Why do rich people complain about paying more taxes when they control most of the money???

[DEAD7]

I'm not going to tell you. As much as you talk about taxes, you should damn well know why a person who makes 200K's whole income is not taxed at 33%. I'm going to give you 24 hours to research it. If you still don't know at 4:05 pm eastern time tomorrow, I'll tell you.

Nobody else reading this tell him please.

off by 10k.

The arguments put forth after still stand.

Ill share for clarity,
at a single individual taxpayer's income of $200,000 using current rates .

So, income between $0 and $8,700 is taxed at a marginal rate of 10 percent—and the tax owed is $870 for that bracket. Then income moves into a new marginal tax rate of 15 percent as it grows above $8,700 with a top of $35,500. That tax due on that income of $26,650—$35,350 minus $8,700—is $3,997.50.

The next income bracket $35,350 to $85,650 is taxed at 25 percent. So, the amount owed for this bracket—$85,650 minus $35,350 for a total of taxable income of $50,300—is $12,575.

The second to last bracket for the $200,000 salary has a marginal rate of 28 percent. So as we use the formula, the tax required for this comes out to $26,040 as we subtracted $85,650 from $178,650 to get the taxable income of $93,000.

So the last bracket and tax rate for the $200,000 salary is 33 percent. To figure how much income is taxed at that rate, we subtract $178,000 from $200,000 for a figure of $21,300. At 33 percent, the taxes owed on that $21,300 is $7,045.

So the total tax due is $50,527.50 on an income of $200,000.


please highlight the errors.

 

[DEAD7]

Thats not even what the discussion is about.


but it sounds like @Mephistopheles doesnt think 130-140 is rich either, which why he clung on to that figure so tightly...

 

[Trip]

No we're not. Again, I'm asking you where did you come up with that 130K number? I suspect you're in the same boat of ignorance on how income is taxed in America as DEAD7.

You're making up your own argument now



the 130k number was after taxes total. My question was why raise the income tax on that guy when after taxes(everything) he isn't nearly as well off as he seems.

 

[Serious]

subs....

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

off by 10k.

The arguments put forth after still stand.

Ill share for clarity,
at a single individual taxpayer's income of $200,000 using current rates .

So, income between $0 and $8,925 is taxed at a marginal rate of 10 percent—and the tax owed is $892.5 for that bracket. Then income moves into a new marginal tax rate of 15 percent as it grows above $8,925 with a top of $36,250. That tax due on that income of $27,325—$36,250 minus $8,700—is $4098.75.

The next income bracket $36,250 to $87,850 is taxed at 25 percent. So, the amount owed for this bracket—$87,850 minus $36,250 for a total of taxable income of $51,600—is $12,900.

The second to last bracket for the $200,000 salary has a marginal rate of 28 percent. So as we use the formula, the tax required for this comes out to $26,712 as we subtracted $87,850 from $183,250 to get the taxable income of $95,400.

So the last bracket and tax rate for the $200,000 salary is 33 percent. To figure how much income is taxed at that rate, we subtract $183,250 from $200,000 for a figure of $16,750. At 33 percent, the taxes owed on that $16750 is $5527.50.

So the total tax due is $50,130.75 on an income of $200,000.

I highlighted your errors in green.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/moneybu...deral-income-tax-brackets-and-marginal-rates/

Someone who makes 200K pays an effective incomes tax rate of 25%, not 33%.

And that is just single filers who are married with no kids. If you have any kids, you don't even hit the top marginal rate making 200K a year.

Single people with no kids who make 200K per year have to pay an income tax rate of 25%. The unspeakable horror!

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

You're making up your own argument now



the 130k number was after taxes total. My question was why raise the income tax on that guy when after taxes(everything) he isn't nearly as well off as he seems.

Finally you said where you got 130K from. That's my point. 130K is not the total after taxes. 150K is. You don't know how income is taxed.

At least DEAD7 picked up on it. You're just clueless. Why do conservatives who whine about taxes never even know how they work? That's my experience on sohh/the coli at least.

 

[Type Username Here]

Single people with no kids who make 200K per year have to pay an income tax rate of 25%. The unspeakable horror!

My god...

How...how...how... will they survive?

 

[Trip]

That's my point, dummy. 130K is not the total after taxes. 150K is. You don't know income is taxed.

At least DEAD7 picked up on it. You're just clueless.

a difference in 20k. Congratulations and hats off- you got me Mr Wizard!

Point still stands. And even then- the 150 could fluctuate depending what you're paying in property taxes.

 

[DEAD7]

My god...

How...how...how... will they survive?

the question is are they "rich" at 150k?

Here in Cali, absolutely not. You'd be extremely well off here in the central valley but in San Francisco

 

[Trip]

My god...

How...how...how... will they survive?

Who's saying they wont though? That's good money. This was never a difference of life and death. What's wrong with that income tax # as it currently stands? Not to generalize but a single guy making 200k has probably done pretty decently for himself.

 

[Type Username Here]

the question is are they "rich" at 150k?

Here in Cali, absolutely not. You'd be extremely well off here in the central valley but in San Francisco

I already suggested above that the rate should depend on locale. Use the Military's COLA standard or something like it.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

Thats not even what the discussion is about.

but it sounds like @Mephistopheles doesnt think 130-140 is rich either, which why he clung on to that figure so tightly...

Nah, I just think people arguing taxable income should know how it's calculated lol.

Regarding what I consider "rich," I could care less because that's just semantics. But I don't see a problem with someone making 200k per year paying an income tax rate of 25% before deductions.

In my perfect world, they would perhaps pay less because I'd get rid of loopholes for corporations and the ultra-rich, raise capital gains taxes, end a lot of subsidies, and put in financial transaction taxes. But I'm not going to lose any sleep over single people making 200k paying 25% income with all the other ways the poor and middle class is getting fukked over in this country, sorry.

 

[the cac mamba]

200,000 after the 33% income tax comes out to only 130-140 thousand... I don't consider that rich...

 

[The 2020 New Member]

200,000 after the 33% income tax comes out to only 130-140 thousand... I don't consider that rich...

that is almost 10x what i made last year i got by. i think that it's rich. is it insanely wealthy? of course, not.

 

[Brown_Pride]

Nah, I just think people arguing taxable income should know how it's calculated lol.

Regarding what I consider "rich," I could care less because that's just semantics. But I don't see a problem with someone making 200k per year paying an income tax rate of 25% before deductions.

In my perfect world, they would perhaps pay less because I'd get rid of loopholes for corporations and the ultra-rich, raise capital gains taxes, end a lot of subsidies, and put in financial transaction taxes. But I'm not going to lose any sleep over single people making 200k paying 25% income with all the other ways the poor and middle class is getting fukked over in this country, sorry.

Exactly. 150k a year for a SINGLE person is rich i don't care what city you live in. That's "doctor" money. Hell i'd argue a married couple making 150k a year after taxes is bordering that "rich" line depending on where you're at.

Anytime you're making "doctor money" you're rich. So if you live in NY and make what a doctor makes in NY then you're rioch biotch.