General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow much would Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's tax plan cost Americans?
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has touted a plan that would tax multimillionaire Americans 60-70% to fund massive energy and infrastructure overhauls related to a plan that aims to reduce the country's carbon emissions to zero and eliminate fossil fuels in 10 years.
The New York's representative said in a "60 Minutes" interview Sunday that a new marginal tax rate would affect Americans making more than $10 million to help pay for the "Green New Deal."
"Once you get to the tippy-tops, on your $10 millionth dollar, sometimes you see tax rates as high as 60 percent or 70 percent," Ocasio-Cortez said. "That doesn't mean all $10 million dollars are taxed at an extremely high rate. But it means that as you climb up this ladder, you should be contributing more."
Ocasio-Cortez pointed to past American policies that implemented similar rates under administrations of both parties.
Policies under former President Dwight Eisenhower reached 90% in the 1950s. Through the administrations of presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, the rate sat at 70%. President Ronald Reagan then sliced the top rate to 50% in the early 1980s before it eventually fell to 38% in 1986.
Analysis from The Washington Post found that if taxes on the approximately 16,000 Americans who earned more than $10 million in 2016 was raised from the 39.6% they paid that year to 70%, the federal government would earn an extra $72 billion each year.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/taxes/how-much-would-alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-tax-plan-cost-americans/ar-BBRSx2f?li=BBnb7Kz
maxsolomon
(33,232 posts)I propose the alternate: "How much would AOC's tax plan cost Rich Fucks?"
16,000 people in a country of 300 million is .0053% of "Americans".
PufPuf23
(8,745 posts)benefit most other Americans?"
Boxerfan
(2,533 posts)Not "cost"
Hope you fix that.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,693 posts)You can wish otherwise if you want.
Boxerfan
(2,533 posts)Because I remember those times....A low defecit full epmloyment and a curve towards progressive policies.
We were going in the right direction. Are you suggesting she is not right about raising taxes on people who have never paid the fair share in most peoples lifetimes?
Why troll that trash?
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,693 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Seems a flawed method to infer data, but a great one to fling at the wall hoping it sticks.
Voltaire2
(12,939 posts)So what do you think of this idiotic editorial hit piece on progressive taxation and Ocasio-Cortez?
ismnotwasm
(41,955 posts)Because (obviously) state taxes are subject to state politics. If we, as a nation, decide to that people with millions or billions of dollars are taxed more, and the monies are directed to specific purposes ie infastructure, green deals, small business incentives I think this could work.
That being said, a high tax rate on 10 million for a small business owner, may not work, if the business owner reinvests, pays employees, health insurance bonuses etc i mean its a lot of money to me, but not much in the business world.
I think tax reform needs to go hand in hand with healthcare.
The math needs to be correct, however. I dont understand the math, not being an economist. When I read numbers, I want them to add up, and add up reasonably. I want reasonable goals. I want small businesses to be able to thrive.
Big businesses stimulate the economy, and the profit sharing is supposed to trickle down by providing jobs. (Jobs are great if they decent wages and benefits; many do not)
In Seattle, I can drive down any city street and see what we are currently doing does not work. We have at least 11,000 homeless here. The opioid crisis is driven by despair in far too many cases.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Before a small business owner gets to $10 million in taxable, profitable income, the business has to pay employees, state and local taxes, lease on business space, and all the other day-to-day expenses of running a business that are deducted from taxable income (unlike an individual's income, which doesn't allow for deductions for buying groceries, paying rent, and the other expenses of day-to-day living like electricity, water, and internet).
So if a business is clearing $10 million in profit subject to taxation, it has benefited greatly from the legal, financial, regulatory, and civil structures provided by the government. That business should be pulling its own weight to benefit itself and others.
ismnotwasm
(41,955 posts)Not convinced 10 million Should be treated the same way as billion as far as tax rates goes is more my point. Im kind of musing out loud, if we are going to tax profits, it has to be completely thought out and supported by good economic data, not political emotionalism
But like I said, what we have now is not working for far too many people. I am very concerned about small business owners.
What I do, is read legislation, and within the limit of my understanding and research see if its a viable, workable plan, that will be beneficial, and passable. I know politics is a lot of grandstanding, but my mind doesnt work that way,
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)There would be other thresholds for folks earning $100 million and up through a billion. Taxing the profit above $10 million at a higher rate than the first $10 million seems a reasonable ask from folks making that much off the system.
As for economic data vs. political emotionalism, all of the data is on the Keynesian side of things, not on the Laffer supply side.
Bettie
(16,058 posts)nets over ten million a year.
The tax is paid after the business expenses, which include health insurance, bonuses, employee pay, and investment in the business. If after all of the bills are paid, your net profit is over ten million?
You're doing pretty damned well and you don't pay the top rate on all of that income anyway.