Last week, the Internal Revenue Service released data on distribution of the income tax burden in 2002. They put a lie to John Kerry's contention that the rich are not paying their fair share and should be taxed more.
The IRS data divide taxpayers into percentiles according to their adjusted gross incomes. Following is the share of aggregate income taxes paid by each group:
Income Group ---- Tax Share
Top 1 percent ---- 33.7 percent
Top 5 percent ---- 53.8 percent
Top 10 percent ---- 65.7 percent
Top 25 percent ---- 83.9 percent
Top 50 percent ---- 96.5 percent
The data also reveal that despite the Bush tax cuts, the income tax is still highly progressive -- taking more from each group as their incomes rise. The following percentages measure the taxes paid by each group divided by their income. Economists call this the average or effective tax rate.
Income Group ---- Tax Rate
Top 1 percent ---- 27.25 percent
Top 5 percent ---- 22.95 percent
Top 10 percent ---- 20.51 percent
Top 25 percent ---- 16.99 percent
Top 50 percent ---- 14.66 percent
Bottom 50 percent ---- 3.21 percent
Finally, the data show that the rich are not only paying tax rates as high as they were during the Clinton administration, eve after large tax cuts in 2001 and 2002, but they are doing so even as their incomes have fallen. The aggregate income of the top 1 percent was down 26 percent between 2000 and 2002. In 2000, the income threshold for getting into the top 1 percent was $313,469. By 2002, that figure had fallen to $285,424, reflecting the slow economy and weak stock market.
This doesn't mean we should shed tears for the rich. They're still doing pretty well. But these data raise serious questions about class warfare agenda. How much more taxes does he think rich people should pay?
For this reason, even sophisticated leftists recognize that class warfare is a non-starter in American politics. As columnist Bob Kuttner recently put it, "Because nearly everyone identifies upward, you don't gain traction in American progressive politics by baiting the rich." Mark Penn, Bill Clinton's pollster, put it this way: "The more government tries to monkey with income distribution, the more people dislike it."
Bruce Bartlett is the author of Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy.
Copyright © 2004 Creators
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/brucebartlett/2004/10/19/13380.html
Edited to remove caps in thread title ... Jimmoyer, please use upper and lower. With the new format, it takes way too much room. Add to that my OCD about these things. Thanks! Cosmo
The IRS data divide taxpayers into percentiles according to their adjusted gross incomes. Following is the share of aggregate income taxes paid by each group:
Income Group ---- Tax Share
Top 1 percent ---- 33.7 percent
Top 5 percent ---- 53.8 percent
Top 10 percent ---- 65.7 percent
Top 25 percent ---- 83.9 percent
Top 50 percent ---- 96.5 percent
The data also reveal that despite the Bush tax cuts, the income tax is still highly progressive -- taking more from each group as their incomes rise. The following percentages measure the taxes paid by each group divided by their income. Economists call this the average or effective tax rate.
Income Group ---- Tax Rate
Top 1 percent ---- 27.25 percent
Top 5 percent ---- 22.95 percent
Top 10 percent ---- 20.51 percent
Top 25 percent ---- 16.99 percent
Top 50 percent ---- 14.66 percent
Bottom 50 percent ---- 3.21 percent
Finally, the data show that the rich are not only paying tax rates as high as they were during the Clinton administration, eve after large tax cuts in 2001 and 2002, but they are doing so even as their incomes have fallen. The aggregate income of the top 1 percent was down 26 percent between 2000 and 2002. In 2000, the income threshold for getting into the top 1 percent was $313,469. By 2002, that figure had fallen to $285,424, reflecting the slow economy and weak stock market.
This doesn't mean we should shed tears for the rich. They're still doing pretty well. But these data raise serious questions about class warfare agenda. How much more taxes does he think rich people should pay?
For this reason, even sophisticated leftists recognize that class warfare is a non-starter in American politics. As columnist Bob Kuttner recently put it, "Because nearly everyone identifies upward, you don't gain traction in American progressive politics by baiting the rich." Mark Penn, Bill Clinton's pollster, put it this way: "The more government tries to monkey with income distribution, the more people dislike it."
Bruce Bartlett is the author of Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy.
Copyright © 2004 Creators
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/brucebartlett/2004/10/19/13380.html
Edited to remove caps in thread title ... Jimmoyer, please use upper and lower. With the new format, it takes way too much room. Add to that my OCD about these things. Thanks! Cosmo