Taxes Avoided by the Rich Could Pay Off the Deficit

DamianTV

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
20,677
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/08/27

Conservatives force the deficit issue, ignoring job creation, and insisting that tax increases on the rich wouldn't generate enough revenue to balance the budget. They're way off. But it takes a little arithmetic to put it all together. In the following analysis, data has been taken from a variety of sources, some of which may overlap or slightly disagree, but all of which lead to the conclusion that withheld revenue, not excessive spending, is the problem.

1. Individual and small business tax avoidance costs us $450 billion.

The IRS estimates that 17 percent of taxes owed were not paid, leaving an underpayment of $450 billion. In way of confirmation, an independent review of IRS data reveals that the richest 10 percent of Americans paid less than 19% on $3.8 trillion of income in 2006, nearly $450 billion short of a more legitimate 30% tax rate. It has also been estimated that two-thirds of the annual $1.3 trillion in "tax expenditures" (tax subsidies from special deductions, exemptions, exclusions, credits, capital gains, and loopholes) goes to the top quintile of taxpayers. Based on IRS apportionments, this calculates out to more than $450 billion for the richest 10 percent of Americans.

2. Corporate tax avoidance is between $250 billion and $500 billion.

There are numerous examples of tax avoidance by the big companies, but the most outrageous fact may be that corporations decided to drastically cut their tax rates after the start of the recession. After paying an average of 22.5% from 1987 to 2008, they've paid an annual rate of 10% since. This represents a sudden $250 billion annual loss in taxes. Worse yet, it's a $500 billion shortfall from the 35% statutory corporate tax rate.

3. Tax haven losses range from $337 billion to $500 billion.

The Tax Justice Network estimated in 2011 that $337 billion is lost to the U.S. every year in tax haven abuse. It's probably more. A recent report placed total hidden offshore assets at somewhere between $21 trillion and $32 trillion. Using the lesser $21 trillion figure, and considering that about 40% of the world's Ultra High Net Worth Individuals are Americans, and factoring in an annual 6% stock market gain based on historical records, the tax loss comes to $500 billion.

4. That's enough to pay off a trillion dollar deficit. Reasonable tax changes could pay it off a second time:

(a) A non-regressive payroll tax could produce $150 billion in revenue.

Get ready for some math. The richest 10% made about $3.84 trillion in 2006. A $110,000 salary, which is roughly the cutoff point for payroll tax deductions, is also the approximate minimum income for the richest 10%. A 6.2% tax paid on $1.43 trillion ($110,000 times 13 million payees) is about $90 billion. The lost taxes on the remaining $2.41 trillion come to about $150 billion.

(b) A minimal estate tax brings in another $100 billion.

The 2009 estate tax, designed to impact only the tiny percentage of Americans with multi-million dollar estates that have never been taxed, returns about $100 billion per year.

(c) A financial transaction tax (FTT): up to $500 billion.

The Bank for International Settlements reported in 2008 that annual trading in derivatives had surpassed $1.14 quadrillion (a thousand trillion dollars!). The Chicago Mercantile Exchange handles about 3 billion annual contracts worth well over 1 quadrillion dollars. One-tenth of one percent of a quadrillion dollars could pay off the deficit on its own.

More conservative estimates by the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the Chicago Political Economy Group suggest FTT revenues of a half-trillion dollars annually.

Add it all up, and we've paid off the deficit, almost twice. More importantly, the avoided taxes and a few other sensible taxes could provide sufficient revenue for job stimulus without cutting the hard-earned benefits of middle-class Americans.

Just my two cents, but the Top 1% of this country controls 50% of the wealth, while the bottom 50% of the country controls just 1% of the wealth. Figures might be a bit off, might be like 2%, but its close enough for Govt work. So it doesnt matter if the Govt were to take EVERYTHING from us, it is only equivilant of just 1% of what the rich already have! So how is it they can expect to take more and more blood from us turnips?

Of course the real solution would be to cut the Income Tax period. The people at the bottom should be able to take their wealth back from the rich because it was effectively stolen from them, and the Theft should be reimbursed!
 
we all know everyone hates fed income tax , but i get sick of the neocon's and fox saying how the top 2-3 % pay over 50% of the fed income taxes.

lets use this example , say i make $10 trillion a year , i pay 10% income tax ( one trillion dollars a year ) , i could say i pay more taxes than all the rest of the american people put together , am i not great .

everyone knows what is happening , the middle class is going away as there is fewer and fewer mfr jobs , look around at the malls and where people are working .

bottom line , the rich and upper income earners will pay more and more as a total of income taxes as the middle class gets smaller .

look at every chart you can find showing the decline of the middle class since the trickle down theory thanks to reagan--kudlow--laffer.

i am 74 years old and can remember when america was great , people growing up now say 35 and under think this is all normal , nothing could be farther from the truth.

i get sick of hearing our elected people say goverment is too big ( i agree ) , but when is the last time you have seen or heard any of them cut there staff or refuse a pay raise .
 
Paul fails to understand how government works. When you give them more money they simply spend more. They don't care at all about the deficit. Raising taxes will do absolutely NOTHING to reduce the deficit when we have a congress and executive branch that likes to spend huge amounts of money. This guy assumes that receiving more money will help pay for the budget deficit, but what he doesn't realize is that the BUDGET keeps going up every year. In a few years that money that he collects now may not be enough to pay for THAT years deficit, so he would then have to raise taxes again.

Then we need to take into account the unintended consequences which is a topic that no liberal or politician likes to talk about. What is the reason people use tax havens and loopholes in the tax code? The reason is because they want to save more of the money that they earned. As soon as they eliminate all of these havens and loopholes (which will never happen) a team of tax specialists and accountants will get together at every major business and determine whether it is more cost effective to stay in the USA or move their headquarters to a different country with lower tax rates. If they find that one is better for the business then they will go to that one. Now the USA has lost ALL of that income tax revenue.

Adding up a bunch of numbers and saying "Hey look, if i add these two together and we tax these numbers, then we can pay off the deficit!" does not take into account future consequences and spending levels. He is using numbers from right now, or in the past, and assuming things will be the same in the future - the liberals biggest problem. There is a saying and it goes like this "Past performance is not indicative of future results" and it applies in this situation.
 
BS. Higher taxes on the rich doesn't work. Look at the high taxed states like CA and others. They have massive deficits. Look at all the European countries that have extremely high taxes on the rich and the middle class. Still huge deficits that will cause a financial collapse very soon.

You cannot take $1.6 trillion out of the economy and expect it to grow. There are so many economic side effects to taxation. Many people need to educate yourselves and read mises.org religiously.

Better yet, why doesn't the FED just print the deficit money and give it as a gift to the govt? Exactly!!!
 
Also, there is a history income tax chart that shows it doesn't matter what top tax rate percentage is applied to the rich, the income taxes collected per GDP is about the same or around 8-10%.
 
What if all the taxes were simply reduced/removed and government adjusts its expenditures to the new budget? This would promote individual responsibility on behalf of the people and the government; we would be all the more accountable and freer for it. This would negate the need to higher (and pay) an army of CPAs and instead the business could spend that towards more capital or towards an actual productive process of the business. If you keep going down the path of perpetually higher/more taxes you'll inevitably hit the threshold of the Laffer curve. Of course I should point out there are those big corporatocracies that receive government subsidies (bailouts, "stimulus", aka picking winners/losers) that distort and prevent any true form of a free market; but those are the very agencies that need to be addressed and corrected (banks being the biggest offender).
 
Big lie of the Democratic machine: "we can keep doing what we have been doing if we can just get "the rich" to pay their fair share."
Big lie of the Republican machine: "we can keep doing what we are doing if we can just kick the lazy bums off welfare and cut waste."

Both are lies designed to divide the country into factions fighting each other while the special interests that profit from government continue to fill their pockets and the country continues to spin down the drain.
 
I'm tired of having the "how should we tax the rich more" argument. Why doesn't anyone talk about how they got that money in the first place? We could solve the problem by putting an end to our centralized banking system that literally prints up money and puts it in the hands of the rich and their friends.
 
The rich could not avoid tax if we had Land valuation taxation (LVT). The location of land is known to the inch. Freeloaders are eliminated. Land cannot be taken to off-shore banking havens. LVT means no income tax, sales tax or inheritence tax. What people earn they keep.

Look up Geonomics. Using commonwealth to pay for common services.
 
the problem isn't revenue. it's spending.

Geonomics promotes enterprise with a vastly reduced need for governments to spend. All revenue can be captured by using commonly created wealth to pay for common services. Using LVT tax avoidance is impossible.
 
Geonomics promotes enterprise with a vastly reduced need for governments to spend. All revenue can be captured by using commonly created wealth to pay for common services. Using LVT tax avoidance is impossible.

Right. What's important is not what the government does with the money. All that really matters is that they get it. As long as they take the full rental value of the land away from people, the rulers could use that money to buy themselves gold-plated thrones. The taxing alone justifies itself.
 
Right. What's important is not what the government does with the money. All that really matters is that they get it.

At the moment that is about right. But when all the debt has gone what they do with is imoportant. LVT will reduce the need for big spending government.
 
Back
Top