^ WHAT THE FUCK.

How is an ability-to-pay tax system fair at all? Fair is taxing those who, beyond the income needed to sustain life (a la the personal exemptions and standard deductions you get to claim on your tax return), have the income to pay for the services they use. More services, more tax. Less services, less tax.

It makes no sense for those that make a lot of expendable income to be paying a ton of taxes for services they don’t use.

Re: tax-dodging laws.

I have two degrees in accounting – one in general accounting (undergrad) and one in taxation (graduate). I prepare and review tax returns for one of the largest accounting firms in the world, and specialize in privately-owned businesses and individual tax returns.

During my time as a tax accountant (in school and as a professional preparer), I will tell you that there are actually very few individuals that get away with paying little tax – the marginal rate has been in the upper 30% range for years now, and I will confidently say that the vast (vast) majority of the taxpayers I have prepared and reviewed returns for pay close to that every year. Very few taxpayers involve themselves in this “overseas account” nonsense because of the paperwork and litigation involved, not to mention you still have to pay tax on most of that income in the US if the country your money is in doesn’t charge enough. Don’t kid yourself and think that the rich are getting away with murder, so to speak. If I had a dollar for every 6- and 7-digit quarterly tax payment check I’ve seen, I’d be one of those rich folks, too.

WTF is that he pays a huge percentage of long-term capital gains taxes vs the average earner (most of his income is from investments in and similar to his own company), which are capped at 15%. If you didn’t work a W-2 or 1099 job like most of the average joes, you, too could invest in companies and pay 15% on your income, too – you would just earn a good bit less because you don’t have the $$ he has to get into the elite investment groups.

Also, he’s one example – I’m not talking about the 2 or 3 or even 400 richest people in the country – I’m talking about the top 1% or so, who make a TON of money every year, but do not have the pull of a Buffet or a Gates. If you were to poll those making in the upper 6 digits and into the 7 and 8 digits, I’d be willing to wager a huge amount of money that most of them pay very close to their highest marginal rate. I say that because my experience has been one big survey.

Howie,

Please don’t polarize or misconstrue my comments – I’m saying less service, less tax, more service, more tax. I am not saying what you’re trying to from my argument, that rich people don’t use more service.

I don’t agree that someone making $1,000,000/yr is using ~$300,000/yr more government services than someone making $22,000. What I am saying is that to make them pay another $100,000/yr in taxes because they can is outrageous – they’re already paying a much higher percentage on their disposable income. Now I know that you cannot measure how much more government-provided service they consume, but I will dare you to say with a straight face that you feel like they’re being taxed somewhere close to what they use.

Your example of how you get “rich” is absolutely ridiculous – I guess you don’t realize how many people make six and seven figures on a W-2 each year – not requiring anyone in the public to drive to them or use government infrastructure to benefit from their service. Besides, do you really think that income taxes pay for even a small amount of road building or maintenance?? Try local sales & gas taxes – that’s where most of the money comes from, and where the “rich” person pays along the same exact use/tax ratio as the “poor” person. What the heck do government-regulated car parts have to do with anything? Perhaps you’re a bit behind the times, but the US government hasn’t given much oversight that has helped the public with wireless digital services, let alone helped advance technology. For what a government should do (or not do, as it were), check out Japan and how it’s government has allowed cell companies to do what they’d like as long as it’s on the general infrastructure for the entire nation.

Let’s also not be racist – I know you never specifically mentioned African Americans in your third paragraph, but we all know what you meant. You’re arguing a point against one I never made – at no point did I say that “LuWanda” should have to “pay a whole crapload” for the services she uses. In fact, if “LuWanda” really does make $200/wk, she’ll pay no income taxes at all. That is fine by me, but you must realize there are people that make incomes between $200/wk and however much you’re implying “Chester McRichbastard” makes, and the people on the lower end of that should have to pay their fair share of taxes, too, instead of having the more wealthy people pay them just because they’re able. And again, I never implied that rich people live “in some kind of fucking vaccuum” where they don’t “need roads or a military or police” – I just don’t think they use tens or hundreds times more of those services. You’re also implying that all rich people have big houses, drive all the time, and generally consume more and more often, which is an ignorant assumption and a wrong one at that.

Lastly, I am still not arguing that tax rates should be the same up and down the board, nor even that the marginal rates shouldn’t increase as income increases. What I am saying is that bitching about “tax cuts for the rich” when their marginal rate is going from 36% to 34% (for example) or when a huge majority of them already pay tens and hundreds of thousands per year in income taxes alone is ridiculous.