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

Skip to comments.

Are You Rich? $92,000.00 Puts You in Top 10%
The Tax Foundation ^ | The Tax Foundation

Posted on 01/07/2003 3:32:10 PM PST by Weimdog

Newest Data Show High-Income Taxpayers Earning and Paying More

Top 25 Percent Paid 84 Percent of Income Taxes; Top One Paid 37.4 Percent

According to preliminary data released by the Internal Revenue Service and a new Tax Foundation Special Report, the top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers earned more than two-thirds of the nation's income (67.3%) and paid more than five out of every six dollars collected by the federal income tax (84%) in 2000. There were 32 million tax returns in the top 25 percent, all with adjusted gross incomes (AGI) over $55,225.

The top one percent of U.S. taxpayers (annual income over $313,469) made 20.8 percent of the income earned in 2000 and paid 37.4 percent of the total federal individual income taxes collected that year. This fraction of the tax burden paid by the top one percent - well over a third of the total - is up from 25.1 percent ten years earlier in tax year 1990.

At the other end of the income spectrum, the bottom 50 percent of the nation's taxpayers earned only 13.0 percent of all income in 2000, but they paid an even smaller fraction of the federal individual income taxes collected - 3.9 percent.

The data come from Tax Foundation Special Report No. 118, titled, "Who Pays the Federal Individual Income Tax?" by economist David Hoffman.

"Americans at the upper end of the income scale continue to bear an increasing share of the total federal individual income tax burden," observed Hoffman. "In a progressive tax system like ours, economic growth inevitably results in a steady shifting of the tax burden up the income scale. Although the current economic slowdown did begin in 2000, the annual growth rate for that year was still 5 percent, so a higher percentage of tax collections came in from high earners."

As the table shows, the top five percent of income earners (adjusted gross income over $128,336) and the top 10 percent (adjusted gross income over $92,114) both pay a significantly greater portion of federal individual income taxes than they did a decade ago.

(Excerpt) Read more at taxfoundation.org ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: taxes; wealth
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-119 next last
To: Weimdog
Only The Rich Pay Taxes

Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.09% of Income Taxes

(October 23, 2002 Rushlinbaugh.com)

The IRS has released the year 2000 data for individual income tax returns. The numbers illustrate a truth that will startle you: that half of Americans with the highest incomes pays 96.09% of all income tax. This nukes the liberal lie that the rich don't pay taxes.

The top 1%, who earn 20.81% of all income covered under the income tax, are paying 37.42% of the federal tax bite.

(*Data covers calendar year 2000, not fiscal year 2000 - and includes all income, not just wages, excluding Social Security.)

Think of it this way: less than four dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners.

Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires."

The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $26,000 and up in 1999. (The top 1% earned $293,000-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives - and those who don't want to, aren't.

Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:
Top 5% - 56.47% of all income taxes; Top 10% - 67.33% of all income taxes; Top 25% - 84.01% of all income taxes.

Top 50% - 96.09% of all income taxes.</>

The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.91% of all income taxes. The top 1% is paying more than ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%!

And who earns what? The top 1% earns 20.81% of all income. The top 5% earns 35.30% of the pie. The top 10% earns 46.01%; the top 25% earns 67.15%, and the top 50% earns 87.01% of all the income.

The Rich Earned Their Dough, They Didn't Inherit It (Except Ted Kennedy)

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.

I had a conversation with a woman who identified herself as Misty on Wednesday. She claimed to be an accountant, yet she seemed unaware of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which now ensures that everyone pays some taxes.

AP reports that the AMT, "designed in 1969 to ensure 155 wealthy people paid some tax," will hit "about 2.6 million of us this year and 36 million by 2010." That's because the tax isn't indexed for inflation! If your salary today would've made you mega-rich in '69, that's how you're taxed.

Misty tried the old line that all wealth is inherited. Not true. John Weicher, as a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank, wrote in his February 13, 1997 Washington Post Op-Ed, "Most of the rich have earned their wealth... Looking at the Fortune 400, quite a few even of the very richest people came from a standing start, while others inherited a small business and turned it into a giant corporation."

What's happening here is not that "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer." The numbers prove it.

I have made an executive decision as the owner and ultimate editor of this website that this table and these numbers stay on this website forever - or until next year's numbers come out. In order to get these facts, you have to see them each and every day. This story, along with a link to the IRS chart, will stay somewhere on the RushLimbaugh.com homepage so everyone can see and find these numbers at any time. It's crucial that people get this, so please, share it with a friend now!

"Highlights mine-- YD"

21 posted on 01/07/2003 3:59:54 PM PST by yankeedame
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
$92,000 minus income tax, state tax, property tax, tax on everything else imaginable, mortgage, utilities, food, other bills, charity to your kids, etc. etc., leaves not much. Rich? Surely they jest. More like middle class hard workers, at least here in pricey California.
22 posted on 01/07/2003 4:00:02 PM PST by janetgreen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brett66
The only difference between a family earning $50,000 a year and one earning $100,000 is the former lives in a $130,000 house and drives a Corolla while the later lives in a $225,000 house and drivesa Camry. Both have nothing left after taxes, mortgage, car payments, etc.
23 posted on 01/07/2003 4:00:03 PM PST by seamas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dead
Woohoo! I'm rich!!

Cool beans. I'll hit you up for a couple samolians.

You all better hope I'm never rich; it looks like the only way that'll ever happen is if the bottom falls out of the dollar.

24 posted on 01/07/2003 4:09:53 PM PST by Physicist (almost making more per year than he still owes in student loans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: seamas
Recall the Clinton / Gore explanation for why somebody making $100K per year is a rich "millionaire" is because, after 10 years, they'd have made a million doolars. Notice that while the cost of living goes up their definition of rich keeps going down.
25 posted on 01/07/2003 4:10:06 PM PST by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
As of 2000, if you have a household income of $92K, you're rich!

Jeeez! I wish ya hadn't told me that....
(Now I'm depressed)

26 posted on 01/07/2003 4:10:42 PM PST by Fiddlstix (Hooray! The tag line is Back! (Way To Go, John!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
If you can count your money, your not rich...
27 posted on 01/07/2003 4:11:06 PM PST by antaresequity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
I have developed a strategy designed to enable W. to win about 90% of the black vote in the next election....First, introduce a bill raising the top income tax rate to 80% on incomes over $ one million..then as soon as the Dems fall over themselves passing it....introduce a bill providing one million in reparations to all blacks.....and oh yeah..reparations are taxable....doncha know..
28 posted on 01/07/2003 4:13:13 PM PST by ken5050
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
NO, that is the figure for a couple filing a joint return.
29 posted on 01/07/2003 4:13:14 PM PST by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
Woooeee Martha, we're rich!
30 posted on 01/07/2003 4:13:57 PM PST by Republic of Texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
I became rich the day I met my lady ....
31 posted on 01/07/2003 4:15:44 PM PST by clamper1797
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: janetgreen
The 92K was AGI. Some of the expenses you mentioned are already deducted to arrive at that figure.
32 posted on 01/07/2003 4:17:00 PM PST by Theyknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
Treasury Department website and confirm for yourself.

1999 IRS DATA
LEVELS---- EARNINGS------TAX RATE------GROUP SHARE
Top 1%------293 K + -----------27.5% ------------36% (1.26 mil)
Top 5%-----121 K +-------------24.2%-------------55% (6.3 mil)
Bottom 50%------27 K --------- 4.5%--------------4% (63 mil)
Top 50%--------- 27 K +--------16.4%-------------96% (63 mil)

This quick reference may dispel the myths about who pays the taxes. The liberals are spinning unbelievable lies about who pays the Federal Income tax along with Pelosi's Trojan Horse it is really disgusting. All are saying that the Bush tax cuts are for the wealthy, they are once again making fools of themselvs.

33 posted on 01/07/2003 4:17:24 PM PST by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog; WhyisaTexasgirlinPA
So a fireman married to a teacher=rich. And these are the "wrong" people.

The dims are pathetic. I so wish the masses had a little reasoning ability, and would uniformly send the dims packing.

34 posted on 01/07/2003 4:17:55 PM PST by SeeRushToldU_So
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bushpilot
If we can make do....why cant every one else.

Because not everyone has your fiscal prudence! Congrats by the way.

35 posted on 01/07/2003 4:20:28 PM PST by spetznaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
Great post...let's not forget that the gubmint has been establishing a "rich" category thru press releases & so called "studies" for some years now (anyone recall the early-mid 90s when the dividing line was reported as $100,000?)
Gub's apparently ignoring its past figures (reverse inflation??)but the goal is clearly the same: establish a figure and work tax increases from there...people are too jealous of those they think are 'the rich'/'the top 10%', etc. to ask: "Who, exactly, are these well-off people you say we should tax more heavily?"
We have met da rich & them am us.



36 posted on 01/07/2003 4:21:44 PM PST by nastypumps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
I took in less than fifteen grand last year.
Paid over fifty G in various taxes.

That's because I'm rich.
37 posted on 01/07/2003 4:24:04 PM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeeRushToldU_So
92K is NOT rich in Bucks County PA....lol...... I wish it was though.........
38 posted on 01/07/2003 4:24:11 PM PST by WhyisaTexasgirlinPA ((Snow.....why am I in PA?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Weimdog
What if youre spending that much but youre not sure if youre making that much?
39 posted on 01/07/2003 4:26:01 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antaresequity
If you can count your money, your not rich...

I think Alfred Kinsey once defined a sex maniac as someone who was having more sex than you were. Something similar applies to wealth too, I bet.
40 posted on 01/07/2003 4:27:00 PM PST by NukeMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-119 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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