Posted on Jan 15, 2015
Would you like to return to a 92% top rate on the Income Tax?
6.9K
10
4
1
1
0
The highest marginal rate on income in US history was 92% (income over $200,000 which is $1.56 million in today's money) in 1953.
Some months ago I got into a conversation wherein someone advocated returning to the 1953 income tax rates. It took some time, first to find the necessary information, then to do the calculations, and then ensure that they were done right. Here's the analysis:
Some months ago I got into a conversation wherein someone advocated returning to the 1953 income tax rates. It took some time, first to find the necessary information, then to do the calculations, and then ensure that they were done right. Here's the analysis:
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 2
4
4
0
If you've read the Communist Manifesto and understand it's planks...
Number 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
As a veteran who served during the fall of the USSR, I'd have to say, hell no.
Number 2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
As a veteran who served during the fall of the USSR, I'd have to say, hell no.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
FLAT TAX. With a set percentage that everyone must pay. Say, about 10%, what ever is revenue neutral.
No exemptions.
No deductions.
A tax code with about ten pages.
Nobody gets a free lunch.
Nobody gets to dodge paying by hiring an Army of lawyers.
Problem solved. Problem staying solved.
No exemptions.
No deductions.
A tax code with about ten pages.
Nobody gets a free lunch.
Nobody gets to dodge paying by hiring an Army of lawyers.
Problem solved. Problem staying solved.
(3)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
I'm not a fan of the term "revenue neutral." Such neutrality depends entirely on how much needs to be spent.
I'd limit spending to either a percentage of GDP in the previous year, or a percentage of revenue collected the previous year, and any surplus required to be returned to the Treasury.
I'd limit spending to either a percentage of GDP in the previous year, or a percentage of revenue collected the previous year, and any surplus required to be returned to the Treasury.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
I'm saying "revenue neutral" so that we don't get howls of protest when the tax system changes. I don't know where the number is, but should be somewhere in the 10-15% range. A GDP-based calculation would require a full recalculation of the annual levy, and would certainly cause gamesmanship to enter the process. The point of the flat tax is to both simplify the system and to take politics out of the process. It won't be easy to demonize a demographic anymore, as a tax increase would affect everybody, it would be both more difficult to raise them and would cause leaders to reflect on priorities more.
At least in theory.
At least in theory.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google