What are the Tax Brackets in the US?

Individual income tax in the United States refers to taxes imposed on personal income by the federal, state, and local governments in the United States. According to the level of collection, it is divided into federal personal income tax, state personal income tax and local personal income tax, of which federal personal income tax is the main. The federal personal income tax is based on the individual who obtains the income, and the personal gross income as the tax object. Personal gross income refers to the balance of the individual's total income minus items not counted. ^[1]

U.S. personal income tax

The calculation steps for US personal income tax are as follows:

(1) All income-

US income regulations are also quite complex. Taking a family where two couples do not have children as an example, the current situation is briefly described as follows:

First, the United States pays personal income tax not only taking into account individual income, but also attaches great importance to the number of other members of the family, especially children. There is a big difference between the taxes paid by two couples of the same income, with and without children. In China, there are obvious shortcomings in paying taxes at the same tax rate based on personal income and regardless of family and children.

Second, high-income earners are the subject of individual income tax in the United States. According to statistics, the tax paid by groups with an annual income of more than 100,000 US dollars accounts for more than 60% of the total personal tax in the United States each year, which is the most important source of US tax revenue. That is to say, the huge financial source of the US government each year is mainly paid by the rich, who are a minority of the population, not the ordinary working class, who account for the vast majority of the total number of taxpayers.

The personal tax return system adopted by Americans for tax purposes. April 15 of each year is the final deadline for Americans to declare their income and tax status for the previous year. Earlier, you could collect forms to report taxes to the government based on your actual income, or you could report taxes to the government through a computer network.

In the United States, January 1 to April 15 is the tax season. The types of tax returns filed by each taxpayer are not the same. Currently there are four types of returns: married merger report, married separate report, unmarried single and head of household. The tax rates are grade 6 progressive rates ranging from 10% to 35%. Each taxpayer has a unique social insurance number, and the taxpayer's various income information is collected under it, which can effectively monitor the taxpayer. Once it has been verified that maliciously owed or failed to pay taxes, the immediate consequence is to go to prison. After the taxpayer pays taxes on time, the U.S. government accumulates the individual tax credit value of the taxpayer every year. Taxpayers need tax certification when applying for various loans, subsidies, benefits or investments in all aspects of social life.

Since the 1990s, the tax structure of the western developed countries, such as the United States, has changed significantly. The proportion of income tax has declined, while the proportion of turnover tax has increased to a certain extent. From the 1980s to 1994, the personal income tax of developed countries declined. With the increase of two percentage points, the proportion of general consumption tax rose by two percentage points.

U.S. Individual Income Tax Rate System and Its References 2010-2-1 8:51

American personal income tax rate system and its lessons

[Abstract] The reform of the personal income tax system has become one of the focuses of controversy in all sectors of our society, and the tax rate is the core link of the system. The personal income tax system in the United States is internationally recognized as a relatively complete tax system, but there are differences in the structure of the personal income tax between China and the United States in terms of tax rate structure, progressive system, and application of tax rates. At present, there are still some shortcomings in China's personal income tax rate system. The experience of the United States should be used to improve the current personal income tax rate system in China.

[Keywords] personal income tax; excess progressive tax rate; tax rate difference; institutional innovation

In recent years, with the rapid development of the economy, the proportion of personal income tax to fiscal revenue has increased year by year. How to improve China's personal income tax system has attracted widespread attention from the whole society. Among the countries in the world, the United States' personal income tax system is internationally recognized as a relatively complete tax system, and the completeness of its tax legislation has been leading the world. This article makes a comparative study of the personal income tax rate system in China and the United States, with a view to providing useful ideas for the reform and improvement of the personal income tax rate system in China.

I. Evolution and function of the US personal income tax rate system

(I) Evolution of the US personal income tax rate system

Since the development of the US federal personal income tax, its tax rate has undergone a process of ups and downs. When the individual income tax was levied in 1913, the ordinary tax rate was 1%. During the first economic crisis, the minimum marginal tax rate on personal income tax reached a historical low, only 0.375%. Beginning in 1932, the tax rate level increased year by year, reaching the highest marginal tax rate of 94% in 1944. In the 1980s, under the pressure of the economic situation in the United States, the Reagan administration successfully carried out the largest tax reform in 1986 in half a century, and triggered a wave of worldwide tax reform. This reform has greatly reduced the personal income tax rate and reduced the number of tax rate files. Since then, Clinton and George W. Bush have also actively promoted tax reforms after entering the White House, making some adjustments to the individual income tax rate structure.

At present, the US individual income tax structure adopts a six-tiered progressive tax rate structure, with tax rates of 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33%, and 35%, respectively. The personal income tax law provides taxpayers with all taxable income in four different reporting methods, and the tax rates for the same taxation are the same. The IRS adjusts the tax rate table based on a certain index every year.

In order to further reform the tax system, in January 2005, the US government established a tax system reform advisory committee, which immediately proposed two tax system reform plans: the "Single Income Tax System Plan" and "Economic Growth and Investment Tax System Plan". Both tax reform proposals suggest that the tax rate structure be simplified, and the tax rate be changed from the original 6-step progressive tax system to 4 or 3 levels, and the levels of each level should be appropriately expanded. In general, the contents of the two tax reform schemes have touched every aspect of the US tax rate system. The fundamental purpose is to construct a fair and reasonable macro tax environment to promote the rapid, healthy, and stable growth of the US economy.

(B) the function of the US personal income tax rate system

The personal income tax rate system has always been an important lever for the US government to intervene, regulate economic activity, and regulate social income distribution. The flexible and progressive tax rate makes the personal income tax income of the United States have certain reliability, thereby maintaining the stability of the national fiscal revenue and the continuation of economic development. When the economic growth rate is too fast and the economy is overheating, the elastic progressive tax rate will automatically generate a pulling force to prevent excessive expansion of consumption and investment demand and cool down the economic overheating phenomenon. On the contrary, when the economy is in a recession period, the elastic The tax rate system will generate a thrust that can effectively stimulate the growth of consumption and investment demand, thereby delaying the economic recession and promoting economic recovery. For decades, the personal income tax rate system has played a huge role in adjusting the interest relationship between American industries and products, and guiding and promoting the rational development of the industrial structure and product structure.

In addition, in order to give full play to the function of personal income tax to regulate income distribution, the United States implements a reasonable progressive tax rate system for personal income tax, and high-income earners become the subject of personal income tax payment. According to statistics, the tax paid by groups with an annual income of more than 100,000 US dollars accounts for more than 60% of the total personal tax in the United States. That is to say, most of the huge annual fiscal revenue of the US government comes from the rich, who are a small proportion of the population, rather than the ordinary working class. Practice has proved that the system has effectively controlled the excessive growth of income of high-income earners, embodying the principles of fair tax burden and affordable capacity. According to the US Bureau of Statistics data, the adjustment of the personal income tax centered on the tax rate system has reduced the Gini coefficient by an average of 0.3 in the past 10 years, and the tax policy effect has reached 7%. Although the income gap in the United States has widened in recent years, It has an advanced personal income tax system and a perfect social security system, which ultimately makes the Gini coefficient of the actual income gap much lower than the current level.

Differences between the Chinese and American personal income tax rates

China has levied personal income tax since 1980. With the continuous development of the economy, the tax base and tax rate have been adjusted accordingly. At present, China has designed two types of tax rates according to the nature of personal income taxable income, and uses a combination of progressive tax rates and proportional tax rates to treat different types of income differently, that is, wages and salaries income are applicable to the 9th grade of 5% to 45% Over-progressive tax rate; the income from production and operation of individual industrial and commercial households and the income from contracted and leased operations of enterprises and institutions are subject to a five-level over-progressive tax rate of 5% to 35%. A proportional tax rate of 14%; 20% of the other types of income, such as dividends, dividends and property transfers, are applicable.

Although China's personal income tax law was promulgated more than 100 years later than the United States, the two countries are the same in terms of basic functions such as raising fiscal revenue and regulating income distribution. Based on changes in the domestic and international economic situations and political factors, the individual income tax rates in China and the United States have also undergone a process of adjustment and fluctuation. However, due to various factors such as the taxation system, citizens' awareness of tax payment, and the level of socio-economic development, the individual income tax rate systems in China and the United States have shown significant differences. The main performance is as follows:

(I) Differences in Tax Rate Structure Design

There are two types of progressive tax rates and proportional tax rates in China. Among them, a seven-level excessive progressive tax rate is applied to wage income, a five-level excessive progressive tax rate is applied to the income of individual industrial and commercial households, and the monthly rate of "more than 100,000 yuan" is 45%. In contrast, the United States implements a single progressive tax rate, using a 10% -35% level 6 tax rate. For high-income people, the average tax burden in the United States is around 32%, especially after 2006, its maximum marginal tax rate has been reduced to 35%. In other words, the average tax burden of high-income people in the United States is now less than 30%. This tax rate is very common for the economically developed United States.

By comparison, we find that the highest tax rate on wage income in China is ten percentage points higher than in the United States. However, from the actual situation in China, the vast majority of taxpayers only apply 5% and 10% tax rates. The tax rate of 20% to 45% basically does not work. The monthly salary income of more than 100,000 yuan needs to apply the highest 45%. The tax rate is very rare, and in practice it can be described as a vanity. Moreover, the higher the tax rate, the greater the temptation for taxpayers to evade and evade taxes, and the easier the tax evasion and evasion incidents will occur, objectively increasing the difficulty of tax administration. Therefore, this kind of marginal tax rate is too high and the tax rate level is too unreasonable.

(II) Differences in progressive tax rate routes and distances

The progressive tax rate applicable to wage income in China has too many progressive steps, and the progressiveness of low- and middle-income progress is too fast. There is no uniform logic in the setting of demarcation points at all levels. There is a ten-fold relationship between the boundaries, and the cut-off points of the fifth to ninth gears show an equal difference series. Compared with China's progressive route, the US personal income tax rate table is very unique. It is an unequal progressive tax rate table. Not only does the progressive amount of taxable income vary, but even the progressive number of the tax rate varies. At the same time, the applicable tax intervals in the tax rate table are different, so even if the taxable income is the same, due to the inconsistent tax levels, the taxable amounts are different. It is worth mentioning that the United States has also made a "progressive disappearance" arrangement in the excessive progressive tax rate system, that is, when the taxable income reaches or exceeds $ 297,350, the taxable amount is no longer calculated according to the usual calculation method under the excessive progressive tax rate , But rather the full marginal tax rate. This special system is also considered by scholars from various countries to be a very creative genius for the US tax reform in 1986.

By comparison, we find that the unequal tax rate in the United States is much more flexible in application than our country, and its decelerating and progressive route with volatility is stronger than China and the effect is better. At the same time, the United States has also fully considered the interests of low-income people, and the low tax rate has a large step. The minimum marginal tax rate of 5% in China is only applicable to monthly taxable income of less than 500 yuan, and the scope seems too narrow. Many taxpayers feel that this system is only collecting more taxes for the country, rather than regulating income. This motivated the work of taxpayers.

(3) Differences in the application of tax rates

The current tax rate in China is designed for personal income. The same tax rate applies regardless of whether the family's burden is different or not, as long as the monthly income has passed the threshold. In comparison, the US personal income tax law applies four different methods of reporting all taxable income of taxpayers, namely married joint reporting, married separate reporting, single and head of household. If the same personal income is reported in different ways, the taxable range is different and the tax rate is also different. For example, for personal income of the same amount of US $ 100,000, the tax rate is 28% for single declarations and 25% for married combined declarations.

Through observation, we found that this tax rate system in the United States has fully taken into account factors such as marriage and family burdens, and has more embodied the principle of quantitative energy taxation. The application of the individual income tax rate in China, regardless of the specific situation, is simple and easy, but it does not take into account regional differences, nor does it take into account the total family income, pensions, and child rearing. People also apply the same tax rate, which actually violates the principle of fair taxation.

Third, the basic ideas of China's personal income tax rate system reform

By comparing the individual income tax rates of China and the United States and their practical effects, we can find that with the continuous changes in the socio-economic situation, the provisions of China's personal income tax rate system have been unable to meet the needs of modern social development, resulting in more and more obvious non- It is imperative to reform and improve the issues of efficiency and inequity. Of course, the reform of China's personal income tax rate system should be combined with China's actual situation, while fully drawing on the useful experience of the United States, completed in a planned, step-by-step, and phased manner. The reform of China's personal income tax rate system should mainly be carried out in the following aspects:

(1) Reduce the grades of progressive tax rates and lower the maximum marginal tax rate

The traditional view is that for personal income tax to play its social function, it must implement a high tax rate and a multi-grade progressive tax rate system. In fact, this kind of high tax rate and multi-level tax rate structure is often difficult to be effective in practice. Generally speaking, the higher the personal income tax marginal tax rate, the fewer people are willing to pay taxes; the lower the personal income tax marginal tax rate, the more people are willing to pay taxes. Therefore, the choice of personal income tax should follow a simple, low-tax approach.

Taxation is a universal international behavior. Especially when China has joined the WTO, what kind of tax rate should be used in China will inevitably be affected by the general international tax level. Therefore, China can learn from the progressive tax rate structure of the United States, reduce the maximum marginal tax rate by 35%, and reduce the progressive level of income tax to 5 levels, simplifying the tax rate level. The highest marginal tax rate of 35% is close to the highest marginal tax rate of developed countries such as the United States, which helps China to attract overseas talents and capital and participate in international competition on a higher platform in the context of all-round opening up. Particularly important is that under the impact of the financial tsunami, China's real economy has suffered a severe cold winter. Reducing the marginal tax rate of individual taxes can effectively stimulate the consumption of Chinese residents and promote economic recovery. In addition, in response to the phenomenon of high-income earners trying to take advantage of the proportion of tax evasion, with the continuous improvement of China's level of tax collection and management, China can consider unifying the current two sets of tax rates into excess progressive tax rates to reduce the tax avoidance space for residents and make the tax burden more reasonable .

(2) Introduce a progressive disappearance tax rate structure and adjust the secondary margins

Personal income tax is a lever for adjusting income distribution. Therefore, when determining the progressive step of the tax rate, it must meet the actual situation of income distribution on the one hand, and the requirement of fair burden on the other. According to data from the National Bureau of Statistics, the annual per capita wage level in economically developed provinces such as Beijing and Shanghai is much higher than the national average wage level. At the same time, high wages inevitably accompany high consumption levels, but the tax tables applicable to low- and middle-income earners in these regions and income earners in other regions are the same. This is obviously not theoretically plausible.

We can solve the injustice of low- and middle-income earners by adjusting the grades, especially the first three grades. For example, if the scope of the first-tier tax rate is adjusted to "not more than 2,000 yuan", the second-tier tax rate is adjusted. The scope of application was adjusted to "the portion exceeding 2,000 to 6,000 yuan", and the scope of application of the third rate of tax rate was adjusted to "the portion exceeding 6,000 to 18,000 yuan". For high-income earners, the "progressive disappearance" structure in the US tax rate can be used as a reference. When the taxable income exceeds a certain amount, the tax will no longer be calculated based on the super-progressive tax rate, but a special proportional tax rate will be used to calculate the high-income earners The benefits received at the low tax rate are drawn away. In the current situation of the wide gap between the rich and the poor in China, adopting a "progressive disappearance" tax rate structure has even greater social significance. It can not only ensure that low-income people enjoy the benefits of lower tax rates and implement the principle of fairness in taxation, but also allow high-income people to face a lower The proportional tax rate reflects the efficiency principle of taxation. Here, both fairness and efficiency are taken into account, and the redistribution function of taxation will certainly be better reflected.

Some scholars are worried that the total amount of personal income tax in our country is not much at present. Such a fundamental tax rate reform will greatly reduce the proportion of personal income tax in China. The author believes that the growth of personal income tax is directly proportional to the development of the economy and the increase of personal income. When the overall income level of all residents in China has generally increased, the total amount and proportion of personal income tax will naturally continue to increase.

(3) The tax rate is applied taking into account "humanization" factors such as marriage and family

China is a country with a big family concept. It has a good tradition of supporting the children and supporting the children since ancient times. Therefore, the gap in personal income must ultimately be reflected in the gap in family income. The total income of a family can more fully reflect its true ability to pay taxes than individual income. From this perspective, the adjustment of personal income distribution can be concentrated on the adjustment of household income. Therefore, in the application of tax rates, drawing on the U.S. discriminatory treatment system, we should fully consider whether each taxpayer is married, whether both husband and wife have income, and whether they are pensioners and children and their numbers. 2. Different tax rates apply depending on the actual situation of each family. In this way, the horizontal equity of the same tax rate for families with the same income and the vertical equity of different tax rates for families with different incomes can be realized, which fully reflects the "humanization" of the tax rate design.

Of course, in the current situation of China's tax collection and management methods are relatively backward, it is extremely difficult to make the income of all members of the family transparent. At the same time, the family structure in China is much more complicated than in the United States. The phenomenon of three generations living in the same house and four generations living in the same house is more common. It is more difficult to design tax rates based on the extended family living together. We can temporarily use the husband-wife relationship as the basic unit, and divide the multi-generational same-family families into several small tax-paying families according to marital relationships, and the tax rates apply. At the same time, the tax rates for joint declarations and single declarations between husband and wife should be different, so that the individual tax can effectively realize the redistribution effect and truly reflect the fairness of individual tax adjustment.

(4) Raising the tax rate on non-labor income and unifying the tax rate on labor income

China's current personal income tax law applies different tax rates to wage income, income from production and operation of individual industrial and commercial households, income from labor services and income from contracted and leased operations of enterprises and institutions. Low tax rates apply, but the working class bears a heavy tax burden. Therefore, the above-mentioned three major parts of labor income should be unified and consolidated into labor remuneration income, and taxed at the same excess progressive tax rate, so as to reflect the principle of "same income and same treatment".

In addition, China's current personal income tax law applies a higher progressive tax rate on labor income and a lower proportional tax rate on non-labor income. However, most of the current high-income people's income comes from non-labor income. If the current tax rate system is adopted, it will easily cause the reverse adjustment of residents' income, which will cause the tax burden to be unfair. Because labor income is hardworking income, it is directly related to an individual's ability, health, and longevity. It may be terminated at any time, and it is relatively unstable due to many unexpected factors. But the above features are non-existent. Therefore, labor income should be treated differently from non-labor income, and the tax rate applicable to non-labor income should be higher than the tax rate applicable to labor income.

(5) To overcome the impact of inflation and implement tax index adjustment

China's prices have risen since 2007, and inflation has been severe. According to the National Bureau of Statistics, China s CPI rose to an 11-year historical high of 4.8% in 2007. Inflation has eroded personal wealth and brought false incomes to residents. In order to eliminate this negative effect brought by inflation, the United States has implemented tax index adjustment since 1981. That is, the applicable tax rate of taxable income is automatically determined in accordance with the annual fluctuation of the consumer price index to prevent inflation from pushing taxpayers into higher tax rates.

In the face of the severe economic situation, we should consider adopting tax indexing measures. When the consumer price index rises by a certain percentage (such as 10%) in the previous year, the tax rate of personal income tax should be increased by the same proportion. Increasing the tax rate step actually reduced the tax rate. In short, through this indexing mechanism, the taxpayer's tax burden level is relatively stable in the event of price fluctuations, thereby avoiding the increase in the actual tax burden caused by inflation; at the same time, it will The issue of "modification" also helps.

[references]

[1] Sun Kai, US federal tax system [M], Beijing: China Tax Press, 1977: 28,

[2] [US] Michael. J. Boskin. Frontiers of Tax Reform in the United States [M], Li Jingwen, et al., Beijing: Economic Science Press, 1997: 270-275.

[3] Jeffrey Owens, Tax Reform: An Intematlonal Perspective [J], Tax Notes International, 2005, (2),

[4] Chinese Institute of Certified Public Accountants, Tax Law [M], Beijing: Economic Science Press, 2008: 305,

[5] International Comparison of Tax System of the Ministry of Finance, US Tax System [M], Beijing: China Finance and Economics Press, 2000,

[6] HoweH H, Zee, Personal Income Tax Reform: Concepts, Issues, and Comparative Country Developments [R], IMF Work-ing Paper. 2005, (4): 87,

[7] Statistical Bureau of the People's Republic of China, China Statistical Yearbook 2006 [M], Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2006: 28,

[8] Merrill Lynch, Capgemini, WorldWealthReport2007 [B / OL], [2007-06-27], [9] State Administration of Taxation, China Tax Yearbook 2005 [M], Beijing: China Tax Press, 2005: 6-8 ,

[10] State Administration of Taxation, China Tax Yearbook 2006 [M], Beijing: China Tax Press, 2006: 5-10

[11] Statistical Bureau of the People's Republic of China, China Statistical Yearbook 2008 [M], Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2008: 35-42,

How the U.S. reduces personal income tax

How the U.S. reduces personal income tax

2010 04 26 10:16 Finance Weekly Qiao Lei

(The premise of the article) In China, the call for reform of personal income tax is increasing, but so far no more reasonable collection method has been introduced. In the United States, the calculation of personal income tax is quite complicated, but it is also very common for low-income and heavy-burden families to exempt or even receive government tax refunds.

April 15 of each year is an absolutely non-negligible date for Americans. This day is the last deadline for citizens to pay federal and state personal income taxes. When it comes to tax season, it is natural that there are several happy and sad. In 2010, the United States had more happy people than sad people. Why? Because this year, when filing personal income tax in 2009, nearly half of households in the United States did not pay federal income tax at all.

Tax cut balances tilt towards low- and middle-income households

The United States has the most taxes in the world, and the federal government's main source of revenue is from taxes on the people. In an evaluation report, the Center for Tax Policy of the United States pointed out that in 2009, a total of 47% of households in the United States did not pay federal personal income tax. Some of these families are exempt from federal income tax because their income is too low, and some are not low, but they enjoy adequate tax credits, deductions, and deductions.

In addition to government tax policy adjustments, the U.S. economic recession, lower incomes, and an increase in the proportion of low-income people are also one of the reasons for the increase in tax-exempt households, but the main reason is that the government's tax balance is favoring low- and middle-income families. And not to high-income families.

In recent years, the US government has implemented a number of tax incentives for low- and middle-income families. The tax deduction benefits for low- and middle-income families have increased significantly, which has benefited tens of millions of American families. A specific example is a family of four in 2009. As long as the two children in the family are under 17 years old, they do not have to pay federal income tax even if the annual income is as high as $ 50,000. Why is a family of four earning $ 50,000 a year exempt from federal income tax? Let s take a look at the specific situation. The standard deduction for joint tax returns for couples is $ 11,400, and the allowance for each of the four is $ 3,650, for a total of $ 14,620. The family's tax income is $ 24,000 and the federal income tax payable is $ 2,768. Two children under the age of 17 can enjoy a child tax allowance of $ 1,000 each, and the couple can enjoy a combined work tax reduction of $ 800, and the total of the above tax reductions is $ 2,800, which is 2769 more than the federal income tax payable The dollar is $ 31 more, so not only does the family pay no income tax, the federal government has to refund them $ 31.

Although nearly half of households in the United States do not have to pay federal income tax, the federal government still levies federal payroll taxes on social security payments and medical insurance, but 24% of American families do not even pay payroll taxes. Consumption taxes that people need to pay for gasoline, tobacco, alcohol, and air tickets cannot be evaded, and most of these taxes go to the federal government. Many people also have to pay real estate taxes, sales taxes, and income taxes to state and local governments, which is also a significant tax burden for many people.

The more children tax cuts, the more

Tax experts assess that 47% of single-family households that paid federal income tax in 2009 did not pay taxes, 38% of households jointly declared by couples did not pay taxes, and 72% of single-parent families with children did not . In the United States, the average annual income of a one-person family and a single-parent family with children is less than US $ 30,000, and the average annual income of a household jointly declared by a couple is US $ 75,000.

The presence or absence of children and the number of children in a household have a significant impact on whether federal personal income tax is required. Every family has various deductions when filing tax returns. The most basic are head tax allowances and standard deductions. In 2009, the standard deduction for a couple's joint tax return for a family was US $ 111.4 million, the standard deduction for each person's tax return was US $ 5700, and the standard deduction for a single parent family with children was US $ 8350. Taxpayers over the age of 65 or who are blind can add an additional $ 1,100 standard deduction. Everyone in the family has a tax credit of $ 3,650. This means that for families with more children, the tax deduction is even greater. In addition, for children under the age of 17, you can also enjoy a child allowance of 1,000 yuan per person. These measures are more beneficial to families with multiple children.

Discounts for single-parent and elderly families

Among all households paying taxes in the United States, single parent families with children and elderly families are the two groups that do not pay the highest percentage of federal income tax.

Among U.S. single-parent families, 99.7% of households with an annual income of less than $ 10,000 do not pay taxes, and 99.3% of households with an annual income of $ 10,000 to $ 20,000 do not pay taxes, and annual income of $ 20,000 to $ 30,000 92.2% of households do not need to pay taxes, which means that more than 90% of single-parent families with children with an annual income of less than 30,000 US dollars do not need to pay federal income tax. And 77.9% of single-parent families with children between 30,000 to 40,000 US dollars in annual income do not need to pay taxes, and 45.1% of households between 40,000 to 50,000 US dollars in annual income do not need to pay taxes, and 50,000 annual income 21.2% of households between $ 75,000 and $ 75,000 do not pay taxes, 8.2% of households with annual income between $ 75,000 and $ 100,000 do not need to pay taxes, and 2.1% of households with annual income between $ 100,000 and $ 200,000 do not need to pay taxes Pay taxes, 2.5% of households with annual income between 200,000 to 500,000 US dollars do not need to pay taxes, 5.3% of households with annual income between 500,000 to 1 million US dollars do not need to pay taxes, and all households with annual income of 1 million or more Need to pay taxes.

In 2009, approximately 55.3% of US elderly households were exempt from federal income tax. Breaking down, all households with an annual income of less than 10,000 US dollars are not taxed, 89.5% of households with an annual income of 10,000 to 20,000 US dollars are not taxed, and 76.5% of households with an annual income between 20,000 to 30,000 US dollars No tax, 61.4% of households with annual income between 30,000 to 40,000 US dollars are not taxed, 48.2% of households with annual income between 40,000 to 50,000 US dollars are not taxed, and annual income is 50,000 to 75,000 22.5% of households between US dollars do not pay taxes, 8.1% of households with annual income between 75,000 to 100,000 US dollars do not pay taxes, and 4.9% of households with annual income between 100,000 to 200,000 US dollars do not pay taxes. 3.9% of households with an annual income of 200,000 to 500,000 US dollars are not taxed, 1.6% of households with an annual income of 500,000 to 1 million US dollars are not taxed, and 1.1% of households with an annual income of 1 million or more are not taxed tax.

Obama continues to tax more rich people

Bush Jr. took care of the rich in the United States during his presidency, and the highest tax rate for high-income families has dropped to a new low. Of course, in 2008, Bush Jr. also reduced taxes for low- and middle-income families in the United States, including tax rebates ranging from 300 to 1,200 US dollars per family. despite this. The tax reduction benefits of low- and middle-income families in the United States are not as good as those of rich families, so Bush's tax policy has been criticized. The various tax reduction programs implemented in the United States over the past 10 years can be said to be very generous to the wealthy. Although the rich make more money and pay the largest percentage of federal income tax, the tax incentives for the rich still become Obama and Democrats attack Republican goals.

After taking office, Obama first benefited low- and middle-income families through a large-scale economic stimulus plan, and then again targeted the rich as the main taxpayer. In 2010, the maximum U.S. personal income tax rate was changed from 35% in 2009 to 39.6. %. The tax policy of the Obama administration is basically aimed at the rich. The tax cuts for high-income earners introduced by former President George W. Bush cannot continue, but tax cuts for middle-class families will remain. It can be said that during the Obama administration, the tax burden of high-income Americans will become heavier. People with annual household income of more than $ 250,000 or personal income of more than $ 200,000 may have to pay an additional $ 650 billion in taxes in the next 10 years. .

Obama and Democrats in Congress believe that increasing the tax burden on high-income Americans may be a way to alleviate political and economic pain, but Republicans have long criticized Obama for dominating large-scale income redistributions that could threaten economic recovery. Health care reform requires an increase of $ 200 billion in taxes for high-income earners over the next 10 years. In addition, Democrats plan to continue the Bush-era middle-income tax cuts. They want to raise the income tax rate of the highest-income group to the former Bush The level of the times. Through this method, an additional $ 443 billion in taxes can be collected over the next 10 years. Democrats see this money as a bucket of gold that can be used to respond to public calls to reduce deficits.

Rich people support the government "both rich and poor"

What is the response of rich people in the United States to the Obama administration's "average rich and poor" approach? A group of more than 700 wealthy Americans said they were willing to donate tax cuts for 2010, while lobbying Congress to cancel this tax cut for the rich next year. A report released by another group of rich people shows that the rich who have an annual income of more than $ 250,000 have received a total of $ 700 billion in tax cuts in the past 10 years. US billionaire Hollander said he wanted to let the world know that many wealthy people support the government to cancel their tax cuts.

What do Americans think of the high concentration of wealth in the hands of a few rich people? According to a survey in late 2009, 68% of Americans believe that money and wealth should be more equitably distributed among the majority, and 46% believe that the government should impose higher taxes on the rich so that wealth can be reallocated .

List of U.S. household income tax exemptions in 2009

Income (USD) One-person family couples combined tax return single-parent families All families below 10,000 yuan 99% 100% 99.7% 99.8% 10,000 to 274.3% 99.9% 99.3% 83.6% 20,000 to 30,000 36.7% 90.2% 92.3% 61.8 % 30,000-40,000 16.0% 79.8% 77.9% 47.5% 40,000-50,000 7.4% 71.7% 45.1% 35.7% 50,000-7.5 million 5.0% 34.2% 21.2% 21.5% 75,000-100,000 3.6% 11.3% 8.2 % 9.2% 100,000 to 200,000 4.0% 3.4% 2.1% 3.5% 200,000 to 500,000 3.0% 1.8% 2.5% 2.0% 500,000 to 1 million 2.6% 1.8% 5.3% 2.0% 1 million or more 2.0% 1.5% 0.0 % 1.5% All 46.7% 38.1% 71.9% 46.9%

Income (USD) One-person family couples joint tax return single-parent family all households

Below 10,000 yuan 99% 100% 99.7% 99.8%

10,000 27,000 74.3% 99.9% 99.3% 83.6%

20,000 30,000 36.7% 90.2% 92.3% 61.8%

30,000 40,000 16.0% 79.8% 77.9% 47.5%

40,000 50,000 7.4% 71.7% 45.1% 35.7%

50,000 to 75,000 5.0% 34.2% 21.2% 21.5%

75,000 to 100,000 3.6% 11.3% 8.2% 9.2%

100,000 to 200,000 4.0% 3.4% 2.1% 3.5%

200,000 to 500,000 3.0% 1.8% 2.5% 2.0%

500,000 to 1 million 2.6% 1.8% 5.3% 2.0%

Above 1 million 2.0% 1.5% 0.0% 1.5%

Total 46.7% 38.1% 71.9% 46.9%