|
Let's
put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand. Suppose that every day,
ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100.
If
they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something
like this:
The
first four men -- the poorest -- would pay nothing; the fifth would pay
$1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth
$18, and the tenth man -- the richest - would pay $59.
That's
what they decided to do. The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every
day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement --
until
one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language, a tax cut).
"Since
you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to
reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the
ten only cost $80.00."
The
group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the
first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what
about the other six -- the paying customers? How could they divvy up the
$20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair
share?"
The
six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they
subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth
man would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner
suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the
same amount and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And
so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid
$5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a
bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59. Each of the six was better off
than before. And the first four continued to eat for free.
But
once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I
only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man who
pointed to the tenth. "But he got $7!"
"Yeah,
that's right," exclaimed the fifth man, "I only saved a
dollar, too! It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!"
"That's
true!" shouted the seventh man," Why should he get $7 back,
when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait
a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The
nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The
next night he didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate
without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered, a
little late, what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short
of paying the bill!
Imagine
that!
And
that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is how the
tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most
benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being
wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore.
Where
would that leave the rest? Unfortunately, most taxing authorities
anywhere cannot seem to grasp this rather straightforward logic!

© The Unknown Taxpayer
Web
Note The
above story was sent to us from a Financial Sense long-time visitor. He
had received it from someone else. I imagine this story has made the
Internet rounds many times! I did track down the source of his email to
Professor Thomas L. Davies, Professor of Accounting & Chair of the
Division of Accounting and Business Law at the University of South
Dakota, School of Business. I searched their site, found his email and
wrote for permission to publish the piece on our site. Below is his
response:
"Thank
you for your message. I previously distributed the "How Taxes
Really Work" article (as well as other opinion pieces reflecting
different perspectives) to my graduate tax class to encourage them to
think beyond the rules and regulations. Unfortunately, it is rather easy
to focus on the myriad of complex rules and forget that tax policy
frequently influences taxpayer behavior beyond what may have been
intended. Thus my students are frequently asked to think "outside
the box" and consider such topics as tax complexity, alternative
forms of taxation, and the impact of taxes on behavior.
The
article was not written by me, and I have intentionally avoided
commenting on its validity in order to encourage my students to think
critically, and to assist in the development of their analytical and
communication skills. I am unaware of the true author's identity, which
is unfortunate, since the piece has generated considerable interest.
Unfortunately, one of my students sent it along and erroneously
attributed the authorship to me. Obviously I am unable to give
permission to reproduce it, and I request that you don't attribute it to
me if you happen to send it on."
Jim and I think this
story/allegory/whatever is one worth reading and sharing with our
visitors. If anyone knows who the "true" author is, we would
very much appreciate their permission. We respect copyright laws and do
not want to infringe on their rights... taxpayer or not.
Do
you have an opinion? Contact
Us
FSO
Visitor Comments on "How Taxes Really Work"
02/03
Dave, Ocean Port, NJ
Excellent
story/parable. This little ditty should be required reading in every
school and government office. When trying to explain "tax
fairness," I give an example of "two people walk in a store,
each buys a $2.00 item. The first person pays with a $5.00 bill, the
second pays with a $10.00 bill. As the clerk starts to give back their
change, the first customer complains of the unfairness of it all.
"Why should I get back only $2.00; while they get back
$8.00?", the customer fumed, "it's just not fair".
"Just because they had more money to give to the clerk, that is no
reason for them to get back more!"
02/01
Dan, Georgia, USA
I
enjoy your website very much and have learned so much. Thank you very
much. I also enjoyed your article on "How Taxes really Work."
I want to share with you something you may or may not be aware of
regarding income taxes. I know you are a CPA [Jim
is a CFP - Certified Financial Planner, not a Certified Public
Accountant] and I hope this doesn't offend you. I used to work in
public accounting myself. Anyway, here goes: There is NO law requiring
99% of Americans to even pay an income tax or file an income tax return.
Am I saying you should not pay taxes? Of course not. All I'm saying is
that, under the Internal Revenue Code and Title 26 Code of Federal
Regulations, you'll find it impossible to find a law making most
Americans liable for income taxes if they earn domestic source income
only and live in the US.
In order to be
responsible for paying a tax, ANY tax, one must first be made LIABLE for
that tax. The only person made liable for the income tax imposed on
taxable income in chapter 1 of the Internal revenue Code, is the
withholding agent, as defined in code section 7701(a)(16) of the Code.
This withholding agent is made liable by code section 1461 to deduct and
withhold tax from nonresident aliens, foreign corporations, and foreign
tax-exempt organizations, as defined in sections 1441, 1442 and 1443
respectively in the Code. Also, one does not have to tell the government
he/she is responsible for paying a tax. The government tells you, and in
the case of income taxes, the government tells you (the withholding
agent) that you are liable for them by sending you a Form 8655
Withholding Authorization Certificate. I could go further into this
subject, but I don't want to offend you too much if I haven't already.
Anyway, thanks for a great website. [No offense
taken!]
01/30
H. C. Visalia, CA, USA
Critics of Bush's tax reduction plan, who point out that
the poor pay a disproportionate share of payroll taxes, forget that
these payroll taxes go to the social security program. These are not
income taxes and to bring them into the argument is simply fallacious.
If these critics want to do something for the non-taxpaying group in our
population, they should enact some kind of welfare legislation and be
honest in describing it for what it is.
01/30
V. V., Mississauga, Ont., Canada
Thank
your for a great article that explains how the income tax system really
works. Those who claim that the article misrepresents the true taxation
picture by ignoring social security taxes are only partially correct.
While it is true that the poor tend to pay a higher proportion of their
income on SS taxes, that fact is not relevant since the taxes are
supposed to fund a form of public pension that is paid out in monthly
installments upon retirement. Since the total SS benefits are capped, it
is only fair that the taxes are also capped. The sad fact is that
government activities cannot make us richer, they only serve to make the
general population poorer. The best thing for all of us if government
reverted to the limited form that the American Founding Fathers
envisioned. Unfortunately, that is unlikely to happen.
When I listened to the
State of the Union speech, I was struck by one tax related item. Mr.
Bush claimed that his new proposals would reduce the taxes paid by a
single earner family that made $40K per year to $45. When you do the
currency conversion, you have an equivalent single earner Canadian
family making just over C$60K per year, but instead of paying $45 in
taxes, it would pay $15K. I think that we need tax relief even more that
the Americans.
01/30
P. DW, Holland, Netherlands
Divine
Law issued by God to the just formed Israelite nation at Mount Sinai
states amongst other, that no more than 20% tax burden is to be levied
in total, of which 10% serves to finance the daily religious duties,
whereas the other 10% is intended to service all other activities at the
village/city/national levels including maintaining the armed forces.
The Israelites as a
nation were expelled some 400 years later from their Promised Land
Canaan after they had entered it, because they had consistently failed
to keep the 10 articles of the Divine Law properly. Since then there is
not one nation on Earth left that maintains other than draconic tax
laws, because all men are wiser than God, they think.
01/30
C. L., Wichita, KS, USA
You need to update the "How Taxes Really
Work" to account for the "Earned Income Tax Credit".
Under the EITC, some of the "taxpayers" would be paid to eat.
01/30
B. M., East Palo Alto, CA, USA
I
just read the story about the 10th taxpayer. Given that some people
instantly scream "unfair" when tax cuts save more money for
the higher income people, this article does a service in clarifying that
it's not necessarily unfair. But it's not a lone voice in the
wilderness, in that I've heard this point made many times in other media
sources, so the value of making this point (yet again) is not
earth-shattering.
However, I would claim
that this article in fact does more to MISLEAD than to inform in that it
adds to the parade of people using personal income tax burdens (alone)
while conveniently leaving out payroll taxes, sales taxes, and other
items that are proportional or even regressive to try to insinuate that
the wealthiest people deserve the greatest tax break.
Once you add in payroll
taxes (and we both know that proper analysis would include the half that
the employer pays on behalf of the employee), this picture of the lowest
income people getting a free ride gets a bit more blurred. And sales
taxes would presumably be regressive too.
If you are truly
sincere in countering the misinformation of the establishment (both
mainstream media and Washington propaganda), you'd point out that the
total tax burden is not as skewed to the rich as it's normally
presented.
Rather than preaching
to the choir (I presume the readership generally already favors making
the tax structure less progressive) and adding to the big lie
(misinformation repeated so often by so many sources that most people
don't question it anymore) that individual wealthy tax payers pay almost
everything, it would be a truly courageous and informative voice to
present the case honestly, with total tax burdens and how they've
changed over time.
Given a more honest
presentation, I believe the messages that would pop out are:
1) The rich do pay a
lot of taxes. But, I believe the percentage might be less than the
preconceived notions of many people that call themselves conservative or
libertarian. And we know the percentage would be more than the notion of
many liberals.
2) The middle class tax
burden as a percentage has grown over the years more than any other
group.
3) The working poor
don't get a free ride.
Thanks for your time
(and I hope for the clarification that you will post).

|