“Starting on Aug. 1, the state will begin to capture the boost in the income tax for 2011 approved by lawmakers in May, which is retroactive to the beginning of the calendar year.
Single and joint filers earning $50,000 a year will see about $200 in additional withholding through December, as will joint filers earning $100,000. Single filers making $100,000 will see about $605 disappear from their paychecks.
It starts to jump up for joint filers at the $125,000 level when $510 in additional taxes will be taken out to make up for the seven months that the new rates were in effect, but not yet collected.
At the top end, if your adjusted gross income is $1 million, by the end of December, you will have contributed $17,400 more to the state of Connecticut, while those hauling in $2 million in salary, will send in some $19,400 in additional taxes.”
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
Taxes in the US are too low. You all need to wake up and get a dose of reality. Pay your bills, pay down your debt and stfu. BTW, gas prices in the US are also low relative to the rest of the world.
Outsider, find me one, just one example, where a tax increase was used not for more spending, but instead to pay down debt. Just one.
doesn’t appear that drastically different from the rest of the world to me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world
gas prices are fairly reasonable around the world too.
America has an excellent history of booming in the 1900s with minimal taxes and very high production. General electric, ford motor, railroad companies, real estate, etc.
If Congress controls the House and spending how are the Dems/POTUS gonna spend added tax revenues without the House approving the expeditures?
They won’t. Lord willing, the GOP will agree to lower the overall tax rate but broaden the tax base by reducing and eliminating some tax loopholes. Fuck, I hope they get rid of the damn ethanol subsidies.
Their will be adjustments in taxes that will result in increased revenues but it fucking better not be through just increased tax rates.
I’m all for eliminating the loopholes. Damn tired of the U.S. gov’t picking winners and losers and playing favorites with the tax code.
I would rather they open up tax loopholes to everyone instead of closing it for the rich. Some loopholes are actually very productive at least in theory. For example, there are loopholes that reward accredited investors via tax credits and tax deduction so they might invest $100,000 and get $20,000 back immediately to invest in oil exploration. This helps influence the direction of capital flows so that more capital and the world’s resources are better allocated towards trying to meet the energy needs. The same thing is done for “green energy”. The tax law is very important to understand because it influences where capital will concentrate into…
BUT…
this is a big but…
Some believe that eventually, over time the prices will adjust so that the investment cost in energy and the supplies to go with it is proportionally higher so it is a net neutral effect.
For example, cash for clunkers provided incentive for people to buy more fuel efficient cars. In theory it made a lot of sense and was productive to some degree. However, it also required them to destroy the old cars rather than donate or keep the old. As a result now used cars in some cases are close to as expensive as new cars and there was also an artificial rush to buy such cars so now a lot of the future demand was flushed out especially since it was a temporary incentive program. I still believe it was a positive step towards an improvement in using less gas, but I don’t like the temporary nature of it, and the destruction of old cars rather than use for donations to communities in need, and feel that it was designed more so as a marketing ploy to help companies like Ford.
You can see that prices may eventually regress back or even overcompensate, but you cannot deny that there aren’t at least an additional initial capital concentrations towards wherever the incentive is provided.
It’s very important to watch which loopholes get closed, because those are the areas that investment capital will likely flow OUT of for the time being until prices (potentially) eventually readjust.
Being that it’s a global economy, I think there is a legitimate case to be made for many of these tax loopholes, to sort of “help the US companies beat the others” to the best places to drill for oil, and more importantly inspire capital flows into areas of innovation. (cold fusion, green energy, etc). The government can use this as more capitalistic form of regulation. i.e. provide grants and tax breaks for new businesses and investors in a particular area if they believe another area is “exploiting” people. With increased incentive towards new businesses in that area, you have more competition and if the business actually is taking advantage, rather than declaring them a monopoly you can level the playing field and with increased competition, potentially have price wars which help the consumers and those being “exploited”.
I think the government can be used in a productive way if people better understand the advantages of tax loopholes and how to use them properly, but the problem is there is so much lobbying that you get a lot of corruption that forms stupid loopholes that don’t serve the right function, and certainly there is a very small percentage of the US that understands things of this nature.
The economy and finance and business is arguably the most important subject to teach, but where is it being taught? Where are the government tax incentives to have apprenticeships and very large educational platforms to teach kids?
I gave a plan in a blog post and maybe I didn’t get the message across, or maybe they felt it was too restrictive, but you could easily modify the plan to instead be something more similar to just providing additional tax benefits for donations towards financial education, or for investment in companies that teach it and so on to provide more flexibility, but I think Steve Jobs for example could take out an hour of his time every now and then to record a lecture that could educate the masses about business planning, and have several others and then have an organized class and I believe it would be very productive towards the future society. Plus the politicians would make more informed decisions, and the people would be able to hold them better accountable instead of this class warfare BS.
I believe so many people are so ignorant
Why do you object to higher taxes for the top 4% of the income earners? They reap the rewards of this nation and should be willing to pay more to support the government that gives them that ability.
Are you one of the dreamers that don’t want to pay once you too become a billionaire? Tax revenues don’t have to be across the board and as history as taught us, aren’t permanent! We’ve had more tax reductions than increases over the last two decades which has contributed to our shortfall and the size of the deficits.
Secondly, once this depression/recession is worked through the need for safety nets will be reduced and revenue will increase reducing the deficits via the economic growth we should experience.
Face it, the tax system has never been fair and never will be as long as rich guys are getting tax refunds for their “gentlemen estates” (horse/cattle ranches) and Napa Valley vineyards that the rest of us don’t qualify for. The fica tax as never been flat and won’t be until the rich are means tested for benefits in return for a cap on their contribution. Time for you to worry about the greatest consumer and engine of this nation, the middle class, and stop worrying about the tax rates of our wealthiest citizens … believe me, they will survive and the crap about them losing their incentive to make money and invest is just that … Crappola!
A real “flat tax” would be everyone pays $100 for example. The word flat tax is a misnomer because it’s geometrically higher the more you make even as a percentage. How much in total dollars do you think Bill gates has given to charity? Over 100 billion dollars worth. He also has contributed towards enhancing society providing 1million jobs during the 90s along with Michael Dell and others as the computer boom lead to the ability for you to type on the computer you are typing now. How much have you given? what have you produced? Look at Apple!
Some of the rich are the ones that actually produce the rewards that the consumers and people they employ are able to reap. Others are investors in those companies that provide the capital so they can produce goods and services that you can buy for a cheaper and cheaper price as they are able to produce more and more and grow. If you increase taxes, you think the businesses aren’t able to raise prices and cut wages to make up for the difference?
Who do you think grows the jobs?
There’s a reason there is incentive to innovate and produce and invest in production of a wealthier society.
In the 1900s we had an industrial revolution that transformed society that was accomplished with less than 5% of the population up until the 1940s paying taxes. If you increase taxes you are increasing taxes on everyone and mostly the income earners. Taxes are inflationary because they give the government more money. The government issues bonds, and does not print cash, that means they must pay interest, and to pay the interest they must print more bonds to get more cash.
So basically if you increase taxes the poor get screwed over even worse. Do you think the poor can afford higher food inflation while we are in the worst drought since the dustbowl?
Many of the richest people in the world were at one point flat broke. Providing tax deductions for effecient investments into society and producing more and more at lower and lower costs is MUCH more productive.
Sure, open up tax loopholes for more people and make contributions to society more accessible, not just the rich, but don’t limit the incentive to produce in favor of handing money to a government that’s corrupted anyways and is only going to give selective treatment to selective businesses.
Many of the rich deserve to be where they are. Sure a select few of them were born into it, but many of them came from not having much but have learned the skills to use their capital and leverage other people’s capital to produce growth for society.
Why not create the “land of opportunity” where it’s made up of the rich and we can all be rich rather than think “there’s only so much to go around”?
It’s not true, we’ve done more and more with less and less throughout history. There was once no money, no houses, no cars, no planes, and look how much there is now. That didn’t just happen by a ruling oligarch deciding where the world’s resources should be put and how people should work as slaves to the government, it happened through inspiration and motivation through a capitalistic society.
Duh … I mean Derr,
I nor Obama proposes higher tax rates for all classes of tax payers … just the top 4% or so that have reaped the most from our free capitalist society that enabled them to attain that wealth.
Secondly, do you not realize that these same taxpayers that you say are the jobs creators have taken the jobs off shore and then use the profits they have reaped to make those charitable contributions which also happens to reduce their taxable income. You think contributions would remain at the same level if the deduction were taken away?
“Many of the rich deserve to be where they are. Sure a select few of them were born into it, but many of them came from not having much but have learned the skills to use their capital and leverage other people’s capital to produce growth for society.”
A select few … I’d like to see some stats concerning % of new wealth vs inherited wealth before I let you make that statement. I’ll bet the majority of wealth in this country is “old money.”
“There was once no money, no houses, no cars, no planes, and look how much there is now. That didn’t just happen by a ruling oligarch deciding where the world’s resources should be put and how people should work as slaves to the government, it happened through inspiration and motivation through a capitalistic society.”
Don’t look now but China is working it masterfully … taking the worlds currency for their slave labor and redirecting it to buildings, roads and bridges, housing, energy and defense … Haven’t you been paying attention?
* Only 19 percent receive any income or wealth of any kind from a trust fund or an estate.
* Fewer than 20 percent inherited 10 percent or more of their wealth.
* More than half never received as much as $1 in inheritance.
* Fewer than 25 percent ever received “an act of kindness” of $10,000 or more from their parents, grandparents, or other relatives.
* Ninety-one percent never received, as a gift, as much as $1 of the ownership of a family business.
* Nearly half never received any college tuition from their parents or other relatives.
* Fewer than 10 percent believe they will ever receive an inheritance in the future.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html
China is communist the average chinese person earns $1000 a year and is overpopulated. How is buildings, bridges, housing, energy and defense “innovative” and how is using inventions that already existed innovative?
And Oh course businesses get deductions for contributing towards charities they are doing the governments work for them, and although some charities are inefficient, there are many charities that are much more productive and efficient than government. They also spend money to grow and create more for society at lower prices.