It’s hard to keep track of all the tax hikes that President Obama is proposing, but it’s very simple to recognize his main target – the evil, nasty, awful people known as the rich.
Or, as Obama identifies them, the “millionaires and billionaires” who happen to have yearly incomes of more than $200,000.
Whether the President is talking about higher income tax rates, higher payroll tax rates, an expanded alternative minimum tax, a renewed death tax, a higher capital gains tax, more double taxation of dividends, or some other way of extracting money, the goal is to have these people foot the bill for a never-ending expansion of the welfare state.
This sounds like a pretty good scam, at least if you’re a vote-buying politician, but there is one little detail that sometimes gets forgotten. Raising the tax burden is not the same as raising revenue.
That may not matter if you’re trying to win an election by stoking resentment with the politics of hate and envy. But it is a problem if you actually want to collect more money to finance a growing welfare state.
Unfortunately (at least from the perspective of the class-warfare crowd), the rich are not some sort of helpless pinata that can be pilfered at will.
The most important thing to understand is that the rich are different from the rest of us (or at least they’re unlike me, but feel free to send me a check if you’re in that category).
Ordinary slobs like me get the overwhelming share of our income from wages and salaries. The means we are somewhat easy victims when the politicians feel like raping and plundering. If my tax rate goes up, I don’t really have much opportunity to protect myself by altering my income.
Sure, I can choose not to give a speech in the middle of nowhere for $500 because the after-tax benefit shrinks. Or I can decide not to write an article for some magazine because the $300 payment shrinks to less than $200 after tax. But my “supply-side” responses don’t have much of an effect.
For rich people, however, the world is vastly different. As the chart shows, people with more than $1 million of adjusted gross income get only 33 percent of their income from wages and salaries. And the same IRS data shows that the super-rich, those with income above $10 million, rely on wages and salaries for only 19 percent of their income.
This means that they – unlike me and (presumably) you – have tremendous ability to control the timing, level, and composition of their income.
Indeed, here are two completely legal and very easy things that rich people already do to minimize their taxes – but will do much more frequently if they are targeted for more punitive tax treatment.
1. They will shift their investments to stocks that are perceived to appreciate in value. This means they can reduce their exposure to the double tax on dividends and postpone indefinitely taxes on capital gains. They get wealthier and the IRS collects less revenue.
2. They will shift their investments to municipal bonds, which are exempt from federal tax. They probably won’t risk their money on debt from basket-case states such as California and Illinois (the Greece and Portugal of America), but there are many well-run states that issue bonds. The rich will get steady income and, while the return won’t be very high, they don’t have to give one penny of their interest payments to the IRS.
For every simple idea I can envision, it goes without saying that clever lawyers, lobbyists, accountants, and financial planners can probably think of 100 ways to utilize deductions, credits, preferences, exemptions, shelters, exclusions, and loopholes. This is why class-warfare tax policy is so self-defeating.
And all of this analysis doesn’t even touch upon the other sure-fire way to escape high taxes – and that’s to simply decide to be less productive. Most high-income people are hard-charging types who are investing money, building businesses, and otherwise engaging in behavior that is very good for them – but also very good for the economy.
But you don’t have to be an Ayn Rand devotee to realize that many people, to varying degrees, choose to “go Galt” when they feel that the government has excessively undermined the critical link between effort and reward.
Indeed, if Obama really wants to “soak the rich,” he might want to abandon his current approach and endorse a simple and fair flat tax. As explained in this video, this pro-growth reform does lead to substantial “Laffer Curve” effects.
But you don’t have to believe the video. You can check out this data, straight from the IRS website, showing how those evil rich people paid much more to the IRS after Reagan cut their tax rate from 70 percent to 28 percent in the 1980s.
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] we know there was a big Laffer Curve response from upper-income taxpayers. Why? Because they have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of this […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] cases where taxpayers have a lot of control over the timing, level, and composition of their income, changes in tax rates may cause big changes […]
[…] cases where taxpayers have a lot of control over the timing, level, and composition of their income, changes in tax rates may cause big changes […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] fly away (while the ones that stay will decide to produce fewer eggs – as well as figure out ways to protect the eggs that […]
[…] away (while the ones that stay will decide to produce fewer eggs – as well as figure out ways to protect the eggs that […]
[…] sensitive to changes in tax rates, Especially upper-income taxpayers, in part because they have significant control over the timing, levels, and composition of […]
[…] are sensitive to changes in tax rates, Especially upper-income taxpayers, in part because they have significant control over the timing, levels, and composition of their […]
[…] in 2009, I narrated a video about the downsides of class-warfare tax […]
[…] in 2009, I narrated a video about the downsides of class-warfare tax […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] that high tax rates lead to rich people earning and declaring less taxable income (they still have that ability […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] that high tax rates lead to rich people earning and declaring less taxable income (they still have that ability […]
[…] that high tax rates lead to rich people earning and declaring less taxable income (they still have that ability […]
[…] that high tax rates lead to rich people earning and declaring less taxable income (they still have that ability […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] Simply stated, there are not enough rich people and they don’t earn enough money (and they have relatively easy ways of protecting themselves if their tax rates are […]
[…] Simply stated, there are not enough rich people and they don’t earn enough money (and they have relatively easy ways of protecting themselves if their tax rates are […]
[…] stated, there are not enough rich people and they don’t earn enough money (and they have relatively easy ways of protecting themselves if their tax rates are […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] since it’s comparatively easy to control the timing, level, and composition of that income, class-warfare taxes generally […]
[…] since it’s comparatively easy to control the timing, level, and composition of that income, class-warfare taxes generally […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] At the risk of stating the obvious, that’s one of the main selling points for better tax policy. Supporters of lower tax rates explicitly want entrepreneurs, investors, business owners, and other successful people to have better incentives to earn and report taxable income. […]
[…] At the risk of stating the obvious, that’s one of the main selling points for better tax policy. Supporters of lower tax rates explicitly want entrepreneurs, investors, business owners, and other successful people to have better incentives to earn and report taxable income. […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] true when looking at upper-income taxpayers who – compared to the rest of us – have much greater ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] how high-income taxpayers are especially sensitive to high tax rates, in part because they have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] you’ll see that’s especially true for taxes on “capital” since households have much more control over the timing, level, and composition of business and investment […]
[…] de ingresos más altos cambien los ingresos de 2016 a 2015 (las personas ricas tienen un control considerable sobre el tiempo, el nivel y composición de sus […]
[…] de ingresos más altos cambien los ingresos de 2016 a 2015 (las personas ricas tienen un control considerable sobre el tiempo, el nivel y composición de sus […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] the way, guess what happens when taxpayers move, or when they decide to earn less […]
[…] the way, guess what happens when taxpayers move, or when they decide to earn less […]
[…] the way, guess what happens when taxpayers move, or when they decide to earn less […]
[…] how high-income taxpayers are especially sensitive to high tax rates, in part because they have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] stated, the rich didn’t pay a lot of tax when rates were extortionary because they can choose not to earn and declare much […]
[…] welfare state with pillaging ordinary people. Especially since upper-income taxpayers can change their behavior to avoid most tax […]
[…] aren’t enough rich people to finance big government. Especially since they generally have the ability to avoid confiscatory tax […]
[…] taxpayers such as investors, entrepreneurs, and business owners are especially sensitive to changes in marginal tax rates because they have considerable control over the timing, level, and […]
[…] real world, though, there are lots of people who don’t fit that profile. They have jobs that give them substantial control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] necessarily translate into higher revenue. Simply stated, well-to-do taxpayers have considerable ability to earn less income and/or report less income when tax burdens increase, and they do the […]
[…] That’s because it’s relatively easy – and completely legal – for them to control the timing, level, and composition of business and investment income. […]
[…] control over the timing, level, and composition of their income, and they can take very simple — and completely legal — steps to protect their money as tax rates […]
[…] Ocasio-Cortez) to increase tax rates on the rich. That’s because upper-income taxpayers have a lot of control over the timing, level, and composition of business and investment […]
[…] Everything we know about the real-world impact of tax policy tells us that these soak-the-rich taxes won’t raise much – if any – revenue for the simple reason that upper-income taxpayers will alter the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] changes, such as upper-income taxpayers shifting income from 2016 to 2015 (rich people do have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income, and they can take very simple (and completely legal) steps to protect their money as tax rates […]
[…] themselves. But they tend to be tax cuts on people (such as investors and entrepreneurs) who have a lot of control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] that’s how the Laffer Curve works. When tax rates change, that alters incentives to engage in productive […]
[…] that’s how the Laffer Curve works. When tax rates change, that alters incentives to engage in productive […]
[…] rates on the rich produce more growth. I suspect the main reason for the stronger results is that high-income taxpayers have much greater ability to change their behavior in response to altered […]
[…] There is a modest reduction in personal tax rates, including a reduction in the top rate on households from 39.6 percent to 37 percent. It’s always good to lower marginal tax rates, especially for high earners. […]
[…] in tax evasion. Third, they can practice tax avoidance, which is remarkably simple for people who have control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] doesn’t necessarily translate into higher revenue. Simply stated, well-to-do taxpayers have considerable ability to earn less income and/or report less income when tax burdens increase, and they do the opposite […]
[…] huge amounts of money from the general population. Simply stated, politicians in Washington will have a hard time financing a bigger burden of government if they can only target the […]
[…] even though class-warfare taxation is unlikely to generate much revenue, the editors want both higher tax rates and more double […]
[…] up huge amounts of money from the general population. Simply stated, politicians in Washington will have a hard time financing a bigger burden of government if they can only target the […]
[…] perspective, but might not be very beneficial for the economy. And upper-income taxpayers have a lot of latitudeover how much of their money is saved and invested, as well as how it is saved and invested. So when […]
[…] upper-income taxpayers have a lot of latitude over how much of their money is saved and invested, as well as how it is saved and […]
[…] Once again, Brian is right. There are ways to significantly increase the tax burden in America, such as a value-added tax. But the class-warfare ideas that attract a lot of support on the left won’t raise much revenue because upper-income taxpayers have substantial control over the timing, level and composition of their income. […]
[…] Once again, Brian is right. There are ways to significantly increase the tax burden in America, such as a value-added tax. But the class-warfare ideas that attract a lot of support on the left won’t raise much revenue because upper-income taxpayers have substantial control over the timing, level and composition of their income. […]
[…] Once again, Brian is right. There are ways to significantly increase the tax burden in America, such as a value-added tax. But the class-warfare ideas that attract a lot of support on the left won’t raise much revenue because upper-income taxpayers have substantial control over the timing, level and composition of their income. […]
[…] pay for themselves. That only happens in rare circumstances, usually involving taxpayers who have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. In the vast majority of cases, tax cuts […]
[…] pay for themselves. That only happens in rare circumstances, usually involving taxpayers who have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. In the vast majority of cases, tax cuts […]
[…] the Labour Party’s tax hike is focused on upper-income taxpayers, who do have more ability to respond when there are changes in tax policy, so a high number is appropriate. However, there are some very […]
[…] This is presumably because wealthier taxpayers have much greater ability to control the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] the tax increases have backfired because some rich people are fleeing the state, while others have simply decided to earn and/or report less […]
[…] This is presumably because wealthier taxpayers have much greater ability to control the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] be accurate, you also have to consider how workers will react (and rest assured that upper-income taxpayers have plenty of ability to alter the timing, level, and composition of their income). Andrew looks at the potential […]
[…] good idea, and there’s powerful evidence from the 1980s about how upper-income taxpayers have considerable ability to change their behavior in response to changes in […]
[…] good idea, and there’s powerful evidence from the 1980s about how upper-income taxpayers have considerable ability to change their behavior in response to changes in […]
[…] class-warfare taxes don’t work very well in the United States. Simply stated, taxpayers have considerable ability to rearrange their financial affairs when governments try to tax capital (or capital income). And that ability is especially pronounced […]
[…] interesting stories that aren’t captured by this graph, such as the fact that rich people have great ability to adjust their taxable income when tax rates climb and fall (which was one of the reasons rich people paid a lot more tax when […]
[…] interesting stories that aren’t captured by this graph, such as the fact that rich people have great ability to adjust their taxable income when tax rates climb and fall (which was one of the reasons rich people paid a lot more taxwhen […]
[…] stories that aren’t captured by this graph, such as the fact that rich people have great ability to adjust their taxable income when tax rates climb and fall (which was one of the reasons rich people paid a lot more tax when […]
[…] keep in mind that there areincredibly simple – and totally legal – steps that well-to-do taxpayers can take to dramatically lower their tax […]
[…] keep in mind that there are incredibly simple – and totally legal – steps that well-to-do taxpayers can take to dramatically lower their tax […]
[…] people aren’t fatted calves awaiting slaughter. They generally are smart enough to figure out ways to avoid high tax rates. And if they’re not smart enough, they know to hire bright lawyers, lobbyists, and accountants […]
[…] Lower marginal tax rates lead to some added growth, particularly if the top rate is reduced since upper-income taxpayers have far greater control of the timing, level, and composition of their incom…. But the biggest growth effects come from lowering the corporate tax rate and reducing the tax […]
[…] people aren’t fatted calves awaiting slaughter. They generally are smart enough to figure out ways to avoid high tax rates. And if they’re not smart enough, they know to hire bright lawyers, lobbyists, and […]
[…] Lower marginal tax rates lead to some added growth, particularly if the top rate is reduced since upper-income taxpayers have far greater control of the timing, level, and composition of their incom…. But the biggest growth effects come from lowering the corporate tax rate and reducing the tax […]
[…] Lower marginal tax rates lead to some added growth, particularly if the top rate is reduced since upper-income taxpayers have far greater control of the timing, level, and composition of their incom…. But the biggest growth effects come from lowering the corporate tax rate and reducing the tax […]
[…] Lower marginal tax rates lead to some added growth, particularly if the top rate is reduced since upper-income taxpayers have far greater control of the timing, level, and composition of their incom…. But the biggest growth effects come from lowering the corporate tax rate and reducing the tax […]
[…] Like many other leftists, Sanders presumably knows that “taxing the rich” doesn’t work because they can alter their behavior. […]
[…] Like many other leftists, Sanders presumably knows that “taxing the rich” doesn’t work because they can alter their behavior. […]
[…] depends on how sensitive taxpayers are to changes in tax rates. Some types of taxpayers are very responsive, while other […]
[…] depends on how sensitive taxpayers are to changes in tax rates. Some types of taxpayers are very responsive, while other […]
[…] rich to pay more, one of the lessons reasonable people learned from the Kennedy tax cuts is that upper-income taxpayers respond to lower tax rates by earning and reporting more income. Here’s a chart from a study I wrote almost 20 years […]
[…] are very simple steps that almost all rich people can take to dramatically lower their tax liabilities. So Hillary and the rest of the class-warfare crowd […]
[…] points out that big changes in tax policy don’t have much impact, presumably because upper-income taxpayers take sensible and easy steps to protect themselves when they’re targeted by government, but they’re willing to earn and report a lot more income […]
[…] points out that big changes in tax policy don’t have much impact, presumably because upper-income taxpayers take sensible and easy steps to protect themselves when they’re targeted by government, but they’re willing to earn and report a lot more […]
[…] On paper, such a system actually could eliminate the vast majority of Social Security’s giant unfunded liability. In reality, this would mean a huge increase in marginal tax rates on investors, entrepreneurs, and small business owners, which would have a serious adverse economic impact. […]
[…] strategy for investors, entrepreneurs, and small business owners, all of whom (if they’re like their American counterparts) presumably have some control over the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] presumably doesn’t understand that rich people earn very large shares of their income from business and investment sources. As such, they have considerable ability to alter the timing, level, and composition of their […]
[…] money to spend. Yes, it’s true that the tax discourages capital formation and may actually lose revenue in the long run, but politicians aren’t exactly famous for thinking past the next election […]
[…] They’re familiar with the evidence from the 1980s about the sometimes-inverse link between tax rates and tax revenue and they are aware that “rich” people have substantial control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] They’re familiar with the evidence from the 1980s about the sometimes-inverse link between tax rates and tax revenue and they are aware that “rich” people have substantial control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] 3. The point about avoiding taxes on goods where there is high “elasticity” has important lessons for why it is foolish to impose class-warfare tax rates on people who have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] 3. The point about avoiding taxes on goods where there is high “elasticity” has important lessons for why it is foolish to impose class-warfare tax rates on people who have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] which is grossly inconsistent with the evidence from the 1980s, but at least they understand that successful taxpayers can and do respond when tax rates […]
[…] which is grossly inconsistent with the evidence from the 1980s, but at least they understand that successful taxpayers can and do respond when tax rates […]
[…] considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. And that means they can reduce their taxable income when tax rates […]
[…] considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. And that means they can reduce their taxable income when tax rates […]
[…] certainly what we see in the U.S. data and I assume Canadians aren’t that […]
[…] certainly what we see in the U.S. data and I assume Canadians aren’t that […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] by Dan Mitchell, International Liberty – https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2011/09/19/one-simple-reason-and-two-easy-steps-to-show-why-oba… […]
[…] tried to explain that soak-the-rich tax policies won’t work because upper-income taxpayers have considerable ability to change the timing, level, and […]
[…] tried to explain that soak-the-rich tax policies won’t work because upper-income taxpayers have considerable ability to change the timing, level, and […]
[…] just as rich people respond logically to incentives, the same is true of poor […]
[…] just as rich people respond logically to incentives, the same is true of poor […]
[…] And it you want to understand specifically why class-warfare tax policy is so likely to fail, this post explains why it’s a fool’s game to target upper-income taxpayers since they have […]
[…] IRS tax data, I’ve shown that this is a very inaccurate assumption. And I’ve also used IRS data to show the President that there are big Laffer-Curve effects when […]
[…] is because rich people are different from the rest of us. As I’ve previously explained with IRS data, they get the vast majority of their income from business and investment sources rather than from […]
[…] And they’re also more likely to understand why class-warfare tax policy won’t work when I show them the IRS data on how upper-income taxpayers have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] And they’re also more likely to understand why class-warfare tax policy won’t work when I show them the IRS data on how upper-income taxpayers have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] tell us the “rich” should pay more, but we know upper-income taxpayer have considerable ability to alter the timing, level, and composition of their income, so we can expect significant Laffer Curve […]
[…] But I don’t trust him. In part because he’s a politician, but also because there aren’t enough rich people to finance big government (not to mention that the rich easily can alter their financial affairs to avoid higher tax rates). […]
[…] The key thing to understand is that revenue feedback is driven by the degree to which a tax cut leads to more taxable income. And you tend to get bigger changes in taxable income when you lower rates on taxpayers who have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] IRS tax data, I’ve shown that this is a very inaccurate assumption. And I’ve also used IRS data to show the President that there are big Laffer-Curve effects […]
[…] IRS tax data, I’ve shown that this is a very inaccurate assumption. And I’ve also used IRS data to show the President that there are big Laffer-Curve effects when […]
[…] IRS tax data, I’ve shown that this is a very inaccurate assumption. And I’ve also used IRS data to show the President that there are big Laffer-Curve effects when […]
[…] IRS tax data, I’ve shown that this is a very inaccurate assumption. And I’ve also used IRS data to show the President that there are big Laffer-Curve effects […]
[…] This is just an isolated example, to be sure, but I’ve already shared IRS data confirming that the rich have tremendous control over the timing, level, and composi…. […]
[…] most rich people – whether they’re golfers, celebrities, investors, or entrepreneurs – have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. And they can afford to […]
[…] understands that rich people have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income, which is precisely why there are powerful Laffer Curve effects when politicians go after the […]
[…] I’m fond of my video analyzing the problems with class warfare tax policy, and I’ve explained that higher tax rates on the rich will cause bad Laffer Curve effects because investors, entrepreneurs, and small business owners have considerable ability to change the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] people – whether they’re golfers, celebrities, investors, or entrepreneurs – have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. And they can afford to […]
[…] stated, there aren’t enough of the “1 percent.” Moreover, rich people have significant control over the timing, composition, and level of their income, so class-warfare tax hikes inevitably will fail to generate much revenue (yes, the Laffer Curve […]
[…] as projected. Surely they are familiar with the evidence from the 1980s, and they must know that upper-income people have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their inco…." Perhaps Dan, despite being as cynical about politicians of both parties as anybody I know, […]
[…] What the left generally won’t admit, however, is that the rich are not a piñata, capable of disgorging limitless amounts of new money. There arebig Laffer-Curve effects when tax rates climb too high, largely becauseupper-income taxpayers have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their in…. […]
[…] you’re trying to stick it to the “rich,” you need to understand that they have tremendous control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. So unlike the rest of us, they can respond very easily when the government goes after […]
[…] What the left generally won’t admit, however, is that the rich are not a piñata, capable of disgorging limitless amounts of new money. There are big Laffer-Curve effects when tax rates climb too high, largely because upper-income taxpayers have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their in…. […]
[…] tell us the “rich” should pay more, but we know upper-income taxpayer have considerable ability to alter the timing, level, and composition of their income, so we can expect significant Laffer Curve […]
[…] tell us the “rich” should pay more, but we know upper-income taxpayer have considerable ability to alter the timing, level, and composition of their income, so we can expect significant Laffer Curve […]
[…] For some types of tax changes, such as lowering tax rates on the “rich,” the revenue feedback may be very large because they have considerable control over the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] people, unlike the rest of us, have tremendous ability to change the timing, composition, and level of their income, which is a big reason why upper-income taxpayers paid much more to the IRS in the 1980s after […]
[…] They could point out that higher marginal tax rates discourage productive behavior. […]
[…] They could point out that higher marginal tax rates discourage productive behavior. […]
[…] stated, there aren’t enough of the “1 percent.” Moreover, rich people have significant control over the timing, composition, and level of their income, so class-warfare tax hikes inevitably will fail to generate much revenue (yes, the Laffer Curve […]
[…] 1. The rich already pay a disproportionate share of the total tax burden – The video explains that the top-20 percent of income earners pay more than 67 percent of all federal taxes even though they earn only about 50 percent of total income. And, as I’ve explained, it would be very difficult to squeeze that much more money from them. […]
[…] 1. The rich already pay a disproportionate share of the total tax burden – The video explains that the top-20 percent of income earners pay more than 67 percent of all federal taxes even though they earn only about 50 percent of total income. And, as I’ve explained, it would be very difficult to squeeze that much more money from them. […]
[…] In part because he’s a politician, but also because there aren’t enough rich people to finance big government (not to mention that the rich easily can alter their financial affairs to avoid higher tax rates). […]
[…] But I don’t trust him. In part because he’s a politician, but also because there aren’t enough rich people to finance big government (not to mention that the rich easily can alter their financial affairs to avoid higher tax rates). […]
[…] 1. The rich already pay a disproportionate share of the total tax burden – The video explains that the top-20 percent of income earners pay more than 67 percent of all federal taxes even though they earn only about 50 percent of total income. And, as I’ve explained, it would be very difficult to squeeze that much more money from them. […]
[…] But I don’t trust him. In part because he’s a politician, but also because there aren’t enough rich people to finance big government (not to mention that the rich easily can alter their financial affairs to avoid higher tax rates). […]
[…] But I don’t trust him. In part because he’s a politician, but also because there aren’t enough rich people to finance big government (not to mention that the rich easily can alter their financial affairs to avoid higher tax rates). […]
[…] But I don’t trust him. In part because he’s a politician, but also because there aren’t enough rich people to finance big government (not to mention that the rich easily can alter their financial affairs to avoid higher tax rates). […]
[…] people, unlike the rest of us, have tremendous ability to change the timing, composition, and level of their income, which is a big reason why upper-income taxpayers paid much more to the IRS in the 1980s after […]
[…] that this will even raise the anticipated revenues. As the Cato Institute's Daniel J. Mitchell points out, the rich have far greater control of the timing and composition of their income than the rest of […]
Reblogged this on contentconservative.
[…] stated, there aren’t enough of the “1 percent.” Moreover, rich people have significant control over the timing, composition, and level of their income, so class-warfare tax hikes inevitably will fail to generate much revenue (yes, the Laffer Curve […]
[…] I’ve explained that it is silly for Obama and others to think it is easy to squeeze more money from rich taxpayers, and I’ve also provided evidence from the 1980s to show that upper-income people have considerable ability to respond to changes in tax rates by shifting the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] if a tax increase imposes a lot of damage and taxpayers have enough flexibility in their financial affairs, then it’s possible that a tax hike can lose revenue (or, as we saw with Reagan’s “tax cuts […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes people engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes people engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] people, unlike the rest of us, have tremendous ability to change the timing, composition, and level of their income, which is a big reason why upper-income taxpayers paid much more to the IRS in the […]
[…] people, unlike the rest of us, have tremendous ability to change the timing, composition, and level of their income, which is a big reason why upper-income taxpayers paid much more to the IRS in the 1980s after […]
[…] if a tax increase imposes a lot of damage and taxpayers have enough flexibility in their financial affairs, then it’s possible that a tax hike can lose revenue (or, as we saw with Reagan’s […]
[…] In other words, government spending undermines growth, and the damage is magnified by a poorly designed tax policies. […]
[…] I’ve explained that it is silly for Obama and others to think it is easy to squeeze more money from rich taxpayers, and I’ve also provided evidence from the 1980s to show that upper-income people have considerable ability to respond to changes in tax rates by shifting the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] I’ve explained that it is silly for Obama and others to think it is easy to squeeze more money from rich taxpayers, and I’ve also provided evidence from the 1980s to show that upper-income people have considerable ability to respond to changes in tax rates by shifting the timing, level, and composition of their income. […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
[…] I will make one correction to his rant. He says that middle-income people have the same deductions that are available to rich people. That’s not really true. Rich people, as I have explained before, don’t rely on wage and salary income like the rest of us. Instead, they earn capital income and business income, which opens the door to a much larger degree of tax pl…. […]
[…] But it’s also because Laffer Curve effects are very powerful at higher income levels. Simply stated, rich taxpayers usually have much more control over the timing, level, and composition of their incom…. […]
[…] But it’s also because Laffer Curve effects are very powerful at higher income levels. Simply stated, rich taxpayers usually have much more control over the timing, level, and composition of their incom…. […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes they engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] But then I came to my senses. It seems that many of the statists I debate and deal with support punitive taxation for reasons of spite and envy. As such, they don’t really care about the impact on either the economy or tax revenues. […]
[…] In other words, government spending undermines growth, and the damage is magnified by poorly designed tax policies. […]
[…] In other words, government spending undermines growth, and the damage is magnified by a poorly designed tax policies. […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes they engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes they engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes they engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes they engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] tax rates increase, sometimes they engage in tax avoidance, lowering their tax liabilities […]
[…] and small business owners probably won’t generate much tax revenue because of incentives (and ability) to reduce taxable […]
Sadly, even if the national (not federal ) government took ALL of the income of the millionaires and billionaires it would not cover all of the deficit for this year’s Obamabudget. And what are the odds that the millionaires and billionaires would hang around next year to let them do it again?
[…] More recently, I’ve explained why Obama’s class-warfare tax policy is especially misguided because of Laffer Curve effects. […]
[…] More recently, I’ve explained why Obama’s class-warfare tax policy is especially misguided because of Laffer Curve effects. […]
[…] One Simple Reason (and Two Easy Steps) to Show Why Obama’s Soak-the-Rich Tax Hikes Won’t Work «… […]
I fall in to the category described, the rich, nasty awful rich, even though I make significantly less than $1,000,000 per year. I already pay about 50 cents on the dollar for federal, state and local taxes. I am a physician with a large debt load from school and large malpractice premiums. I have a wife and 4 children to raise. I sat next to people in high school and college who had the same opportunities as me, could have made the same decision to become a doctor but chose not to. I did because I was raised to be the best you can be, encouraged to be a professional and contribute to society. I paid for everything myself, college and medical school, as my parents could not afford to. Now I am the devil. Now those people who sat next to me in high school and college think I should subsidize their laziness….sounds fair, NOT! This attitude breeds mediocrity and is not the America I remember growing up. Sad.
It’s absurd to present logical arguments, like in this article, as a response to this kind of warfare. This “proposal” is not intended for logical arguments. It’s only intended to appeal to emotions, naturally for the left, but also for some of the gullible independents. The way to fight this sort of thing is NOT with logic, but with ridicule, etc.
Even if one subscribes to the class warfare philosophy — whereby the rich are a small group of undeserving people whose privileged status cannot be unseated due to inertia, conspiracies etc. — a better measure of “evil” is not how much one earns but how much one spends.
A person who earns a lot but spends little is essentially a good Samaritan. He basically works a lot but does not “cash in” the rewards of his labor (whether that labor is actual labor, high value work, unique investment intuition – i.e. unique ability to efficiently allocate capital whether acquired or innate etc.). By not spending his earnings he is essentially re-allocating immediately his deferred compensation to mechanisms that provide compensation to other people (i.e. investments). He is only “evil” to the extent that he MAY one day exercise his option (his earned right, really) to spend sometime in the future. Until he actually does spend (and thus allocates the fruits of his work not to what is economically efficient investment but to what he personally and whimsically desires) he has not committed “evil” — even by Marxist terms.
Warren Buffet, obviously does not intend to spend a significant portion of his money before he dies, neither plans to leave a significant portion of the wealth to his heirs. Nonetheless, he paradoxically insists on managing that wealth by himself and allocating it to the private sector rather than surrendering it to government management (i.e. loosely speaking to collective management by the people) in the form of taxation. Because nothing prevents Mr. Buffet from donating a portion of his wealth to the government — in the form of voluntary taxation. Which brings to light what Warren Buffet really thinks about the efficiency and utility of how the government (loosely speaking the people) will collectively manage his money.
So here is the link Mr. Buffett,
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm
…could you please demonstrate to us how much more efficient you believe the government is in managing the portion of your wealth that you intend to neither spend nor pass on to your heirs?
Neither will a tax on the rich (even if behavior modification is discounted) raise anything more than a few tenths of billions. But as Mr. Mitchell has correctly pointed out, such a tax is a necessary pretext to wider swaths of the population acquiescing to higher levels of taxation. Other countries have shown that it is possible to collect large percentages of GDP in taxation and that is indeed the inevitable result, and probably desire, of Hope N Change. But the completion of that dream will accomplish little more than setting the US on the same perpetual 1%-2% growth trendline that these other high-tax nations are bound to. Such low average growth in a world that is poised to grow 4-5% per year on average, is a deterministic path to economic extinction within a couple of short decades.
All this, of course, if the dream of Hope N Change is completed before the decline, which is very unlikely and thus will provide the necessary pretext for Progressives to blame the decline on not enough Hope N Change.
If people recognized the reasons for their decline, Democracies would never decline. Alas…
So by this rationale, when Bush lowered the rates govt revenues increased? Are there data to support that?
Attention President Obama: the way to really soak the rich is through a “wealth tax.” Our delightful gallic friends have had such a TAX for years. In 2012, the maximum French wealth tax will be 0.5%, not really that much. If your wealth is 1 billion euros, you’ll pay a paltry 5 million euros.
The wealthiest folks in the USA (defined as those with household net worth of 1 million dollars or more) were estimated by Deloitte & Touche to have total net worth of 38.6 trillion dollars. (See HERE.) A 1% wealth tax on them would yield 386 billion dollars, 2% 772 billion etc. And if the wealthy want to flee to another country, impose an “exit tax” just like the French.
Anyone second this suggestion?
When Obama says it’s not “Class Warfare” he is exactly correct. For there to be “Warfare” both side have to fight, and in Obama’s America, entrepreneurs don’t fight the US government, we just quit.
The good news is that the idea of America escaped the country’s geographical boundaries before the Left killed it–and all over the world it is bringing humans out of the degrading poverty that has been the norm throughout history.
For all of you, like me, who gain great joy from building a business that creates economic value for its workers, customers and investors, I invite you to move. Get out of the USA before these people suck the spirit from your soul. Trying to “save” the US from its chosen suicidal self-indulgent path is as useless as pleading to persuade a bottle out of the hands of a drunk. It is wasteful of your life energy, disasterously enabling, and in so doing you are denying your talents and training to the non-Americans who need it, want it and will benefit from it.
If you want to build a business, you can still change people’s lives for the better, just not in the U.S.
Get out while you can.