Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Hey HondoBros
MikeDamone
Member Posts: 37,781
in Tug Tavern
One of your leftist friends here @gds thinks the effective tax rate on the top 400 highest earners in 1950 was over $70%. I’m sure you are all smarter than that and can check the facts. This tard thinks if someone made $10 million in wages they paid $7 million in taxes. You should have a private conversation with him. He’s hurting your brand.
Comments
“The average tax rate on the richest 400 households last year was only 23%, down from 70% in 1950 and 47% in 1980. Why? In recent decades, the top income-tax rate and the estate tax have both fallen, and corporate taxes — which are effectively paid by shareholders — have plummeted. Middle-class and poor families, on the other hand, haven’t benefited much if at all from the falling corporate tax or estate tax, and they now pay more in payroll taxes than in the past. Overall, their taxes have remained fairly flat.”
“A study from the Congressional Research Service concludes that the effective tax rate for the top 0.01 percent of income earners during the period of 91-percent income taxes was actually 45 percent. Given that the top bracket is so much lower today ($3,425,766 in 1955 vs. $413,200 in 2015), the 39.6 percent top marginal rate probably yields something pretty close.”
Bottom line, effective tax rates haven’t changed much in 60 years. Sorry that hurts your vag.
The average tax rate for the top 0.01% (one taxpayer in 10,000) was about 60% in 1945 and fell to 24.2% by 1990.
Again even the top 0.01% is a much larger group than the top 400 income earners.
So sure, let’s discuss something that was never asserted.
The effective tax rate for the top 0.01 percent of income earners during the period of 91-percent income taxes was actually 45 percent. Given that the top bracket is so much lower today ($3,425,766 in 1955 vs. $413,200 in 2015), the 39.6 percent top marginal rate probably yields something pretty close.