Controversy over Tax Collection Reflects Uneven Distribution of Wealth in U.S.

Published in Xinhua/Huanqiu
(China) on 9 June 2011
by Zhu Weiyi (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Lisa Ferguson. Edited by Amy Wong.
Who is rich, and who is middle class? This is the most important question of tax collection. U.S. President Obama's attitude is clear: Tax delineation is drawn at a household annual income of $250,000. At this, most Americans clap and cheer. Those with a household income of over $250,000 should be considered wealthy, and in all, they total less than two percent of the U.S. population. Yet these people do not think of themselves as wealthy and thus criticize Obama's standard as having no basis in economic analysis.

Some say that Obama is learning from Clinton: In 1993, President Clinton drew the line at $250,000 per household for a tax rate of 39.6 percent. Before this, when Bush Senior was president, the U.S. drew the line at $86,500 per household for a tax rate of 31 percent. There are also some who say that Obama is hoping for some good luck, because after 1993 the American economy was good.

There is a difference between having money and being truly wealthy. There should be a difference in the way the two are treated, with an emphasis on taxing the wealthy. However, since Reagan was in power, according to tax rate calculations, wealthy Americans have been paying less and less in taxes. In 2010, the wealthiest 400 Americans payed taxes at an average tax rate of only 16.6 percent. The tax rate of the extremely wealthy was lower than that of the average person because most of their income comes from investments, and long-term capital gains tax on investments is only 15 percent. In the 1950s, 60s and 70s, the highest U.S. tax rate reached 70 percent. Even in 1986 when President Reagan was in office, the highest U.S. tax rate was still 50 percent. But in today's America, it's a "fool's paradise" for the rich and powerful and the Wall Street manipulators.

For Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, a large part of their wealth comes from these taxes and can be said to be "ill-gotten gains." On the contrary, Americans with an annual household income of $250,000 or slightly higher have a tax rate of nearly 40 percent. Thus, these Americans are not at all convinced.

Moreover, this across-the-board line at $250,000 fails to take into account regional differences. Just like China, U.S. regional economic development has its inconsistencies. Living in Little Rock, Ark., an annual income of over $250,000 is enough to make one feel a little like the master. But in New York, an annual income of $250,000 is merely considered a comparatively good standard of living.

From 2002 to 2008, the income of the top two percent of wealthy Americans increased around 30 percent, while at the same time, the income of 90 percent of low-income people dropped 34 percent. This period of time was also a period of great development for America's capital market, yet it was at this time that the U.S. economy also started to slump. America's economic problem is not a growth issue but rather a problem of uneven distribution of wealth. One of the important reasons why the U.S. financial crisis happened was the uneven distribution of wealth. The wealthy largely consumed luxury goods, and as a result, this led to abnormal economic development; poor people had no money to spend on consumer goods. Thus, society's resources were used on wasteful and unstable production. Again, as mentioned earlier, since capital gains tax is much higher than individual income tax, wealthy Americans who invest in the stock market or property market can further distort normal market demand. Therefore, it is very important to understand who has money, but also to understand the distribution of wealth. This is important both for taxation and for rapid development of capital markets.

(The author, Zhu Weiyi, is a professor at China University of Political Science and Law.)


收税争议折射美国贫富不均
2011年06月09日 10:33:33  来源: 环球时报

谁是富人,谁是中产阶级,这是收税的首要问题。美国总统奥巴马的态度很明确:征税以家庭年收入25万美元划线。对此,大多数美国人拍手称快。年收入在25万美元以上的美国家庭应当算是富人,其总数不到美国人口的2%。但这些人觉得自己不富,批评奥巴马的标准没有任何经济分析的基础。

有人说,奥巴马是向克林顿学习:1993年,克林顿总统以家庭25万美元划线,税率39.6%。而此前,老布什在担任总统时,美国以家庭8.65万美元划线,税率31%。也有人说,奥巴马是要讨个吉利,因为1993年之后美国经济不错。

富人与富豪不同。对待两者应当有所区别,把征税的重点放在富豪身上。但里根上台之后,按税率计算,美国富人纳税越来越少。2010年,美国最富400人缴税的税率平均只有16.6%。超级富豪纳税的税率低于普通百姓,因为其收入大部分来自投资,而投资的长期资本收益税只有15%。上世纪50 年代、60年代和70年代,美国的最高税率达到70%。即便是1986年里根总统当政的时候,美国最高的税率也达到50%。但现在的美国是富豪和华尔街操纵的“愚人乐园”。

如果从税率看,巴菲特和比尔·盖茨,其财富的很大一部分来自少纳的税,可以说是“不义之财”。相反,家庭年收入25万美元或略高于25万美元的美国人的所得税税率却近40%。所以,这些美国人就很不服气。

此外,以25万美元为线一刀切,也忽略了地区差异。同中国一样,美国各地区经济发展水平也是参差不一。如果生活在阿肯色州小石城,年收入在25万美元以上,就有点人上人的感觉。如果是在纽约,年收入25万美元,不过算个小康。

2002年到2008年期间,美国塔尖2%的富人的收入增加了约30%,而同期90%的收入低端的人收入下降了34%。这一时期也是美国资本市场大发展的阶段,同时也是美国经济开始走下坡路的时期。美国的经济问题不是增长的问题,而是贫富不均的问题。美国之所以发生金融危机,贫富不均是一个很重要的原因。富人消费大多集中在奢侈品,结果导致经济畸形发展,穷人无钱消费,社会资源被用于浪费性生产和不稳定的生产。再有,如前所述,因为资本收益税率远高于个人所得税率,美国有钱人投资股市和房市,进一步扭曲市场的正常需求。因此,了解谁有钱很重要,了解财富分布也很重要,对税收重要,对大力发展资本市场更重要。▲(朱伟一 作者是中国政法大学教授)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: How To Avoid ICE? Follow the Rules

Germany: Bad Prospects

Germany: Nerve-Wracking Back and Forth

Russia: The 3rd-Party Idea as a Growing Trend*

Germany: Musk Helps the Democrats

Topics

Turkey: Conflicting Messages to Syria: US Supports Integrity while Israel Attacks

Japan: The Role of a Diplomatic Attitude To Maintain the International Order

Russia: The 3rd-Party Idea as a Growing Trend*

Germany: Trump’s Tariffs: China Acts, Europe Reacts

Germany: Trump Is Capable of Learning

Germany: Nerve-Wracking Back and Forth

Indonesia: Trump Needs a Copy Editor

Indonesia: Trump’s Chaos Strategy Is Hurting His Allies, Not Just His Rivals

Related Articles

Germany: Trump’s Tariffs: China Acts, Europe Reacts

Australia: As Trump Turns His Back on Renewables, China Is Building the Future

Indonesia: US-China: Tariff, Tension, and Truce

China: US Chip Restrictions Backfiring

Thailand: US-China Trade Truce Didn’t Solve Rare Earths Riddle