Interesting article. Thanks for posting.
AOC and her fellow travelers want it all.
By any means necessary.
I worked with a military NCO who spent around six years in Montana. She’d bought a ranch property...put up a horse stable and cleared a good bit of 300 acre property. The property value escalated a significant amount by the time she got ready to sell, and she had a fair sized tax issue to account with. The local accountant just grinned, and pulled out this text written and passed by the House about a decade prior. As long as the property was noted as a horse-property and met several conditions....no taxes were owed on the profit. Oddly enough, the text was only written for Montana horse-ranch property.
I would speculate there are thousands of text exceptions written and people would be shocked that you could raise the taxation rate to 99-percent, and it wouldn’t matter....these exceptions to taxation exist and the majority of people would not be affected by AOC’s gimmick.
The government does not have the right to take our money and give it to people who vote for more money.
Connecticut is currently experiencing a well-publicized budget problem due to ignorance of tax impacts. Basically, they tried to soak the rich to plug a gap and the rich - from hedge fund managers to corporations - moved out. Now the gap is bigger. Whoda thunk?
So how did Jack Benny pull it off (pay wall)
Did it have something to do with Rochester? ha ha
But... The purchasing power of a dollar was 20 fold or more through the better part of that time span. This greatly changes the perspective.
btt
USA “dominated” the world economy in the 1950s because much of the industrial world’s infrastructure was still being rebuilt from smithereens due to World War II, it had nothing to do with tax rates. They didn’t actually say there was some sort of connection, but it’s an odd way to construct a sentence.
All the deductions and tax dodges are gone, they got that part right. So confiscatory tax rates would be an incredibly profound mistake on business and employment. The problem in this country is our “thought leaders” and “experts” and “economics nobel prize winners” have never held a job, ran a business, or have any idea how things work. Or, they are batting for the wrong team. Take yer pick.
The business of business is business. These morons just screw everything up.
Confiscating the entire wealth of the wealthiest and then redistributing it to the poorest would only be a one time benefit of a few thousand dollars per person,which would then quickly be consumed and lost forever.Meanwhile the motive and means of producing even more wealth would be lost forever.
The real cost of such rates is the social rate of return on the funds. Taxes distort the allocation of resources, so private money is channeled into projects that are tax exempt/reduced rather than where they earn the most return. AOC uses Warren Buffet as an example who complains his taxes are too low. Really? He, and most of Hollywood, sing the same song. If that’s the case, then write the IRS a huge check, sit down, and STFU. The rest of us out here think the gov’t doesn’t know how to spend our money better than we do, and I’m sure as hell certain AOC doesn’t.
For those who don’t want to subscribe to the WSJ
The truly wealthy will never lose the tax game. They write the rules.
Mr. and Mrs. Average always did and always will pay the freight.
A flat tax would garner more money from millionaires than trying to gouge them.
Why should all that money be invested in gov’t., which produces nothing but overpaid gov’t. employees? Millions of dollars, in the right hands, can be invested wisely & produce more jobs & wealth for many people who are the real producers in the nation....not the gov’t. Ms. Cortez has little concept of a proper working country. Maybe she needs a low-paying job in the Venezuelan embassy. At least it might be a learning experience.
1. Eliminate ALL corporate tax.
1a. Eliminate ALL depletion allowances and depreciation allowances.
2. Eliminate ALL current IRS regulations.
3. Set the individual tax rate at 10% regardless of income.
3a. Perquisites at taxed at 10% of cost.
3b. Withhold at the rate of 11%, to get a refund you have to file taxes, but there is no legal imperative to file.
4. Tax ALL money coming into the country at 0% (yes, ZERO%).
5. Tax ALL money leaving the country at 11%.
You’ll get more out of the rich at low rates than high rates.
I remember when I lived in New Mexico, the heir to the Revlon fortune bought a huge cattle ranch. People wondered how in the heck they made any money on it. It was a money hole from the get-go.
Reality was they didn't want to make any money. They wanted to lose money, lots of it.
That in turn translated to lower income and therefore a lower tax rate.
Wealthy people make enough money to have plenty of options to avoid paying the top rates. States that decide to tap into the wealthy's collective pockets for revenue, many times see their revenue go down because the wealthy are also not stupid. They move to another state where the taxes aren't so onerous. Duh!
It happened in France when that liberal predecessor to Macaroni man, Hollande, ratcheted-up the top rates to 75%. They had to rescind it because all of the smart wealthy residents moved to other countries to avoid the tax. It was a failure of the government "experts".
There are still plenty of loopholes in the US tax code so that if AOC gets her 70% rate or, heaven forbid, Castro gets his 90% rate, that the wealthy will do what they have always done.
They will figure out how to avoid the highest rates and the liberal government programs reliant on these high tax rates for their revenue will fall flat on their faces.
But like someone else on this thread commented, these liberals don't know the first thing about economics, or more important, human nature. People that can, will flee the high tax rates. Why would someone stand still while the government was trying to fleece them?