Active Users:2364 Time:18/06/2026 11:40:50 AM
what does it mean to "pay no federal income tax"? moondog Send a noteboard - 18/09/2012 06:30:28 PM
this 46 or 47% number of americans who supposedly pay no income tax keeps getting thrown around, especially by the political right in the US. we are supposed to be outraged that almost half of americans pay no income tax. in reality, the actual number of americans who "pay no income tax" is actually americans who "pay zero or negative income tax".

as a personal example, i got a tax refund last year. therefore, i qualify for the 46-47% who "paid no income tax". but, how did i get a refund if i paid no tax? the answer is that i *DID* pay income tax, but i overpaid my share based on my income and deductions. as a result, i got a refund of the amount i OVERPAID in taxes but i hardly paid zero income tax last year.

i realize that we will never stop having political candidates who are willing to stretch any amount of data to fit their narrative for re-election, but it completely frustrates the hell out of me to hear this particular stat being used to drum up republican support when the reality is that the vast majority of americans *do* pay income tax, but those of us who overpay our income taxes are somehow cheating the system or something :rolleyes:
"The RIAA has shown a certain disregard for the creative people of the industry in their eagerness to protect the revenues of the record companies." -- Frank Zappa

"That's the trouble with political jokes in this country... they get elected!" -- Dave Lippman
the actual tax study where this stat comes from
Reply to message
what does it mean to "pay no federal income tax"? - 18/09/2012 06:30:28 PM 1172 Views
Wrong - 18/09/2012 06:37:07 PM 727 Views
Additional categories - 18/09/2012 06:51:46 PM 852 Views
SS income is very much taxed, my friend - 18/09/2012 06:59:28 PM 722 Views
Re: SS income is very much taxed, my friend - 18/09/2012 07:22:35 PM 726 Views
The wealthy get their income from investments - 18/09/2012 07:33:55 PM 772 Views
ok - 19/09/2012 05:46:49 AM 825 Views
Is that true? - 18/09/2012 06:54:33 PM 744 Views
No, it's not. See my post (you should really have read it first ) *NM* - 18/09/2012 07:00:07 PM 306 Views
No - 18/09/2012 06:56:43 PM 737 Views
While we're talking about taxes, am I the only one who doesn't give a rat's ass about Romney's? - 18/09/2012 10:37:12 PM 699 Views
That sort of thing does matter to me - 18/09/2012 10:48:30 PM 657 Views
Ah, yeah, not so much for me. - 18/09/2012 11:16:56 PM 634 Views
You gave that away with your first post - 18/09/2012 11:49:28 PM 637 Views
No way! - 19/09/2012 01:41:04 PM 648 Views
Yuh huh! - 19/09/2012 08:56:01 PM 697 Views
As an outside observer ... - 19/09/2012 01:28:13 AM 695 Views
Re: As an outside observer ... - 19/09/2012 04:45:11 AM 663 Views
the question of legality has already been covered by the offshore accounts though.... - 19/09/2012 05:44:28 AM 681 Views
Different situation then the Birther stuff - 19/09/2012 07:02:09 AM 632 Views
It's a conflict of interest. - 21/09/2012 09:52:58 PM 648 Views
I think you got it wrong: - 19/09/2012 01:52:30 AM 649 Views
+1 - you are correct, moondog screwed the pooch with this post. *NM* - 19/09/2012 05:18:19 AM 283 Views
Easier to read/understand - WSJ data on the 47% - 19/09/2012 05:25:01 AM 818 Views

Reply to Message