41–50 of 98 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wrong. If it's not a loan then it's a gift and that's not taxed either for $1,200 as I mentioned. No need to even report it if it's under $16,000 per year.
Venmo will happily send you a 1099 form if it's above the 600 dollar threshold. We have Joe Biden to thank for that. It used to be higher.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s still interesting, and I bet many on HN hit that top bracket.
When he died, Benjamin Franklin bequeathed $5,000 to the city of Boston. This was a large sum at the time. Today, it's just a paycheck for a software engineer.
Interesting. I think it would be more impactful/meaningful if it also had columns for inflation adjustment, income distribution, and average effective tax rate. It seems like when it first started, it only taxed the rich and at a very low rate. Then it expanded from there, to the point where 20% was the min and 91% was the max. Then lower to what we have now.
Looking at 1961, where we have 20% and 91% marginal tax rates, this comes out to be ~19k and 1.9mil, adjusted for inflation (2k and 200k nominally). Compare these days, where we have 12% min and 37% max for 10k and 500k respectively. If we were to tax at 37% using 1961 threshholds, you'd have to be making 95k inflation adjusted (that's the 38% threshhold), or 10k nominally. Something else I found fascinating was that…
I have to imagine that the IRS tax tables aren't a recent creation, so the math should have been similarly easy.
I don't understand why we don't just not tax income below say $20k. It can't be a lot of money for the government even in aggregate, and it would make a huge difference in low income people's lives, arguably larger than any of the government programs their taxes are going to fund.
I'm not sure the scale of this being taken advantage off though but it's well know benifit if you situation allows.
The economy overall grew by 37% during the 1950s. At the end of the decade, the median American family had 30% more purchasing power than at the beginning. Inflation was minimal, in part because of Eisenhower's efforts to balance the federal budget.
Unemployment remained low, about 4.5%.
1950 Tax Rate - 91.0% > $400,000 The economy overall grew by 37% during the 1950s. At the end of the decade, the median American family had 30% more purchasing power than at the beginning. Inflation was minimal, in part because of Eisenhower's efforts to balance the federal budget. Unemployment remained low, about 4.5%.
https://taxfoundation.org/taxes-on-the-rich-1950s-not-high/
Average rate paid by the 1% back then was around 41%
Interesting. I think it would be more impactful/meaningful if it also had columns for inflation adjustment, income distribution, and average effective tax rate. It seems like when it first started, it only taxed the rich and at a very low rate. Then it expanded from there, to the point where 20% was the min and 91% was the max. Then lower to what we have now.
Looking at 1961, where we have 20% and 91% marginal tax rates, this comes out to be ~19k and 1.9mil, adjusted for inflation (2k and 200k nominally). Compare these days, where we have 12% min and 37% max for 10k and 500k respectively. If we were to tax at 37% using 1961 threshholds, you'd have to be making 95k inflation adjusted (that's the 38% threshhold), or 10k nominally. Something else I found fascinating was that…
For example, 401k, IRA, 529, 403b, etc didn't exist. A lot of states and localities didn't have income taxes at that time either. If the deductions and overall tax code was simpler, then calculating the brackets would be easy - you're basically taking the percent times each bracket max until you get to your top bracket, then the amount in that bracket times that percent.
My understanding is that most people could do their taxes just based on the instructions on the back of the form just because there weren't so many deductions, credits, and complicated securities/instruments.
I couldn't find info on the deductions, but this was interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When he died, Benjamin Franklin bequeathed $5,000 to the city of Boston. This was a large sum at the time. Today, it's just a paycheck for a software engineer.
What does that have to do with tax brackets?
Better yet, do overall tax burden rather than just income tax.
Everyone loves to get a good ideological circle jerk going over the nominal 1950s rates but the actual tax burden at (various different points on the income spectrum) paints a very, very, different picture.
I don't understand why we don't just not tax income below say $20k. It can't be a lot of money for the government even in aggregate, and it would make a huge difference in low income people's lives, arguably larger than any of the government programs their taxes are going to fund.