Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GodGunsGuts; Brad Cloven

The lower line in the graph shows that the amount of income Messrs. Piketty and Saez attribute to the top 1% accounted for 10.6% of personal income in 2004. That 10.6% figure looks much higher than it was in 1980. Yet most of that increase was, as they explained, "concentrated in two years, 1987 and 1988, just after the Tax Reform Act of 1986." As Mr. Saez added, "It seems clear that the sharp, and unprecedented, increase in incomes from 1986 to 1988 is related to the large decrease in marginal tax rates that happened exactly during those years.".....

The top line in the graph shows how much of the top 1%'s income came from business profits. In 1981, only 7.8% of the income attributed to the top 1% came from business, because, as Mr. Saez explained, "the standard C-corporation form was more advantageous for high-income individual owners because the top individual tax rate was much higher than the corporate tax rate and taxes on capital gains were relatively low." More businesses began to file under the individual tax when individual tax rates came down in 1983. This trend became a stampede in 1987-1988 when the business share of top percentile income suddenly increased by 10 percentage points. The business share increased again in recent years, accounting for 28.4% of the top 1%'s income in 2004.

As was well-documented years ago by economists Roger Gordon and Joel Slemrod, a great deal of the apparent increase in reported high incomes has been due to "tax shifting." That is, lower individual tax rates induced thousands of businesses to shift from filing under the corporate tax system to filing under the individual tax system, often as limited liability companies or Subchapter S corporations.

The Top 1% . . . of What?

22 posted on 12/18/2006 9:06:36 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (If you agree with EPI, you're not a conservative!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: Toddsterpatriot

Thanks for the cite and support.


36 posted on 12/18/2006 9:24:20 AM PST by Uncle Miltie (Heads up, people! The Nazis are back. They're more numerous and gearing up with atomic weapons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Your article may explain some of the gains in the top 1%, but the problem with your article is it does not address what's been happening across the board. As you can see from the following graph, income gains have been declining in all income brackets, and this is especially so in the middle and lower classes. I contend this is so because they are locked in a losing labor arbitrage battle with places like Red China:


45 posted on 12/18/2006 9:51:03 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Somebody has a lot of studying to do before she earns her degree...

51 posted on 12/18/2006 10:19:57 AM PST by Fan of Fiat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Toddsterpatriot

bttt


107 posted on 12/18/2006 5:49:45 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Income is very different from wealth. Actually if you are wealthy enough (independently wealthy) you do not need income.

"In 2001 top 5% owned 60% of national wealth, while bottom 60% owned 4%"

152 posted on 12/18/2006 7:10:59 PM PST by A. Pole (John McCain: "Pick lettuce!" - http://projectusa.org/db/forums/lettucepickers100.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson