Why Do Americans Pay More Taxes

This article written by Dave Roos explains the American situation that is already in the title itself “Is it true that only 53 percent of Americans pay income tax?” To further explain, Mr. Roos pointed out that the politicians and organizations believe that the richest Americans pay the largest share of taxes. He then gives an example of the top twenty percent of Americans that earn 53.4 percent but pay 67.2 percent of total income tax. Another shocking point that was made was half of all Americans don’t pay income tax at all; reason being that they are the 99 percent. That being said, the 53 percent of Americans who pay income tax must be given credit for keeping the US in business. This statistics states to be true because only 49 percent

Alyssa Battistoni makes some very good points in her article, “The Public Overwhelming Wants It: Why Is Taxing the Rich So Hard?” regarding how the wealthy have a big part in influencing the government and taxes. Her article makes valid points on how we, as citizens, under estimate the political influence of the rich and that we have a hard time understanding the magnitude of the economic inequality and the relationship it has with political power (Battistoni, 720). She states that many of the politicians themselves are in the wealthy category. This article shows the frustration Battistoni feels by the tone and wording she uses to make her examples such as when she states that we are getting caught in a negative feedback cycle as the rich

However, what people do not realize is that when Sanders is taxing these divisions, he is really increasing the tax for everyone, including the middle class. The Tax Policy Center analyzed that “Sanders would raise taxes by about $15.3 trillion over the course a decade” and that “tax hikes would be concentrated amongst high earners, just about everyone would pay more” (Suderman). In another article, it is stated that most of the tax burden would fall on the rich, with majority of the wealthy paying an extra $739,000 more than their pre-income tax and the top 0.1% paying about $4 million (Covert). This would seem favorable, unfortunately, the middle class will have a “tax increase of about $4,700,” thereby reducing their after tax income (Suderman). Sanders believed in a fair share of income, however, taxing the rich unintendedly lead to raising taxes for even the middle

There is no doubt that wealth inequality in America has been escalating quickly; the portion of total income earned by the top one percent has doubled since the beginning of the 1970’s. The wealthy are the main beneficiaries

Many people think we should. For instance, the New York Times author Patricia Cohen argues in her article, “What Could Raising Taxes on the 1% Do? Surprising Amounts”, that raising taxes on the top percent of Americans would bring in much more revenue to the government and cause little to no damage on the economy (Cohen par. 18). Furthermore, she explains that if we increase the tax rate to 40% in the top 0.1% of households, which have an average income of $9.4 million, then that would give around $55 billion in extra revenue the first year alone (Cohen par. 12). This is a great amount of revenue that could pay for a wide variety of government programs such as economic stimulus packages.

Another huge problem is the way that the tax code works. As Warren Buffett explains, the “tax code is tilted towards the rich and away from the middle class.” It’s actually upside-down those with more pay fewer taxes, than people with less. Though the top rate for wage-based income is 39.6%, the rate for income from investments (capital gains) is only 20%. That means wealthy people pay a lower tax rate than the rest of us. Examples include Buffett, whose tax rate is about 17%, while

Why shouldn’t the wealthiest of Americans pay a higher percentage of their income for taxes? Certainly, things would get better if the wealthy paid more taxes. This philosophy is why welfare continues to exist today. People worry more about what is right for the other person without looking at themselves and taking responsibility. It is overrun with individuals who prefer to be on welfare than to work hard and contribute to society. This doesn’t mean welfare is not needed, but that it should not be a career. It offers no permanent solution, but only prevents a real solution from being realized. So why should the wealthy pay a higher percentage of taxes just because they can afford it? They work hard, so shouldn’t they be allowed to keep what they earn? This is not an example of scrooge-like behavior, but that hard work should have its rewards. The way to a better life should start with hard work and the desire for independence from government support. This would help people regain personal pride and become productive members of society, rather than a drain on its resources. It is not a crime for the wealthiest to earn high incomes. Shouldn’t hard work pay off? Why be penalized by paying a higher percentage of your income when you worked hard to make that income? Simpler solutions are required.

Additionally, with the rich paying so little in taxes, most don't even pay their taxes! “About 46 percent of all tax filers (individuals or households) pay no federal income taxes each year because of various exclusions. More than half of the tax revenue lost to the most common tax exclusions stays in the pockets of the richest one-fifth of Americans, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. By contrast, high earners who paid no tax were primarily able to do so because of a wide array of other special provisions in tax law. Roughly 1,000 of the 4,000 millionaire non-payers in 2011 did so because their income that year was locked away in individual retirement accounts not subject to federal taxes, according to Roberton Williams of the Urban Institute, one of the authors of the Tax Policy Center analysis.” (“Why Thousands of Millionaires Don’t Pay Federal Income Taxes.” by Christopher Ingraham)Then,

Before delving into the topic at hand, a look at the current and projected tax system will help understand the predicament of taxing the upper class. According to Bardes, Schmidt, and Shelley, in the textbook American Government and Politics Today: Brief Edition, Americans pay a variety of federal, state, and local taxes, which are all assessed on most sources of income, sales and land. Bardes et al, made their agenda clear by pointing out that “the wealthy receive a much greater share of their income from these sources (capital gains, rents, royalties, interests, dividends, or profits from business), than others do (315).” But what is considered wealthy? In the article, Who gets to be “Rich”, Jordan Weissmann reported that a household income of around $113,000 lands one at the top 10% of income earners, while $394,000 makes one a

The obvious questions to this position are at what income levels should taxes begin to increase? Also, how much should their taxes increase? We know that high tax rates can be detrimental to an economy, largely due to the deadweight loss that the taxes impose on the markets. Combine this with the fact that the government has proven to be inefficient with the tax revenue it currently has at its disposal, and it is hard to find a suitable argument for why taxes should be increased on the wealthiest

On the contrary, most now wealthy Americans are living off of money that was given to them from their parents and grandparents. The argument that the upper class citizens are not paying enough in taxes, although a matter of opinion, should be reconsidered when looking at how much the rich avoid paying in taxes when using loopholes. Although it may seem as if they pay a lot in taxes, they are avoiding a large portion of what they would have to pay normally with the use of the loopholes.

One of the obvious reasons to raise the taxes of the rich would be because they simply earn more. One example is if two people started the year off with fifty thousand but then let us say one had a rich family member that died and they had received millions through a will, then say they received a gift of one billion by the end of the year they pay the same taxes even though one of they are now a billionaire (Cohen). The reason is that the government does not tax on gifts or wills so then they would not have to pay more taxes if they received a gift that had consisted of a large sum of cash (Cohen). Now there is a large chunk of change out of circulation and now the middle/lower

Another reason that the wealthy should pay more taxes is because they owe it to society to do so. Every person wouldn’t be where they are today without the people who helped raise them and the society they were raised in. In “The Great Gatsby”, Nick Carraway is disgusted with Tom and Daisy, “Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made” (Fitzgerald 179). Nick is repelled by how Tom and Daisy, with all of their money, would do nothing to help the society or other people. Successful people are largely successful due to the society and conditions that they were raised in. Without the better conditions that they were luckily born into, it is logical to question just how successful someone in the top one or ten percent could have been. In a recent commencement speech last summer at Princeton, author Michael Lewis stated “Recognize that if you have had success, you also have had luck—and with luck comes obligation. You owe a debt, and not just to your Gods. You owe a debt to the unlucky”. In a

All my life my parents never struggled to get me anything. Whether it was toys, clothes, or even food; they always had a way of getting. Now, they aren’t rich but they’re not struggling either. They are just the ordinary simple middle class that pay taxes every year. But the question is should rich people pay more taxes? And I think yes, because the tax code we currently have is unfair.

When it comes to income taxes, the focus is usually on jobs, personal investments, and savings. The debate on who should bear the greater burden when it comes to income taxes is timeless. If all types of tax are aimed at developing the economy, it should be everyone’s equal responsibility to engage in taxation regardless of one’s economic class. Both parties involved proclaim the legitimacy of their arguments. The articles under discussion are representative of this debate. On one side of the debate, there are those who feel that the rich should pay more taxes. Then there are those who feel that the rich should not be punished by shouldering the burden of taxation (Benson and White 1). From an economic theorist’s point of view, both articles articulate valid arguments. However, this does not nullify the significance of the prevailing economic situation. The above debate can be based on various economic contexts.