Yes, we can.

[scaeagles]

They are from IRS data as posted on the National Tax Payers Union website.

This IS the data. That IS the percentage of federal income taxes paid by those groups. The top 1% DID pay almost 40% of all federal income taxes collected in 2006. Other years are listed as well, and interestingly, the percentage paid by the top has gone up since 2002 (it took a significant dive from 37+% to 34-% from 2000 to 2001, then has steadily creeped up again to the highest percentage ever).

You may think they are not paying a high enough percentage of their income, which is a different debate. This ia about what percentage of federal income tax collected comes from where. The rich pays the VAST majority of federal income taxes.

[JWBear]

What would they have paid without the loopholes and tax shelters?

[Betty]

What percentage of their income did they pay compared to what percentage of my income did I pay.

I'm more interested in that then what they paid overall.

If I pay 25% and they pay 2% then they aren't being taxed enough compared to me - even if they paid $1,000,000 and I paid $10,000.

[Morrigoon]

Originally Posted by Betty

What percentage of their income did they pay compared to what percentage of my income did I pay.

I'm more interested in that then what they paid overall.

If I pay 25% and they pay 2% then they aren't being taxed enough compared to me - even if they paid $1,000,000 and I paid $10,000.

If they paid $1,000,000 and you paid $10,000, and they didn't receive the benefit of 100x more roads, military protection, etc. Then can you honestly say they deserve to pay even more? I know we use it as a way to even out the burden a bit, but how much is enough?

[Betty]

Originally Posted by Morrigoon

If they paid $1,000,000 and you paid $10,000, and they didn't receive the benefit of 100x more roads, military protection, etc. Then can you honestly say they deserve to pay even more? I know we use it as a way to even out the burden a bit, but how much is enough?

So - why am I paying for the libary if I never go there? Why do childless people pay for public schools for kids they don't have? Why are you paying for national parks that you've never visited? And why are the roads I drive on not pothole free when I'm paying for their maintenance to be kept that way?

[Morrigoon]

Originally Posted by Betty

So - why am I paying for the libary if I never go there? Why do childless people pay for public schools for kids they don't have? Why are you paying for national parks that you've never visited? And why are the roads I drive on not pothole free when I'm paying for their maintenance to be kept that way?

I wasn't suggesting we completely nullify the difference, just pointing out that there is already an inequality in usage to explain why people MIGHT object to changes that make it even worse.

[scaeagles]

I am not one for tax loopholes. That's a fine conversation to have. Tax loop holes are set up by those who pass tax law, or the congress. While I would love for it to happen, congress isn't going to give up that power any time soon.

However, regardless of loopholes, one cannot possibly say that when the top 1% pays 40% of all federal taxes that they aren't paying their fair share or that the middle class is paying taxes that increase the wealth of the uh...wealthy.

[Betty]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I am not one for tax loopholes. That's a fine conversation to have. Tax loop holes are set up by those who pass tax law, or the congress. While I would love for it to happen, congress isn't going to give up that power any time soon.

However, regardless of loopholes, one cannot possibly say that when the top 1% pays 40% of all federal taxes that they aren't paying their fair share or that the middle class is paying taxes that increase the wealth of the uh...wealthy.

Why shouldn't they have to pay a similar percentage to everyone else? Because they are rich? Because they already pay so much? Psh. Why shouldn't they be left with 75% of their earnings like I am after taxes? That's still a considerable amount of money. Seems like they are getting special privledges.

What ever happened to that proposal of a flat tax of 10% for everyone? and by everyone I mean everyone - not just those that can't afford to pay for the unforseen loopholes.

From what I saw of McCain's latest proposal, all his tax relief won't affect me at all. But it will certainly affect all those will a lot of money.

I'm not suggesting that those with money be forced to pay more then me - just the same percentage as me.

[JWBear]

I agree with Betty. What percentage of their income do they actually pay?

[mousepod]

I'm not going to throw in my opinion on this one right now (don't have the time), except to point out that the Wall Street Journal editorial and the report from the Tax Foundation skew conservative. While The Tax Foundation calls itself non-partisan, they've been consistently one-sided for decades. While not nearly as sexy or incendiary, I would suggest that folks here check out the comparisons at the Tax Policy Center (from the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution) and their blog, TaxVox.

You're not likely to get as many talking points (for either side), but you might see some data that will help you to draw some conclusions on your own.