Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 19:53:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 0:57:21 GMT
From the article I attached,,, ”However, the rates are not necessarily the most important feature of the Scandinavian income tax systems. In fact, the United States’ top marginal income tax rate is higher than Norway’s and only 18 percent lower than Sweden’s, yet raises 40 percent less income and payroll tax revenue than Norway and 50 percent less than Sweden. Scandinavian income taxes raise a lot of revenue because they are actually rather flat. In other words, they tax most people at these high rates, not just high-income taxpayers. The top marginal tax rate of 60 percent in Denmark applies to all income over 1.2 times the average income in Denmark. From the American perspective, this means that all income over $60,000 (1.2 times the average income of about $50,000 in the United States) would be taxed at 60 percent.Sweden and Norway have similarly flat income tax systems. Sweden’s top marginal tax rate of 56.9 percent applies to all income over 1.5 times the average income in Sweden. Norway’s top marginal tax rate of 39 percent applies to all income over 1.6 times the average Norwegian income. Compare this to The United States. The top marginal tax rate of 46.8 percent (state average and federal combined rates) kicks in at 8.5 times the average U.S. income (around $400,000). Comparatively, few taxpayers in the United States face the top marginal rate.” But it's still not 55% for everyone and working on an average general income doesn't work out when no one in Denmark actually pays any income tax until they earn 46,200 DKK. Then you have the tax ceiling is the maximum tax rate applicable to your income. The tax ceiling is designed to ensure that your total income tax to the state and local administrations (i.e. bottom-bracket tax + top-bracket tax + health contributions + municipal tax) does not exceed 51.95% of your income. I love how people get the vapors at considering higher tax rates but don't say jack when it comes to paying tens/hundreds of thousands for college and hundreds of thousands-to-bankruptcy for medical care. Not to mention no mandatory paid time off for family leave, and on and on. FFS people. Also Automated Payments Tax - ALL COUNTRIES should be looking into this instead of the property/income/wage/utility/gas/etc/etc/etc taxes we pay now. apttax.com " How would it work? Consider a family with an annual income of $60,000, paying $20,000 in interest and mortgage payments on their house and spending $40,000 on all other items. The family has total transactions of $120,000. Today that family would owe roughly $20,000 in total taxes. Under the APT tax, with a rate of 0.7% they would pay $210 (.35% x $60000) on their income receipts and $210 on their expenditures for a total tax of $420. Their employer would pay $210 tax on the income payment, the mortgage company would pay $70 on its receipts and the merchants receiving the family's $40,000 of other expenses would pay another $140 in taxes. In total, the government would receive $840. And all the taxes would be automatically assessed and paid without filing tax returns. How then does the government collect enough taxes to pay its bills? Most of the revenues would be collected from the massive volume of stock and bond trades and foreign exchange transactions none of which are now taxed. One might be concerned that imposing taxes on these types of transactions would stifle economic activity in these critical areas, however, the tax is so small it would be dwarfed by the simple fluctuations in price that typically occur during the trading process. Although "day trading" and short term foreign exchange transactions will certainly decline, the reduction in these "hot money" transactions are only likely to reduce speculative market activity, thereby reducing the volatility of prices in these markets. Although every voluntary transaction is assessed the same low tax rate, the APT tax achieves equity and fairness because the wealthiest portion of the population executes a disproportionate share of financial transactions, whereas the poorest members of society engage in relatively few financial transactions since they have so much less wealth to manage. So it's inherently progressive.... Feige details how the replacement of our current tax system with an APT tax could save the government and its citizens as much as $500 billion annually by eliminating the compliance, collection, enforcement and inefficiency costs of our current tax system. "
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 19:53:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 2:41:06 GMT
Of course I was going to look into the APT...
There is not a lot of current stuff written about this that I could find. But then I didn't spend a lot of time looking either.
But I found this on Wikipedia...
”The rate of the tax is measured as the Electronic Single Side Rate (ESSR).[11] The ESSR is the tax rate charged to each individual. If the ESSR were 1%, then both parties to a transaction would pay the 1% tax. If a person were transferring money from one account to another, each account would pay a rate of 1%. For this transaction, the government would receive a combined rate of 2%. Dr. Feige writes that the tax could be as low as 0.3% to remain revenue neutral using data from 2005.[12] Instead of acquiring taxes solely based on income (whether corporate or individual), the APT Tax would broaden the tax base to include Stocks, Bonds, and Options Transfers, Money Saving Transactions, Goods and Services, and Foreign Exchange related transactions.[13] The ultimate goal is for the APT Tax to fund not only the Federal Government, but also "all state budgets (allowing the elimination of state income, sales, and excise taxes) as well as the public school portion of the local property tax."[11][12]”
Bottom line, in order for these fees to generate enough revenue to replace the various taxes, cash goes away and everything is done electronically. Otherwise there will be a lot of transactional fees missed when goods and services are paid for by cash.
Example. Once a month I take out a lump sum of cash that I use to pay for goods and services during the month. The only transactional fee I would pay is when I take the money out of my account. After that I would not pay another fee while spending the money. Right? So revenue lost. And it works for me because I’m not paying sales tax when I’m spending the money on whatever.
Yes I have a bank cards, but understanding there is no such thing as secured servers I don’t use my bank cards except to take money out of ATM’s and then only my bank’s ATMs.
There are a lot of people who still pay for stuff with cash. For whatever their reason.
San Francisco just passed a law that stores must accept cash.
At some point there may be a cashless future but not anytime soon or at least to pay for the various programs Sanders and Warren are touting.
So I guess it’s back to taxing the hell out of the corporations and rich, which Denmark has determined is too small of base to ensure the solvency of their programs. Hence the high taxes on the individuals instead. I don’t think I need to tell you that is not going to fly in the US do I?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 19:53:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 4:30:29 GMT
Taxing the $1TRILLION per day traded across all financial instruments is a good start at an APT and no, Wall Street ain't goin' to cash.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Aug 18, 2025 19:53:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2019 4:32:00 GMT
"7. Isn't there a big loophole around the APT Tax by simply using cash?
We must remember from Dr. Feige's bio - his expertise is in cash and "underground economies" so this topic is pretty well covered. It is known that cash goes through an average of 2.5 transactions between leaving a bank or other tax collecting entity, before it returns. So a tax of 2.5 times the electronic single side rate would be charged on withdrawal and deposit.
Based on the rate we are projecting of 0.3%, that would mean a tax of $0.75 per $100 cash entering or leaving a "taxing institution/account". That sounds a bit onerous but consider that replaces all the other Federal taxes and, if we can come to the agreements required to implement Phase III (see FAQ # 3) instead of sales tax at $6 to $9 per $100 spent.
One would presume businesses dealing in cash might choose to add that minute amount to the purchase, as sales tax is added today, to compensate them when they deposit the cash in their accounts. Monies paid to what is now an external wiring service, like Western Union, for wiring out of the country, would be taxed at the cash rate on deposit and, again, at the "electronic" rate on actual wiring. The savings would be so minimal for small transactions to go to very much inconvenience to avoid the tax that small time evasion is anticipated as rare. Of course, there still is envisioned a smaller, leaner and acutely focused IRS or equivalent to watch the very large transactions, especially those with a foreign side. "
|
|