Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share in Taxes? >
Soaking the Rich Won't Grow the Economy
Without economic growth, the government will run out of rich people to tax
December 16, 2011
About Alan Reynolds:
Alan Reynolds is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and was formerly director of economic research at the Hudson Institute. He served as research director with the National Commission on Tax Reform and Economic Growth, an adviser to the National Commission on the Cost of Higher Education, and as a member of the OMB transition team in 1981.
In 2007, before the housing and financial crises, the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 39.5 percent of individual income taxes, according to the CBO, plus 57 percent of the corporate tax, 4.7 percent of federal excise taxes, and 4.1 percent of payroll taxes. Combining those taxes, the top 1 percent paid a record 26.5 percent of all federal taxes combined from 2003 to 2007—up from 21.8 percent when Clinton was president and 13.8 percent from 1979 to 1982 before the Reagan tax cuts took effect. Which sounds like the fairer share?
[Read the U.S. News debate on the flat tax.]
We tried soaking the rich in the past, but the resulting revenue loss was more than we possibly could afford today. Individual income tax rates of 20-91 percent under Eisenhower brought in only 7.7 percent of GDP. Lower tax rates of 14-70 percent from 1964 to 1981, thanks to President Kennedy, brought in 8 percent of GDP. A top tax of 28 percent from 1988 to 1990 brought in 8.1 percent of GDP. By contrast, raising the capital gains tax to 28 percent from 1987 to 1996 thwarted stock sales and clearly cost the Treasury a bundle. What was fairer about high tax rates that were not paid?
The trouble with depending on so few people for so much government is that it doesn't work when the party stops. We're running short of rich people to tax.
[Read 10 things you didn't know about the Bush tax cuts.]
From 2007 to 2009, the IRS reports that the number of incomes above $1 million (including many businesses) fell by nearly 40 percent. As a result, incomes above $1 million accounted for "only" 20.5 percent of individual income tax receipts in 2009, down from 27.8 percent in 2007.
A shortage of prosperity always creates a shortage of prosperous taxpayers. That is not a problem that can be fixed by taxing the few surviving millionaires into oblivion.
- Read the U.S. News debate on the payroll tax cut.
- See a collection of political cartoons on the economy.
- Read about 7 groups with reason to protest.
- Other Arguments
-
#1417115
Yes — The claim that the rich don't pay enough taxes is based on perception, not fact
JASON FICHTNER, Senior Research Fellow at George Mason University's Mercatus Center
-
#396189
No — On rates alone, the rich pay their fair share; but don't forget about the deductions and exemptions
KELLY PHILLIPS ERB, Author of Taxgirl Blog
-
#4118214
No — The steep drop in federal tax revenue was caused by cuts in the tax rates for the very wealthiest
TAMARA DRAUT, Author of 'Strapped: Why America's 20- and 30-Somethings Can't Get Ahead'
-
#596205
No — The current tax code is skewed in the rich's favor
DAN BERGER, Member of Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength.
Reader Comments Read all comments (4)
j burger of NC 10:52AM December 25, 2011
Mike Brooks of CO 9:54PM December 21, 2011
Louis Trujillo of CO 8:38AM December 18, 2011