Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

People seem to love pointing out income distribution numbers (seemingly to pit people against the wealthy, but maybe I'm wrong). But let's not forget who also pays the taxes:

http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

(top 1% pay 38% of income taxes)




So, 42% of the wealth supplies 38% of the tax base? That's pretty close, of course, but when you're talking about trillions of dollars 4% is quite a big shortfall.


And it's 4% the other direction if you use the net worth number. He defines wealth as (net worth - home value) so I don't know that it's a good metric


The NTU distributions appear somewhat oddly presented in those tables, and odd portrayals of data make me curious. Odd displays can indicate the existence of information that a presenter intentionally wishes to avoid highlighting, or information that the presenter simply does not recognize is present, and that information can be as interesting as what a presenter does choose to highlight.

Based on the Slate data referenced elsewhere in the comments here, there looks to be around 84% of the aggregate income for the top 20% of the earners.

Then interpolating the data buckets shown within the NTU tables and particularly guessing that the 20% range is around 80% of the taxes paid, and matching that with the Slate income charts.

This implies that the folks with 80% of the income pay somewhere roughly around 80% of the taxes. Give or take.

I'd be interested in seeing a NTU-like breakdown matched with what data Slate has shown for relative incomes; matched with what looks to be the income and with slicing the income based on the different AGIs.




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: