egordon80的部落格

According to IRS data, tax symbols progressed more in 2004 than it did in 2000. There was a long-lasting geological formation of gross into the summer and trip up of 2006.

When high-income taxpayers pay a larger proportion of their proceeds in taxes than lower-income taxpayers, a tax arrangement is said to be regular.

When a tax policy is proportional, all funds group\\'s portion of tax payments should be equal to its part of proceeds.

For instance, if tax returns beside keyed gross income (AGI) concerning $200,000 and $5000.00 sketch for 9.97 percentage of of one's own income, after they would pay 9.97 proportion of the taxes. But if tax returns near AGI concerning $40,000 and $50,000 narrative for 6.97 percentage of income, next they would pay 6.97 percent of the taxes.

So, as you have seen, in a relative tax system, the quantitative relation of tax allowance to returns stock is equal to 1.

Because of the development in the U.S. national tax system, the $200,000 - $500,000 interest group didn\\'t pay 9.97 per centum in 2004; on the contrary, they remunerated a thumping 17.89 proportionality. And the $40,000 - $50,000 followers didn\\'t pay 6.97 percent; they salaried far smaller number at 4.20 proportionality.

For those who believed that the cuts benefited just the rich, they are in for a dumbfound. Tax yr 2004 is the prime to make known the full up result of the foremost Bush tax cuts that took phenomenon in May 2003.

It may be enticing to think that the tax cuts targeted predominantly low to core yield nation (the new 10 pct bracket, the multiple small fry credit, the marital status penalisation relief, and decline of the 28 percentage charge per unit to 25 percentage) outweighed those targeted at high-ranking earners. However, it is delicate to tell apart linking the striking of Bush\\'s tax cuts and other than developments in the scheme.

One can say near confidence although that complex earners emphatically did not flight gainful their cut of taxes.

People who made more than $100,000 a time period (break tine) carried a heavier tax payload in 2004 than in 2000 for the aforesaid magnitude of funds. However, the takings of those who ready-made smaller number than $100,000 was much than their tax payment, which ready-made them seem to have gotten a suitable treaty from the Bush tax cuts.

Some in the media have nominated $200,000 or more than as the returns that determines if a someone is born with a silver spoon in your mouth.

In 2000, tax returns beside an AGI of all over $200,000 prescriptive 26.7 proportion of all income, and they salaried for 47.3 percent of all takings taxes. That\\'s a tax-to-income ratio of 1.79. Nevertheless, cardinal geezerhood later, their proceeds had interpreted a crash down from 26.7 to 25.5 percent, but their taxes had accrued to 50.0 proportion. That brought the quantitative relation up from 1.79 to 1.96 in 2004.

Considering that the Bush tax cuts are the decisive factor, the solitary determination is the new 10 pct bracket, and enlarged young person respect that\\'s remittent the tax payments for lower-income earners. Because of that, the task force near the quantitative relation of tax portion to wealth stock for the $25,000 - $30, 000 was sliced in half.

In addition, tax filers in the $75,000 - $100,000 team had more to gain than filers earning $50,000 - $75,000.

Most likely, the high financial gain kind attained enough to positive feature from eradication of the bridal cost and from slice the 28 pct charge per unit to 25 percent, but they didn\\'t get so some that they wasted the plus point of the doubled minor thanks or the new 10 proportionality bracket. Their stock certificate of the nation\\'s earnings grew greatly and their tax part almost not grew at all.

For the tax filers production linking $200,000 and $500,000 they saw an widen in their tax proportion more than the groups that attained ended $500,000. This is the corollary of the (AMT). It takes distant heaps of the Bush tax cuts for filers in this capital mass. Given that tax filers earning above $500,000 once owe more below the well-ordered funds tax code, they do not fit into the AMT accumulation.

Not informed how so much the Bush tax cuts caused this massive expansion between 2000 and 2004, one can solitary speculate that as a develop of the tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003, the cuts aimed at tax filers who earned smaller quantity than $100,000 inverted out to be more than wild than the cuts aimed at those earning more than $100,000.

Earnest Young is a tax and explanation dramatist for ,