I’m not envious, I take advantage of most tax breaks that come my way. I’d be silly not to do so.
I live among the top 3% net worth folks and I have also lived among the bottom 10%. I can tell you from that experience that folks in the bottom 10% aren’t envious and the folks in the top 3% are pleasantly surprised when the bottom 95% take up their cause to lower taxes on the rich. 
BINGO! “Turn in your cards folks, we have winner”. 
The same folks who vote against their own self-interests for the most part.
Yes, they are!
I did answer it, but I’m not getting into discussions on hand-picked graphs and charts. The games people play with those are endless. I deal with the laws, the truth and principles. The law says they are fair, it’s the truth and the principle is the people vote for it. You never answered my questions about fair and fairness, or the distribution of taxes. Your graph just points out results, but doesn’t say anything about why and leaves one to make their own decisions about fairness, which people won’t address, just project their opinions about it, but no explanation. It’s a two way street. Fairness is whatever you think it is, as is Equal. Is one group paying 70% if all taxes, equal?
Interesting philosophy, good luck with it…
Then define it for me. It’s the 3rd or 4th time I asked that and no one will. To many it means “equal” especially if it fits their agenda. So, is it “fair” that 70% of the taxes are paid by 5% of the people? Obviously, you think that’s fair, but maybe I don’t. Does that make me wrong? If you want to define “fair” as “equal” then you are espousing a Flat Tax, so everyone pays the same rate, including the 50% that don’t pay taxes. It’s your philosophy that is causing the problem here. You won’t explain yours, but criticize me for mine. It’s looking more like you fall into that the Rich don’t pay their fair share slogan that President Obama preached. And, that’s OK, but explain it and support it. I know where you are coming from, bc you and many like you just complain and accuse, but have nothing to offer or won’t support it. What I’ve said is very sound, whether you agree with it or not. I’m just stating facts, it’s you that are being philosophical. Correct me then! Maybe you can convince me that fair is one class carrying the burden for the other 95%. I’m open. I’m all ears. Just if you have to use graphs, support yourself with them. I’m more than aware of what your graphs represent, but they don’t prove anything.
Are choosing to ignore the fact that Federal Income taxes are only one piece of the total tax pie? The other 95% pay a much larger percentage of their incomes on Social Security, Medicare, state, local, real estate, embedded corporate taxes, etc. When all the taxes are added up, the other 95% could well pay a larger percentage of their take home than the ultra-rich.
Agreed, tl;dr
OK… I’ll use my original post in this thread as an example of what is not fair. I said that Grantor Retained Annuity Trusts (GRATS) gave the richest of the rich an unfair advantage over people not in that category.
The reason that is so, is that in order to take advantage of a GRAT, you must first have an asset capable of earning enough to offset the $2K to $20K or more of the initial cost of establishing the GRAT. The asset must remain in the GRAT for a time certain and in that time period you cannot touch it. After that specified time the asset is returned to you plus a cash amount determined by the IRS section 7250 interest rate which is tied to the Federal Midterm rate which is currently around 4.5%.
The average taxpayer does not have access to resources that will sustain start-up expenses of two to twenty thousand dollars to save paying taxes on 50% to 90% of their net worth.
In my opinion that is not fair. And GRATs used by the ultra-rich in this country cost our government $100B and that $100B is added to our national debt which is the responsibility of ALL taxpayers to pay off, That includes you and me.
Your opening statement in post #16 in this thread stated "What I don’t understand is this obsession with Wealthy people. They have access to the exact same laws, tax or otherwise, that everyone else is subject to. "
I disagree with you. So please explain how the use of GRATs are fair to all taxpayers.
Of course they could pay more, but is that Fair that they pay for everyone else? You still dodge the questions. Be honest and say you want the rich to pay for everything. You and many others are big fans of Karl Marx, and how has that turned out for them? I gather you think it’s fair for us responsible people that paid our own school debt should pay for the others who made bad choices for their college education. Is that fair? If I had to guess, I’d say you would think it’s fair. Will you help me pay for my mortgage since I bought more house than I could afford? Socialism is good as long as you have rich people to pay for it. That’s a strange look at Fairness.
I’ll be brutally honest and say I never said any such thing… and I’d appreciate it greatly if you ceased to put words or ideas in my mouth or head.
What I will say is that the super-wealthy have the ability to take advantage of federal income tax laws that they’ve helped tailor over the decades allowing them to accumulate even more wealth… perfectly legal and not via loopholes. It’s legislation that the super-wealthy have pretty much bought and paid for. They are the political donor class after all.
I don’t think could argue that that share of the nation’s wealth hasn’t been gradually shifting toward the already well-fixed. If you consider our legislated tax codes punishing, give me a few million and I’ll sign me up for the beating.
I never accused you of saying anything. And, who gave these so-called wealthy millions of dollars? That is part of the problem. They earned their money, but some think it was some kind of a gift. Do you realize the inherited wealth usually runs out in about 3 generations, sometimes less? That’s because most of those that get it never earned it. That’s why the welfare state makes more poor people not less. The problem is you say nothing! I have to guess at what you are hinting around with the few words you do say. This is the first time you actually said something that makes sense. I never argued that there isn’t a wealth gap and that it’s widening, but I will disagree on what causes it. There are no tax laws that are made so the wealthy can get wealthier. If there are I’ll tell you the Democrats make them. The Republicans are for lower taxes, any cuts are across the board and tax revenue is always up when the Republicans are in office, especially when they have lowered rates. Listen to the MSM and you want hear that, but look at the records and it is the truth. Besides Wealth and Income are two different things. And I don’t disagree that the wealthy as you call them, could pay more, but when they pay 95% of the income taxes, do you really want all of their income? Chances are they will quit producing income and retire on their wealth, unless you believe as many people do that their wealth belongs to you as well, you being collective? The wealth gap isn’t growing because the rich are getting richer, but the others are getting poorer. Do you really think this inflation is hurting the wealthy like it hurts the regular person? Our government created most all of the issues that keep people from getting ahead. Just as I mentioned before, those 87k new armed IRS agents aren’t targeting high-income earners and corporations. They are going to squeeze it out of you and me and the small businesses out there. If they could get more from the others, don’t you think they would? The country has a huge Spending Problem, not an income problem. The government has created all of this mess in the name of helping the little guy, and you cannot show me anywhere the little guy is better off. You can believe it’s the mean ol’ conservatives that have done that if that makes you feel better, but it isn’t true. I’m not arguing about what you feel, but why it’s that way? If you take all of the wealthy’s wealth, we could run the government for 3-4 months. Then what? Too many people believe money comes from the government, but it comes from the Productive people in the country. Why haven’t you argued that a Flat tax is fair? Everyone pays the exact same tax rate, but you don’t, you just blame them for being wealthy and productive. If you actually look at where politicians’ wealth comes from it may surprise you. Why did the WH bail out a poorly run bank SVB, and not the smaller one that Goldman bought? There are reasons for that. The SVB depositors were huge donors to the President. He violated the law to bail them out. Why? That’s all I’m trying to point out. Blaming the rich guy is a nowhere game and just plays into the hands of the politicians so they never have to take the blame. Sure there are a lot of laws that could be changed, but who has had control of it for the past 5-10 years, and nothing has been done? We have to vote for better people and change our thinking of being productive, and not just a user. We need more productive people to narrow that gap and it can be narrowed. I’m with you on that. I’m not in the top 2%, but I am above the bottom 50%. The opportunities are there. Why do you think so many foreign people want to come here? It’s bc they see the potential and don’t envy those who have made it, but use them as encouragement and motivation. It’s all in the way you choose to see it.
You are incorrect, here is where the added tax collection effort is going: (linked to sources)
That’s exactly what I said! The 87k armed IRS agents aren’t coming after the Wealthy and High-income earners, that are targeting us and small businesses. I don’t know about you, but I make <$400k/year. And, just another tidbit is an IRS study from a few years ago said that most individual taxpayers Overpay their taxes bc they are afraid of the IRS or don’t have people do their taxes for them. The Ultra-wealthy are constantly being audited by the IRS. Some big corporations literally have IRS agents in their offices constantly.
I suggest you read my post #52 one more time. It says the IRS is NOT going to increase audits for filers with LESS than $400,000 per year.
Actually, it says that twice!
She just suggested they aren’t and there is nothing in the bill that authorizes the 87k armed IRS agent that limits them. She claims to not require it, but doesn’t say they cannot. Remember the Lois Lerner IRS targeting of conservative groups. They will do whatever they think the leadership wants. Even the ex-IRS agents call BS on it. So why go the been to hire that many more agents to target the group ghat is already targeted? Why do the need to be armed if they are auditing the ultra-wealthy m, which is being audited already. Do you think Gary need guns to audit Warren Buffet? The people you believe are the targets have professionals doing their taxes who know more about the tax laws than these agents. Not much more to get there. The only place to even get the extra money they claim is there is from the average person and that’s why they need the guns. Can you trust an IRS that comes to your home using false names and on false pretenses? Can you trust an IRS that specifically targets a president’s political rivals? While you are correct, I misstated what she said, but responded based on the only thing that makes any logical sense. The numbers don’t add up and her rhetoric rings hollow. I know too many people who have had experience with the IRS bullies. The IRS has a very dark history of not following the rules. I truly hope you are correct, but a dollar to a donut that I’m much closer to the truth than you are. The numbers do not add up. Why spend billions for excess armed agent while the IRS is running on Widows XP? Something else is going on.
Maybe you should read it a third time:
and…
Try cleaning the lens of your reading glasses…
Don’t be so gullible. She has no constitutional authority to order anything. There is nothing codified in the new law that will not allow the IRS to go after those with less that 400k income. The “directive” is little more than a suggestion. Even if she did have the authority will next Secretary of Treasury have the same “directive”?
Ok then answer this… what is the penalty if a new IRS agent targets an income of less than 400k?
Thanks for the tip. But, I don’t trust her for one second, and try answering someone else’s questions sometime. I’ll believe it when I see it. You can dish it out, but you cannot take it!
There simply aren’t enough people making over 400k to justify the expense of 87k new IRS agents.
I couldn’t find the exact data, but this is close (latest IRS info is 2020):
Seems like around 2.5M tax payers at $400k and above. So that would be 1 new IRS agent for every 30 people.