A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
No one enjoys paying taxes, but most people view taxation as a necessary shared sacrifice, when it’s fair. However, “fairness” is debatable. Those claiming the system is “fair” cite statistics: 38 percent of federal revenue comes from the top 1 percent, while the bottom 50 percent only account for 3 percent.
However, as the saying goes, statistics and lies have a lot in common.
In 2021, ProPublica analyzed years of IRS data and found that effective tax rates peak at the $5 million income level (27.5 percent), then drop due to legal tax-avoidance measures. ProPublica found: “On average, the 25 richest Americans paid 15.8 percent in personal federal income taxes between 2014 and 2018. They had $86 billion in adjusted gross income and paid $13.6 billion in income taxes... lower than the rate a single worker making $45,000 a year might pay if you include Medicare and Social Security taxes.”
If that sounds unfair, it gets worse.
During those five years, the richest 25 individuals became $401 billion richer, not merely $86 billion as reported to the IRS. The $315 billion difference went untaxed thanks to the ultimate tax loophole, unrealized capital gains, whereby stocks and assets aren’t taxed until they are sold.
When the 16th Amendment passed in 1913, legislators thought the language enabling “taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived” was airtight. In 1916, Myrtle Macomber proved Congress wrong.
She received a dividend from Standard Oil in the form of additional shares, not cash. Macomber brought a court challenge arguing that she’d gotten richer, but hadn’t received money, therefore it wasn’t income. In 1920, in Eisner v. Macomber, the Supreme Court agreed, ruling that a person needed to sell an asset before it becomes “taxable income."
Macomber lit a light bulb on Wall Street that burns just as brightly today.
Joseph Cannisi
Joseph Cannisi
6 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Valete
A data, the top 1 percent of earners pay 38.4 percent of all federal income taxes, and the bottom 50 percent pay 3.3 percent.
Treating paper net worth as cash income is a huge mistake.Unrealized gains are not income. They are paper asset valuations, not cash.
Forcing audits on private companies, real estate, and stocks is impossible. A punitive wealth tax drives capital flight. the wealthy move their assets and companies overseas. This does not hurt the rich. It robs American businesses of investment capital, kills jobs, and wrecks middle class 401ks
Only someone unschooled in economics could draft such an absurd essay—how it made it to print is a complete mystery .
Sunday, September 13 Report this
reenjoe
I wonder how this paper can post the ramblings of someone so economically ignorant to believe that owning a car and cell phone with Internet separates the poor from Middle Class.
Monday, September 14 Report this
reenjoe
Word Man's post repeats the failed economic theory of supplyside. In the 1950s and 60s corporations made up 30% of federal revenues, top tax rates were 80-90% and inheritances were heavily taxed, yet GDP grew by more than 4.5%. Today corps contribute less than 10% of federal revenue, the top pay less than 40% and tens of millions can be passed on tax free.
We've heard the falsehoods of wealth flight, job losses and economic stagnation if we fairly tax. Many economists reject this theory based upon real world data showing it's flawed. Noble laureate Paul Krugman is but one of a growing number of economists that believe supplyside is not only wrong, it's an economic disaster.
Monday, September 14 Report this
Valete
"You never learn, Cannisi. You cannot debate a master of debate and skilled writer, especially since you write lies and try to push them off as absolute truth. Reread my essay and post; both speak loud and clear. There is no need for me to comment on your farfetched propaganda and fiction narratives—in the future. Hang up your pen, Cannisi; it does not serve you well and serves no purpose."
Tuesday, September 15 Report this
reenjoe
The old "fake news" defense, very original Sica. Your post is nothing more than regurgitated "supplyside" hocus pocus, also not original. I know you believe yourself to be a deep thinker, but like your hero Trump, you're just a clueless hack.
Tuesday, September 15 Report this
Valete
Calling iron-clad data “hocus-pocus” and name-calling isn’t a rebuttal Cannisi—it’s a white flag. You avoided answering one statistic or fact from my bulletproof-essay. You choose to attack me personally because you cannot refute the data. Thank you for making it obvious to everyone here that you have no answer.
"Your silence on the facts says it all."
Wednesday, September 16 Report this