Related Posts
Is Life Insurance a scam?
Why or why not?
More Posts
I hate taxes
Additional Posts in Partners Only
Do we get dividends over vested RSUs?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I think the broader point is that well compensated professionals (let’s say HHI between 500k-2m) are paying a much higher effective rate than the true capitalist class like your hedgies and high earners off w2. I have no problem paying more but I would like to think that those with the means should pay more in general. This entire debate really hits w2 earners hard. I also assume big4 k1 types as well.
There’s not a problem with capital formation in this country. So no reason to subsidize it. There is a problem with ensuring adequate retirement savings in this country. So there’s plenty of reason to provide tax advantaged investment accounts through which I own nearly all of my equity investments and thus capital gains taxes are irrelevant to me.
Furthermore, you wouldn’t be “penalized for responsible behavior” — making the capital gains rates equal to other income just removes a subsidy. Working hard at a job is just as responsible a behavior as investing in equities.
I’m glad to see all the benevolent partners posting here. Taxes suck. They suck for everyone. And they disincent success. But you guys go right ahead and think we’re “doing our fair share”. I assure you, there are far more people (not to mention our clients) getting away with no tax bills, while we are paying more.
EY2, do you have any highly compensated partners or friends in France? It happens.
You’re right. It doesn’t come across well. You’re not “upper middle class” if you’re above the 99th percentile in household income.
But agree that the IRS budget needs to be massively increased to chase tax cheats among the megarich
OP that is a delusional interpretation of upper class by any measure. Do you also think lower class is < $200k and the poverty line is < $100k?
Coach
I am reading the details now (on WSJ). Ouch.
That said, I don’t think anyone on this thread/bowl is “upper middle” class.
Just taking it like a champ here.
Whoops! I got that backwards… Marginal rate increase is greater than total rate increase
I already caught it in the shorts with the SALT BS.
I have a real problem with dramatic & sudden
changes to tax structures after I committed a serious amount of capital based on the structure being something else. Income tax changes are one thing, but real estate is something else.
OP, let's be clear, we are rich.
My wife and I make $600K+ combined and would probably call ourselves rich by common standards. Read an interesting article recently on whether “rich” should be defined by income in the top 1% or assets in the top 1%. The taxation policies seem to be socking the income earner class harder than the asset accumulator class. I consider myself
socially liberal and fiscally conservative. I’d like to see SALT deduction reinstated in full. It is wrong to tax income that has gone towards paying other taxes.
The issue I have with the DEMs is they think throwing money at a problem is the solution (e.g., education, child care, healthcare, unemployment,infrastructure) and they never bother solving anything. And ofcourse, raise taxes to waste more money. The other bunch of REPs thinks cutting taxes, running up deficits, denying societal problems is the way to go. We need bold ideas like the moonshot to spur innovation and light up the imagination of next generation to solve hard challenges ahead. We cannot raise or cut taxes enough to bring about the next round of prosperity.
Companies and super rich will always find ways to avoid taxes .. hire lobbyists and tax consultants. The real targets of the “tax the rich” rhetoric are income earners like us. Look at what’s missing from legislation .. wealth tax, financial transaction tax, carried interest loophole, 1031 exchange or closing corporate tax loopholes like stock option expensing, minimum corporate tax. Between the progressive taxation of higher income and regressive taxation of consumption, the current tax policies are heavily skewed to benefit the ultra wealthy class who should be paying more. I did the math on our total tax burden (federal, FICA, state income, sales, property) is somewhere between 33% and 40% of what we earn. I think it ought to be more like 30% to be considered fair and equitable.
I have no problem paying high taxes. I benefit from government services more than low income earners because the subsidize a lot of the infrastructure that makes it possible for my wife and I to have the income we do. My only problem is that they keep going after salaried employees instead of closing the bullshit loopholes that the ultra wealthy use, like carried interest. My basic principle is that the more you make the higher the tax on your marginal dollar should be. That’s true until you get to the ultra wealthy at which point there’s a huge drop off and they pay a lower rate than many middle income families.
Stop shaming her. OP has courage for speaking up and is correct, the new tax proposals are aimed too low.
Pointing out a fallacy over the definition of rich is not shaming. Claiming that 2.9% of the difference between $535K and $600K is going to kill her is also hyperbole.
Wait, what does “kill us” mean quantitatively?
Wife and I make about $550K. I just plugged the numbers I found online into my tax planner spreadsheet and got an increase of $460. That feels pretty ‘meh’ to me.
What’s driving the increased tax burden you’re worried about? How much is it?
The latest proposal starts at $535K.
I don’t much care about most of my income getting taxed by another 2.6%. It’s a meaningful sum, but I’ll be plenty fine without it.
My bigger objection isn’t with how much of my money the government takes. It’s that they do such a garbage job of spending it wisely. And the Biden administration is no more interested in being serious stewards of my money than the Trump administration was (or the various administrations that came before them).
Yes - most of my income will be subject to an added 2.6%.
The majority of my household income resides in the space between $450K and my total household income.
I bet Jeff Bezos calls himself extra upper middle class
Can the “the taxes are unbelievable” people help me understand that POV? It seems we are living in the golden era of taxes for people making over 200k; let’s alone 400k. Perhaps I’m missing something…
Pwc3, in the 1800s the mean time between recessions was under 5 years, very few went to school, apprenticeship was only a small step beyond servitude for 10 years, medical was done only for the rich or through charity, starvation was a major cause of death.
The government was funded heavily by tariffs which are simply hidden taxes on consumers.
I'd hate to have been alive then, or in the current equivalent.
Crazy how many people here are happy to just fork over more money to the government. Boiling frog syndrome?
The quality of the political analysis here is not good.
The Trump administration was very antipharma. HHS was run by a guy who was fired by pharma and he was widely known to be vindictive about it. They had proposed various forms of price control themselves using broad “pilot” authority within CMS.
Meanwhile, price negotiation already exists in much of the government business. Medicare Part D drugs have price negotiation and discounting is substantial - just run through private entities. And Medicaid has access to the best prices that pharma negotiates with anyone.
The problem is that when people say the government should “negotiate,” what they really mean is that government should “dictate.” That’s clearly the intent behind the actual legislation sitting in the house.
Believe what you want about drug prices. I’ll just note that the social return on investment in pharma R&D is massive. Had the kinds of price controls envisioned in house bill HR3 been passed into law 10 years ago, we wouldn’t have had mRNA vaccines today. That one innovation is worth trillions of dollars annually to society. It seems like a strange time to be complaining about us not getting a good enough deal on pharma stuff.
You mean the 2.6 pp increase on income above 450k?
I agree, this doesn’t come off well at all. And no, you are not upper middle class by any measure.
Mentor
Really? It’s going to kill you?
I’m more worried about this reduction in the death tax amount, yikes!
OP, I feel the same way you do. Top 4.99% of earners (professionals and small/mid-size businesses) will take brunt of the blow, while the 0.1% will find loopholes and minimize impact (BIL works in private banking, they already have options for ultra rich).
$600K is nowhere near the middle class, not even the hairy upper edge. Come on.
Friends of mine are considering divorce because marriage penalty is REAL.
And yes, MD5, married filing separately is a penalty. But it was designed that way as that filing status is intended for people who are married but not really cooperating financially (e.g. legally separated) and therefore aren’t acting like a single family unit. Therefore they’re taxed as separate units. The filing status can be used for other reasons than it was created for if you want, but then you get the penalty that comes with it.