2/7/2013 3:00 AM ET|
Why you should pity Phil Mickelson
The golfer has a sweet swing but a sour view of the federal income tax. As a pro athlete, he pays a far higher rate than many on Wall Street.
Does Phil Mickelson have a legitimate beef when it comes to his taxes? The Hall of Fame golfer and one of the world's highest-paid athletes recently caused a stir when he threatened to move out of his native California -- and hinted at perhaps even retiring from golf -- because of his high state and federal tax rates.
Mickelson reportedly earned nearly $48 million last year. He was reacting in part to California's newly passed Proposition 30, which raises the state tax rate on people earning more than $1 million from 10.3% to 13.3%.
And as The Wall Street Journal recently reported, federal tax rates on income of more than $400,000 rose this year, from 35% to 39.6%. At the same time, according to the WSJ, "'Obamacare' levies a new 3.8% surtax on investment income and raises the Medicare tax by 0.9% on wages over $200,000. Limits on itemized deductions for high earners have also been reinstated, which will raise many athletes' marginal rates by one to two percentage points."
While "Lefty," as Mickelson is known, quickly backtracked and apologized for his comments, he also opened the door on something that a lot of affluent folks and their accountants already know: Rich people are not all equal when it comes to the taxes they pay.
"If you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and the state, my tax rate's 62, 63%," Mickelson said at the time.
Analysts believe his actual tax rate is closer to 50%, according to CNBC. But still, how does Mickelson end up paying about half his income in taxes when Mitt Romney, who's reportedly worth about $250 million, famously had a rate of around 14% on his 2011 taxes?
Or, to quote Salary.com, "How does a man worth hundreds of millions end up with a tax rate similar to that paid by a household earning $50,000 per year?"
One big difference is in their jobs. "If you look at someone like a professional athlete, they are earning their income through their services, through labor, similar to a construction worker," says Sharon Lassar, a director of the school of accountancy at the University of Denver's Daniels College of Business. "And income that is earned through labor is ordinary income that is subject to U.S. taxes today as high as 39.6%. That's after the legislation that was passed to deal with the fiscal cliff; it was lower before that."
In comparison, Romney's income likely came through capital gains -- the profits from selling assets such as real estate or stocks -- acquired through his partnership with firms that buy and sell other companies. "And the sale of those underlying companies is a capital gain; it generates a capital gain to the partnership," Lassar says.
Romney's income is taxed twice – first at the corporate level and a second time when reported on a personal income-tax return. As he said during his interview with "60 Minutes" last September, "One of the reasons why the capital-gains tax rate is lower is because capital has already been taxed once at the corporate level, as high as 35%."
The income Romney and others like him report on their federal tax returns comes mostly from capital gains, which currently are taxed at a high of 23.8%. But last year, before the fiscal-cliff legislation, they were taxed at a maximum of 15%. "And that's why Mitt Romney's tax rate was just under 15%," Lassar says, "because he also had charitable contributions and other items which reduced his taxable income."
"Essentially, the (federal) policy is this: If you have income from capital, we're going to tax it at a preferential rate," Joseph Newpol, a professor of law, taxation and financial planning at Bentley University in Waltham, Mass., explained to Salary.com. The government's rationale for that lower capital-gains tax rate, he says, is "to encourage people to invest in stocks, bonds and things like that because that's good for the economy, it creates jobs."
Romney also came under fire during his presidential campaign for not providing enough of his tax returns for public scrutiny. But Lassar says those returns wouldn't have provided much political ammunition to Romney's opponents, because they cannot really explain the tangled way that investment income is earned and taxed.
Others look at the discrepancy between what a top athlete and a world-class investor pay in taxes in a more pragmatic way.
"The Mitt-Lefty paradox has a simple explanation: In America, we tax work. And highly," Edward McCaffery, a professor of law, economics and political science at the University of Southern California, said recently on CNN.com. "We do not tax capital or wealth much at all. Indeed, if you have wealth already, taxes are essentially optional."
More on taxes:
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
Poor Phil. Paid 63% in taxes and was left with only $18M (for playing golf).
Maybe you "No taxes, I'll pay out of pocket to fix my own damn roads" guys can take up a collection for him.
actually I look up to him, not because he had the courage to say what a lot of us are thinking but as a left handed golfer, i don't have anyone to teach me and so i have looked up to him for a LONG time!
The political hacks who sit n power where ever they sit think we ( taxpayers ) are a bottomless well of money. Now , when I say taxpayers I mean you and me , it doesn't matter is we sign the back of our paycheck or the front of it.
And certainly if you are a small business owner and you do sign the front of your paycheck you are a bad person because you own your own business.
Now about Phil....he is absolutely correct. The government hacks just keep taking. I wonder how many people does Phil employ. How many related jobs or business does he impact ?
Well in hacks in their infinite wisdom has driven Phil out of California and those jobs are now gone.
Way to go.
He apparently needs a better accountant. Romney pays less in taxes because of write offs...Phil needs a better tax stratagy
Believe me, I do understand. For instance, during the George H. Bush administration, he, the president made a statement, “Read my lips, no more taxes”. Bush was not talking about not taxing the poor, or the middle class, he was talking about the very, very rich. The rich did not pay anything for long, long time. His son George W. Bush said, “Mission Accomplished”. Believe me he was not talking about some military act. Somebody needs to wake-up.
Well living in CA that's pretty much made up of mostly liberals that re-elect officials that ran the state in the ground and also vote on liberal prop's and private agenda's why is everyone in CA so mad? the population voted for this @#%$#! So why now are most citizens complaining? Everyone that has lived here for some time should know this, liberal government cares none for its people or what money you make or keep for that matter. Case and point Governor Jerry Brown screwed up this state the last time he was elected, do these liberals learn, HELL no! They re-elect him again and vote for a hiked up sales tax so the private sector can again misappropriate your tax funds as all the governor's have done in this crappy state. instead of passing tax hikes making the crooked politician liberal's rich, how about education spending, how about lowering college tuition's. Oh that's not important but now that the rich have been taxed more they bit%$, I have no sympathy for them, they make a ton of money and live in Rancho Santa Fe and they worry about how manicured their lawns look, whatever, all they will do is seek more tax shelters. how about real issues, homeless vets, people that need jobs to feed their family, educating the future populace of this crappy state CHILDREN! Well considering this state only really cares about the filthy rich, just see how they get away with murder in court here, no accountability for them, oh my bad they made and paid off another million and than went and smoked weed how great for them. Maybe if the liberals could maybe al least once do what you all run your mouths about. But that's not going to happen, after all the parties sign is the Jack#$% that's not by accident!
Lefty is a ****. so what if his 47 million earned in one year is taxed at 50% or higher. with the remaining 23 million I believe neither he or his children or their children will have to worry about food or shelter. Undoubtedly the acquired wealth will be taxed less when it is conveyed to his heirs. The reality is that anyone who has that type of income should pay more as they are certainly in a position to do so. Also, the taxes he pays will ultimately improve our society in general of which he is also a member. That same societal structure which has enabled him to make a fortune playing golf as a professional. I realize it is his own effort and determination that has earned him great wealth, but it is important to contribute to the furtherment of a country that makes such successes possible. I guess it really doesn't matter to Phil, as long as he can be an obnoxious fat **** with man boobs why should he give a ****.
Boo hoo. Let him try living on the $ 1,200 dollars every two weeks after taxes and see if he isn't getting taxed fairly. Screw him. It's the working stiff that pays his bills. Piss off Phil
My husband was a pro golfer in the 70's. He won a couple of tournaments and made $2,000. This was back in the time when pro golfers didn't make ANY money. He got out of the game but is still a golf pro at a small55+ community. He makes less than $20K a year. Yet he held the world record for the longest hole in one for years. 244 yards left on a dog leg. He is a leftie. Went to Pro School with Tom Kite from Texas. But stays under the radar because he is so humble. the Canadian guy won the Masters years ago and came down here where we live. My husband played him, at his request, and beat him by 7 strokes. MADE NO MONEY. Didn't do that for money.
I don't play golf. But my husband taught me how to put. He got us in a scramble and because I could put, I sunk 15 our of 18 holes and we won 1st prize. $20. I retired at the top of my game! haha
I am in agreement with Mickelson, he earns his money and does not live off investments, the two are taxed at different rates and simple minded uninformed jealousy is rearing it's ugly head.
Why is there not ire shown for the crooked schemes this congress pulls to make your lives miserable by their slick theft and scams they deem as law. they make us use HC they don't even want, if they had to pay for their own security like Mickelson you can bet they too would like the 2nd amendment and that elected faker we are supposed to call a potus is a national historical disgrace........I think the low info crowd had better get their heads out their butts.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. 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 Morningstar Inc.