Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mit-eddie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!we13!ihnp4!mit-eddie!lkk
From: lkk@mit-eddie.UUCP (Larry Kolodney)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Do the rich pay their fair share? - (nf)
Message-ID: <1606@mit-eddie.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Apr-84 18:20:41 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.1606
Posted: Thu Apr 12 18:20:41 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Apr-84 21:13:54 EST
References: <29200122@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 34

Scott Renner's tax tables are quite convincing until you read his last
paragraph.

Of course people with adjusted gross incomes in the 50% range pay a much
larger percentage per person of the tax burden, thats just simple
mathematics and you don't even need those charts to back it up.

MOST tax loops-hole use deductions  on UNADJUSTED GROSS INCOME in order
to make the payer pay less.  Thus, your statistics only tell us about
those rich who choose not to take advantage of the loop-holes.

It is quite conceiveable, for instance, that a person with an annual
income of $100,000 could claim $0 AGI due to business expenses such a
purchasing a rolls-royce or going to a convention in geneva switz. (yes,
a rolls-royce is a valid deduction).

The Reagan Administration has also speeded up the depreciation schedule,
so that still another source of deductions has been made available.

There was a very interesting Article in an issue of co-evolution
quarterly last year.  It made an argument that a flat tax of something
like 14% on total income with no deductions (adjusted for social
security at the $30,000 point), would provide equal funding to the
current system.  THis has the benefit of decreasing the marginal tax rate
as well as eliminating tax-loopholes.  It claimed that most people's
taxes would go down.

I'll post excerpts from it if there is interest.
-- 
Larry Kolodney
(The Devil's Advocate)

(USE)    ..decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!lkk  
(ARPA)	lkk@mit-mc