Early this morning, the House Ways and Means committee approved a health care bill that would implement a surtax on the richest Americans as a way of financing reform. Conservatives have seized on reports calculating what the top tax rate would be if the House’s bill becomes law to lament the plight of the richest one percent of Americans who stand to have their taxes raised. For instance, Fox New’s Megyn Kelly lit into Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) today, claiming that this “astronomical” top rate will lead us down a slippery slope to 70 or 80 percent tax rates. “Where do you draw the line? Does 60 percent not shock the conscience?” she asked. Watch it:
Clint Stretch, a tax expert at Deloitte Tax, was quoted by USA Today saying that the House bill will push tax rates for the very wealthiest to “levels never seen,” so I think this all needs to be put into perspective. As I pointed out yesterday, the surtax would have no impact on 98.7 percent of Americans. The one percent that are affected received $715 billion in tax breaks from the Bush tax cuts, while the surtax will raise $544 billion. So this isn’t even going to make up for the massive tax cuts that this tiny population received from Bush.
Furthermore, while the top one percent’s overall share of income has been skyrocketing, its effective tax burden has been falling. Consider this chart, from Conor Clarke:

From 1950 to 1963, the top federal marginal income tax rate was 91 percent. It was in the 70’s until 1980 (albeit, different amounts of income were subject to the top rate). Even if the health care surtax is enacted, the Social Security payroll cap is lifted, and the Bush tax cuts expire in 2011, the rich would be paying 45 percent in federal income taxes. Meanwhile, after-tax income for the 95 percent of Americans who just received a tax cut courtesy of the stimulus package will not go up at all.


The reason it is viwed as a problem is because tax rates very rarely go down. At one time it was less than 10%, then when one proposes 15% people are angry and does it reach 10 again? absolutely not. It reaches 20% and so on, right now it’s 45. It won’t be too long until the government decides it gets to own one of every two dollars made, how is that moral? Frugal business owners spend money the best, which causes demand. What government run agency is efficient. Dept of Transportation (think of the high way crews, I know many that know it’s run poorly) Think of the DMV, also ran well? The more things the government runs the worse it will be. I fully understand regulation and the need for it, but this is seizure.
July 20th, 2009 at 3:37 pmBut you forget, the top tax rate is going back to 39%+, so its disingenious to compare the “savings” that aren’t going to exist. Effectively, the tax rate will be 39.6% plus whatever the surtax is plus whatever state + local income taxes (plus of course medicare which is roughly 1.45%)
In states like California, I could see it being over 50% when
July 20th, 2009 at 3:39 pmall taxes are considered. I think 60-70% sounds high, but even 50% seems high.
Dear God save us from these ‘tards…
July 20th, 2009 at 3:41 pmFox News spreading lies that make the middle class vote against it’s better interests since 1996
July 20th, 2009 at 3:47 pmEvery dollar you take from the rich is a dollar not put back into the economy, dollars which if spent promotes job growth. Or if saved, it’s all lent by banks. Or if it’s invested, more wealth is created which, again, results in job creation. Give that money to the government, and the majority ends up as fat little paychecks for bureaucrats and war profiteers. Maybe the middle class knows where its interests lie better than progressives imagine.
July 22nd, 2009 at 8:00 am