Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Rich Lowry :: Townhall.com Columnist
Rebates For Non-Taxpayers
by Rich Lowry
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who won Tuesday's presidential debate?


Should non-taxpayers get a tax rebate? That had been the revealing sticking point in the Washington debate over an economic stimulus package.

Democrats insisted on spreading the rebate to people who don't pay the federal income tax for a simple reason -- there are so many of them. A literal rebate in the sense of giving back a bit of what people pay in federal income taxes was objectionable because it would exclude the 40 percent of households that pay none at all.

That fact is worth noting because it puts the lie to the notion that the federal tax code is a vampirish scheme by Republican economic elites to privilege the rich at the expense of the poor. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards can barely say the word "taxes" without retailing some version of this tale, which is detached from reality and has been getting steadily more so.

The number of people on the lower end of the income scale who are exempt from federal income taxes has been increasing, while the proportion of the federal income tax burden borne by higher-end taxpayers has gone up. If this is the fruit of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush class warfare on behalf of the wealthy, the boys down at the yacht club have to be bitterly disappointed.

A study by the Tax Foundation (of all taxes, not just federal income taxes) found that between 1991 and 2004, "the only income group whose share of total taxes increased was the highest income quintile." According to the Congressional Budget Office, the top 40 percent of taxpayers paid 99.1 percent of federal income taxes in 2004, leaving the other 60 percent to pay .9 percent. The wealthiest 1 percent of taxpayers -- the focus of so much Democratic ire -- pay nearly 40 percent of federal income taxes, and about as much as the entirety of the bottom 95 percent.

People at the lowest end have been escaping federal income taxes entirely. More than 40 million income-tax filers have no income-tax liability. President Bush's tax cuts increased the number of people in this category by millions. And more than 20 million families pay no income taxes while getting a check from the Treasury thanks to the Earned Income Tax Credit, a bipartisan policy that President Bill Clinton made one of his causes.

Our tax system is hugely redistributive. When all federal, state and local taxes and spending are taken into account, the lowest 20 percent of households got $8.21 in spending for every dollar of taxes paid in 2004, while the top 40 percent paid more in taxes than they received in spending, according to the Tax Foundation. Overall, more than a trillion dollars was extracted by the U.S. government and handed out further down the income scale.

Democrats counter that the rich pay more in taxes only because they've been getting richer. Yes, but no one knows how to stop them from getting richer as long as the economy is growing, and it wouldn't help anyone to try anyway. By any standard, they pay their fair share. As they pony up almost 40 percent of federal income taxes, the top 1 percent earn a little more than 20 percent of the nation's income.

Federal income taxes aren't the whole picture. People lower down on the income scale still have to pay the payroll tax to fund programs like Social Security. Even here, though, the rich bear the heaviest burden. The top 20 percent paid more than 44 percent of payroll taxes in 2004, according to the CBO.

As for the debate over the rebate, if the (dubious) premise is to kick-start the economy by scattering money around, lower-income people paying no income taxes might as well be included, as they are in the White House-congressional deal. But the moment shouldn't pass without noting what it tells us about the tax system supposedly being skewed toward the rich. It is not, except in the sense that it exacts more taxes from them.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Rich Lowry is author of Legacy: Paying the Price for the Clinton Years .
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Rich Lowry's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Subject: About Those That Don't Pay Taxes
I would like to say that, I can to a point understand what you are saying about you work and pay taxes and someone that doesn't shouldn't get a rebate. Some of you think it will be the illegals that would get the rebate.
That's isn't what they were purposing, they said senior citizens that have worked and paid in, but draw such a small income they can't even afford to pay taxes.
I would like to say, I am 62 years old, single worked everyday, raised my son without child support, because the law wouldn't do anything about a deadbeat dad unless you were on welfare. I didn't want welfare.
The point of this is, I had to take an early retirement due to my open heart surgery and an injury.
I'm not getting one penny, but what I paid in and it wasn't much because I come from when women did not get paid well.
I draw $764.00 social security and $316.00 pension. social security takes $96.40 for medicare and $18.10 for prescriptions a month.
I have to have supplemental insurance to cover hospital which is $148.50 a month. They keep raising the medicare and prescriptions and when they do my supplemental insurance goes up.
My total income is $1,080.00. This will no longer help me pay my mortage, utililies, food and gas to get to the doctor as I have to have blood work 1-2 times a month to keep my blood regulated to get thru a mechancial valve in my heart.
When I first had to be out of work before I had to apply for my social security, I got $200.00 a week company medical, I had to pay medicare out of that $200.00, yet when I had to go out on my social security I couldn't get medicare beneifits for 2 years.
I'm not saying this for anyone to feel sorry for me. Also, they take more from the taxpayers for all the pork spending. Thats what people should be really yelling about instead of seniors, thru no fault of their own could use a little of that rebate.

Tish writes:
Tish writes: Friday, January, 25, 2008 12:04 PM
Old Man
You keep on forgetting that while the products themselves may be coming from from China -- .... That money sure goes to purchase those items in China, but it also increases sales in America, provides jobs for retail establishments in America, etc.
====================
Those jobs would be here whether the goods are made here or not. We send a "trade deficit" money flow to others that could be flowing to our workers making those products and still employing truckers, clerks, stockers, etc.

The thing is too, since all business taxes are included in prices., we pay Chinese taxes included in their prices and don't pay U.S. taxes when we don't buy American products. If we are going to tax business but not buy what that business makes, we are screwing ourselves every time we make a purchase (from a tax revenue standpoint)>
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily dose of conservative columns, editorial cartoons, talk radio, news, and more!
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.