View Single Post
  #49 (permalink)  
Old 10-18-2008, 10:18 PM
allinaugust allinaugust is offline
Ultimate Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: in a house
Posts: 7,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by hambirg View Post
If she is being taxed on her entire $60,000, she is paying 25%.

She would have to make between 164,500 and 357,700 to be paying 33%

Tax Brackets (Federal Income Tax Rates) 2000 through 2008
But, my question is this: After all of our exemptions, deductions, and whatever all else you can write off, our "tax" was approximately $1,500. Then, we got a child tax credit that was equal to that, so our tax was then zero, so we got back everything we paid, and then some with the add'l child tax credit. So, what was our tax %?? Zero, or negative something or other???

Then, take someone who earns $30,000 and has no or very few deductions, and acutally pays in with no refund at the end of the year...... they are clearly paying a higher percentage than me, yet I have earned much more than them.

You see, to me the statement about the rich paying less in taxes doesn't really mean anything to me. The tax system, from looking at the tables, seems to be set up for the people earning more to pay more, yet, with deductions and other write offs, which are legal, they can actually pay less. I don't know that this necessarily makes it wrong.

What about the military person who re-enlists in a Hazardous Duty Zone, receives a Re-enlistment bonus of $60,000 and is not taxed on it at all, and it is not included in their pay figure, nor are many other payments, or monies earned in a HDZ. Does that make it wrong??? You could easily have someone making $200,000 in a year, and getting a refund, since much of their income is not included or taxed.
__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.