10/5/2011 5:05 PM ET|
Today's taxes lowest in 60 years
Yes, while we demand tax cuts, we're actually paying less, as a percentage of income, than ever before. And we're doing it while soldiers are fighting.
As Republicans and Democrats continue to bicker over who should be taxed and how much, one fact rarely gets mentioned: Most Americans today pay less in federal income taxes than they have in 60 years, and far less than they have during other wars.
This is particularly true for the wealthy: By 2007, the richest 400 Americans paid an average of 16.6% in income taxes, thanks to exemptions and low capital-gains taxes, far less than the same group had paid decades ago and well below the 26.4% that group had been taxed only 15 years earlier.
Add the hit of economic turmoil, and in the past two years the federal government has collected less of the nation's income than at any time since 1950: 14.9% of gross domestic product in taxes, compared with a post-World War II average of about 18%. One percentage point today equates to about $140 billion.
"Overall, taxes are very low right now," said Chuck Marr, the director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan Washington, D.C., research group. In addition, "you have this tremendous shift (of wealth) in the United States to high-income people."
Meanwhile, with taxes low, the nation's public debt has soared to $10 trillion. But perhaps the most dramatic departure for U.S. taxpayers is not today's swollen debt load -- we've been there before -- but that never before have taxpayers been asked to give so little in wartime.
"This is the first time that we actually cut taxes and went to war," said John O. Fox, a tax-policy scholar and professor at Mount Holyoke College in Amherst, Mass. "There's less of a sense that we're all in it together."
How we got here
For most of America's history, federal spending and tax revenue charted a more-or-less parallel course, with the government approaching annual deficits of 10% of GDP -- the current level -- only during war or economic depression, then quickly leveling out.
By 1981, the country had racked up a paltry $789 billion in public debt, a mere 25.5% of the value of what the nation produced that year. And that was after a civil war, two world wars and many other foreign military conflicts, the Great Depression, the New Deal, the Great Society and much of the Cold War.
By contrast, today's public debt -- the total of two centuries of annual deficits minus any annual surpluses -- is approaching 70% of GDP. (Public debt is the amount the federal government owes others, and it's what economists use to gauge a nation's finances. Gross debt, now at $14.7 trillion, provides a larger number but includes money the government has borrowed from its own surpluses, such as from the Social Security trust.)
For decades, two things had kept the national debt under control: a generally robust post-WWII economy and relatively high tax rates.
In 1954, as President Dwight Eisenhower rejected fellow Republicans' efforts to reduce income taxes, then at 91% for top earners and 20% for low-income workers, he told the nation, "Every real American is proud to carry his share of that national burden."
He added, "Some think it is good politics to promise more and more government spending and, at the same time, more and more tax cuts for all." But, Eisenhower warned, "this is one kind of chicken that always comes home to roost."
At the time, just after the Korean War, the federal public debt stood at $230.9 billion ($1.94 trillion in 2011 dollars), or 60.7% of GDP.
By 1961, the year Eisenhower left office, the debt had been reduced to a post-WWII low of 44.6% of GDP even with expansion of highways and higher-education funding.
"You want to have taxes at a level so that in booms you're taking in probably more than you need and in recessions you're taking in less, but over time it averages out," said John Irons, the research and policy director at the Economic Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank that focuses on low- and middle-income Americans. "The problem is, the last 10 years we've been on a path of running deficits in both booms and recessions."
Go to war, pay a tax
The nation's first federal income tax was levied to help pay for the Civil War. Aiming at those with the greatest ability to pay, the Union applied a 3% tax rate on annual incomes over $800, which exempted most wage earners.
A year later, in 1862, Congress created a new top rate of 5% for those earning more than $10,000, "to address the concern that it was a rich man's war and a poor man's fight," said Joe Thorndike, the director of the Tax History Project at Tax Analysts, a nonprofit publisher of tax data. The sentiment, both then and in later wars, was: "People are dying; the least we can do is open our checkbooks."
The Civil War income tax expired in 1872, and the federal government returned to its reliance on tariffs to fund what were, by today's standards, its relatively limited operations. But in 1913, against fierce opposition, the states swiftly ratified the 16th Amendment, authorizing the federal government to collect income taxes.
With a graduated tax rate of 1% to 7% for those with incomes exceeding $3,000, the tax initially affected only the wealthiest citizens. Even when World War I prompted a steep tax hike, to a top rate of 67%, the federal income tax essentially hit less than 10% of earners.
The evolution of income tax
It wasn't until World War II that the federal income tax evolved from a so-called class tax to a mass tax.
"During World War II . . . they needed a lot of money, and they needed it quickly," Thorndike said. "And that really did change the tax system forever, because it would no longer be confined to the elite. However, they retained the progressive structure."
President Franklin Roosevelt knew that to generate enough revenue, he would need money from the middle class -- but that to garner strong support, the rich would have to be seen as paying their fair share.
At the height of the war, the top tax rate stood at 94%, although exemptions, deductions and lower capital-gains taxes brought the effective rate down to about 60%. Workers at the very bottom, those earning up to $2,000 ($25,200 in 2011 dollars), were required to chip in 23%.
In 1945, the federal public debt reached its all-time high of 112.7% of GDP ($251.4 billion, or $3.155 trillion in 2011 dollars).
As Walt Disney propaganda films implored Donald Duck to pay his "taxes to sink the Axis," the federal government was pulling in 21% of its GDP in all taxes, investing that money overseas in the war effort and at home in the form of factories, roads and schools.
In 1947, just two years after the end of the war, the government brought in an annual surplus, equivalent to 1.7% of GDP. From the beginning of his presidency, Democrat Harry Truman fought off efforts to lower the tax rates, calling for a commitment to pay down the war debt when the economy thrived.
If not, "the country would, as a result, be in a poorer position to extend supports to the economy should a subsequent deflationary period develop," Truman told the nation in his 1947 budget address.
The marginal tax rates remained at least 91% for top earners and 20% for low-income workers through 1963, when they were reduced to 77% and 16%, respectively, under President John F. Kennedy. The federal public debt gradually and steadily dropped, reaching 39% of GDP in 1964 and 25% in 1974.
The federal debt, meanwhile, dropped every year during the post-WWII boom, thanks to a thriving economy and a rapidly expanding middle class. In 1964, it stood at 39% of GDP, or $258.8 billion ($1.88 trillion in 2011 dollars).
Even with the spending of the Vietnam War and the Great Society -- which ushered in Medicare and expanded educational funding -- the debt as a portion of the country's output shrank, reaching 24.6% of GDP in 1974, or $369 billion ($1.69 trillion in 2011 dollars). That was the lowest the debt load had been since 1931.
Starving the beast
In 1981, President Ronald Reagan introduced a new era, lowering income taxes in an effort to boost investment and starve the government from further spending.
The tax rate for top earners was reduced from 70% to 50% in 1982 and to 28% in 1989. Spending, however, rose, and the public debt steadily crept back up, from 26% of GDP in 1981 to 49.5% of GDP in 1993, or $3.3 trillion ($5.15 trillion in 2011 dollars).
In 1993, the year Bill Clinton became president, the top marginal tax rate was raised again, to 39.6%. By 2000, the public debt had dropped, to 34.5% of GDP, or $3.38 trillion ($4.43 trillion in 2011 dollars), and the government was realizing an annual surplus.
For middle-income Americans, the tax rate was at a historic low. And top earners were paying less on capital gains, for a lower effective rate.
A shift in America's long budgetary history occurred, economists say, when tax cuts were not only introduced during a relatively healthy 21st-century economy but also kept low as the country went to war.
"The real cost of that is you've turned those surpluses into deficits," said Marr, of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
With the economy strong, President George W. Bush and Congress cut income taxes across the board in 2001 and 2003. Those cuts cost the government more than $1.8 trillion from 2002 to 2009; the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan cost an additional $1.5 trillion over the same period.
By 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, the public debt stood at $6.3 trillion, or 53.5% of GDP, its highest percentage since 1955.
The other dramatic shift? For perhaps the first time since the inception of the income tax, it is possible for those at the top of the income scale to pay a smaller effective tax rate than those in the middle.
"Everybody's taxes have gone down over the past 10 years," said Michael Linden, the director of tax and budget policy at the Center for American Progress, or CAP, a progressive nonprofit in Washington, D.C. "But rich people's taxes have gone down much faster than middle-class taxes or low-income people's."
Compounding the problem is that far more income has moved to the top. From 1979 to 2007, the wealthiest 1% of households saw their pretax annual income increase 240% (on average, to $1.87 million from $550,000), according to the most recent figures from the Congressional Budget Office. Average income for those in the middle fifth rose 19% (to $64,500 from $54,000).
Today, the top 20% of Americans hold 84% of the country's wealth, so low tax rates at the top end up having a large effect on total tax revenue. With spending needs projected to rise due to increasing health care costs and an aging population, experts agree that revenue -- meaning taxes -- will have to go up.
"On some level, we're going to raise taxes, and everybody knows that," said Thorndike, of the Tax History Project. "Except maybe the Tea Partyers."
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
"In 1954, as President Dwight Eisenhower rejected fellow Republicans' efforts to reduce income taxes, then at 91% for top earners and 20% for low-income workers, he told the nation, "Every real American is proud to carry his share of that national burden."
How different Americans are today. Cheap, tight, resentful of their fellow citizens. Devoid of empathy for the unemployed who have had their jobs outsourced overseas. Unwilling to pay the dues required of living in a fine country. I don't know how people got so cold here. As long as we refuse to take care of each other then we deserve to keep going down, down, down.
Great point in the article. Since '79, the average persons' income has gone up about $10K. This while their pension plans have disappeared, their time off reduced, and they're asked to contribute to their health plan premiums if they're lucky enough to be able to afford it or even have it offered.
Meanwhile, the wealthiest among us have seen their income more than triple. Where did the money come from? Read the above. They didn't earn it. They're not working any harder than the wealthy did back in '79. It has been taken out of the average worker's pocket, yet people will complain about taxing these people!
It's simple math. If the people with 84% of the money in the country pay a higher rate, the deficit will come down. And unlike the poor and the dwindling middle class, it will have little if any effect on their quality of life.
And let's be clear. Everyone pays taxes, even the poorest. They just may not pay federal.
The other new game is where you take an earlier time, when the tax code was different than it is now, and apply a single rate factor against today's average (which is based on different rules).
You don't find much talk of double taxation either -- where you pay taxes on earned income, and then pay taxes on investment income.
This article is nothing more than a orchestrated campaign of propaganda coming out of Washington.
How can you tell? It is full of class warfare, and unsubstantiated statistics about those evil rich people. Folks, under Democratic leadership, the rich Democrats are RAKING IT IN LIKE NEVER BEFORE.
Notice how nothing in this article mentions the actual problem which is that the government is spending far more than it takes in... and most of us understand that much of that spending is pure waste, or payoffs to constituents (known as BRIBES in most places), and that most of us see no reason to give corrupt politicians more of our money to waste.
In the last three weeks this is about the 10th article I've read that lays out the same case, certainly not a coincidence, and all the proof I need to see how the press is being manipulated, especially NBC which really ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Liars figure and figures lie. The "average" tax rate is so low becaues so many pay nothing! Everyone needs some skin in the game; no new taxes until we get everyone on board and pulling together, paying at least a nominal amount.
You've heard it before: when the majority figures out that they can vote for candidates who will take from others to give to them, guess how they're going to vote.
But, let's make sense in our thinking! The taxpayers do not make the tax laws. The US government makes the tax laws.
People are going to complain about excessive taxes until: they pay no taxes; the country has no debt; but the still get support from the federal government. This is a known and a great campaign pledge.
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Quotes are real-time for NASDAQ, NYSE and AMEX. See delay times for other exchanges.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Thomson Reuters (click for restrictions). Real-time quotes provided by BATS Exchange. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Interactive Data Real-Time Services. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by SIX Financial Information.