GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
For more than a century the Left has offered a magical solution for our problems with debt, "Raise Taxes!" For anyone who thinks this is a viable solution to our debt problem, you're welcome to make your case.
Two things first,
1. Attacking plans to lower taxes is NOT a legitimate defense of your claim that raising taxes increases revenue.
2. Please, no specious claims or logical fallacies.
If you've heard anything from the Left as it relates to our debt problem then you have heard them say, "Raise Taxes!" and it goes without saying that they don't want their tax rates to go up... Just raise taxes on those evil "rich" people. And despite the top 1% of taxpayers footing more than 33% of the tax bill, and the top 5% paying more than 53% of the tax bill, the Leftists still wish to claim, "The rich don't pay their fair share!"
Here's a little article that puts that nasty piece of agitprop to rest:
Before you claim that things changed since this article was written, you're right... The income tax has become even more Progressive:
In FY'08 the top 1% payed more than 38% of the Income tax bill, the top 5% payed more than 58%, the top 10% more than 69%, the top 25% payed more than 86%, the top 50% payed more than 97% , and that just leaves the bottom 50% who payed less than 3%! - National Taxpayers Union
Enough of who really pays income taxes... Common sense would seem to tell us that raising taxes would result in greater revenue but thanks to historical data that shows tax revenue as a % of GDP, we know this is not true (same can be said for those who think lowering taxes will result in greater revenue, that is also not true)
http://www.cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.pdf - Page 4 shows Revenue as a % of GDP. This document debunks two claims: 1. Higher taxes = greater revenue and 2. Lower taxes = greater revenue. Neither claim is supportable based on actual historical data.
The relationship between taxes and revenue is correlative, not causal, but because people mistakenly believe that tax rates have a causal effect on revenue, politicians on both sides use the issue of raising and lowering taxes to distract voters from the real problem - Spending.
The high point in revenue as a % of GDP was 20.9% and this occurred in FY 2000 when the top marginal rate was 39.6%. Now if higher taxes actually increased revenue as a % of GDP, then the years between 1968 and 1981 should have seen the highest recorded revenue as a % of GDP. During that 13 year span, the top marginal rate was 70% but revenue as a % of GDP never went above 19.6%. Those who claim that higher taxes = greater revenue on the basis of "Common Sense" or "Simple Math" need to offer something more substantial to back their claim when it's so easily debunked by historical data.
I've offered the historical data as evidence to prove that raising taxes does not have the causal effect of increasing revenue but I know many of you still believe otherwise. So this is your chance to make your case and offer some solid proof that raising taxes will increase revenue. Good luck.
Two things first,
1. Attacking plans to lower taxes is NOT a legitimate defense of your claim that raising taxes increases revenue.
2. Please, no specious claims or logical fallacies.
If you've heard anything from the Left as it relates to our debt problem then you have heard them say, "Raise Taxes!" and it goes without saying that they don't want their tax rates to go up... Just raise taxes on those evil "rich" people. And despite the top 1% of taxpayers footing more than 33% of the tax bill, and the top 5% paying more than 53% of the tax bill, the Leftists still wish to claim, "The rich don't pay their fair share!"
Here's a little article that puts that nasty piece of agitprop to rest:
Who Pays the Most Income Tax?
Feeling overtaxed? Under the U.S. income tax system, most of the taxes collected are supposed to be paid by the people who make the most money. Thanks to President Bush's tax cuts, that is exactly the way the system works, says the U.S. Treasury Department.
According to the Office of Tax Analysis, the U.S. individual income tax is "highly progressive," with a small group of higher-income taxpayers paying most of the individual income taxes each year.
In 2002 the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.
The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.
Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.
Before you claim that things changed since this article was written, you're right... The income tax has become even more Progressive:
In FY'08 the top 1% payed more than 38% of the Income tax bill, the top 5% payed more than 58%, the top 10% more than 69%, the top 25% payed more than 86%, the top 50% payed more than 97% , and that just leaves the bottom 50% who payed less than 3%! - National Taxpayers Union
Enough of who really pays income taxes... Common sense would seem to tell us that raising taxes would result in greater revenue but thanks to historical data that shows tax revenue as a % of GDP, we know this is not true (same can be said for those who think lowering taxes will result in greater revenue, that is also not true)
http://www.cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.pdf - Page 4 shows Revenue as a % of GDP. This document debunks two claims: 1. Higher taxes = greater revenue and 2. Lower taxes = greater revenue. Neither claim is supportable based on actual historical data.
The relationship between taxes and revenue is correlative, not causal, but because people mistakenly believe that tax rates have a causal effect on revenue, politicians on both sides use the issue of raising and lowering taxes to distract voters from the real problem - Spending.
The high point in revenue as a % of GDP was 20.9% and this occurred in FY 2000 when the top marginal rate was 39.6%. Now if higher taxes actually increased revenue as a % of GDP, then the years between 1968 and 1981 should have seen the highest recorded revenue as a % of GDP. During that 13 year span, the top marginal rate was 70% but revenue as a % of GDP never went above 19.6%. Those who claim that higher taxes = greater revenue on the basis of "Common Sense" or "Simple Math" need to offer something more substantial to back their claim when it's so easily debunked by historical data.
I've offered the historical data as evidence to prove that raising taxes does not have the causal effect of increasing revenue but I know many of you still believe otherwise. So this is your chance to make your case and offer some solid proof that raising taxes will increase revenue. Good luck.