$1.5 billion in estimated revenue: A look at the Massachusetts 'millionaire's tax' first year taxing the rich

return2ozma@lemmy.world to News@lemmy.world – 667 points –
$1.5 billion in estimated revenue: A look at the Mass. 'millionaire's tax' first year
wbur.org
104

You are viewing a single comment

And anyplace worth living already has a higher tax rate anyway.

Massachusetts was already relatively high tax, high cost of living

Besides we would all be better off if people like that left. Human happiness levels off around 110k per year, on average in the US. If there really are people who would give up all the things that make normal people happy just to add a marginal amount to their net worth, do we really want them?

We have all unfortunately met someone like this. Someone who cuts the line at an all you can eat buffet. All the food you could possibly want and they are angry that someone else might possibly get slightly more of something. And that isn't fair. Someone who has a fake job with almost no work and tries to find ways out of that even token tasks.

Let them leave.

Source on the 110k number? Because I remember reading something about 75k not that long ago and inflation couldn’t have been that bad could it?

Examples?

Western Europe

The average US rate is 25% while the average Western Europe rate is below 20%….

They even get more out of those taxes too.

You are looking at two different tax systems. The effective US tax rate (the rate you actually pay is much much less). Our household makes $300k per year, and we have a $650k net worth. Our income taxes every year? Less than 7% of that, which is absurdly low. The ultra wealthy are taxed even less than that. The US is propped up by taxes from the middle-class because the more you makes, the easier it becomes to optimize and lower your effective tax rate. We need to tax the rich more.

Ok, now what's the top tax bracket? We're talking about people making >$1M/yr.

10% $0 to $11,000.

12% $11,001 to $44,725.

22% $44,726 to $95,375.

24% $95,376 to $182,100.

32% $182,101 to $231,250.

35% $231,251 to $578,125.

37% $578,126 or more.

If you make $579k, you don’t pay 37% of that. You pay the above rate for each range of dollars you earn. So everyone pays 10% on the first $11k they earn.

There’s also deductions including the standard deduction of $13,850 (so subtract that from what you earned)

Some good information: https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/taxes/federal-income-tax-brackets

Yes, I understand how marginal rates work.

The one we're talking about is the state income tax:

5% - $0 to $1,000,000

9% - $1,000,000+

They aren’t paying the highest marginal tax rates, that’s what the loopholes are for. Trusts are well known for this exact scenario.

Nice cop out.

Eh… be proud of the lower taxes and quality of life if you want I guess.

So, you agree that places with higher taxes have a higher quality of life? Thanks, I guess.

The tax is specifically on taxable income over $1M (after the loopholes).

And Massachusetts in particular is noted for having a high quality of life.

noted

Where, what?

I'm about to do some googling, but Im curious what you're basing that on. Like most things, this seems n subjective.

It's like when people point to how expensive a state is while denying that it is expensive because so many people want to live there.

It’s funny to say you’re ignoring the abundance of places that do have lower taxes and are also much better places to live.

The only places better than Massachusetts all dont all have higher taxes despite your original asinine claim…

But they, people love living in a bubble.

But they, people love living in a bubble.

You mean the guy who thinks average tax rate is relevant to a discussion about taxable income over $1M?

I would ask you to name some of these abundant places, but between the lame insults and embarrassing grammar, I don't actually care what you have to say. I provided sources for the high standard of living, and marginal tax rates are easy to find.

Enjoy your bubble.

California. Highest taxes in the US, yet we generate 14.2% of the country's GDP despite being 11.7% of the population. We have an economy the size Germany (who has the world's 4th largest economy) with 46.4% the population.

People talk shit about the state, how awful it is, etc, and while we do have many problems we're doing pretty damn well all things considered. If we get housing and healthcare fixed (both active efforts by our government) we'll be in an amazing position as a state.

California is weird like that. I've seen plenty of sentiments about California surviving standalone as its own nation.

Without doing any research, most of us assume the revenue and economy is based on key industries like tech, agriculture?

Would the states survive if it didn't have his current water supply for agriculture?

With the Exodus of some tech companies, what is that trend look like overall? If it continues, will the state still be in the same good shape?

I'm assuming the great weather has something to do with it?