To test the hypothesis of increasing income taxes causes people to find ways to avoid tax or causes citizens to work less, ultimately reducing the tax rate can be tested at the national level, as well as, the state level. In one state a higher income tax rate could cause people to work more, but when increasing income taxes is tested at the national level the average might prove the opposite. In order to test the effects of increasing income taxes I would suggest a data set that is aimed more at the national level. The data set provided by the Internal Revenue Service has tax years from 1996 to 2013, ranging in different adjusted gross incomes of $0 to $10,000,000 or more. With the years provided as well as the different income brackets the data shows how many people were a part of a certain income level at one point of time and in another point of time when the tax rates can be increased how many people switched income brackets. Variable such as GDP and the unemployment rate could be factored in, which would allow a regression to be ran and then one could find out if the increasing tax rates does reduce the tax rate at the national level. …show more content…
The data set is provided by the United States Census Bureau and it breaks down income taxes as well as individual income tax by different states. Why I think looking at the effects of increasing income taxes at the state level is the certain states that might not have such a large population such as Montana or Alaska might have more of an effect on the reduction in the tax rate, and the opposite might prove true for states such as California, or Texas. The variables in these different states might be different such as the unemployment rate in California might be higher than it is in Montana so that might have more of an effect on the tax rate. In other words, to look at the whole one must look at the pieces
However, there are also some drawbacks associated with raising taxes. Tax is a form of leakage from the circular flow of income leading to negative multiplier effect. If the government increases income tax rates, it might create disincentives to work. It is because when income tax increases, the opportunity cost for leisure time decreases; and people will have to work longer
Like I previously stated there are always advantages and disadvantages, making no different. Although there are a great amount of advantages to raising taxes on $300K income households, you cannot forget about the disadvantages. One of them happens to be giving the government power. The amount of power our government have at the moment is pretty sufficient, even though it may not seem like it. Raising taxes would mean giving them even more power. There'll be money for secret projects and what not. We truly don't know what they do other than what they tell us. Take 9/11 for example, government officials said terrorist are the ones that caused it, but in reality they are the ones that caused it. Sometimes I personally think can we trust them?
In the United States, the top one percent received about 20 percent of the overall income for 2016. This creates an uneven distribution of income causing Americans to argue about whether or not the wealthy should pay more in federal income taxes. One side of the argument is that the wealthy make a huge portion of the nation’s income; therefore, they should have higher tax rates. The other side argues that wealthy Americans already pay their fair share of taxes by paying nearly 40 percent and should not be forced to pay more. These arguments both use compelling evidence to make their claims; however, a solution could be reached by increasing the tax rate of the top one percent by only 10 to 20 percent.
Another idea would be to avoid increasing the tax rates as this will help “minimize economic distortions that shrink the level of production” (Baker III, 2009, p. 1). To promote economic growth, our team recommends that we take the approach of increasing the corporate tax base and decreasing the corporate tax rates. Other suggestion is to reduce the deductibility of state and local taxes. Other reforms that could be looked
However, these long and short term economic improvements are only what is predicted to happen and there negatives to the reduction in income tax. A factor that the government must take into account is the budget deficit, can the government afford to simply cut income tax that is a large source of revenue for the budget. A worsened budget deficit could have devastating impacts upon the economy, for example less people able to have the benefits they require, (this would also reduce demand in the economy as those on benefits generally spend the money they have as they do not have spare to save, this may damage the economy even further) or a reduction in money towards health care. Also, a reduction in income tax does not necessarily mean
Heated debates over tax cut have always been one of the central economic themes on the American political table. Since taxes relate directly to the quality of lives, it is by no means surprising to find people showing significant concern about policies regarding cutting or raising the amount they have to pay. The idea that lowering tax rate makes room for growth has remained generally popular among the majority, taking a possible decrease in individuals’ tax burden and increase in productivity into account. There is, however, extensive research conducted on the topic that produced controversial results. Despite its appeal to instant benefits for one’s saving account and investment, reducing tax rate has yet to show a definite positive effect
In states without state income tax, higher sales, property and other assorted taxes can exceed the annual cost of a state income tax. Texas is one of seven states that do not levy an individual income tax. The Tax Foundation, a conservative-leaning research group, ranks Texas ninth-best on its State Business Tax Climate Index, largely because of the state’s lack of an income tax. On three of the foundation’s other major rankings — property taxes, sales taxes and corporate taxes — Texas ranks in the bottom 20 states. Texas does not have a statewide property tax, but local property taxes remain a crucial complaint among businesses and homeowners. (Terrence, 2002) The main benefit is that states with no income tax become a beacon for growth. They 're better at creating jobs and keeping a core of young, educated workers from moving to other states. The issue is undoubtedly controversial. Public opinion usually swings with the size of one 's paycheck and the role people think governments should play in shaping society. Texas has an above-average sales taxes, and Texas also has higher-than-average effective property tax rates. Cutting the income tax will boost take-home pay for everyone. It 'll make the state more attractive than its neighbors, creating jobs, drawing new businesses, and sparking an influx of talented workers.
Parent Corporation owns 85% of the common stock and 100% of the preferred stock of Subsidiary Corporation. The common stock and preferred stock have adjusted bases of $500,000 and $200,000, respectively, to Parent. Subsidiary adopts a plan of liquidation on July 3 of the current year, when its assets have a $1 million FMV. Liabilities on that date amount to $850,000. On November 9, Subsidiary pays off its creditors and distributes $150,000 to Parent with respect to its preferred stock. No cash remain to be aid to Parent with respect to the remaining $50,000 of its liquidation preference for the preferred stock, or with respect to any common stock. In each of Subsidiary’s tax years, less than %10 of its gross
Tax decreases can stimulate economic growth because if people are paying less in taxes, they have more money to spend. It has been proven over the years that tax decreases generate economic growth and federal revenue will always rise. From a personal standpoint I always spend more during tax season because I usually get a good return; since I am a single parent and full-time student, therefore, I qualify for various tax breaks. These obviously affect my household because I am more disposable income. Tax decreases can help a business if their taxes are decreased the organization will payout less and have more income.
However, raising taxes on the rich and corporations is not as helpful to our economy as most people think. Although raising taxes on the top percent of people and companies appears to create more income for the government, the result will make it harder for middle class and lower class citizens to grow. Some argue that by combining several key changes, including the simplification of the tax code to avoid loopholes and the decrease of taxes on the rich and corporations, there will be an improvement in the national economy. Although this may seem a bit counterintuitive, it makes more sense when looked at closely. By lower taxes and remove all loopholes, smaller businesses are given further opportunities to grow instead of facing financial roadblocks and government
For example, if the tax rate is seven percent and one person makes one thousand dollars they would pay seventy dollars to the government. While someone that only made one hundred dollars would pay seven dollars to the government; this they may deem unfair.
Tax changes can also affect the day to day lives of citizens. For example, in the fall of 2011, “Bill O’Reilly threatened to quit his popular television show if his taxes were raised” (Matthews). Taxes have such an effect on the lives of people that even famous people have had complaints over tax increases. If there is even a slight tax change, the people are affected greatly.
As with any government program, the type of tax imposed on the taxpayers depends on the political group currently controlling the government. With a republican president in office, we are seeing the effects of the conservative philosophy: cut taxes and limit government involvement, thereby decreasing poverty by stimulating economic growth. Earlier in his term, President George W. Bush passed a major tax cut with this rational guiding his tax policy:
The Federal Government relies predominately on the individual income tax, and federal income tax makes up more than 50 percent of the federal government’s revenue. Income taxes are paid by all those who earn income (Mikesell, 2011). It is essentially a bill from the federal and state governments for individual earnings through salaries and investment profits. Income tax is considered a progressive tax because the individual's financial obligation rises with the level of reportable income (Mikesell, 2011). Although income tax is the one of the most effective ways of raising revenue for the government, it is also one of the most controversial.
The reason for tax rates is not always directly related to economic growth. For example, a higher tax on alcohol and cigarettes may serve to reduce their consumption habits.