Your first example has aggregate after tax profit from all layers at almost 65% ($42.93 out of $66.44). Even the second one with far reduced profits has the aggregate after tax profit as 43%. Total corporate profits as a percentage of the GDP are around 10% (or maybe a little less). And I would need to check if that amount is before tax or after tax.
If you include the 80% aggregate cost of domestic labor and accumulate the employer's half of SS and Medicare on that, you'll get an embedded tax figure closer to the 8% I calculated. If you add together the employee's half of payroll taxes and the employee's income tax you'll get a figure close to Jorgenson's 22%.
If you include the 80% aggregate cost of domestic labor and accumulate the employer's half of SS and Medicare on that, you'll get an embedded tax figure closer to the 8% I calculated. If you add together the employee's half of payroll taxes and the employee's income tax you'll get a figure close to Jorgenson's 22%.
Actually Jorgenson's remarks as regards his 1996 Ways&Means testimony, which is what this all refers to, only accounts only for a generic NRST that replaces income taxes alone, and does nothing as regards SS/Medicare taxes.
According to Jorgenson's later characterisation much of the real gain arises from efficiency gains in reducing deadweight losses that are part & parcel with the high marginal tax rates of the 1996 graduated income tax that his model implemented a NRST replacement for.
For the discussion of these hidden taxes a aggregate profits is a meaningless concept. Each level is considered as an entity. You have misunderstood the example and what it represents since labor is included as part of the net profit determination and does not need to be separately presented. Remember it is not "aggregate profits" or even "aggregate taxes" we are talking about but the taxes that cascade from level to level by being embedded in the price mechanism for each level.
The term "tax cost as % of sell price" at the end of the cascaded chain is the amount that could be removed without the income tax. Note that this is an example of the mechanism involved. The numbers used are not presented as and sort of representative number. That's why I urge others to use the example with numbers they believe are valid. It is the hidden tax mechanism that is important here.
In addition, corporate taxes or profits are not being discussed as I said in the example, but business taxes or profits since there are many other business entities other than corporations. Also profits as a percentage of GDP are not meaningful to the discussion either since taxes are calculated and paid on the particular businesses profits subject to tax and the tax rate that pertains. FYI, in 2001 the average corporate major industry tax rate was 34.3% for Form 1120 filers of that category.
I think you also missed the comment in the example that payroll/withholding taxes are not included in the example (nor are compliance cocts) - only business income taxes.