Hypocrites! Not one of them, or Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, puts their money where their mouths are, by writing a separate check to the Treasury to pay their "fair share." I daresay most of the entertainment industry, a group whose majority have no love for the President, also have not sent one check out of the guilt they feel for being allowed by law to hold onto their money.
But Mr. Prince seems baffled by how taxes work anyway. When asked why he had not cut a 'guilt-edged check', his reply was, " I don't want to just give away my money to the government." It should be explained to Stephen Prince that paying taxes isn't like choosing one charity in the United Fund to receive your donation; it's one big pool of money. Some goes to programs he likes, some goes to programs he hates. Such naivete about the funding of government should perhaps engender establishing a trust by his relatives or friends to handle his own finances, to keep him from being swindled.
5
If these rich folks truly believe they are not paying their fair share, nothing is stopping them from voluntarily paying more. I have yet to hear a coherent explanation for why they don't do so.
9
Nothing prevents them from making donations to the Federal government
https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html
Yet they make no mention of this simple method of paying the amount above and beyond their legal obligation.
Why is that?
7
Mr. Gelles - Thanks for this article. Having "dropped out" of a formerly wealthy life, I've pretty well lost touch with the people I knew who have lots of money. But I figured there had to be some Patriotic Millionaires out there, as a number of the people I used to know had hearts and minds - and were not content to sit around like Scrooge McDuck, staring at their piles of gold coins.
3
Anybody can pay more tax if they choose. Boy, talk about an easy subject to be pro-choice about!
Wanna pay more? Go for it! Meanwhile, if we want to direct our "more than we need" money to charities and worthy causes, ok if we keep doing that?
3
Four hundred people own more than half of everything there is to own in the US. That's 0.00012%. It's hard to get your mind around that. Republican voters have drunk and still drink the Kool-Aid since Reagan "cut taxes" and then added tax on Social Security. It's on purpose to eventually destroy Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. "Starve the beast." I encouraged my kids and will encourage my grandkids to leave the sinking ship.
7
This is a great example of fake news. Mr. Prince complains about not paying enough in taxes, yet he won't donate the additional amount he thinks he should pay. Says he "I don't just want to give my money away to the government." Since it's allowed, my question is "why not?" Isn't that what taxes are all about- giving your money to the government? If this person really exists, it sounds like he doesn't want to pay more, he just wants everyone else to pay more. This is the typical liberal position. Note to liberals: if you feel that you aren't paying your fair share, just pay whatever additional amount you feel is appropriate- up to 77% as suggested by Bernie Sanders.
7
I agree that he should donate the money that he would be paying in taxes, but it doesn't make the article "fake news." There are plenty of rich people not paying their fair share of taxes, and we shouldn't have laws that enable them to do so.
8
If more of the ultra-rich and corporate CEOs don't wake up and smell the coffee, the pitchforks will indeed be coming, as Nick Hanauer predicted several years ago. They are already amassing on the left and the right.
1
Hooray for these enlightened rich people who realize that being rich while others starve is wrong and shortsighted as well. This is the kind of situation from which revolutions are born. Off with their heads if they can't share their wealth to make this country a better place to live.
22
The phrase "traitor to my class" really struck me. I then realized why - I don't feel any class solidarity with other people in the 22% tax bracket. I want what's best for my family. I try to be open to policies that might be good for the country even if they're not hugely beneficial to me. It's never occurred to me that I and everyone else in my social class should unite around policies that are maximally beneficial to us. It kind of reinforces the Elizabeth Warren idea that class warfare has been occurring for decades, but only one side has been fighting.
4
Trump/GOP’s top priority was to give themselves/ultra wealthy a massive tax cut which we the average folks will have to pay off for decades. Then, during midterms, Trump/GOP promised a small tax cut for the middle class. Since then, not a single word from Trump/GOP about that. Shows you Trump/GOP’s priorities. Wouldn’t it be nice to be Trump/GOP- To be able to give yourself a huge tax cut anytime you want to. Think about that the next time you see your taxes going up while theirs are going down.
4
To Roberta Kaplan's point, my republican father also believed it was a special privilege to be in a position to pay taxes in support of community and government I strongly feel the same way. Our Federal government needs fiscal management, but it is a 'gem' and one of our greatest resources - not the wasteful behemoth the right makes it out to be - try running an airline without NOAA or the FAA!
6
Last three paragraphs are telling. If it is such a good idea for high taxes, why don't we see large numbers of these rich individuals kick in what they deem as their fair share? Answer must be that they feel that they can better do good works if they chose on their own rather than handing the money to the government bureaucracy. Should we doubt their wisdom?
4
"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required," reads Luke 12:48 in the King James Version.)Jan 26, 2007
9
Enact a flat tax.
2
doesn't make sense.... give your 3 million extra in income to the US Treasury.... if you want to be taxed more then you should be willing to contribute more
4
@roseanne dickovitch He is willing to contribute more. He just wants all the other millionaires and billionaires to also contribute more.
3
Mr. Prince says, “I don’t want to just give away my money to the government,” he said.
Is it because he thinks the government does such a poor job in properly using his money and he could spend the money in a more effective manner? Then why does Mr. Prince think others should be forced by taxation to give an even larger share of their income to the government? The simple fact is the government is wasteful and inefficient and people are sick of it.
3
An 'around the world cruise' ??? I'm a college professor and had my water shutoff last month. This semester started January 4th and as of today, I still have not received a full paycheck. (They withold our pay EVERY semester for 4-6 weeks). I don't know how I'll have money for food this week if I use what I have to put gas in my car. I'm highly educated and work two other jobs and haven't had a vacation in over a decade. As a middle aged hardworking, experienced, bright single woman, I've experienced bias in the the workplace and job searches that make racial discrimination look like a cake walk. Mr.'Prince' gets a lead story in the NYT. He's so wonderful to support more equality for his fellow Americans while he's luxuriating in the lap of luxury. He gets a gold star for the day. And what do people like me get ?
3
Until people like Mr. Prince actually put their money where their mouths are, by actually paying what they believe they should pay in taxes, their sentiments and beliefs are just hypocrisy.
If you think taxes on you personally are too low, pay more tax, or at minimum don't make use of your allowable tax breaks. Give back until it at least starts to hurt.
But everyone wants someone els to pay.
4
There is no law against voluntary tax payments. If one ( limousine liberal ) feels guilty, pay more.
4
the Bloomberg's and Shultz's of the world don't get it or, if they do get it, they don't wan't it. What, in fact, they need is at least an eighty-percent tax placed on their absurd amount of income. hen, maybe we will begin to see the start of some sort of equality in this otherwise backward country.
1
"Mr. Driscoll said he would double his support for progressive causes and politicians..."
NO!!!! I am a progressive, but this is THE perfect example of exactly what is wrong now. The wealthy currently own our politicians at all levels of government.
The people - all the people - own government, not just the wealthy few, who are absolutely responsible for law being written in their favor, at every turn.
I was a child during the Eisenhower era - my minimum wage job gave me my college education with no debt. A single earner in a family could support that family comfortably.
But from the 80s on, we could never, ever "get ahead," but only got pay raises that kept us just where we were after inflation. Wage stagnation. And the wealthy just kept (and now keep) getting wealthier, with nothing better to spend all that hoarded money on than yet another "luxury" cruise. Disgusting.
2
People who earn their money through work generally have a very deep sense of fair play. They learned it through their efforts or from their parents. People are handed money have a sense of entitlement. This holds true for the rich and the poor.
The Constitution clearly states that all men are created equal. Unless this country decides to deeply search themselves what is fair for all versus what I can get for me. We will continue to have these problems. And our culture will continue to Decline!
1
The only practical way to implement a “wealth tax” is to create a progressive estate tax. The only time it’s possible accurately to calculate someone’s net worth is when those assets are being passed on to heirs. The assets of the truly wealthy are likely so complicated that evaluating them every April 15 would require months of auditing, wasting time and money.
I don’t have any sympathy for heirs whose supposed entitlement comes from being born into a wealthy family. Instances where a progressive estate tax would dissolve a family business (farms are often used as examples) are likely very small in number.
Also, it’s about time that capital gains are taxed the same as ordinary income. It wouldn’t reduce investment. What else would people do with income that was left over after their bills are paid? Even spending it on “stuff” would grow the economy by increasing demand for products, services and the jobs required to deliver them.
2
If they're feeling patriotic, why not just donate the amount of taxes they feel is fair? In California, such wealthy patriots also need to be aware of how inequitable their property tax treatment might be, and pony-up for that as well. I'm not hearing an outcries about the unfairness of this, even though it severely effects school funding. eg "in 2003 financier Warren Buffett announced that he pays property taxes of $14,410, or 2.9 percent, on his $500,000 home in Omaha, Nebraska, but pays only $2,264, or 0.056 percent, on his $4 million home in California."
4
It is a very, very well proven fact that the infrastructure in this country is in desperate need of repair. Water delivery, not to mention CLEAN water, our sewer systems, our electrical grid, our transportation systems, all are not being addressed. What ever happened to that fantastic infrastructure/jobs bill that the Republicans promise during every election cycle, only to drop the day after the votes are counted? More to the point, why do the media and we the people drop the subject? The rich don't use the subway or mass transit so they don't need to care if people are packed into squalid conditions like sardines. Take an around the world cruise--out of sight out of mind. Remember Leona Helmsley--only little people pay taxes.
2
The ultra wealthy have many opportunities to give to charitable causes and they can make gift tax free donations to the U S Treasury if they feel that their tax bills are too low. have at it!
The risk here is the definition of "wealthy" and my experience as a tax lawyer is that every taxpayer thinks that the people who have income more than then them are "wealthy" and should be the one's who pay more , when in fact many of those people have been dutifully paying taxes, been employed and have never drawn on the social services that were once considered a person's personal responsability as opposed to a service provided by the government that is paid for with other people's money.
2
What family controls an exorbitant amount of the countries wealth and gives a very small percentage to charities let alone their employees? I am talking a combined wealth far more than Me Bezos. Their Dad’s first name I think was Sam. The perfect example for why we do need a more progressive tax system.
2
I appreciate Mr. Prince for his commitment to democracy but lament that he made his fortune from plastic. The poor will pay the highest price for climate change.
1
It is always surprising to me that people like Mr.Prince are so adept at telling others what is wrong but unwilling to simply exercise their wrists by writing a bigger check. There are plenty of needy causes that would happily accept the contribution.
5
Thank the wealthy. Absent their tax payments, the 47% who pay no federal tax would have to start contributing. Opportunity? Strip out government wasteful spending. There’s plenty of low hanging fruit.
2
My comment will mirror many others, if you feel you're not paying enough, write a check to the IRS. If it's the right thing to do, then do it. I contribute to charities not because of the tax deduction but because it's the right thing to do. and I feel good about it.
7
If Mr. Prince is really upset about this, why doesn't he write a check to the IRS and donate his refund back to the government? It is his free will to do so and he should. Some people could use the refund to donate to charities, or use the proceeds to invest in early-stage start-up companies that always have trouble securing funding. Mr. Prince could do any of these things rather than loll around on a luxury boat that emits a lot of carbon and destroy our earth.
8
The wealthy made a huge return on their investment in politicians and many of them will use their savings to buy more influence. Even the philanthropic get to choose what types of causes they feel are worthwhile. It's entirely undemocratic and will not end well.
1
I understand their concerns with unequal tax laws however. If they have too much money it should be easy enough to find a good cause to give it to.Cancer research,the poor,schools etc
5
I democrat house member authored and 174 democrat house members cosponsored Social Security 2100 Act (HR 1902) that raises Social security payroll taxes 2.4 percent 0ver 24 years for income under $132,900 and over $400,000. 80% of Americans make under $132,900 and just .5% of the wealthiest Americans make over $400,000. This bill will put all but .5% of the burden of keeping social security solvent on the 80% earning under $132,900. I am not rich, but I am mad. Low income people are living as much as 10 years less than wealthy people. The fleecing of the least fortunate Americans continues, not by Trump and republicans, but by democrats. Two parties are now one.
1
You may write a check out to the IRS any time you want to. Please do not wait. Our country needs to pay off its debts.
11
It's possible to want to reduce tax breaks for income from property and capital while objecting to proposals to tax wealth. Politicians will open back doors in budgets to benefit the donor class irregardless. More specific tax on wealth could result in increased regulatory burden on everyone, that would be even more punishing under the purview of the most earnest believers (for relief from the 7 deadly virtues, see Donald Trump). The tax code, bilaterally simplified in the 1980s, produced surplus through the 1990s even as its loophole elimination was being rolled back, until right-wing tax lobbyists joined special interests to take control of the congress and white house.
Want to eliminate excess wealth? Try inheritance tax. Want to raise additional revenue? Try simplifying the tax code and tax capital gains as ordinary income. Just because it worked before doesn't make it a bad idea. If you want visions, take LSD.
1
How annoying that so many commentators suggested that wealthy individuals who object to their outsized tax savings write a check to the IRS or give to charity. If this is what they gleaned from the story they should immediately return to school and take classes in reading comprehension and critical thinking.
Mr Prince was simply stating what most of us already know: Trump's tax "reform" favors the most wealthy individuals and short shrifts the middle class. If readers failed to understand this it is not surprising given that our creepy Sec. of Treasury Munchin provided Congress with a 1 page summary of a 500 page bill, as the basis for their vote.
He demonstrated a concern that Republicans would propose cuts to Medcare, Medicad, and SS to make up the short fall due to tax cuts in the escalating and unsustainable national debt of $21 trillion and growing national debt. Of the pressure exerted on so many Americans who would find an increase in their tax bill untenable. He is more interested in an equitable tax system and is aware of how divisive the Trump tax reform is to the healthy functioning of democracy and society.
Unlike so many Republicans, Mr Prince wasn't self righteously grubbing for undeserved dollars.
I wish there were more Mr Princes who spoke truth to power.
I am not normally a vindictive person, but a part of me wishes every Trump voter is stripped of health care and receives a higher tax bill so they pay the price of their stupidity.
5
The top 10 of tax payers already pay 80 of all US personal federal income taxes. The top 1 percent pay 38 percent of all federal income taxes. Both of those are objective facts, taken from IRS data. It is impossible to either raise or lower federal income taxes in the US without disproportionately affecting the so called "rich."
The rest is just noise.
4
@ Arizona... you must have not read the end when the writer of this piece asked Mr. Prince if he would voluntarily pay more tax than he legally owes. Mr. Prince emphatically refused to do so. That makes him a grand standing hypocrite. Nothing more, nothing less.
1
Send a check to the I.R.S. But he doesn't want to give his money away, typical
4
The sorrowful fact is that the government cannot fix what is wrong with America because what's wrong here is cultural. You think the Scandinavian Model proves otherwise? Wrong! Read up on the real story: Law of Jante - Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante. Civic virtue leads to good laws, not vice versa. We are getting laws that reflect who we are.
4
Rigged game people. Our forefathers would cringe.
2
Please, NYT, print the classic New Yorker cartoon of the insanely rich folks going to the movies to watch the news reels and "hiss Roosevelt", that most famous traitor to their class.
2
Hey Mr. Billionaire...I don't care how much you give to the Met or your alma mater...you're noblesse oblige ain't workin.
4
Bet the new pass-through laws especially benefit the Trump organization. But will the American people see the tax returns that would confirm this massive swindle? Let’s hope so, and quickly.
As Nixon said, the American people deserve to know whether their President is a crook!
4
Better a traitor to your class than a traitor to humanity.
3
Since when are Michael Blomberg and Mr Schulz liberals? Come on NYTimes, quit trying to redefine the goal posts!
50
Mike Bloomberg is worried about climate change, the proliferation of guns, a woman's right to have an abortion. He has used his own money to support these causes both publicly and anonymously. That is true also for job training for African American men.
If you want him to give all his money to the poor, most of whom would probably spend it down on big flat-screen TVs and cars, then you want too much. The poor will always be with us especially when they have babies before they can support even themselves let alone 4-5 young ones.
5
@B. Not important what I want, whats important is that all the positions you mention are very much centrist positions. I am perfectly happy to debate and evaluate those positions on their merits, I just don't want them labeled as "liberal" because then the liberal positions all of a sudden become radical. A process by which true solutions to our ills keep getting pushed off the table rather than being seriously considered.
12
With US public infrastructure rotting away, and not being rebuilt even with the unholy offset of borrowed money, some bright bulbs have figured out they don't want to finance the foundation for doing their business from their own personal pockets.
1
Mr. Prince is an idiot and he knows it.
If he thought government spent money well, he would make contributions, but he knows it would be wasted. so why argue for more taxes.
5
Consider. Government is not a charity.
2
RE: Mr. Prince, speaking from the Silver Whisper, said he had no plans to make voluntary contributions to the Treasury. “I don’t want to just give away my money to the government,” he said.
1)So Prince won't put his money where his mouth is. Typical limousine liberal.
2) Also he is pretty ignorant about taxes. The unit of measure is dollars not rates. Prince is indeed paying much more than most people just as Warren Buffet pays much more than his secretary.
3)Finally investment income should be taxed at lower rates. Encourages people to save for old age when they no longer can work.
4
“I’m pissed off about it,” said Mr. Prince, speaking via FaceTime during a four-month, around-the-world cruise with his wife.”
OMG, that’s hilarious...
6
Little secret for ya: self-made millionaires generally want others to have the opportunities in this country that they had. Inherited millionaires like Trump just want more and more and more. They owe nothing to this country, because it didn’t give them their wealth, their parents did. They only see the US as a government taking from them, not a country giving them opportunity.
You’re welcome.
343
@Mike While the gap between wealth and poverty needs to be addressed throughout the world, including the United States, I would caution against such stereotypes and generalizations. One should never categorize all persons of a group as thinking one way, unless supported by peer-reviewed empirical evidence. Otherwise, such claims, Mike, are nothing more than hyperbole and distract from making progress to address the issue.
8
@Mike, I think the point is that there is no such thing as a "self-made millionaire". It is just that delusional thought that supports our current system of gross financial inequality. Until all people recognize themselves as part of a vast community of interdependent beings and realize that no one does it alone, we will continue to have a country where the few rise on the backs of the many.
13
@Glenn Franco Simmons true: Trump may lack generosity, but look at the Roosevelts. Being rich after being poor is no panacea.
9
Those who are wracked by guilt because they feel they don't pay enough in taxes can put their money where their mouth is by figuring out what they feel that they should pay and writing a check (credit card or pay pal is also acceptable) to the Bureau of Fiscal Service and sending it to Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Fiscal Service
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188.
Until they do this , they are just hypocrites.
5
The government is not a charity. They are functionally different things.
3
A lot of rich people give a lot to charities which in turn do a lot of good.
Right now, with the government we have, I wouldn't want to give them a lot at tax time.
(Oh, that's right, I already do. I am, after all, solidly part of the middle class.)
2
We are at an extreme in the swing of the pendulum. Now it is time for it to swing back. Does the top 1% want every last dime? The rich and their lackeys in government would have us believe it is a one way pendulum. That is ridiculous.
4
The millionaire capitalists who lined the campaign coffers of the Uber wealthy red state senators will have to answer this question: why can’t I, a middle class mortgaged home owner in California who also pays a HELOC set up three years ago, buy a new refrigerator or replace my roof this year????
It’s because my tax bill went up $3,000. And when the IRS published a fraudulent calculator showing improper set-asides in early 2018 so that the tax scam could be muted, i was left with an inability to render accurate cash flow.
Maybe I just won’t file! If 10 million of us did that, Wyoming wouldn’t get its federal welfare.
Never mind. You all will be tossed out of office and replaced with Democrats who will repair the damage.
6
Dear Patriotic Millionaires,
Please launch a public education campaign aimed at the lower and middle classes who keep voting against themselves. That would be an excellent use of both your patriotism and your resources.
Sincerely,
Patriotic Paupers
6
Lots of comments on how the author could donate instead of support involuntary means. All of the author's class need to and eventually will pay high rates they can not imagine now. Because they hurt the common man the next thing they are led to the guillotine. And in our times that is over 70%. History repeats. Read Will Durant!
1
If you think you are paying too little taxes please write a check to the US Treasury for the amount you believe you are undercharged. Problem solved.
3
Government is not a charity. They are functionally different, serving different purposes.
2
For the people who are "upset" with feeling that they are not paying enough in taxes, there exists a simple solution...write the I.R.S. a check and send it in! Simple!
4
Government is not a charity. They are functionally different.
2
They are different. When you give to a charity, you get to see the immediate good that your personal funds enabled.
So what? You keep repeating an irrelevancy. If Prince doesn't want to voluntarily pay more, why even bring up that he thinks he's undertaxed?
2
Another billionaire who's "sick" about his riches. As I've said here many times: if we could figure out a way to tax Arrogance and Hypocrisy, we could balance the federal budget in 5 minutes.
4
I am wary of the word “patriot”, b/c it has been co-opted by all manner of folk w/ vastly different political philosphies that seem to variously emphasize “greed”, “bigotry,” “white supremacy,” as well as the use of guns willy nilly to support their “patriotism.”
Absent a dark side which wasn’t reported on, I’ll cautiously call Mr. Prince a true patriot. He worked hard, undoubtedly with inspiration and effort, and is now on a round the world cruise. AND, he doesn’t feel he pays enough taxes to offset his acquisition of the “American Dream.”
Good on him!
Pragmatically, though, I think he should create a foundation to house his unexpected and unwanted governmental gift. From that foundation, he could donate million dollar packets to legitimate organizations in need. They’d be thrilled, and he probably would be, too!
Let me suggest one out of the many deserving his consideration: There is a school, the Springer School, in Cincinnati, OH, that teaches learning disabled children (normal to high IQ w/ discrepancies in how they can learn) that could do even more good by being able to offer their services to middle and high schoolers. One million dollars would allow them to expand their scholarship base and open a high school.
I know, up close and personal, how this school not only helped my children become the successes they are today, but gave us, as extremely anxious and helpless parents a sense of much needed calm in the face of their competence.
Enjoy your cruise!!
1
Look, let’s do something. This Prez and his fan base are an object lesson in what it means when democracy goes crazy. (It happens.)
All of us—rich, poor, and in-between—should be marching in the streets. (BTW, where is the sound track for that sort of thing, the musicians like Guthrie, Dylan, Baez?).
If you’re super- or just very rich, you have a special responsibility to put your money where your mouth is.
Plesse help fund a movement to organize, not just resistance, but non-violent protests and civil disobedience.
Everybody who’s sick of Trump and his supporters should do something now to make it absolutely plain that this administration’s style of givernment isn’t us and that its legislative shenanigans are for the birds!
The time is right for action in the streets.
2
1. Rich people getting richer does NOT trickle down and makes us all happy.
2. The problem is not bad greedy rich but humans being rich. Nobody should expect too much of any human. They are not an enlightened bunch, by and large.
3. There is evil in the world however. Take the GOP for instance and the Churches of the Republican Way that promote war, gun deaths, environmental destruction, and the bashing of the poor, destruction of a free democracy, etc.
3
“A traitor to my class” - a person is a citizen of the United States and member of the human race. Class is an arbitrary distinction that designates accumulating wealth as the meaning of life, a competitive sport. Always nice to hear and remind ourselves that just because someone is wealthy, it doesn’t mean they have little to no concern for their fellow man. The idea that one has an obligation to their class is silly to this reader, however.
1
Why rage about it simply right a check to the IRS, it’s that easy
2
But it would be illogical to do so. The government is not a charity.
2
Why is this article so small it is barely mentionable, barely notable on the page? I won't get an answer from the New York Times but I'm asking anyway. The poor in this country are also ignorant of what keeps them poor. The government does its best especially the republicans to keep the issue from being reported. Particularly any item on income. The Times does its best to report the issue but it still keeps the issue on the down low. The reason is obvious; the are many people who would have to pay more in taxes if the government were obviously fair.
Nothing is stopping these rich souls from writing the treasury a check....is there? That is if they are so upset about being under taxed.
1
Nothing stopping them, but it would be illogical and meaningless to do so. The government is not a charity (think about it) and their contributions would not be significant enough to make any difference.
2
What about an estate tax that is higher for the very wealthy? It would raise money for government, but also make it so the children of the ultra-rich at least have to think about money. Bill Gates is only leaving each of his kids 10 million. That's enough for a smart person who works to live more than comfortably on till the end of their days, but little enough that a stupid person could easily squander it.
3
A “National Emergency “ followed quickly by a trip on Air Force One to play golf is all you need to know.
2
A very uninformed dimwitted actor, Ronald Reagan, rode the horse of no government, no regulations and less taxes to the White house. David Stockton, the architect of 'trickle-down-economics' eventually admitted that it was a ruse, but it was too late.
In 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.
Citizen United was the final domino in the selling out our government to the corporate world. Our politicians have sold their voices and votes for campaign money and now control the agendas of all three branches of government.
How else do we explain our governments climate denial? Working class Americans need to find their voice, soon, or our children will, at best, be little more than slaves of the rich owner class.
6
The only consideration for tax rates should be to maximize the amount of federal taxes collected, nothing else. The federal government collected a record $1,683,537,000,000 in individual income taxes in fiscal 2018 (October 2017 through September 2018). So the tax cut resulted in recorded collections. Why? Jobs created.
1
NYT is lying about the impact of Trumps tax changes. Under Obama I was paying 4K at tax time on top of my withholding. This time....400. Nothing changed on my side. I make under 100k, have 2 kids and a disabled wife. Liberals screw working people into the ground all while loudly announcing that they are the party of working people. What a joke. God bless Donald Trump.
5
@JoeBobFrank
Don't you think lying is a bit strong, after all, you are not the only taxpayer. Good for you JoeBob that you saved on taxes. But I can guarantee you that there will be millions of your fellow Trump voters who will be stunned by the increase in their tax bill and feel betrayed by our "I'm to smart to pay taxes," president.
Your conceit ignores the current unsustainable national debt at $21 trillion and growing rapidly in large part due to Trump's tax "reform." I only hope your disabled wife will not suffer a reduction of any benefits she might receive.
5
@JoeBobFrank I have a disabled child and wife who has severe arthritis and when the Obama tax rates were in effect I was paying over $80,000 in Federal, state, FICA, Medicare taxes. I am hoping I won't have to send in another $7,000 or $8,000 this year to the Federal and state government like I did the past few years. I can save that money for my son's future care. I kept getting hit with AMT year after year. P.S. My wife doesn't get any disability benefits because she stayed home too long to take care of our autistic child. Then she was hit with very bad arthritis and could not work and is not eligible for SSDI according to their rules.
1
One of them said some nonsense about how he wants to fight "hunger"- no you dimwitted Daddy Warbucks, the issue is solving what causes hunger: runaway capitalism. Putting a chicken in every pot isn't going to solve a damn thing, we don't need charity we need a system that doles out wealth FAIRLY, which is what the Green New Deal is all about (in spirit anyway). We can start with paying people a LIVABLE WAGE and scrap this destructive version of capitalism that destroys the environment. That guy got rich off making plastic cards, goodness knows how much of that junk winds up in the oceans.
2
@Keely The New Green Deal is a joke that will not work. Are we going to have Americans junk their perfectly good gas powered cars in favor of unreliable electric cars that lose range the minute the temperature drops? I'm very happy with my Toyotas. Great, dependable cars, low maintenance and I could probably get another 200,000 miles out of them if I had to. Why do you want to punish lower income Americans by forcing them to buy expensive electric cars that have unreliable technology? Also you cannot make enough electricity in this country unless you replace natural gas and oil with nuclear power plants and there is no way you can build high speed trains which criss cross the country to make air travel "obsolete." They couldn't even get it done from San Francisco to Los Angeles in California. The new governor of California just canceled the project due to cost overruns.
2
This rings completely hollow. For every one of these people who fear the guillotine, there are 100s who could care less, are completely ignorant of history and want that second yacht and don’t care how many ordinary Americans go without food or medication to make ends meet. The rich pour money disproportionately into conservative candidates, conservative think tanks, conservative media. Multiple studies have shown being wealthy correlated with lower levels of empathy. They have waged class war on the rest of us for too long. It’s time to fight back in the political arena, because if we don’t the fight will happen in the streets.
2
"Mayor Michael Bloomberg ... called Ms. Warren’s idea “probably unconstitutional.” "
Ummm ... so a tax on assets is unconstitutional? This will be news to states and localities that levy real property taxes and taxes and fees (e.g. vehicles) based on the value of the asset.
6
Have Civics in high school? The 10th Amendment provides the states the authority to tax property. Cities and Counties, as creations of a state,can do what a state allows. Article 1, Section 9 specifically limits Article 1, Section 8 in the area of direct taxes, taxes on specific people to be paid to 5h3 Federal Government by those people. Any direct taxes must be apportioned by a state’s population. The state with least population would pay the lowest share of the tax. All the high wealth people would become Wyoming citizens. The 16th Amendment provides for only exemption to Article 1, Section 9: Income taxes. The amendment also defines income taxes.
If you think the Federal Estate Tax is a wealth tax, your high school teacher would have told you that tax is officially an excise tax. The tax is on a one time transfer of wealth to new owners, essentially a stamp tax that has existed on and off since 1800. No movement of wealth means no authority to tax.
2
There are many of us who benefited from the Trump/Republican tax cuts and who continue to oppose Donald Trump, with his phony populism, and the Republicans who aid and abet him.
Trump’s willingness to put the burden of paying for the tax cuts on America’s working people and his deceit in undercutting Obamacare and Medicaid should mobilize all Americans, regardless of our financial windfall.
America’s most vulnerable people need us now, more than ever before in our history.
4
There’s nothing to stop these people from paying more taxes. So, if they are that patriotic why didn’t they start years ago...?
3
Because it is illogical and meaningless to do so. Government is not a charity (think about it) and the amount paid would not make a difference.
1
Those who rail against other wealthy individuals who understand the inequities of the new tax code, and income inequality in general, and call them "traitors to their class" are the real traitors. They may not be traitors to their class, but they are traitors to the entire country by not paying their fair share of taxes and by maintaining and furthering a system that redistributes the nation's wealth to a select few.
4
I have sailed on the Silver Whisper and must commend Mr.Prince. He has great taste in sailing and a wonderful sense of what really makes America great. This gentleman is a true patriot and reminds us of how greedy Trump and his pals really are.
3
Capitalism is the best model to provide the most economic well being BUT the form of croney capitalism that now dominates our country is a farce. We have insurers and health care providers who rig prices in collusion with politicians. where free market supply and demand do not determine legal costs in a country crawling with JD’s, where CEO compensation is determined by not by merit and real results but “pro forma adjusted” fakery and by how many pals you packed your board with. Free Market capitalism works fine, we just don’t practice it here in America. Our tax code rewards this phoney system of smoke and mirrors by allowing these practices to flourish.
2
No penthouse is safe if it is expanded with materials stripped out from the levels and foundations that support it.
When the entire structure is hollowed out and neglected too long, it collapses and takes the penthouse with it.
It 's a pity more of these penthouse dwellers do not see that they are engineering their own destruction.
3
Nothing keeps these wealthy individuals from paying more in taxes. They should just write an extra check to Uncle Sam.
1
It’s comforting to know that “Patriotic Millionaires” like Stephen Prince are engaging in a “quixotic quest” to increase their own tax rate. Trying to craft a means to force the government to take more of his money while sipping coffee from sparkling china in exotic locales like French Polynesia must be especially taxing, no pun intended. Even more stressful is having to endure accusations of “treason” from his wealthy peers. Sadly for him, sojourns in far off lands aboard luxury cruise ships likely offers no escape from their presence nor solace from their criticisms.
Until Mr. Pence and like minded patriotic millionaires succeed in having their tax rates raised it is understandable that he has no plans to make voluntary contributions to the Treasury. Quixotic quests can be expensive and the millions of dollars the Trump tax cuts saves him will allow him to continue his.
1
I suppose rich people complaining about paying too little in taxes makes them traitors to their class, but if that’s the case then so are the lower class people who supported the tax bill and traded peanuts for a deficit busting handout to rich people.
4
The Republican ideal now is always endless welfare for the rich. After all the ultra-rich would suffer so much if they didn't have a third private jet.
2
Beware billionaires and multi-millionaires espousing higher taxes. Warren Buffet and his ilk already have there’s so it’s easy to pontificate about how everyone else should kick in. Mr Buffet is in the enviable position of controlling how much he pays in taxes by keeping his income low thereby rendering any discussion of how he pays a lower marginal rate than his secretary completely disingenuous. Further, the bulk of Buffet’s estate of $70-$80 billion is going to pass tax free to the Gates Foundation which avoids the taxation he seems to like so much. This charitable giving is noble but puts the $’s in the hands of a private charity which will make better decisions about how to use the windfall compared to the federal govt. regular citizens don’t have that luxury. Berkshire Hathaway has also never paid a dividend which has created a vast trove of untaxed wealth for shareholders who control what they pay in taxes until they decide to sell or via estate planning to pass along wealth virtually tax free. Warren Buffet needs to keep his mouth shut and allow regular folks the opportunity to pursue their own path to accumulate wealth and to better their lives as they see fit.
2
No equitable tax system, no government, no civilization, no path to pursue wealth accumulation.
Go Warren!
:-)
1
Apparently many members of the wealthy class have no class at all.
3
Oddly, I don’t see in this article any mention of Mr. Prince voluntarily giving the extra tax savings he’s so enraged about to the IRS or to any charity.
2
The government is not a charity. It’s noble to give to charity, it’s patriotic to pay taxes.
1
The Trump Corporate Welfare Tax Bill must be eliminated. There were too many loopholes in corporate tax law, before this give-a-way. Any corporation doing business in this country must be taxed. If they don’t like it, you can’t profit here. Real estate like Trump’s, should be taxed with additional premiums for the inflated values that they have created. Gang GOP “gave away the store”, Democrats, after winning control of the Congress, should make them give it bake , and penalize all recent corporate “buy backs”, for the inflated values that they caused. The reasons for that reform were all , smoke , it was really just GREED coming home.
3
Paying more taxes because your rich is a problem most people would love to have. I am rich compared to most people and also think I can afford to pay more. My problem is the percentage that the ultra affluent pay. Warren Buffet says he pays a less percentage than his secretary does. Once you achieve the stratosphere level of wealth you can afford smart tax attorneys to weasel out of paying more.
Write offs for the affluent include 529s, 401ks, mortgages, HSAs, SALT, children.
The AMT is still alive and kicking yet Buffets and Trumps of the world get to somehow avoid it.
1
So when will ??we see Trump's taxes?Perhaps we can build the wall with his returns for a start. And I also need to see the entire family. And his lackeys.
3
Kudos to Mr. Prince (oh, the irony of that particular name in our new gilded age). At least he has a conscious. The rich are the only one's with a class consciousness in this country, which is why his friends call him a traitor to his class, which he is. Good for him. I can't even imagine a bunch of blue collar Trumps supporters sitting around and drinking coffee touting Trump's policies and one of them standing up saying "You are traitor to your class!". Now, that would be rich.
3
The ultra rich contribute billions to politicians in order to ensure that laws get written to save them money in taxes and to limit regulations on their businesses. They prefer bribery that benefits them personally over tax payments that benefit all. They need to consider what the likely consequences will be should America’s wealth inequality and disinvestment in public goods continue and exacerbate. Social collapse may leave them wealthy but maybe not. Third world economies don’t thrive. And there’s the danger of revolution. Beware the guillotines, guys.
3
On my headstone, I want these words: "He died with massive amounts of wealth in his accounts". Not.
1
The readers of The NY Times should question this newspaper more often. Your region is losing jobs and people. You can thank your elected officials. And yourselves, you voted for them.
Before tax reform, our economy ways growing at the slowest pace in decades following a recession (Obama years). Now the economy is growing and jobs are plentiful because companies are staying in the US. Tax rates are more aligned with other countries. Rich people invest. Invest in companies and create jobs. Any rich person that feels like they aren’t paying enough taxes is certainly free to give more to charities (non-profit hospitals)or invest in companies hiring. The government is not good at spending effectively.
Funny how even those opining here think one way. The writer interviewed only a few people and never gave you another point of view. But not many journalists have to cover a payroll.
Oh, and if you don’t change or consider the other point of view, then other regions will accept the job growth. But please don’t move.
5
@MooreUS
The reformed tax rates might be more aligned with other countries however citizens of other countries actually get real value for their tax payments:health care, child care, free university education, real vacation time, significant retirement benefits and accommodations, decent housing, food that is not genetically modified, etc. In other words, countries where citizens may pay very high taxes receive in return a quality of life that insures dignity and promotes community, and humane values.
While we Americans receive non of these benefits and our only solace is that thieves and thugs like Trump and Munchin (responsible for hundreds of thousands foreclosures through essentially illegal bank and mortgage practices and left unprosecuted by CA then AG Kamila Harris, who is the only democrat to receive a campaign contribution from Munchin, $2 million.) and his wife who lords her haughty propensity of overpaying for luxury goods and then having the classless gall to publicly gloat over her lavish idiocy. In fact, the more America is exposed to its wealthy citizens the less there is to admire. For example Zuckerberg and his tech ilk who would sell America's democracy for profit. Or Jeff Bezos, the world's premier promoter of mindless consumption currently in the news for uninspired sexting to his generic mistress.
This is not innovative creative capitalism rather it is destructive plundering. The ultimate cost is our democracy.
1
They rather not starve the goose that lays their golden eggs.
They should all put up or shut up. And it's not about giving money to their favorite causes. It's about writing a tax to the United States Treasury for the amount of the windfall. Nothing else is acceptable.
2
Long before AOC started high school, I had similar negative thoughts about billionaires and other very wealthy people. What most people need to realize about the very wealthy is that they are not just greedy and stingy, but that they are mentally ill. Only psychotic people would think that a world that includes people who die of hunger and disease on the same streets they have their chauffeurs transport them on is a sane world. In fact, in examining climate change and inequality, we can find that living by the rules of this system of irrational rewards and punishments is leading the human race to extinction. It is barbaric and Neanderthal to think that any man, Bloomberg, or Trump, or Bezos, or Gates, --or any other ridiculously wealthy individual--has done anything that truly merits the level of reward they have received. It would be barbaric even if our streets weren't filled with the homeless. We may not have a mutually agreed-upon solution to this terribly unfair state of the world, but we should agree that it's abhorrent to a level that positively demands that all of us should be working tirelessly toward a solution.
5
Elected Politicians control the tax code and tax rates. For decades, individually they have accepted significant campaign funding, and who knows what else, from lobbyists, corporations and the wealthy to structure the tax code for the rich to get richer and the middle class get poorer.
Our tax code is over 70,000 pages filled with discrete loopholes bought and paid for. It has been reported Amazon, a beneficiary of these loopholes, paid no taxes in the last two years.
The OECD Revenue Statistics 2017 show the US tax to GDP ratio decreased from 28.2% to 26% in 2016 compared to the OECD average of 34.3%. The US ranked 31st out of 35 OECD countries in terms of tax-to-GDP. This is before the Trump tax cut!
We must find a way to hold self-interested and self-enriching Elected Politicians, government officials, their staffers and operatives from both parties personally and financially liable, responsible and accountable for the lies and half-truths they have told US, their gross mismanagement of our county, our $22 T and growing national debt (105% of GDP), and our $80 T in future, unfunded liabilities they forced on US jeopardizing our economic and national security, while benefiting themselves, their staffers, their party and special interest donors.
4
I wonder if the inexorably greedy 1% in the U.S. have considered the fact that we folks in the bottom 99% can still get a pitchfork for under $40...American made too.
6
Unfortunately, human nature leads to far too few Mr. Princes. Consequently, we need policy changes, perhaps like those of Ms. Warren and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez. I hope that when that happens we look back on the current times and see them for what they were--a period where the economy was captured by, and run for, the super wealthy and to the detriment of the rest of us.
4
I am one of the lucky ones. I will likely save around $30k on my 2018 taxes because of the tax act of 2017. I don't need the money and certainly did not ask for this cut. That said, I think the direction of the "Democratic Socialists" is entirely incorrect. Their proposed tax rates are meant to be punitive instead of helpful and will serve as deterrents to wealth creation. There are much more common-sense solutions to "pick everyone else up" instead of "put the wealthy down." For instance, much private wealth has been created on the back of government research, such as with the internet and space travel. Govt. could and should retain trademarks and charge licensing fees. Big companies should have worker representatives on the board to ensure their voices are heard. And most of all, the Fed should normalize interest rates. The reason people like me have made a fortune is due to artificially inflated asset prices in stocks & real estate. Let interest rates go to a true neutral. I'm happy to live with the effects that has on my asset prices while regular folks have an opportunity to choose whether to invest in risk assets or earn a decent return in a savings account.
4
Billionaires wouldn’t be billionaires if they had a moral compass and figured out ways to give it back and help those less fortunate. Even I, as a Social Worker, making very little, have figured out what I am able to donate on a monthly basis.
4
It's how pass-through income is treated that is the most egregious aspect of the current law. You can say that it promotes entrepreneurship, but only an intro to microeconomics instructor could say that with a straight face. In the real economy it amounts to a giant, legal tax dodge hiding in plain sight. We can (and should) do other things to promote small and medium-size business. But creating a two-tiered tax system between salaried employees and investors/business owners has been and continues to be a road to a dark future for the American workforce. Taxes are for suckers, according to Donald Trump. The last thing we need is for our tax law to promote the idea that the same is true of work.
5
@ jsomoya... Business owners take on more risk in the form of potentially losing their invested capital and risk of default on bank loans if the business doesn't turn profitable. As a general rule, owners of businesses also work harder than their employees because they care more whether the business is successful or not. The "pass through deduction" under IRC 199A was designed in part to reward this risk taking as it's critical to job creation in our economy. The other reason is that the corporate tax rate was reduced to 21%, so the 199A deduction was needed to provide tax relief to small businesses (who generally aren't subject to the corporate tax rate).
3
As a 30-year career educator with two Masters degrees, for the first time I now owe $1200 in taxes; last year I received a $4000 refund. The disparity between my salary & taxes and the many new millionaire residents I share my city with is one I can no longer stomach. I’m moving back to Canada, (where I lived while doing a graduate degree); at least the high tax rate directly benefits me (and others like me) in the form of medical and unemployment insurance. In the USA I am no longer part of the middle class. My country has become morally bankrupt.
12
@MA Taxes for thee, but not for me!
This piece presents a lifestyle that is completely foreign to me but interesting. You can also learn about other people's lives from the Neediest Cases files at Christmas time, and they live that way all year long. I agree with the post about whether you want to maintain the status quo where the is such disparity knowing do many lives could be better with some sacrifice by the 1%.
2
If the tax laws are enacted by elected representatives who are funded by multimillionaires, they will favor multimillionaires. It’s very difficult for a person to see inequity when his blindness results in self-interest. Until we get the money out of politics. Until we outlaw campaign contributions and fund political campaigns with public money, we will have tax laws that penalize the many and favor the richest among us.
Check out makeitfair.us.
We can have an equitable tax policy. We can have a just society. We need to pick our elected representatives based on their ability to solve problems rather than collect campaign contributions. Please join us
2
It is nice to see that at least some wealthy folks interest goes beyond amassing wealth for themselves and includes concern for the greater good. Patriotism used to mean wanting to give back to the country, not wanting to figure out ways to give less. Everyone who is successful has built their success at least partly on the infrastructure of the country - public investment.
4
Good on Mr. Prince for speaking out. Now go out and help some Americans with that extra money Mr. Prince. It won't be hard to find people that need and would appreciate the lift up.
5
Ok, where is the part that covers how each is using their tax windfall to provide raises, not bonuses. A raise is a long term versus a short term onetime bonus. Or perhaps pick up more of the employer part of health insurance.
Also, I didn’t find anything related to employee training that would lead to employees enhancing their skills.
Sure, they may make more substantial contributions to their favorite charities, but, what about the people who work for them?
4
The progressive radio host Thom Hartmann is fond of telling about a wealthy businessman he knew when he lived in Germany years ago. When Hartmann asked the gentleman how he felt about the 51% he was taxed, the man replied "why would I want to be a rich man in a poor country?"
8
Let's see if we cannot redirect the dialogue here.
The problem is not inequality (at least, not economic inequality).
The problem is economic DISPARITY.
When a society has hopeless masses toiling away to scratch a living out of the earth, and at the same time a very few who control that society's wealth, access to privilege, and political power, that society is on its way to self-destruction.
And that is not radical Marxism, by the way. It is as old as the biblical Book of Micah.
4
To those who would say: “Why don’t they just donate their excess funds to the government?”
This is a fair question. The fair response is that the government is not a charitable organization, so it is a fallacy to equate them. The government is a system by which we collectively organize ourselves to promote and maintain civilization. The financial burden for its administration should fall then on the citizens equitably (as that may be defined), and it shouldn’t rely on charity for its functioning, as by definition, some would definitely not pay their fair share.
This argument assumes of course that people value civilization more highly than chaos - debatable.
3
“Yet when Mr. Prince scrutinizes the laws that govern his payments to the Treasury Department, he sees an inequitable system that asks too little of him and his peers, and too much of those with not much to spare.”
You don’t say? I think this rich dude is onto something.
3
Since the 1980’s and the reign of St Reagan, virtually all the economic gains have gone to the top 10% on the wealth scale. Those between the 90th and 99th percentile have kept pace with gains while those in the top 1% have done fabulously well.
It’s not clear that the wealthy have become more deserving or more productive. But it’s the aggregate productivity gains that have been funneled to the top. Along with that redistribution of wealth have been repeated tax cuts that lessen the personal and corporate contribution to government revenues. Reagan started that trend of trickle down economics followed most notably by Bush the lesser and now the Trump abomination. That’s not rain trickling down your leg, it’s Trumps favorite color liquid.
Now we’re adding a trillion a year to the deficit at a time when baby boomers are retiring and increasingly drawing from Social Security and Medicare. Accelerating technologic changes will threaten working class jobs. And the looming climate disaster will require significant economic reordering with the inevitable winners but no doubt many losers.
A 70% top income tax bracket and 2-3% wealth tax may not be enough, but it’s probably a good start. If it doesn’t hurt, you’re probably not contributing enough. Just ask the bottom 90% who done more that their share for decades.
3
@Michael Tyndall You should really start reading more. Try this article: "ECONOMIC FREEDOM OF THE WORLD: AN ACCOUNTING OF THE LITERATURE" It indicates greater economic freedom (e.g.,modest taxes and regulations as opposed to your suggested high taxes) are much more frequently associated with positive societal outcomes. Recent research is even indicating high taxes and overzealous regulations are exacerbating income inequality (i.e., the exact opposite of your desired outcome). Our societal problems and economy are complex. Progress will require creative and intellectually challenging solutions. Blindly calling for high taxes on rich individuals and businesses is an intellectually lazy approach that is predicated on a perceived sense of fairness. Nothing more. Nothing less.
@Marcas in order to have modest taxes, all the tax ' loopholes' need to be closed. That is tax policy. Amazon for the second year running paid no taxes. It had expected a $3 billion dollar tax support from NYC. The recent federal tax law reduced corporate tax to 21%. But the effective tax was zero for many. If one argues modest taxation, then one must also argue for elimination of favored deductions, equitably of taxation from source: wages and capital gains/investment income, offshore accounts etc. The argument that if you tax more people will move only goes so far: Monte Carlo is full, they are building out a pier, new Zealand is going to be far more selective about sales of real estate/ citizenship as their own population rebels against the Uber wealthy. And more information ala Paradise Papers will out those who demand wealth but that the general populace protect them.
3
@Marcas
'Blindly calling for high taxes on rich individuals and businesses is an intellectually lazy approach that is predicated on a perceived sense of fairness.'
It's not blind or lazy at all. Trickle down economics manifestly hasn't worked. Instead, those tax breaks should be reversed and additional taxes levied to the extent they pay back the treasury for past economic malpractice.
BTW and as you no doubt know, Economic Freedom of the World is an index put out annually by the Fraser Institute, a Canadian think tank described as conservative and libertarian. They get some funding from the Koch brothers as well as oil and pharmaceutical interests. That doesn't negate their publications, but it does raise questions when you start with a point of view and publish to that end.
Per JK Galbraith, the modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
2
Since the federal government apparently doesn’t need their money they should contribute more to poorer neighboring communities right where they live. Better schools, police, child care, health clinics, homelessness, the arts, infrastructure - essential problems that the federal government is unwilling and clearly incapable of dealing with.
As one very rich guy said, I have a wife ,2 children, we al have adequate clothes and a big house and 2 cars. I vacation when I want and where i want. I have all the stuff i can use. My business and success depends on people buying my products. If they don't have a reasonable salary to buy things then I go broke. I don't need more I need my customers to have more.
10
Let’s not forget The moderately rich. A guy I know bought a airplane, a new corvette and is building his forth house on Key West (not rental houses) in lieu of paying the money in taxes.
5
@ Paulie... Good for your friend! That sounds fantastic.
4
For those who would criticize him for not “donating” his money to help pay down the debt:
I wonder if Mr. Prince objects to donating money to the government because it would have little effect. Let’s pretend he is worth 1 billion dollars. He gives it all to the government to pay down the debt.
That would lower the national debt by about 0.0043% (and do almost nothing to help the problem).
So he is correct if he is feeling his contributing would have much less impact than if the system were changed and the entirety of the top 1% were asked to pay higher taxes to the system that allowed their success to occur in the first place.
5
Give his money to a worthwhile charity and he can watch his money do some good.
How can we not realize the Christian perspective in Mr. Prince's comments? If we are really are a country based on a Judeo Christian heritage his words and sentiment should be the rallying call of the GOP.
I am sure Mr. Prince is no saint, like all of us, but his wisdom in this regard should make us all think a little more serious about our responsibility to ourselves and others.
3
Good for these people. They get it. I wish the rest of the super wealthy would understand they've benefited from the government their taxes support.
9
Let them pay more...and eat cake!
For the rest of us benefitting from the new tax laws I will gladly pay off debt and invest our windfall.
3
Oh the irony... "Mr. Prince, speaking from the Silver Whisper, said he had no plans to make voluntary contributions to the Treasury. “I don’t want to just give away my money to the government,” he said."... Millionaires talking about how they want to pay more taxes yet they will not voluntarily pay more to the government when asked if they will do so by this reporter (by the way, I'm so glad this question was asked). These people think they can better direct their tax savings to charitable organizations and causes they believe in where the money is more impactful than letting the government have it. So what are they complaining about exactly?
9
This is a fair question. I think the fair response is that the government is not a charitable organization, so it is a fallacy to equate them as such. The government is a system by which we collectively organize ourselves to maintain civilization. The financial burden for its administration should fall then on the citizens equitably (as that may be defined), and it shouldn’t rely on charity for its functioning. This assumes of course that people value civilization more highly than chaos - debatable.
4
Ted talks Hanauer ' Beware fellow plutocrats the pitchforks are coming'. It is when the inequity is so great that the underclasses have no choices left for survival. 'we are doing fantastic!' except that a record number of Americans are three months behind in their vehicle payments. A marker of the choices on where to spend the limited income. The statement of using extra money to fight for hunger causes is obsene. Pay taxes. Pay wages. The three month shutdown as a marker of workers as pawns. History repeats itself. We don't seem to learn.
5
@Mnemosyne Americans don't know how to manage money. Most are fiscally reckless and, even worse, vote for like minded politicians. The best car is one that is paid for. My wife and I could buy a new 40k or 50k car every year, but we choose not to because it's not a wise investment of money. When we do buy, we usually buy used cars with relatively low miles.
1
@Marcas yes. And not use credit cards as a loan. Only buy what you can pay for. Taught my children that. But it marks you in a category that has more financial resources than much of the population. Your good financial stewardship is part of what makes you secure. Many do not have the basic wage, a retirement, etc. Our economy has changed. Having grown up with executive compensation more closely aligned to worker pay, corporate interest more directed to product quality, sustainability, worker sustainability and appreciation, and community partnership. We now have a gig economy, part time jobs, no corporate retirement accounts for most, primacy to shareholders. It is an unsustainable direction. Yes, teach fiscal responsibility, fund great public education. But it does not negate the need for structural policy changes to address institutional inequality. And the consequence of not doing that is demonstrated in history. Taking from Janice Joplin: Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.
3
Rich people could award scholarships... That would help the poor get an education they don't have to pay back the government for, where the poor kind of repay your taxes a second time with interest and pray the degree made enough of a difference... The recession generation keeps getting overlooked, too. They bully us as "millennials" but no one really likes to look at what we (the older "millennials") went through, just make fun of us for not coping better with the devastation of emerging into adulthood in a world of layoffs at a time when the newspaper suddenly had no viable job adverts in it. Now there are none of those at all -- we have to build our resumes based on pleasing an algorithm and hope someone magically picks us. I'm trapped in the "gig economy", because I cannot afford daycare even though I got a finance degree. That shouldn't happen. I don't need the wealthy to be taxed more, I just need to be able to do something to make myself be able to survive. It will mean literally nothing if someone else paid a couple million more dollars in taxes, not unless that means I can get affordable daycare. And yes, I have resorted to going on the waitlist, I am so desperate. It's humiliating and it apparently takes forever. I need a real opportunity. I need something sustainable I can maintain myself. I've settled for the waitlist now that I've given up on getting to that on my own. It's humiliating, but it's the closest thing to an answer I can find.
6
@Amanda
You go girl! Speak truth to power. May you shine brightly.
1
The claim: I am outraged that I am not forced to pay the government more in taxes, but I am refusing to exercise the voluntary option of paying more to that same government. Saying it differently: I want to be forced to pay more tax to our treasury. If I’m not, I will not volunteer to pay our treasury.
While I don’t doubt the sense of obligation of folks like this, and agreed— our government may not be the best place to fulfill that — but the contradiction by Mr. Prince’s own statements makes his sincerity soft.
It’s ok to make money and live well, but if you claim a moral high ground on giving it might be ok too to put your money where your mouth is.
5
@Independent Mr Prince may or may not be sincere but Warren, AOC and Bernie certainly are.
2
Seeing themselves as a class unto themselves says it all. I can see an uprising in the future where the working poor say enough and take their vengeance. Is it right to do so? No, but admittedly, the super rich have long gamed the system at the total expense of nearly all others.
5
Mr. Prince and the rest of them are nothing but insincere people making phony claims to advance their personal political agendas.
If he and others like him think it is so right that they pay more taxes, then they would voluntarily pay the governments the extra amounts they think they should owe. But instead they fill out their tax returns and go to effort and expense paying tax and accounting professionals to take advantage of every deduction and tax avoidance scheme they can. They could just enter their gross income and not go to such effort and thus actually pay the more tax they pretend they want to pay.
Warren Buffet is among the worst behaving advocate for higher taxes. He has efforted to take advantage of tax avoidance schemes in the code to eliminate many BILLIONS of dollars of taxes. At least 40% of money that he donates to charity would go to tax. It is actually much more than 40% because his donations are probably of very low basis stock that if sold instead of donated would generate income tax of at least 23.8% and then estate tax of 40% on what is left. In addition, his donation gets him a deduction against income tax that he would otherwise owe on the income he has.
3
While I don’t find her to be very charming, I’m growing more certain that this is why we need to elect Elizabeth Warren as our the next president.
12
I was irked at the discussion a few years ago of making Obama's temporary payroll tax relief permanent. Sure, I was seeing a nice $80 a month extra from it, but at the cost of mine and everyone else's future social security. Still now, I would be happy to pay more taxes to prop up this deteriorating country (which it is, in so many ways) as long as I know everyone else is paying their fair share.
Civilization isn't free.
9
On the one hand Mr. Prince wants to pay more taxes and on the other hand he says, referring to voluntary contributions, "I don't want to just give away my money to the government." Seems a bit contradictory, to say the least.
3
@Jim
Not at all. It doesn’t do much good if an individual makes a donation. To really make a difference, the tax code has to more equitably apply to all the super-wealthy. I believe that’s his point.
10
The "generous wealthy" are still living quite comfortably and even luxuriously, and I don't begrudge them for it. When you're wealthy (I'm not), you spend money for things, and one thing worth spending money on is a salve for your conscience. Spending money that way makes you feel good, and that should be the whole point of spending money.
@Paul Abrahams Most Americans are living luxurious lives compared to their counterparts across the globe. Income of about ~32k per year places you in the top 1% globally. Americans rank 4th globally in terms of income, but only 25th in wealth. We constantly spend more than we earn. The average dual income American family should have at least one million dollars in net assets in their 50s, but most of them simply spend too much. We don't need $200/month cell phone plans, $150/month cable plans, $60k cars, etc. We all need a reality check about our spending habits.
1
@Marcas We also need a more equitable distribution of wealth and income. What we have now is a failure. Not as bad as Somalia, granted, but so what?
4
@Doug Lowenthal I agree that income inequality is not desirable, but we should be very judicious in positing solutions. The least intellectually challenging and viable idea is to assess high taxes on rich individuals and businesses. Recent research has demonstrated that high taxes on both businesses and individuals, especially in concert with overzealous regulations, actually exacerbate income inequality. Why? Only those with the necessary financial means or political connections are able to navigate the morass.
The U.S. has reigned supreme not too long ago and I am hoping that the Trump aberration + the Republican greed over the last 40 years plus will be fixed (ah,ah).
Global the planet will become, perhaps in the form of multitude of "states" under the purview of a "federal body of governance" assuming we generate the appropriate planetary Constitution. There is plenty of work and infrastructure that needs to be done here, on other planets, and in space and people will need to deploy, govern, robots and more importantly think BIG!.
There are also very basic precepts that will have to be cast in stone. Equality for ALL including women, people not like us and even white men.
Fair taxes for the Common Good will be another such precept and it better be set up before we all gel into a
universally accepted "federation". The overriding factor, to be mathematically arbitrated, is that nobody operates in a vacuum and it is the overall well-being of an economy that "lifts all boat" and this well-being is the result of everybody pushing at the wheel, not always equally.
The only reason some water frees itself into gas is because EVERY molecule participates in conducting the heat necessary to reach escape "velocity". The 1% cannot cannot do it on their own and never will. The 1% will NEVER access space or eliminate cancer, or the next frontier on their own.
Yet, because we ALL are asleep at the wheel, we let people like Bloombers or Shultz and others define the playing field.
2
Lets not forget that tax cuts for those who don't need them are really a political fundraising "bankshot" for politicians. The parties know that a percentage of the bounty for the undertaxed will find its way through the Citizens United and K-Street cloaca into their re-election campaigns. The politicians themselves see lucrative lobbying and consulting opportunities for their post-elective careers.
8
Such hypocrisy. I want to pay more in taxes, but I won't just give my money to the government. Stop focusing on people with so much wealth that a modest tax increase or decrease doesn't make a material impact. Nobody seems to want to address the burden of higher taxes on working professionals, who are far from wealthy, but who will bear the burden of increased taxes. While a few extra thousand dollars may not change the spending habits of someone who can take a 4 month around the world cruise, that money to a working professional could mean the difference between whether or not they do a home renovation or buy a new car or many other things that put money back into the economy.
6
The proposals mentioned in the article affect dollars earned beyond $10 million in annual income, or beyond $50 million in net assets. The democrats seem to have acknowledged that while the 99% vs. the 1% was effective for getting income and wealth inequality into the national language, the people earning six figures while they dig out of medical school debt really aren’t the systemic problem at all.
Per the Washington Post this morning, Amazon paid no taxes on $11.2 billion in earnings last year. Actually, it received a $129 million federal tax rebate, so its effective tax rate was negative one percent.
4
@ Ryan... Are you a CPA who has a deep understanding of Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 740, Accounting for Income Taxes? If not, then I assume you are ignorant of just how Amazon could get to those results. If you are ignorant of the accounting rules then I'd recommend not expressing an opinion on what the results actually mean.
1
I read an article the other day explaining that government revenues were down because of the new tax laws. Ignoring facts while listening to the scallywags (aka Republicans) who were promoting the tax legislation is bearing evidence which will quickly be swept under the rug. The power of the people is so diminished by voting ignorance. Maybe if they see their tax liability rise this year, it might hit home....but I doubt it. Many are not playing with a full deck.
4
I don’t think it should go unremarked that the tax changes wrought by Republicans on behalf of the rich have been decades in the making. The policies are the deliberate, direct result of people like Grover Norquist, bank rolled by groups like Americans for Prosperity (their prosperity). These groups use marketing strategies, focus groups, donor outreach, and a lot of sham science from right-wing think tanks to further enrich themselves.
To defeat them (and bring back a more just and equitable society) the left will have to make a deliberate effort to counter this enormous greed and mis-information. The rich are few, voters numerous, and they are afraid of what could happen if the voters suddenly woke up. If I were rich, I would be in the camp of Mr Prince, not only on moral grounds but also out of fear of the inevitable swing of the pendulum too far in the other direction.
These tax cuts for the super wealthy and corporations are not only immoral, they will likely drive the country within a decade to a significant debt crisis if not reversed. Tax receipts are stagnant in a booming economy and we’ve run up 2 trillion dollars more debt under Trump. Our total debt now exceeds GDP for the first time since WWII. When the economy slows or stalls, debt will rise even faster.
I feel like I’m living in a (Titanic) country hurtling toward the iceberg that everyone says couldn’t possibly sink the ship. And no one listens.
15
Anecdotal stories that strengthen your existing views, for most NY based readers. It’s called confirmation bias. We all love to read stories that we agree with.
The business of “news” is business.
Every day they provoke outrage and division.
6
The goal of the rich is to bilk the American tax payer of as much of their income as they can. And to become richer from this. Guilt does not even enter their way of thinking.
10
And let's not forget the so-called leader of this nation claims to be a billionaire but is on record saying that he's "smart" for figuring out how to reduce his tax burden to ZERO.
From a debate between Hillary and Poor Donald:
"The only years [of Trump tax returns] that anybody's ever seen were a couple of years when he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license, and they showed he didn't pay any federal income tax," Clinton said.
Trump quickly retorted: "That makes me smart."
Later, when Clinton accused Trump with "maybe ... you haven't paid any federal income tax for a lot of years," this so-called president said that he was a better steward for his money than the government.
Well, he's made that assessment come true anyhow.
12
@D.A.Oh
The Clintons didn't become multi-millionaires by giving their money away and not not saving on tax deductions!
2
A multitude of empirically based research articles in peer-reviewed journals demonstrate that taxes and tax rates change the behavior of individuals and businesses. We should be having a discussion about identifying individual and business tax rates that generate the most revenue because it is undeniable that high tax rates erode revenue over the long term. Most of the comments below revolve around some perceived sense of fairness and such regarding tax rates. I'm disappointed in this observation because I thought readers of the NYT were much more savvy.
2
@Marcas again, agree with the statement that tax policy changes behaviour. But it is not just about the generation of revenue. Tax policy which favors employee benefits reduces government dependence: retirement accounts / social security, medical benefits / Medicaid. The notion that NYT readers are emotional responders is not true. And unfortunately fairness is a relative term. It is in the interest of all that there be less inequality. More stability in the country.
1
@Mnemosyne Fair points about benefits and such
1
In 2017 before the tax law, I was taxed at 10% making about $30,000 for a single individual. Thanks to the new tax law, I was taxed—making the same income as last year—at a 12% rate in 2018. So my Federal taxes went up not down. Thanks Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans for making it just a little bit harder to live paycheck to paycheck to this year.
18
I'm with Ms. Kaplan's father. Paying taxes is the least we can do to express patriotic support for our Nation.
I reserve my contempt for how the money is spent, and the tax structures chosen by Congress that eternally skew towards the wealthy and non wage earner as displayed in this article. As an example of egregious spending, how trillions of tax dollars financed the (what should have been) invasion and occupation of Iraq, and the 16 year ongoing wars in the Middle East that have ensued, all based on lies by the GW Bush Administration (which also gave two billionaire tax cuts).
From whom money is collected, and how it is spent, are extremely important discussions to be held. Congress and Administrations need to be held accountable.
I'm sick to death from hearing people whine about the Federal tax burden, while they vote Republican, for the very people who put that burden on the middle class and working poor.
These same people thought Trump would get Mexico to build that wall?
13
Definitely worth trying... we can always go back to the current system if raising taxes on the folks with most of the income does not help.
2
I agree with almost everyone that the ultra wealthy should pay more in taxes but, as the article points out, those who want to pay more are free to do so. The article doesn't explain why they don't.
3
We don’t have information here about the philanthropic contributions of wealthier individuals. I don’t think I’d want to donate money to the federal government beyond what the tax rate mandates. There are ways to improve society independent of direct taxation, and many feel that other avenues are more efficient at contributing to the public good than tax revenue itself. I support efforts to raise taxes on the extremely wealthy, but feel that the real problem is in the corporate welfare state, where Fortune 500 companies pay an approximately 11% effective rate in spite of the 21% corporate tax rate (previously 35%, among highest in the world). Dozens of these companies actually received a net refund from the government in at least one year of the past several.
The problem with relying on other avenues to promoting the common good is that it can’t be mandated. It comes down to attitudes about what wealth is and is not, and if there is moral responsibility that comes with being empowered by the wealth that can be easily accumulated only in a free society. You can’t mandate that feeling of responsibility. If actors recognize that responsibility and act accordingly, they are less likely to contribute to a society with unmet social need such that there is such strong desire and evidence behind pushing taxation upwards.
1
@PWR It wouldn't be fair for only some of the wealthy to voluntarily increase their payments to the government while others with the same income did not. The tax system should be based on everyone paying their fare share, not some voluntarily supporting the government, and others not.
2
@PWR, because the problem is SYSTEMIC. A few odd zillionaires donating some $ to the Treasury won't change anything.
2
There is one irrefutable fact: No one amasses wealth that is thousands - and/or millions, billions, trillions - of times more than average people without cheating in every way they can. They have either been having laws made for them, by corrupt politicians and/or regulators, or are simply taking advantage of laws any way possible to try to evade paying their fair share. Many, like Manafort still cheat relentlessly to get even more.
OUR government must return to protecting 99.9% of us from them, just as it did pre-Reagan.
The corrupt, insatiably greedy fools who think they should "have it all" are killing the goose that laid the golden egg - WE THE PEOPLE and our democratic form of governance.
That didn't work out too well for Rome/Italy in the long run or any of the supposed champion thieves of HIStory.
10
I just discovered how my Social Security is taxed because I'm withdrawing my IRA money. First, IRA earnings are taxed as income, not capital gains. Then, to add insult to injury, Social Security is taxed (again!) because my income is now higher. If that IRA income had instead been capital gains, I would not have paid a penny in taxes on Social Security, and I would have paid a lower rate on the investment income.
This is just one of the ways capital gains are favored while income is taxed.
I also believe that the tax on Social Security should go back into Social Security, but no, it goes to the general fund.
3
@pazza4sno, yes, IRA gains are variably from stock/bond income and capital gains ... there should at least be some of it taxed at cap gain rates. It's just another way the tax system hounds the middle class and benefits the wealthy.
But of course the best solution is simply to tax all income at the same rates -- with, say, a surtax on short term cap gains, to preserve the long term investment incentive in the tax code.
Not intended as a personal attack because you certainly aren’t alone, but I don’t really understand why people elect to take social security when they have access to investment vehicles and subsistence in retirement. I heard this many times on the Dave Ramsey program - taking social security is just something you ought to do, because you paid into it and the money is there to take. That’s not really what the program was intended for. People are free to decline to take social security checks if they are lucky enough to be in a position where it’s not going to be the difference between health care and no health care during retirement.
Your IRA distributions get taxed as income because you took the contributions as income deductions putting the money into the IRA or 401K that became an IRA and you did not pay any taxes on any income earned, dividends and interest, over those years. If you did not take deductions for your contributions , you can take those amounts, not the current value, tax free from your IRA. As noted by the other commenter, you sound like you do not understand how your accounts work, including social security. You better get some help, fast.
perhaps some of the wealthy beneficiaries of the Trump tax cut have read the tales of the French Revolution and have had second thoughts about the relative value of additonal millions v their heads. perhaps they benefitted from better early toilet training. perhaps they have discovered within themselves a strand of patriotism stronger than avarice. or maybe they have come to the realization that money itself doesn't make them happy.
3
One nice thing about the United States is we have legal mechanisms to pursue structural changes, and we categorically reject guillotines (or bullets, or anything else) to demand change. We’re better than that. It’s why it was so disappointing to hear a sitting president basically excuse away a person driving a car into a crowd. I hope we never have a car driven into a crowd of legislators here. And yet, in the previous year and a half we’ve had republican legislators shot at and mail bombs sent to prominent figures and democratic leadership. I guess some of us don’t grasp how wrong this is and how much of a threat such acts are to our civil liberties and stability of our society. I guess there needs to be more responsibility in messaging from any and all platforms. You can’t improve democracy by violent threat. It just doesn’t work that way.
1
Anyone who cannot subside on taking home $3mm or more per year on $10mm or more in "earnings" does not know how to live within their means.
Meanwhile, the millions of Americans living paycheck to paycheck would live longer if they got back the tax refund many count on to help cover the debts incurred over the previous year.
Because the financial insecurity of neverending debt brings not only massive stress, but bad healthcare choices, suicide in the face of financial ruin, and violent reprisals against a society perceived to be unjust.
Yesterday's shooting, for example, by a disemployed worker -- how does that happen when Trump claims this is the bestest economy in the history of economies?
9
Ask any contractor, the richer his client is, the harder it is to get him to pay. As a group, rich people are cheap, begrudging every expenditure, even very small ones. (Perhaps that's how they got to be rich.)
They fatuously say, "If you want to pay more, then go ahead, but don't come for mine," ignoring the fact that a few individuals giving everything they have does nothing for the national debt. Change must be systemic to make any difference. Everyone must participate.
While I agree with Buffet that reducing taxes on businesses is a good thing -- we live in a global marketplace and must compete with other countries for business -- there have been much higher taxes on individuals in modern times with no ill effects. It helped shrink income disparity while still supporting lifestyles of the rich and famous. Why should we not do that again?
5
@Amanda You do realize that even confiscsting 100% of the wealth of the top 1% would not solve our current debt problem and certainly would not allow the servicing of various new programs being proposed for college, healthcare, etc?
2
Long ago I squeaked into the 50% tax bracket. I wasn't wealthy, but single, owed nothing, and lived comfortably -- much more comfortably than most people. I ididn't resent the high tax, which applied only to the last bit of my income. I figured it was better spent on people with much less income.
12
@jjc
And trusted that’s where it went?
My wife and I chip in about $100k a year to just the feds. Meanwhile, Amazon pays nothing on billions in profits, and wanted New York to shell out 3 billion in corporate welfare. I don’t have my taxes done yet but almost certainly I will be paying more this year because of the cap on deductions. All I can do about it is complain. I wish I lived in a democracy.
23
This is my primary problem with trying to divide the upper 1 or 5 or 10 percent of income earners against the rest. It’s the wrong target. Dividing the people is a good way to ensure the corporate buybacks and ridiculous incentive packages continue indefinitely.
In 2016, 98th percentile of individual income was $219,999. The 99th percentile was $300,800. Amazon’s profits last year: $11.2 billion. Effective tax rate: negative 1%.
2
@Rick So you're complaining about paying taxes? What about your civic duty?
Mr. Prince’ $3,000,000 windfall in tax savings can be much more effectively and efficiently put to use with a prudent placement in a charity of his own choice. Paying it to the cesspool of tax revenue to state and local governments will waste much more than half of it. The assumption that government will use it for the betterment of all is absurd.
7
All of these “wealthy” are free to pay more to the Fed in taxes, I suspect they do not.
6
I mean, the federal government paid $1.7 billion to build a health care website. And $43 million for a gas station in another country that it didn’t even use. I’d love to see the wealthy contribute more to the crumbling society they are presumably a part of. It’s not unfounded to view voluntarily paying more to the government as an inefficient means of pursuing that goal. Naturally, a lot of us want to mandate that they contribute more to the government, because there is way more unmet need than unforced action to meet it.
Sentiments like this---followed by actions--would do a lot to whittle away at the national anger aimed at the ultra rich. Recall that it was Franklin Roosevelt who became the enemey of his class in order to save the country from the depression. The more prevalent selfishness at the top is a short-sighted view. The country is now torn apart by individualism. The notion of patriotism, which includes the quality of shared sacrifice, seems to exist only at the middle and lower economic classes.
9
What people don’t understand is that by decimating the middle class you decimate the center/moderate of the body politic. A strong middle class keeps a check on democracy by keeping a country in the middle with moderate sensible policies. When we have a large percentage of people at the bottom who become disaffected or have no voice so politicians ignore them and a smaller percentage of people at the top who pay their way into the power structure then what is left is extremism. This has been the trajectory of this nation for the past 30 plus years and the result is a divided nation.
My point being...the GOP has been working to destroy the middle classes’ financial clout by convincing them that less taxes on the super rich will benefit them too. But it doesn’t. Never has and never will.
25
I am not able to comprehend the physical and psychological benefits of a tax cut to people who received one under the Republican tax bill.
For example, if I were worth $10 million and the tax cut saved me $50 thousand dollars, would that extra money change my lifestyle? Probably not. If I earned $200 million a year and the tax cut saved me an extra million, would that change my life style? Probably not. I could not foresee any emptional satisfaction from buying my tenth Rolls Royce, or my fifth yacht, or another private jet, or another gold toilet for my bathroom.
For me, it seems that the ability to accumulate extreme wealth is an ego thing, something dangerous and something that has to do with poor self esteem.
The money many ultra wealthy are so happily saving, money that has no benefit to them, could make a dramatic difference in the lives of people less fortunate then them. I am not refering to free loaders, but people who are working as hard as they reasonably can but still can’t afford health care, can’t get their kids a decent education because there is little funding for schools, etc.
What is the purpose? What the need? Does it result in increased personal satisfaction or happiness? For me it would not.
15
If you had $10 million and withdrew 4% per year, you would get $400,000 a year as income. Assuming you paid capital gains tax on it plus state tax and probably property taxes plus health care totaling probably at least 50%you have $200,000 left. If I had $200,000 net and someone gave me $50,000 tax free, it would not completely change your life. Still, getting a post tax 25% boost is not just a blip to anybody.
A solid middle class is good for everyone — the middle class because it’s a comfortable niche to occupy, the poor because it is a level to aspire to, and the rich because it is a better buffer than walls and razor wire. Why don’t more of the rich understand that?
17
As Americans, we’re all in this together and we have obligations to each other. Why not a tax system that tries to promote the greatest aggregate happiness across all Americans? Cutting a the wealthy guys’ taxes doesn’t make them happier - it’s just more money to throw on the pile. Doing the same for middle or lower earners increases their security, comfort and happiness without hurting the wealthy guys. Increased total happiness for our nation.
12
I suggest Mr. Prince simply write a check to the federal government in the amount he believes appropriate. Problem solved.
9
Ok, provided all others in his position do likewise, but they haven’t and they won’t.
8
Mr. Prince is the one that has the problem with not paying enough. His peers likely do not. If I have a personal problem, I fix it myself.
2
That solution would make Mr. Prince's peers freeloaders.
We should have a system where people, and corporations, have the opportunity to get rich. Those fortunate to be in that position should recognize that other constituencies make success possible and deserve to share the wealth. That should mean profit sharing for employees, not just executives. Businesses likewise should recognize some responsibility to their community and the larger society and accept an equitable tax system. Government provides the infrastructure such as roads, police and fire protection and legal system that make success possible. The current system of driving all benefits to the 1% with corporations squeezing everything they can from employees and the community will ultimately result be a revolt against the rich. Think some version of the French Revolution.
4
I don’t applaud any billionaires. Those who speak out about the unfairness of the tax rate, do so solely for their own precieved common man popularity. If they truly believed in unfairness, they could reduce the national debt, fund infrastructure projects, or donate to healthcare for the poor. The simple fact that they don’t, speaks volumes to their hypocrisy.
A friend told me, he hopes Bloomberg runs; I said, we don’t need another billionaire. After all Bloomberg said if they tax the rich, it would cause “chaos.” Not taxing the rich has brought chaos to the rest of the country.
13
It's not just that higher taxes on the wealthy means more income for the state.
Paying a higher rate forces the wealthy to choose between giving more money to the state or more money to those they employ.
With higher tax rates at the top end, we would no longer see CEOs making 200 times the salary of the average worker.
12
Why would they give to people they employ? They would give it to a charity. Charity, like so many things, is fungible. As Bill Gates said,giving a million dollars in Zaire does a lot more good than doing something in Seattle. We are all equal before God. Helping 100 in one place vs. 5 people in another means you did more good in the first place.
@D.A.Oh If higher taxes dissuade people from smoking and drinking, what do high income and business taxes dissuade?
Warren's proposed wealth tax would not not apportioned by the census and, as Mr. Bloomberg suggested, may well be unconstitutional under Article I, Section 9, and other grounds like the Equal Protection clause, although a progressive income tax is different because of the 16th Amendment. A smarter concept would be to adjust the AMT to make sure that the top end has to pay basic levels of taxation that are at least commensurate with other payers. Today, there is too much gaming that allows some in the super-rich category to pay below-average rates. But you don't have to confiscate property or go to extreme progressive rates of taxation to do that.
3
I haven’t reviewed it yet, but the Indiana University Maurer School of Law argued for the constitutionality of a wealth tax here:
https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/ilj/vol93/iss1/8/
That brief argues a direct tax is not what every dictionary says it is. It also says that contrary what Founding Fathers and everyone in government thought for 120 years, the Feds always had the authority to tax incomes and those wild and wacky people in 1916 spent all that time on the 16th Amendment for no purpose. It also claims that Article 1, Section 9 was favored by slave owners not wanting to be taxed for their slaves and consequently is a moral failure that just needs to be removed.
It then spends time arguing why the morality of a wealth tax to remove wealth disparity is more important than any pesky, black and white clauses in the US Constitution.
I assume the plan is try and get it before a favorable Supreme Court, obviously not the current one, and get a favorable decision.
Well, kind of the man who will use his windfall to promote progressive candidates. One of the choices he has as a person with a fortune and politicians pouring wealth his way. But if helping working people and social programs is really what he wants, he might forgo some windfalls for himself so people with less won't have to pay for those programs or be left out while he skates.
4
Simple solution - give the tax windfall to the party or groups opposing Trump.
4
And let's not forget that the middle class portion of the tax cut expires soon, while the tax cuts for Mr. Prince, his company and his friends don't.
17
Nick Hanauer, the Seattle billionaire, has been promoting these ideas for years. Check out his website Pitchfork Economics for a refreshing perspective from a guy who speaks bluntly about the income inequality in the U.S..
9
Close the borders to low income, low skill peasants who are an economic burden to us and then we can talk about tax reform. In any case, most countries in the world, including the lauded Western European social democracies, tax investment income at a much lower rate than ordinary. This is a feature, not a bug. Policy makers think that this lower rate is necessary to encourage capital investment. They (and we) may be wrong, but it’s not a mere giveaway to the rich.
1
@Jon W. Farmers, dairy farmers, ranchers, food processors, hotels and restaurants -- all rely on those "low income, low skill peasants" to do the work most others won't do.
Yes, I believe that rich people can also be ethical and fair-minded. They are, after all, human beings. Without people like that there would be less desirable jobs, less philanthropy, and even less decency in this country.
Like a thief in the night, Donald Trump finagled a massive fraud against the lower and middle class with his tax scheme and handed millions, billions, to people like himself and his friends.
I am sure that there are people of means who would rather not accept dirty money garnered through what amounts to a criminal conspiracy to defraud the American people. But this is a capitalist society.
The Trump administration perpetrated the fraud with the knowledge and help of the republican party.
All while hacking away at the laws meant to protect American citizens from economic and election fraud.
And he did that with the help of the judiciary.
So, after Trump is defeated in 2020, or is impeached and then pardoned by Pence, he can relax and look back on his achievements.
He can sit at the head of a table at Mar a Lago, surrounded by people like Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Steven Mnuchin, Wilbur Ross, and, of course, Sean Hannity, and have a good, long laugh.
Trump can have a good meal with his friends and co-conspirators while the rest of us try to figure out how we will make ends meet in the new trickle down 3.0 economy.
21
"shared sacrifice " - a rare commodity these days.
surprised that supply side vs. demand side economics didn't come out more explicitly in the article.
5
He can write a check to the US Treasury anytime for the amount he feels he is underpaying. For anyone to lament that their taxes are too low seems very disingenuous, especially if they choose to spend the extra money on self indulgence.
5
Increase the inheritance tax already! An inheritance is income on the part of the heir, so why not tax it like any other income!
16
Looking back in time...
A society in which the government was deeply in debt due to an overseas war, the wealthiest 3% paid almost nothing in taxes, while the rest of the society suffered under a crushing tax burden. The government tried to get more money from the 97%, but riots broke out and created such unrest that the government was forced to ask the 3% to pay more taxes. They refused. The result, a revolution, namely, The French Revolution. It brought such chaos to that society that in a few years, the government became a dictatorship and executed about 50,000 of its own citizens for being enemies of the state.
Another case... A society facing a massive debt burden from a conflict overseas, tries to tax some of the people, placing a number of new taxes on a portion of their society. They refuse and cause significant financial burdens on businesses and the government. The result, another revolution, this time the American Revolution.
A third case, a government involved in a massive war, which forces the government to place greater tax and other burdens on the masses. The people become upset, a small group rebels and succeeds in overthrowing the government. The brief history of the October Revolution that brought the Bolsheviks (later renamed the Communist Party) to power in Russia.
There are other revolutions where the government does not listen to the majority of the people and revolutions happen (Iran and China come to mind). I wish Trump studied history.
13
(Editor: I’m willing to share this info anonymously only. Thanks for respecting that)
I have annual income somewhat north of 500K, and I don’t invest in real estate or engage in any other income tax avoidance schemes. My tax for 2018 has gone up due primarily to limitation of the SALT deduction and elimination of the domestic production allowance. I’ll be paying about 42% of AGI this year in state and local income tax. Despite having paid in during my working life, I also pay Uncle Sam just under $1100 a month for my wife & I to participate in Medicare, plus the supplemental insurance. Is this my fair share?? Seems about right to me. I’d like to see the big dogs pay this much.
16
You are simply doing as others suggested: you got out your checkbook and made a contribution to the US Government. You just did it with IRS tax forms instead of a letter to the Treasurer of the US.
You might think about changing your assets to pay less taxes and donate the difference to a worthwhile charity of your choice. It i# probably likely that you will do more good and the world will be a better place. Or do nothing. It is your choice, as it should be.
The ‘tax cut’ is enabling my fixed income to contribute $2,000 more than I paid in prior years to Prince and his colleagues. Thank you republicans. I won’t forget you.
8
Of course, these rich folks "don't want to give away their money to the government" -- they just want to impose their values on other people.
9
Mr. Price, like the rest of them, do not care as long as they pay less in taxes. If it was up to them, they will pay zero; and a number of them do. The millionaires, in Congress (both par ties), are part of this group.
If the elite class really cared, then people would not have to pay taxes, if they were below a certain income or pay taxes when they receive Social Security. They would be willing to pay more, so thousands would not have to starve, live in their cars, or become homeless (with jobs).
It is fitting this article begins with a billionaire on a cruise. He was probably going to the Cayman Islands to see how his hidden cache is doing.
The US and state income tax systems were designed to make the rich; richer; keep the middle class in its "place", and to make the poor dependent on the middle class. For many years it was hidden through various deductions and give aways to the wealthy. The new tax law just made it much more obvious; the elite only pay "token" taxes.
8
I often remember, especially now, the first evening of Estates Tax class. The professor compared income ratios in the 1960s/1970s to ratios in the 1990s/2000s. Company owners/executives earned approximately 20 times more than their lowest paid employees (exclusive of options and other perks). Now, more like -
$10K worker=$200K CEO
(1970s)
$30K worker=$3M-$120M CEO
(2010s)
How can a democracy survive such an oligarchic disparity? I don’t believe it can.
Common sense taxation is the moderator that keeps the American majority safe from a dictatorship by the few. We must correct the tax codes to reflect our true values.
35
I agree. I’d like to see this group propose realistic changes to the tax code that could bring this pay equity back in balance.
9
@Mary Tepper There are literally 100s of millions of workers and maybe 15,000 CEOs. If you do the math. If the actual dollars spent on CEOs were transferred to the workers, the workers might receive a few extra bucks in their paychecks.
It's the same with taxation. Taxing those 18,000 uber rich simply will never generate the type of revenue to pay for anything like the social programs the far left is proposing. Even raising $500 billion/year in new revenue would only cut the CURRENT deficit in half.
At the end of the day, the left is as ignorant of the fundamental math as the right and the country is going down the drain because everyone wants stuff and wants someone else to pay for it.
4
Cutting deficit by 1/2. Looks like a good idea!
2
Warren Buffett has been saying this for years. Tax me, please! Taxing the relatively wealthy should begin with removing the income cap on Social Security tax.
34
@Pat Johns - I bet a lot of educated people don’t even know the income cap exist.
1
Change happens from the bottom up, it will not occur from the top down.
The neoliberals and the neoconservatives both pander to the wealthy, although the neoliberals throw a bone to the masses by saying nice things about rights for gay people.
It’s not enough to overturn Citizen’s United, if we want thoughtful, intelligent people running the country, we must get money out of politics.
60 Minutes did an investigative segment on Congress within the last couple years - representatives spend at least two hours a day just cold calling potential donors for money.
It looked like a phone bank system for a sleazy, illegal stockbroker scam, duping naive investors out of their hard earned money.
Obviously, their time is better spent addressing the nation’s business, rather than building their campaign war chest.
As long as the size of the war chest looms as the most important consideration, Americans can only look forward to eventually residing in a full-blown kakistocracy.
We’re well on the way now.
15
Wasn't there an article earlier this week telling readers how angry the wealthy from blue states are because Trump's tax plan limited their state tax deductions? So which is it?
2
No, there wasn’t. Only middle class homeowners, or home owners with kids, got creamed. The higher income taxpayers got enough benefits from lower tax rates and AMT to offset any burden from the loss of SALT deduction.
9
This article is (rightfully) about income tax policy, but don’t forget that much of the systemic inequality is the result of all the rules and regulations put in place behind the scenes, quietly, while nobody notices. Robert Reich talks about this at length in his book, Saving Capitalism.
You think the Billionaire Welfare Tax Plan Congress passed a year ago was bad? Imagine all the horrendous stuff going on behind the curtain in this administration while everybody remains distracted by shiny objects like an unnecessary border wall? As a prime example: Deregulating environmental protections and gutting the EPA so that a few wealthy corporations and individuals can make even more money, at the expense of safe drinking water for all of us. Privatized profits, socialized costs: The hallmark of this corrupt administration.
74
I just figured the taxes for a couple making $100,000 in wages and a couple making $100,000 in dividend income. The couple making $100,000 in wages will pay $18,389 more in taxes than the other couple. The $18,389 is composed of federal tax ($8,739), SS tax ($7,650) and city income tax ($2,000). The couple with the dividend income will pay "zero" on those taxes. This example shows how labor is taxes at a higher rate than capital. Why can't a Democrat use an example like this to show the unfairness of the tax system. Who can more afford the tax burr?
23
My family is going to give more money to fight issues of hunger, and we’re going to invest more in candidates who don’t put the income of wealthy people ahead of people who need help,” he said. “The unnecessary and fiscally imprudent reduction in the individual tax rate gives me more income to fight the imbalances.”
In order words, lip service to make sure his millions remain in his account. Help the poor by setting up foundations, coming up with practical measures for retraining and housing which includes paying a fair share of taxes, help is not paying lobbyists to make sure he doesn't pay taxes. Amazing how the wealthy think they can con the masses.
6
"...Mr. Driscoll said he would [increase] his support for progressive causes and politicians." This is what all Progressive supporters need to do. Not just the billionaires.
1
The article does not provide full information. There is the corporate tax and the personal income tax and Value added taxes (sales tax)
From a global perspective, the USA had one of the highest corporate tax rates. The Trump its put it between Canada and Germany, while other progressive EU countries have lower. This should stop money being hidden low tax countries and allow re investment. The people in this article should be investing their money and hiring.
Mr Buffett especially seems to get a free ride on all the downsizing he has forced due to his liberal stance on social issues.
Vats tend to hit the poor the hardest, as people who have disposable incomethat save and invest and bypass the tax, while the poor have to spend all their income to survive. You could get the money back by filing taxes, but many poor people don't bother.
2
These are voices of humility , speaking from recognition that top-tier wealth at the tip of the pyramid rests on the backs of those who in most cases just were not as lucky -- didn't get the memo about being in the right place at the right time knowing the right people.
These are the Honest Rich, who don't kid themselves about their fortunes being the result of the "sweat of their brow," but mostly just the power of money to make MORE money, a feat which would be impossible if not for the vast interconnected infrastructure created by others, many of them subsisting on minimum wage.
You could cynically argue that the complaints of Mr. Prince, et al, are " the least they can do" -- but unlike the great majority of their one-percenter peers, at least they are doing it.
My hat is off to the likes of Mr. Prince, and Warren Buffett when he publicly expressed outrage that all his workers were paying a higher rate. It's wrong, they know it -- and are putting their money where their mouths are.
10
Bill Gates said it best recently, that a 70% (or whatever it is) tax rate on ordinary income does nothing since he and Buffett and the guy in this article don't earn money this way. It's also not as easy as increasing the rate on (realized) capital gains. The truly rich never realize these gains, they just borrow against the shares tax free. A constitutional amendment may in fact be necessary, as Schultz said, to tax wealth. Much of middle class wealth is already taxed by local property taxes, it makes sense that super rich wealth can be taxed even if it's not in the form of real estate. Watch the Forbes lost of billionaires shrink as Trump and others ndeny they're worth anything close to what Forbes says now.
8
The affluent use tax attorneys to find every deduction. They put their houses in LLCs and income in ‘family foundations’.
Calling for an increase in their income taxes is nothing more than virtue signaling. These people could easily choose to pay more but will still use every trick in the book to pay less.
9
Medicare for All is no more socialist than huge tax cuts for the rich. It is just legislation within our democratic system.
22
Lots of Americans want to avoid paying taxes or pay as little as possible
This is part of our general decline into a nation that mirrors most of Latin America/or parts of Southern Europe - gun violence, gated communities with armed guards for those who can afford it, crumbling infrastructure, no middle class, trash piling up in streets.
As some commenters have noted - not so long ago lots of our citizens were proud to pay taxes. Like most in Germany, Netherlands and Scandinavia.
31
Apparently many of the people interviewed in this article and posting below haven't read the relatively new research highlighting how high taxes and overly onerous regulations may exacerbate income inequality. The probability of an average person breaking through to a lofty income level are much lower in this environment. Talk about irony.
5
The Census just published the housing figures for 2017. Over 25% of homeowners have unaffordable housing (defined by HUD as more than 30% of pretax, post-transfer income) and fully 50% of renters pay more than they can afford on housing.
That is a real crisis.
Trump just blew up the deficit for tax cuts for the super-rich and declared a state of emergency over the border wall.
14
My father, like Ms Kaplan’s, has always taken pride in paying his taxes. It is his way of giving back and the more he pays, the better he knows he has done. It is a marker of success for him.
It was a long time before I realized people harbored I’ll feelings about contributing back.
6
Have they even filed their taxes yet? I dont think that its as big of a wind fall as most people think.
2
Sad to see the times messing up simple stuff. There were two major things in the tax bill, a corporate tax rate to match most other nations and outrageously, a income tax adjustment that helped primarily really estate developers while purposefully hurting the upper middle class professionals that tend to live in cities and vote Democrats. It was Republicans twisting government to literally punish perceived enemies, like fascists do.
Democracy is supposed to be about making popular policy, not weaponizing the government. This is how nations fail.
17
There are government programs that support literally everything. What’s really interesting is that no 1%er or philanthropist has ever written a check to the government instead of a private charity.
5
Prince is a rare. welcome voice here. I wonder how many of the 1% were railing against Obama for increasing the deficit and are remarkably silent on the galloping debt under Trump as they smile all the way to the bank?
13
@AP So were you concerned about the debt under Obama's watch? I doubt it. Most people concerned about the debt now couldn't care less about debt during Obama's tenure. They are simply applying circular logic and reasoning tethered to their ideological beliefs. The same applies to many Republicans unconcerned with Trump's spending. A small percentage of conservatives with a libertarian flare have consistently criticized overspending by both parties.
1
Um, no: people with a rudimentary education in economics approve of deficit spending when the economy is in recession and disapprove of it when the economy is at full employment.
For such people the relevant change isn’t presidents but the economy.
Obama inherited the worst recession since the 1930s and unemployment over 9%. Deficit spending was needed to bring us out of recession.
Trump inherited a recovered economy with unemployment under 5%. Deficit spending reaching new record sizes in such circumstances is suicide.
1
@AP
And Obama's deficit decreased every year.
Their first inclination is to put their windfall into politics. They would have done that anyway, in all likelihood. How about finding some worthy causes in their communities or in areas of the country that don't have millionaires and help people that really need it. Families that lose everything in a fire. Homeless shelters, food banks, Habitat for Humanity are just a few. Helping others is not their first thought. Let's face reality. They didn't become superwealthy helping others. Now that they have more money than god, they have a hard time figuring out how to how to help level the playing field. Call me, I can help you with that.
13
Agreed. While I appreciate the sentiments of Prince and his cohorts in the Patriotic Millionaires, and do welcome their influence in politics, the most expedient way to make a real difference for their fellow citizens is through community-based philanthropy. Of course, we don't know that they aren't doing this already - indeed they probably are. Anyway, one can hope this is true.
4
My late dad did everything he could to make sure that mom would be taken care of when he passed on. He set up his retirement from the army and post office to make sure mom would continue to receive a part of his retirement. He made wise investment decisions. Dad believed in the United States and bought savings bonds on a regular basis. I do think it a bit ironic that the interest earned on the savings bonds is taxable. The result is my mom at 92 has a hefty tax bill. I looked at every deduction under the rocks to see if she would qualify, no luck. I firmly believe that when a person reaches a certain age they should not have to pay any more income taxes regardless of income.
7
@Chuckw there are ways to not pay a "hefty tax bill" at 92...things were not set up correctly (although you don't say what a hefty tax bill is, and if she can afford it)...if there is an age when people "should not have to pay anymore income taxes REGARDLESS OF INCOME" I would pick 110...
2
Your father chose poorly. Why did not he put the money in municipal bonds and move to a state with no state income tax? Savings bonds, when cashed in, are by law ordinary income and don’t even allow, by specific provision in law, for cost basis step up at death. They also stop generating interest once mature.
Instead of or at least in addition to doing such things as supporting progressive politicians and “issues” such as hunger, how about giving your own employees meaningful raises, fully funded pensions and health benefits?
39
Remember we had a budget deficit when they passed this law. We have a BIGGER budget deficit now. This giveaway is all borrowed money
18
I wish some of these civic-minded rich people would fund the subways or fix the bridges in their own cities.
10
@Chris
Liberals believe that it is our duty to pass on to the next generation a society as good or better than the one we got. This takes money to maintain the infrastructure, including the health and welfare of the younger generation. This has been done by the government in all past generations.
The current generation believes in hollowing out our society, pocket all the money "saved" and our society should pass on as little as possible to our kids.
7
Tax laws are not tilted toward the rich. Tax laws are progressive meaning the more you make the more you pay. Capital gains rates are the same for everyone.
Here is what you really mean to say: raise tax rates on people that earn more than X. Hillary Clinton advocated raising rates on the rich, which she defined as $250,000 in income. Everyone knows you are not rich if you make $250k otherwise no one would be complaining about the change in SALT.
What you are really saying is raise taxes on the very wealthy which is a level that needs to be defined. Whatever this rate may be should be progressive as well. Perhaps 1% for $1 million, 2% for $10 million etc.
I wish the NYT would spend more time on what an actual policy would look like than the politics of it.
33
We used to tax the wealthy at 80%. Let's start there. You don't need millions of dollars to live and CEOs are certainly not working 300 times harder than their employees. Tax them properly and they'll spend that money
18
@Brian
No. Taxes are not progressive in the USA. In the USA our TOTAL tax system is regressive. By a lot. Include state tax, property tax, sales tax, gas tax, vehicle tax, tobacco and alcohol tax, etc, and one can easily see that our taxes are regressive. Our Fed Taxes are supposedly progressive, but as Buffett points out, it is not either.
22
@Brian.....Tax rates are progressive for earned income. The 1% live on *unearned* income, which is taxed at a lower rate. Think about that. You and I get out of bed and go to work to earn a living. We pay our taxes. Folks who simply won the birth lottery and inherited a trust fund don't have to work and they pay less in taxes that you and I pay.
2
I went from from receiving an tax refund of about $3/$4k, to now paying about $1,600 (with only a $1,400 difference in Federal Taxes withheld in my pay). My deductions (mortgage, etc.) no longer apply. Count me in as one of the colossally outraged citizens who are subsidizing the already grotesquely uber-wealthy of this country. I've no issue with their greater wealth; I've issue with Republicans rewarding their donors more money, our money, while we scrimp and save, and have "benefits" taken away such as health care, and soon Social Security and Medicare. I was OK with crumbs; now I've no crumbs at all. VOTE THEM OUT and repeal the harmful tax cut for the oligarchs are corporations.
168
@Sara G. I also will be paying more federal income tax this year due to the loss of the SALT deduction and the personal exemptions. I wouldn’t object if the wealthy also paid more. But it’s a pipe dream to believe that raising taxes on the rich will solve this country’s fiscal problems. Upper-middle class taxpayers like me will also have to pay more. In addition, it’s crazy that we are subsidizing the healthcare (Medicare) and retirement income (Social Security) for the wealthy. These programs need to be means tested.
@Sara G. Sara, you failed to simply state your total tax bill. This, is all that matters.
I don't live in the United States. But because of the passport in my drawer, I pay taxes to the US. I even pay taxes on my retirement savings, something that you have the privilege of not doing.
For now, my marginal tax rate have dropped 4%. I'll take it.
2
@David we should all be so lucky as to choose our nation of residence.
4
If I thought my taxes were being spent wisely and efficiently I might think differently about celebrating the tax cut. As it is I’m going to keep every dollar I can. Government is too large already and between income, school, property, and sales taxes, plus the extra I pay in pass thru costs, I feel I’m paying more Thanh fair share.
If the Patriotic Millionaires are so upset about their tax windfall let them donate it to the treasury. But leave my money alone.
11
The sad fact is that America is a culture where counting one's money and making comparisons comprise a lot of people's sense of worth. I was once an acquaintance of a plenty wealthy, aggressive businessman who was friends with one of the richest men in the world, and he was just emotionally bereft knowing he could never catch up to his friend in money wealth. Plenty wealthy, but by his standards permanently insufficient. A tortured existence, for what?
9
Just make state and local taxes deductible again and millions of middle class tax payers will be released from this punitive Turmp Tax meant to direct punish the avid anti-Trump population.
16
@Mark Not until after 2020. Their ire is needed.
@Mark I actually like the new, increased standard deduction...I never understood why state and local taxes would be deductible (or mortgage interest either)...
3
the corporation I work for just closed our office 2 days a week bringing us down to a 4 day work week. They are a billion dollar health care conglomerate and I guess the tax cuts did not work in their favor.....so they cut the mostly $11 an hour staff down 10 hours a week. Something is so wrong here; several of the employee's are on the poverty line...and will NOW qualify for federal benefits.
What has to happen in this country to change this??
21
Maybe it's because they feel like they are getting away with something as in this example. The taxpayers made it possible for Bill Gates to create Microsoft. The father went to college on GI bill. They bought their first house on a VA loan.
The father became a successful lawyer and his mother was a teacher in a public school. When he dropped out of school his parents gave him money to start a business. The taxpayers made it all possible.
22
@Dan It's really too bad that Obama fumbled "You didn't build that!" because there's a lot of truth to it. The middle class has funded a ton of infrastructure and societal support for entrepreneurs and fat cats to build wealth, from roads to utilities to public safety to patent protection to fair means of dispute adjudication... But, no, they did it themselves, those rugged individualists who don't want to be taxed.
20
@Dan As did millions of others. None of whom became Microsoft. The taxpayers didn't make Microsoft any more possible than the junkie on the SF street who's grandparents also went to college on the GI bill and bought a house on a VA loan. Did the taxpayers make that possible?
Why is this relevant? We all owe the government more for a stable legal system, a fair and equitable marketplace to sell into. Low barriers to business creation. Not what you cite. And Bill has given away most of his money...
1
If taxpayers made it ALL possible, then everybody would be as rich as Bill Gates.
1
Its hard for me to understand why these rich are upset with lower taxes. Now that the money not taxed remains in their account, they have a limitless range of options on how to use the funds. In fact, rather than lament their lower tax rates, why not, instead donate the money saved to the US Treasury thereby raising their tax rate to one they philosophically agree with. Problem solved.
8
@Toni: the problem with the scenario you lay out is that it depends on the wealthy being principled, and compassionate towards others. I've yet to see this trait given that they're the one who drove this tax cut via the Republicans. As well, even principled ones, like Mr. Prince, says he'll donate his money towards charity rather than the treasury. The only way to get them to pay their fair share is to enact equitable laws and close loopholes.
15
Why not continue with a broken system and let a evil people benefit indefinitely?
Now the rich are setting a moral example. How noble of them. It’s like the robber barons of the Gilded Age. But in the meantime build your monuments to your egos and net worth and donate even more money to your charitable foundations and your other tax shelters. Withdraw your money from your offshore accounts. Then fire your estate lawyers and tax advisers. You won’t need them anymore. Then you can get out the crying towel and we’ll listen to your lectures and lamentations on the unjust enrichment of the billionaires.
9
Traitors to what class? The greedy class, I think. But that was never their class to begin with, rich though they may be. But for some reason, it seems easier for most people to classify according to wealth than selfishness.
4
Theodore Roosevelt was called "a traitor to his class.'' The Patriotic Millionaires are in fine company.
8
This is just part of the eternal class warfare of the super rich against the rest of us. Real change will only come when the "rest of us" really become conscious of the unjust system we have suffered for too long and do something to change it.
283
Marx said there would be a proletariat uprising. History has shown several instances where the lower socioeconomic classes overthrow the ruling class. The problem is: the lower classes have always been pushed far beyond a reasonable breaking point to do this. And, a new elite class has always emerged. This the cycle continues.
7
WE THE PEOPLE have the power, Adlibruj, with OUR votes, voices and actions.
Just ask Jeff Bezos. Average people essentially kicked Amazon out of New York before he could invade their community and get billions of THEIR tax dollars.
All we have to do is hire/elect Socially Conscious Women and men who will work for 99.9% of us and cannot be corrupted by money.
15
@njglea Amazon would have received a discount on taxes they would pay. No money at all was to be given to them. Just say goodbye to 20 billion of tax revenue, not a loss of 3 billion.
2
Good on Mr Prince for stating the obvious, but the silence from others like him is deafening. The laws favoring the 1% (and really the top 10%) have been rigged for so long our country may never recover. It's a shame - I hardly recognize the country I once loved.
311
@markymark OK I am in the top ten percent but not the top one percent. Pretty much all of my income comes from work, not investment. And I am being taxed to death.
That said, I am a progressive. I get that I should pay more and do usually without complaint. But Stop lumping me in with people like Jared who payed no taxes for seven years and lives like a king. The absurdity of this tax system applies to people who make far far more than I do.
42
@markymark You have no idea how high the ladder of inequality goes. The top 1% are not the problem. For the most part they are people we went to school with: The kid voted most likely to succeed, or the brainy one that aced all the AP classes even though she was always staring out the window in class, or the guy in shop class who could make anything work the first time he built it.
Even if we are not in the 1%, the 1% know who we are and how we live.
The problem is the top 0.01%, like Mr Trump and all of his cabinet members. They were born rich, went to private schools with all their rich friends and only get richer.
They have no idea what life is like for the rest of us! They don't know us and we sure as heck don't know them, yet they pull all the strings of power to enrich themselves.
71
@markymark. Top 10% starts at $90,000. So much for just hating billionaires- that didn't take long!
3
I applaud Mr Prince for his candor. And lets use his story as an example. His taxes went down. He gets to take an extra around -the -world cruise. The benefit of his spending (which is just a blip in his overall life) goes to French Polynesia, Bali and who knows where. Maybe buy an extra car that he will hardly drive. An extra house - maybe in the US - maybe not. No need for more food and how may suits do you really need? Not much benefit to anyone else.
But if his taxes were a little higher, and the taxes of 100 US workers were lower - or if that worker had good health care so he could work more steadily or his kids could get a good education - those funds would be spent purchasing groceries, clothes, gasoline and cars here in America. His kids would be healthy and could get a good job. And those grocery workers would have more money, and the recipients of their spending would also have more money - an on and on. And some of that may even percolate back up to Mr Prince
I have always wondered - once the 1% have everything. They will be on top of What?
512
@Meza
I've determined that, to have everything I want (including money earning income), I need about 22 million. This gives me the three homes and three race cars I want. It gives me enough to send two kids to private school. It gives me enough to shop at Bergdorf and Barneys. By my calculation, a net worth of 22 mil after taxes would allow me to own everything I desire and to have money in the bank earning money.
I know people who think 22mil is a modest amount and others who think it's a disgustingly, unnecessarily large amount.
11
@Anti-Marx
That's an interesting number. $22 million being enough. I thought a range of $10 million to $1 billion would be the starting point for a conversation about how much accumulation we should accept. That is, how much wealth (property) should we agree to protect.
In the grand scheme of things, if we don't protect it, it doesn't exist.
3
@Meza
Don't be ridiculous! Mr. Prince did not go on an "extra" trip around the world because of his tax windfall. He would have gone on the cruize anyway. He did not buy a new car or another vacation home. He has all he wants with the money he's already accumulated. The extra money from the tax cut went into his savings. It was not spent.
Had it been spent on a new car, it would have been a boon to the economy. Not because he needed a new car, but because someone would have been put to work building the new car.
That's the benefit of lowering taxes for poor and middle income people. They spend their tax-break money on items they truly need. Their purchases, in turn, employ people. That's how actual trickle down economics used to work. Money trickles down from the poor and middle income folks to other poor and middle income people.
That only worked, however, when unions were strong, taxes skewed dramatically to favor the poor, and public schools received far more money with far less top-down accountability. Take some of the money out of the hands of the rich and give it to the poor in the form of healthcare and education, and we'll have the most prosperous country ever.
26
I do know quite a lot of very wealthy people who feel like the inequality in this country has gotten completely out of whack, and higher taxes would help. Personally, I believe people should think about the society they are living in. Do you really want to be ultra wealthy but living in a country with high child poverty? Where the middle class can work extremely hard and make no progress? Where the environment is being degraded? Life is not just about the stuff you own.
554
@Treetop perhaps consider that the immense investments we’ve made fighting high child poverty have netted dismal positive results and has done nothing to reduce child poverty.
We can’t just keep throwing more and more money at the same failures. That isn’t the problem.
12
Nice try but, wrong. Measures of poverty have shown significant gains and that positive trend spans decades and covers many major programs. Unfortunately, Trickle Down Economics hasn’t worked. Forty years ago, CEOs made 85X the median income. Today, it’s 300X. Follow the money.
154
@TR88 You are so right! we need to raise the taxes on the poor since giving them has only made things worse!
25
Democratic Socialists everywhere cry about taxing the rich when they know they need to tax the Middle Class.
3
Let them eat cake, huh? Yeah, that lazy middle class really needs to pay up. [Insert eye roll here.]
Class warfare! What else need be said.
My pitchfork is ready. Bring it on.
The long sad human story goes on and on. The rich want more and get it. The poor want more and get less. And on it goes until the mob is at the rich man’s door and he wonderingly asks “ Why me?”. Perhaps nature’s experiment with ego driven intelligence is a failure?
Meanwhile,
There is nothing an individual themselves can do that is worth a Billion dollars. Nothing.
The same people who use the excuse of the US being a classless society then invoke class when using the trope “a traitor to the class”. The class struggle exists and is ongoing.
Capitalism is a tool to be used. We should control it, it should not control us.
10
People who snark and say, “well why don’t you just write a check to the government” are fooling themselves. Without a playing field all are invested in (like a Eisenhower tax rate on the wealthy) gestures get little done. These folks at the least are addressing the stupidity of the Trump tax cuts.
If you look at recorded human history there has never been a moment where the elites have ceded control. We are fortunate to have a way to take control: democracy. For all of it’s weaknesses and all of the game rigging of the 1-.01 percent, it remains possible to fight back. Inequality is the enemy most worth fighting. Capitalism is not equal to democracy.
10
No, they say give it to a worthwhile charity where it will do some measurable good.
The Roosevelt family was also considered "traitors to their claaaass (class)". The Roosevelt family did more than just use their heads to "keep their ears apart" and count their money. They like every one else wanted to protect the security of their position and their wealth, knew that the best way to protect the security of their position and wealth was to make sure that EVERYONE was in a position of SECURITY. They were not looking for everyone to be wealthy but to be SECURE in their position whether that position was wealthy or poor. As wealthy as they were and they WERE wealthy they would be considered paupers by today's "wannabe trillionaires". The EXTREMES of wealth and poverty today are incredibly dangerous to the well being of this country and the world.
21
The operative words used were traitor to their class. Glad to know that in America class is defined by $$$$$. Jesus weeps.
And charity is good and we must all continue to contribute, but by far most people would prefer to earn enough in their jobs to feed and house their family, not to mention have a safe infrastructure.
5
Brilliant. What’s next, an article about poor people complaining about too much government assistance?
5
“The unnecessary and fiscally imprudent reduction in the individual tax rate gives me more income to fight the imbalances.”
There’s the answer. What’s stopping the rest of these
Scrooge’s from doing the
same? But he could go a step further and not deduct the amount of his charitable contributions from his taxable income. Will he do that? Hardly likely. Another option is to make voluntary contributions to the US Treasury. But on second thought, “I don’t want to just give away my money to the government,” says another Scrooge. Isn’t that a contradiction if you’re opposed to lower taxes for the rich? One thing they all know is that, if you give any of your money to Democrats, you may as well sink it in the ocean. In fact it’s just a few steps away from the decks of their luxury yachts. So heave ho with it all!
3
Pretty admirable.
2
I am afraid Mr. Prince is more of an anomaly than the author implies. Most rich people want to get richer. Everything is relative, and what is ostentatious and disgusting waste of wealth from my perspective, may just be keeping up with the neighbors for the super rich. The point is they dont feel guilty or bad because they are rich and they dont wan t to give it up. Even Mr. Prince will finish his lamenting and start thinking about how he is going to spend that 3 mill. Maybe a new boat, or probably just the anchor for his class.
Also non of these people got rich because they like giving money away.
1
So.....why don't these affluent million/billionaires donate money to bring down our deficit instead of donating to political campaigns??????????
9
It doesn’t seem most people are that unhappy.
ECONOMY
FEBRUARY 11, 2019
Americans' Confidence in Their Finances Keeps Growing
BY JIM NORMAN
—gallup
2
Americans just borrowed a ton of money that they and their kids and grandkids will of course have to pay back. The borrowed money mostly went into the pockets of people who already have plenty. The rest of America, who live from paycheck to paycheck, got a little bit of what they borrowed. Because they aren’t focused on how their government mortgaged their future, that little bit they got makes them feel a little better today. What’s your plan for tomorrow?
2
Like the noble Mr. Prince, I too am willing to pay “some taxes.” Last time I checked, I was paying “some more taxes,” both quantifiably and per dollar earned, than approximately 90% of my fellow citizens. I understand the IRS accepts donations. Knock yourself out, Steve. You’ll be counted in these pages as one of the Less Evil Rich. For a few minutes.
7
Most wealthy liberals who cry tax warfare are tilting at windmills and importantly, they know. it. They let conservatives push tax issues, enjoy the benefits and pretend to a mock outrage while covertly desiring little more than the status quo. They want to have their virtue signaling cake and eat it too.
If Prince thinks he owes $3 million more to the community at large, don't cry wolf about it. Pick 30 people and give them $100,000 each. Change their stars. Pay off $3 million in college loans for drowning students. He could walk out the door right now and put the money into productive use for people who need it. And I don't mean foundations and charities that mete out meager amounts that don't do much in broad terms but do get your name on a wall and do instigate galas with tapas. Go pay electric or gas bills for a struggling community so their kids can do their homework in warmth and the old and infirm don't die of the summer heatwave. Pick those who others deem abhorrent and help.
Get off the boat and get your hands busy, but please quit with what reads as a mock and knowingly moot indignation. There's no shortage of hypocrisy among wealthy liberals who virtue signal about progressive issues when there is nothing at stake. When it comes down to brass tacks, they're often just as selfish, self-serving and even malicious as any right wing rube. When the test of character comes, they fail. But they don't bear the cost, they just get back on the boat.
42
@Casual it’s true he could step up and help lots of struggling individuals and maybe he has been - he’s looking for the ripple effect - drop a pebble in the ocean and watch it grow into a tsunami via the multiplier effect of many thousands of wealthy people having to do the same
There is really nothing stopping anyone from writing a second check to the IRS.
7
I think all these ultra rich people are hippocrits. They can pay more to the treasury than what they are required. If they were serious they would!
3
Whatever happened to "noblesse oblige"? "Noblesse Oblige : the inferred responsibility of privileged people to act with generosity and nobility toward those less privileged. " The greed of the wealthy to blindly accept undeserved decreases in taxation at the expensive of the economy and national debt is shameful and short sighted. That's why AOC and others call to tax the rich is being welcomed, in spite of the republican effort to paint them as radical extremists. Extremism is to profit while watching your country burn at the hands of incompetent con artist traitors like Trump!
6
In the 1950's I discovered a neighbor walking his dog. The dog's name was Falla, like FDR's. It turned out that his friends had called him a traitor to his class. He was one of the founders of the original radio companies and actually owned half of the block.
4
They called FDR a traitor to his class when he saved capitalism with the New Deal.
7
Do those who support Trump, et al have ANY understanding of the impact of this tax "cut"? What mental disconnect allows them to not only accept but actively support those who do everything they can to redistribute wealth to the already wealthy?
5
The rich must fix the inequality of the poor will make an industry of kidnapping their loved ones. There is no free lunch.
So we see the results of trying to create a classless society. I am continually amazed that the American electorate tolerates this immoral inequality by voting for people who put the interests of business and the rich before the welfare of the people. "We the people" need to stop reacting to the charge of socialism as if it's a disease. The wealth of a nation belongs to the people of the nation, not to the few who have arranged to hoard it. Wake up, America.
8
Glad to see Mr. Prince and his fellow gazillionaires acknowledging that there is, in fact, a class system here in the USA. Just a reminder, FDR was also called a traitor to his class, but he had the guts to say, "I welcome their hatred" and to do the right thing for the country.
4
It is better to be a traitor to your class than a traitor to humanity. The wealthy investor class causes universal harm to everyone else in their ridiculous pursuit of excessive ever growing acquisition.
They have the resources, they have the power, only they can put a stop to the increasing concentration of wealth and resources in a non violent way because when the masses have finally had enough their solution is not likely to be peaceful.
5
You are in good company, a "traitor to his class" was what they called FDR.
6
I'd be ok with low marginal tax rates if we actually made people pay for what they get:
1. Inheritance has no place in our society. You should pay for what you get, not get something for nothing. People should start out equally and EARN their way to different results.
2. Limited Liability is FREE insurance for business owners. Business owners should pay for what they get: they should pay for insurance to protect them from liabilities taken on by the businesses they own. Because owners do not pay for this insurance, they invest in risky businesses and mismanage them.
3. Burning fossil fuels burdens society without requiring the person doing the burning (and getting the benefits) to pay for those costs. You should pay to dispose of your garbage, not just throw it out in the middle of the street.
If we required people to actually pay for what they get, the people that work hard would still be rewarded, but they wouldn't be able to take advantage of economic loopholes that lets them profit at the expense of others. And inherited wealth is just plainly inefficient, irrational, and immoral.
3
many really wealthy people are going to donate their money to charity like the gates foundation when they die. Mr. Prince and the other patriotic millionaires can donate their money to the US Treasury if they choose and do it now.
3
There was a famous writer who once said, "you can make a fortune as a writer in America, but not a living". We are now coming to the place where you can make millions in America, but not make a living.
One day, the peasants will revolt.
6
It's not just the taxes. If a billionaire can afford to cruise around on a yacht, but his front-line employees can't make ends meet without food stamps, housing vouchers and healthcare subsidies, not only is the billionaire being under-taxed, but he's also the real beneficiary of all those government subsidies for the poor that in reality are simply covering the billionaire's payroll costs.
That's the magic of the Republican message: there aren't nearly enough of the über-wealthy to carry elections on their own, so they finance GOP candidates who will cut their taxes, shift the burden to the middle class, and then point fingers at the poor, blaming them for being on government benefits. Fooled by the misdirect, the middle-class turn around and vote for the Republican politicians who are in fact robbing them in service to the billionaires.
28
As we live in a capitalist economy - unlike communist or socialist which have failed to motivate people to work hard - rewarding hard work is good for our society. So, income tax cuts are good - better the more we can cut for the poor and middle class than for the rich.
However, cutting estate tax is a different story. The root cause of the wealth inequality is the fixed pattern of rich get richer while the poor stay poor. Why is it fixed? Because a vast majority of the wealthy parents pass on the wealth to their children.
Cutting estate taxes reward even those who are less productive as long as their parents are wealthy. On the contrary, children of the less fortunate families can only hope to inherit something let alone be left behind a heavy debt burden due to debts racked up such as student loans. Fixed pattern of poor stay poor is so rigid that most children of less fortunate families can’t dig themselves out of the hole.
Loving your child is indeed a wonderful feeling.
However, if that love is reserved only for your child without regard to others, then it will shape itself into an act of selfishness.
In lieu of monetary wealth, leave your child a wealth of heartful memories from the highs and lows of life shared together.
And then, as for the monetary wealth that remains even at the end of your life, return it to the wider society for the benefit of those who are less fortunate. In the form of estate tax or, even better, donation to those who need it the most.
2
I commend these wealthy individuals for their stated desire in giving back tax monies that they believe are dispersed against the nation’s best interests to them. The concept of higher taxes for the wealthy is right, they are benefitting from our system better than most, therefore their contribution should be more substantial.
9
Why are the investment income of hedge fund managers still being taxed at a very low rate. This was one of the campaign promises of Trump and he seems to have forgotten it as soon as he moved into the White House. Very low long term capital gains rates is definitely one of the most common ways how multi-millionaires and billionaires avoid paying their fair tax.
Formerly proposed 30% minimum Federal tax on income over $1 million bay be a short term fix. Unfortunately, it has zero chance of passing in the current lobby-driven congress.
Of course, most rich people effectively cheat on not on the tax rate they pay but how they "define" their income. One way to get around this problem is to tax spending instead of income and have a wealth tax, but the implementation details of tax schemes based on these ideas have been unrealistic or horribly complex so far.
6
A message to the "class warriors" out there.
A billion dollars just isn't what it used to be.
It used to be one thousand million dollars.
That's right ONE THOUSAND MILLION.
Today, it's only a paltry billion.
6
The infant morality rate in the U.S. in 2017 was 5.8 per 1,000 live births. The rate in Japan is 2.0 and in Cuba it is 4.4. Yet, the US boasts the highest number of millionaires or High Net Worth Individuals (HNWI) of any country in the world. These statistics reflect just how twisted the values and priorities have become in America. It is shameful, and the equity imbalance is a threat to our democracy. The solution...higher taxes on the wealthy? Revolution? I know which one I prefer. I'm not a radical progressive by any measure, and I think that Elizabeth Warren, OAC and others are far too centrist on this issue.
15
The #1 issue in America should be to ensure a tax code that abolishes tax reductions, write offs, and tax credits for all to include individuals, businesses, and corporations.
Additionally, the IRS needs to double the number of tax investigators and vigorously pursue tax cheats.
Subsequently, drastically increase the penalties of prison time and fines to those individuals and corporate executives perpetrating tax crimes.
The tax code must equally and proportionately benefit all, not just the rich and/or businesses.
20
@Buzz D
The budgeted funds for the IRS have been drastically cut over the last few years. The Service can barely keep up with tax changes and collections never mind finding tax cheats. A former CPA
4
The media would have us believe that money and fame are everything. Not even close. When we empower others with education and opportunity, we will find that they will often invent things or contribute their talents and energy to improve the quality of our lives. Each person has endless potential. Right now we cast too many aside. Higher taxes on those with money to spare could create a much better world.
9
Here comes the tired argument that the rich pay most of the taxes, so why shouldn't they be the one's to get a break? The inconvenient truth is that the rich also are the ones who have lobbyists to write laws on their behalf, and access to offshore accounts and other mechanisms most of us don't have. In a democracy, there should be a sharing of power and a reasonable degree of transparency. I realize we don't live in a perfect world, but what we've experienced in the past 30 years is class warfare, where the the GOP is looting the country on behalf of their billionaire donors. Please don't call this an argument for socialism. It's just a call for fairness, one of the traditional pillars of a functional capitalist society.
114
True, fairness is not a left position it’s a human position.
15
I suggest that they figure out what they should owe. Take that money and form a tax deductible foundation to promote a fair tax policy. My suggestion, end all deductions except dependent children, while having the majority of taxes generated by ongoing taxes on wealth and the consumption of nonessential goods and services.
3
I have mixed feelings about Mr. Prince's stance on current taxes. On one hand, I can understand his contention with the tax cuts yet have a tiny bit of resentment for his complaint.
On the the other hand, I'm thinking why are you complaining about your blessing yet not actively creating solutions? Is he doing any philanthropy with his extra funds? Is he offering his talents up to those who benefit from it? Is he contacting his representatives to let them know of his complaints?
Perhaps Mr. Prince might need to change parties because I'm sure the Koch Brothers, DeVos , Waltons, etc seem to have no complaints about how to get the government to use their tax dollars.
3
Real change will not occur until enough of our elected representatives become more concerned with the common good than with the interests of an tiny minority of extremely wealthy individuals. The individuals featured in this story can help by supporting progressive politicians as they indicated they would. Giving their tax savings to the government at this point, with the current representation, would be throwing good money after bad.
24
"While the millionaires of the resistance may up their charitable giving, none said they would be making voluntary contributions to the government."
I daresay I detect some other agenda here at work. I suspect a distraction, away from the more radical suggestions being proposed, such as 70%-90% income taxes with few or no deductions.
5
Given what growing inequality will do to this country's economy (and, indirectly, to rich people's portfolios), it's a wonder that all wealthy people don't think this way.
26
"The rich are different than you and I" And how! Glad to know there are some really great wealthy people who are grateful for their riches and maybe to those who helped them get them. Or just caring human beings . I have known a few rich people who were like that and not so different than you and I.
9
As the author writes, Prince is in a “peculiar” place in the ideological spectrum.
What I find more peculiar, though is the millions of middle class and poor voters who vote against their own self interest by putting Republicans in office whose tax policies have overwhelmingly benefited the wealthy.
317
@Jake they like that their paychecks are finally growing
3
@Jake
..that’s because these voters are easily duped and bamboozled by social issues like religion, gays, abortion, immigrants etc, and don’t see, or want to see, they’re back pockets being picked by Republicans.
4
@Jake It's like LBJ said, and I paraphrase him: give the lowest white man a reason to hate the highest black man and he'll let you pick his pockets. Give him someone to hate and he'll hand you his wallet. This is true whether the issue is race, ethnicity, nationality, abortion, guns, prayer in school, or "the gays," just to name a few.
6
A quaint story.
Maybe it’s the French cynicism in me (and our famous, or infamous, hatred of wealth), but I can’t help but wonder if millionaires and billionaires clamoring for higher taxes are actually genuine.
Are they really willing to abandon (marginal, for them) personal well-being for the greater good; or are they looking to “virtue-signal”, as the lexicon of the day says, or get good coverage, knowing full well that their clamoring won’t actually end in results these days almost anywhere in the world, and particularly not in America?
I do find the notion of them being called “traitors to their class” very interesting, however. Apparently, the very rich have a notion of class, class treachery, and class warfare, at least to some capacity.
I wonder what the working classes who vote for the American Republican Party (and the right in general, but most particularly in America) think of that...
12
It's nice to see a few millionaires with an understanding of history, at least.
13
I applaud anyone who wants to shine a light on our society's artificial inequalities, but moaning that the government isn't levying a large enough tax on you rings hollow. Nothing is stopping anyone from writing the treasury a check as a gift -- or from donating more to charities.
13
@David DeSmith Writing an extra check to the treasury would support the incredibly inequitable tax system. That is not the answer. Donating to charities is great, but if increasing the welfare or quality of lives is the goal of societies, shouldn't the recipients of the these funds be determined by the citizens as a whole, not just rich people who are getting tax credits for funding big buildings named after them?
24
@barbara schenkenberg
Big buildings like Hospitals and Cancer Research Centers?
2
@TR88
Big buildings like the Sackler wing of the metropolitan Museum of Art, funded by oxycontin profits.
Good for the NYT.
I hope to see more articles such as this in the mainstream media which promote conversation about the pros and cons of tax policy.
These kinds of articles may not be as “ entertaining “ for the general public as are articles about Porn Stars and real or imagined collusion with foreign governments. Nevertheless the topic is an important one and worth the time engaging.
The cost of healthcare in the US on a per capita basis is roughly twice as high as any other nation on the planet earth....and the quality of care the public receives for that cost by most objective measures is middling at best.
Why is this relevant?
It is relevant because a very substantive line item of Federal spending is directed toward healthcare and a meaningful slice of that spending flow to private insurance interests in the form of ANNUAL premium subsidies.
Every single citizen in the US pays for this in either the form of higher taxes, reduced wages, or pass thru as higher prices for goods and/or services.
47
@David Loiterman
Take that just a little farther. Lump excessive spending on health care and security (military) compared to the rest of the world we compete with. It’s easy to see that we operate at a 10% handicap. Compounding ahead for a decade or two, what does it look like for for the AOC generation? It shouldn’t be a surprise that this conversation is finally getting started.
2
If Trump constitutes what's "class" these days, then if I were rich, I'd gladly be a traitor to his "class".
18
If you’re truly worried that YOU aren’t paying enough. https://www.irs.gov Will take it.
Glad I could help.
9
@TR88
That's a great suggestion for HIM, but without changes to the taxation system, what happens to the rest of the country? Soaring inequality, failing infrastructure and economic malaise...Are these outcomes worth it to keep extraordinarily wealthy people even more wealthy? Certainly not to me.
45
@Mike
Oh, I thought the article was about people mad THEY weren’t paying enough. Maybe it was a misleading headline.
They’re Rich and They’re Mad About Taxes (Too Low!)
An affluent few are raging against a tax law that puts more money — a lot more — in their pockets. Friends call them ‘traitors to their class.’
3
Please make their problems my problems.
5
They are free to write checks for whatever additional sums they want or believe are appropriate to contribute. Isn't freedom grand?
11
@JMR Yes, but I believe what they would like to see is a change to the system -- on the basis that no one at their level of wealth needs more of it -- to ensure greater wealth equality and investment in our infrastructure overall. The proposal is for systemic change to address systemic problems. Relying on one-off, voluntary checks to the IRS doesn't address the issue.
20
@JMR
Good Lord, not that one again. This country is in dire need of tax reform.
It's also in need of rhetoric reform. If Trump's and his loyalists' inane rhetoric were to get a financial penalty, they'd be dirt poor by now.
7
So give the extra billions to a state treasury where they can be used to improve schools, fix potholes and mitigate healthcare costs.
9
I wouldn’t be surprised if a 5 year old child understands the fiscally disastrous consequences of the passage of last years barbaric tax law. How can we be so adept at giving more money to those who don’t need it, while taking more away from those who do? The coming burden of this pox on our economy will soon come due, and those who will bear this burden are not the ultra rich I can guarantee. It will be the less heeled masses who will be turned upside down and shaken clean. The saddest part is that we have, and will allow this to continue.
46
@Bill -
"How can we be so adept at giving more money to those who don’t need it…?"
Citizens United - which allows the pluto-corporatocracy to surreptitiously purchase their pet Congress Critters and was foisted upon us by the (R)oberts court with the 5-4 support of (R)egressive "Justices" all of whom were appointed by (R)egressive presidents.
2
Do you know a five year old child that understands the tax laws? What is her name? I want to invest in that kid. Capitalism, you got to love it.
Funny how when regular people bring up the issue of class the corporate media rushes to cry 'class warfare' for any mention of the topic.
At the same time, the fact that Prince is considered by his peers to be 'a traitor to his class' is an admission that the ultra wealthy are not applying the same rules to themselves.
153
Why not voluntarily pay more?
8
@Peter Rinn because the premise is false.
This wasn’t written because those people are angry that they aren’t paying enough.
They cant contain their anger over what other people are paying, or their compulsion to boss people around.
2
@Peter Rinn Because that won't solve the problem. It's incumbent on the government to make our tax system fairer.
45
@Peter Rinn - If you had read the article, you'd know that some are cited as increasing their donations to charities and social causes about which they care deeply. That does have the side benefit of allowing them to avoid having their tax dollars being spent on America's Endless Wars.
Nonsense; the only rich people (like Warren Buffet) who say they are for more taxes just want you to get off their back. It is politically correct only. Socialist Democrats are big on taxes for everyone else to pay but themselves. If the wealthy are so concerned about taxes let THEM write a check to the U.S. gov't. No one is stopping them and it will never happen; end of story.
11
@Jan
Agree - it's completely disingenuous of Buffett to rail in the media against a tax code favoring investment income, while personally taking great pains to ensure that he's taxed at the lowest possible rate.
Buffett drew a $100 k salary as Chairman of Berkshire Hathaway last year, while taking an additional $11.5 million in capital gains. He could easily take the entire amount in the form of wages, and be taxed at the maximum bracket if he were so concerned.
Rather, we should be concentrating on ways to reduce taxation, for wealthy and working class alike, by starving our bloated government apparatus.
5
I admire Buffett and his integrity immensely, but he has $85 Billion. I don’t think he has any authority as one if the 10 wealthiest individuals on the planet to decide who the rich are and what taxes they should pay.
7
Exactly! In fact, let’s make ALL taxes voluntary. Those who want roads, schools, police or any other public service might at first be inclined to complain. But you can always tell them that they’re welcome to donate more money to the government if they don’t like it.
8
"The swift pushback from Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Schultz was a reminder of just how far outside the mainstream the Patriotic Millionaires’ views are for the wealthy, even the liberal ones."
Yet well within the mainstream of most Americans. Just how pathetic does one have to be when they literally have billions in the bank that's already been taxed, yet still raise such hell over a hike in future income taxes?
Meanwhile, as a disabled vet, I have to go see a doctor today who will not be in the room with me but on a monitor because he'll be a hundred miles away. We can't afford to fill the vacancies in the VA but we can afford to give people like this a $1.5 trillion tax cut?
325
@BV Imhoof
My favourite "compassion" story about Mr. Bloomberg was the one about housing. He initiated a competition during his tenure as the mayor of NYC. His proposal was for entries to have been designed for 275 square foot apartments and rental units.*
At the time of his being the mayor, his private
$ 7,000,000 helicopter probably had more area than the apartments he was proposing the New Yorkers to live in! He was also eyeing a $ 30,000,000 helicopter to replace the "less-costly" one.
So much for caring for the common person, and no wonder he is "pushing back" on raising taxes for the wealthy!!!!!
https://dc.urbanturf.com/articles/blog/poll_could_you_live_in_275_square_feet/5754
11
@BV Imhoof Unlike the honorable and patriotic tradition of many other democratic countries, e.g., the UK royals, the aristocrats in America don't serve in the military, and in fact, go to great lengths, even faking health issues during times of war, to avoid serving. Neither do their sons, or grandsons, or their daughters or grand-daughters serve. So they have no concern for you or other military veterans, all of whom in the U.S. are from the working and middle classes. In fact, these American "royals" are rarely found anywhere near ordinary Americans, so rarely even ever have an opportunity to say the gratuitous "thank you for your service" to any actual veterans.
7