Conservative

383 readers

12 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Data prove it: The Trump tax cuts soaked the rich (nypost.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The latest IRS data on who bears the income tax burden demonstrate yet again the benefits of lower tax rates over higher rates.

When President Donald Trump entered office, the richest 1% of tax filers ($675,000 income and above) paid a little more than 40% of the income taxes collected.

The 2017 Trump tax cut reduced the effective highest federal tax rate to 37% from 42%.

But the most recent IRS tax return data (for 2021) confirm that even as these rates were lowered — not to mention the corporate tax rate cut from 35% to 21% — the share of the tax burden shouldered by the 1% rose to almost 46%.

Written by the guy who came up with the Laffer Curve, Arthur Laffer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 29 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (6 children)

Damned interesting! OTOH, the wealth gap has exploded since 1980, so it seems natural that the 1%, being so very much richer, and the rest of us being so very much poorer (in relation!), would bear a higher percentage of the total tax burden.

Can someone explain more? I'm no finance guy, but I'd guess there's more than a 1-1 relationship here.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 8 months ago

Your post is almost word for word what I was going to post, right down to the "I'm no finance guy." But yeah, greater concentration of wealth in the 1% in comparison to everyone else seemingly should result in increased tax share.

load more comments (5 replies)