%............... 10-45% ........16%
Italy ..........31.4% ...........23%-43% .......20%
Japan ........30% ................5-50% ..........5%(consump)
Latvia .........15% .................23% ............22%
Libya ...........20% .................15% -
Lithuania ......15% .............15%/20% .......21%
Luxemburg ....21% ................0-38% .........15%
Malta ............35% ................15-35% .........18%
Mexico .........30% ...................0-28% .........16%
Monaco .....33.33% ..................0% ...........19.6%
Morocco ......35% .................0-41.5% ........20%
Montenegro... 9% ...................12% ...........17%
Netherlands 20-25.5%........... 0-52% ..........19%
New Zealand .30% .................0-39% ..........15%gst
Norway .......28% ...................28-49% .........25%
Pakistan ......35%................... 0-25% ...........15%
Panama..... 27.5% .................15-25% ...........7%
Philippines ..30% .....................5-32% ..........12%
Poland ........19% .................18%/32% .........23%
Portugal 12.5/25%................... 0-42% ..........23%
Romania .....16% ......................16% ..............24%
Russia .......20%........................ 13% .............18%
Saudi Arabia 20%...................... 20% --
Serbia ..........10% ...................10-20% ..........18%
Singapore ....17%................. 3.5%-20% ..........7% (gst)
Slovakia .......19% .....................19% ..............20%
Slovenia .......20% ..................16%-41% ..........20%
South Africa 28%...................... 0-40% ............14%
Spain ...........30% ......................24-45% ..........18%
Sweden ......26.3% .....................0-57% ...........25%
Switzerland 12.5-24% ..........0-11.5% (federal) ..8%
Thailand ......30%......................... 5-37% ............7%
Tunisia ..........30% ......................15-35% ...........18%
Turkey ..........20% .......................15-35% ...........18%
U.K. ..............28% .........................0-50% ............20%
Ukraine .........23% ........................15/17% ...........20%
U.S.A. .........15-35% ......................15-35% -
Vietnam .........25% ..........................5-35% ...........10%
Zambia ...........35% ...........................0-35% ..........16%


(Last partial update, May 1, 2011 )

www.worldwide-tax.com/

[privateinvestor]

Are taxes in the US too high


Not only that but " The Rents Too Dam High"

[ugonow]

By BRUCE BARTLETT
Bruce Bartlett has served as an economic adviser in the White House, the Treasury Department and Congress.

"Historically, the term “tax rate” has meant the average or effective tax rate — that is, taxes as a share of income. The broadest measure of the tax rate is total federal revenues divided by the gross domestic product.

By this measure, federal taxes are at their lowest level in more than 60 years. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that federal taxes would consume just 14.8 percent of G.D.P. this year. The last year in which revenues were lower was 1950, according to the Office of Management and Budget.

The postwar annual average is about 18.5 percent of G.D.P. Revenues averaged 18.2 percent of G.D.P. during Ronald Reagan’s administration; the lowest percentage during that administration was 17.3 percent of G.D.P. in 1984.

In short, by the broadest measure of the tax rate, the current level is unusually low and has been for some time. Revenues were 14.9 percent of G.D.P. in both 2009 and 2010.

Yet if one listens to Republicans, one would think that taxes have never been higher, that an excessive tax burden is the most important constraint holding back economic growth and that a big tax cut is exactly what the economy needs to get growing again.

Just last week, House Republicans released a new plan to reduce unemployment. Its principal provision would reduce the top statutory income tax rate on businesses and individuals to 25 percent from 35 percent. No evidence was offered for the Republican argument that cutting taxes for the well-to-do and big corporations would reduce unemployment; it was simply asserted as self-evident.

One would not know from the Republican document that corporate taxes are expected to raise just 1.3 percent of G.D.P. in revenue this year, about a third of what it was in the 1950s.

The G.O.P. says global competitiveness requires the United States to reduce its corporate tax rate. But the United States actually has the lowest corporate tax burden of any of the member nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.


Revenue Statistics of O.E.C.D. Member Countries, 2010If taxes are low historically and in comparison with our global competitors, how are Republicans able to maintain that taxes are excessively high? They do so by ignoring the effective tax rate and concentrating solely on the statutory tax rate, which is often manipulated to make it appear that rates are much higher than they really are.

For example, Stephen Moore of The Wall Street Journal recently asserted that Democrats were trying to raise the top income tax rate to 62 percent from 35 percent. But most of the difference between these two rates is the payroll tax and state taxes that are already in existence. The rest consists largely of assuming tax increases that no one has formally proposed and that would be politically impossible to enact at the present time.

Ryan Chittum, in Columbia Journalism Review, responded with a commentary that called the Moore analysis “deeply disingenuous.”

Nevertheless, one routinely hears variations of the Moore argument from conservative commentators. By contrast, one almost never hears that total revenues are at their lowest level in two or three generations as a share of G.D.P. or that corporate tax revenues as a share of G.D.P. are the lowest among all major countries. One hears only that the statutory corporate tax rate in the United States is high compared with other countries, which is true but not necessarily relevant.

The economic importance of statutory tax rates is blown far out of proportion by Republicans looking for ways to make taxes look high when they are quite low. And they almost never note that the statutory tax rate applies only to the last dollar earned or that the effective tax rate is substantially lower even for the richest taxpayers and largest corporations because of tax exclusions, deductions, credits and the 15 percent top rate on dividends and capital gains.

The many adjustments to income permitted by the tax code, plus alternative tax rates on the largest sources of income of the wealthy, explain why the average federal income tax rate on the 400 richest people in America was 18.11 percent in 2008, according to the Internal Revenue Service, down from 26.38 percent when these data were first calculated in 1992. Among the top 400, 7.5 percent had an average tax rate of less than 10 percent, 25 percent paid between 10 and 15 percent, and 28 percent paid between 15 and 20 percent.

The truth of the matter is that federal taxes in the United States are very low. There is no reason to believe that reducing them further will do anything to raise growth or reduce unemployment."

.

[ugonow]

...I wanna pay less in taxes

Who doesn't?I would like to none. Buuuttttttttttt

[BeenThere...DoneThat...]

May 31, 2011 12:12:22 GMT -5 ugonow said:

...I wanna pay less in taxes

Who doesn't?I would like to none. Buuuttttttttttt

...I wanna pay less in taxes because I don't like how they're spending the money... meanwhile, I am vocal about spending... when spending is apealing to me, I'll feel less territorial over my dollars...

[wyouser]

Once upon a time...in a land a while ago...the guy in the middle of the pack got to spend 97% of what he/she made. I believe this was in the mid 1960's. Once upon a time in a land a while ago (maybe about 1914) only some where more than 1000 folks made enough to pay an income tax. Now in real time , in a land pretty close, nearl 50% of the people live happily everafter paying no income tax at all. And who said the fairytale is dead??

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

Despite living in California, I tend to get more worked up over our electricity rates than our tax rates. (Not that I have any control over either....)

[henryclay]

Once again, boys and girls. It isn't the tax rates, it's the spending habits.

If the government owned the entire kit and kaboodle and everybody looked to them for their money, they'd find a way to spend it before they wrote the paychecks.

So the solution, , , , , and the only solution that will work, , , , is to remember how your representative votes to spend your tax dollars the next time you consider who you are going to vote for.

[ugonow]

Once again, boys and girls. It isn't the tax rates, it's the spending habits.

True.Unfortunatly,IMO, it will be impossible to slash and burn your way to a balanced budget in one year through cuts alone. A combination of well thought out cuts [everyone has things they don't want on the table,face it] and a small increase in tax revenue seems to me to be the right way to go.Cutting everything that moves can cause a lot of problems.

[henryclay]

It seems we see eye to eye here. So let's see if the next congress will outlaw union dues being used by any union official for travel or lobbying efforts. Maybe they'll even consider outlawing union officials altogether, unless they are plain old employees who do not draw a salary made up of union members dues, and do not have access in any way to any fund that is established by using union member dues.

How's that for a start?