Bush Tax Cuts For The Rich Actually Had The Rich Paying More Taxes
The liberals tell us that the Bush tax cuts were tax cuts for the rich. We know they were lying now because those same liberals now want to keep the Bush tax cuts that weren’t for the rich. But they continue to insist that people who are “rich” should have their tax hiked because they don’t deserve tax cuts.
But here’s the thing: The Bush tax cuts actually resulted in “the rich” paying more in taxes as a dollar amount because the reduced taxes prompted more economic activity, more prosperity and thus more taxes paid.
In 2000, for instance, the top 1 percent of income earners paid 37.42 percent of all income taxes collected. In 2008, they paid 38.02 percent. That’s down a bit from the peak of 2007 and reflects the recession hitting. The bottom 50 percent of filers saw their share of the income tax burden fall from 3.91 percent to 2.7 percent. Two groups in the upper half of the income distribution made out, it seems: Folks coming in between between 10 percent and 25 percent of income and those between 25 percent and 50 percent. Each saw their share of total tax collected decline a bit (like the share of taxes paid, this reflects the recession).
The Clinton rates in force between 1993-2000 similarly increased the total income tax share paid by the wealthiest tax filers. Both decades also saw general increases in the adjusted gross income (AGI) share, or percent of total AGI, among wealthier groups. In 2008, however, many of the top income groups saw their share of total AGI decline for the first time since 2001.
Here, via the Tax Foundation, is a chart showing the trends discussed above:
Going further, the left is fond of saying that the Bush tax cuts caused deficits, but the truth is that overall federal tax receipts increased for several years after the Bush tax cuts were implemented:
Spending, not taxes, is our nation’s problem.Tags: bush tax cuts