Progressive Tax

Published on January 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 63 | Comments: 0 | Views: 331
of 8
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

Progressive tax
A progressive tax is a tax in which the tax rate increases as the taxable amount increases.[1][2][3][4][5] The
term “progressive” refers to the way the tax rate progresses from low to high, with the result that a taxpayer’s
average tax rate is less than the person’s marginal tax
rate.[6][7] The term can be applied to individual taxes or
to a tax system as a whole; a year, multi-year, or lifetime.
Progressive taxes are imposed in an attempt to reduce the
tax incidence of people with a lower ability to pay, as
such taxes shift the incidence increasingly to those with
a higher ability-to-pay. The opposite of a progressive tax
is a regressive tax, where the relative tax rate or burden
decreases as an individual’s ability to pay increases.[5]

about 1% and a flat poll tax on each adult, this made
the tax system less progressive (as it no longer only taxed
wealth) and closer to an income tax.[18]

1.2 Modern era

The term is frequently applied in reference to personal
income taxes, in which people with lower income pay a
lower percentage of that income in tax than do those with
higher income. It can also apply to adjustments of the
tax base by using tax exemptions, tax credits, or selective
taxation that creates progressive distribution effects. For
example, a wealth or property tax,[8] a sales tax on luxury
goods, or the exemption of sales taxes on basic necessities, may be described as having progressive effects as it
increases the tax burden of higher income families and
reduces it on lower income families.[9][10][11]

A caricature of William Pitt the Younger collecting the newly introduced income tax.

The first modern income tax was introduced in Britain by
Prime Minister William Pitt the Younger in his budget
of December 1798, to pay for weapons and equipment
for the French Revolutionary War. Pitt’s new graduated
(progressive) income tax began at a levy of 2 old pence
in the pound (1/120) on incomes over £60 (£5,641 as of
2015),[19] and increased up to a maximum of 2 shillings
(10%) on incomes of over £200. Pitt hoped that the new
income tax would raise £10 million, but actual receipts
for 1799 totalled just over £6 million.[20]

Progressive taxation is often suggested as a way to mitigate the societal ills associated with higher income inequality,[12] as the tax structure reduces inequality,[13]
but economists disagree on the tax policy’s economic and
long-term effects.[14][15][16] Progressive taxation has also
been positively associated with happiness, the subjective
well-being of nations and citizen satisfaction with public
goods, such as education and transportation.[17]
Pitt’s income tax was levied from 1799 to 1802, when it
was abolished by Henry Addington during the Peace of
Amiens. Addington had taken over as prime minister in
1 History
1801, after Pitt’s resignation over Catholic Emancipation.
The income tax was reintroduced by Addington in 1803
when hostilities recommenced, but it was again abolished
1.1 Early examples
in 1816, one year after the Battle of Waterloo. A tax on
In the early days of the Roman Republic, public taxes incomes over a certain amount is a two bracket graduated
consisted of assessments on owned wealth and property. progressive tax, similar to those still in use in Sweden.
The tax rate under normal circumstances was 1% of prop- Bottom brackets of 0% are almost universal, whether they
erty value, and could sometimes climb as high as 3% in are called “earned income credits” or appear explicitly in
situations such as war. These taxes were levied against tax tables.
The United Kingdom income tax was reintroduced by
Sir Robert Peel in the Income Tax Act 1842. Peel, as
a Conservative, had opposed income tax in the 1841
general election, but a growing budget deficit required
a new source of funds. The new income tax, based on
Addington’s model, was imposed on incomes above £150

land, homes and other real estate, slaves, animals, personal items and monetary wealth. By 167 BC, Rome no
longer needed to levy a tax against its citizens in the Italian peninsula, due to the riches acquired from conquered
provinces. After considerable Roman expansion in the
1st century, Augustus Caesar introduced a wealth tax of
1

2

3

(£12,611 as of 2015),[19] . Although this measure was initially intended to be temporary, it soon became a fixture
of the British taxation system. A committee was formed
in 1851 under Joseph Hume to investigate the matter, but
failed to reach a clear recommendation. Despite the vociferous objection, William Gladstone, Chancellor of the
Exchequer from 1852, kept the progressive income tax,
and extended it to cover the costs of the Crimean War. By
the 1860s, the progressive tax had become a grudgingly
accepted element of the English fiscal system.[21]
In the United States, the first progressive income tax
was established by the Revenue Act of 1862. This was
signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln and repealed the flat tax, which had had been brought in under
the Revenue Act of 1861. By the mid-20th century, most
countries had implemented some form of progressive income tax.[22]

2

ECONOMIC EFFECTS

marginal rate will be constant. Usually, the average tax
rate of a tax payer will be lower than the marginal tax rate.
In a system with refundable tax credits, or income-tested
welfare benefits, it is possible for marginal rates to fall as
income rises, at lower levels of income.

2.2 Inflation and tax brackets
Many tax laws are not accurately indexed to inflation. Either they ignore inflation completely, or they are indexed
to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which tends to understate real inflation. In a progressive tax system, failure
to index the brackets to inflation will eventually result in
effective tax increases (if inflation is sustained), as inflation in wages will increase individual income and move
individuals into higher tax brackets with higher percentage rate. This phenomenon is known as bracket creep and
can cause fiscal drag.

Measuring progressivity
3 Economic effects

Indices such as the Suits index,[8] Gini coefficient,
Kakwani index, Theil index, Atkinson index, and Hoover
index have been created to measure the progressivity of 3.1 Income equality
taxation, using measures derived from income distribuMain article: Economic inequality
tion and wealth distribution.[23]

2.1

Marginal and effective tax rates

German marginal and average income tax rates display a progressive structure.

Main articles: Marginal tax rate and Effective tax rate
The rate of tax can be expressed in two different ways;
the marginal rate expressed as the rate on each additional
unit of income or expenditure (or last dollar spent) and
the effective (average) rate expressed as the total tax paid
divided by total income or expenditure. In most progressive tax systems, both rates will rise as the amount subject
to taxation rises, though there may be ranges where the

Progressive taxation has a direct effect on reducing
income inequality.[13] This is especially true if taxation
is used to fund progressive government spending such
as transfer payments and social safety nets.[12] However,
the effect may be muted if the higher rates cause increased tax evasion.[13][24] When income inequality is
low, aggregate demand will be relatively high, because
more people who want ordinary consumer goods and services will be able to afford them, while the labor force will
not be as relatively monopolized by the wealthy.[25][26]
High levels of income inequality can have negative effects
on long-term economic growth, employment, and class
conflict.[27][28] Progressive taxation is often suggested as
a way to mitigate the societal ills associated with higher
income inequality.[12] The difference between the Gini
index for an income distribution before taxation and the
Gini index after taxation is an indicator for the effects of
such taxation.[29]
There is debate between politicians and economists over
the role of tax policy in mitigating or exacerbating wealth
inequality and the effects on economic growth. For example, economists Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez
wrote that decreased progressiveness in US tax policy in
the post World War II era has increased income inequality by enabling the wealthy greater access to capital,[14]
Conversely, a report published by the OECD in 2008
presented empirical research showing a negative relationship between the progressivity of taxes and economic
growth.[15] Describing the research, economist William
McBride stated that progressivity can undermine invest-

3
ment, risk-taking, entrepreneurship, and productivity because high-income earners tend to do much of the saving,
investing, risk-taking, and high-productivity labor.[30][31]
Professor Robert H. Frank states that tax cuts for the
wealthy are largely spent on positional goods such as
larger houses and more expensive cars, which could have
been used to pay for things like improving public education and conducting medical research,[32] and suggests progressive taxation as an instrument for attacking
positional externalities.[33]

3.2

Educational attainment

Economist Gary Becker has described educational attainment as the root of economic mobility.[34] Progressive
tax rates, while raising taxes on high income, have the
goal and corresponding effect of reducing the burden on
low income, improving income equality. Educational attainment is often conditional on cost and family income,
which for the poor, reduces their opportunity for educational attainment.[35][36] Increases in income for the poor
and economic equality reduces the inequality of educational attainment.[37][38] Tax policy can also include progressive features that provide tax incentives for education,
such as tax credits and tax exemptions for scholarships
and grants.[39][40]
A potentially adverse effect of progressive tax schedules is that they may reduce the incentives for educational attainment.[16][36][41] By reducing the after-tax income of highly educated workers, progressive taxes can
reduce the incentives for citizens to attain education,
thereby lowering the overall level of human capital in an
economy.[16][36][41] However, this effect can be mitigated
by an education subsidy funded by the progressive tax.[42]
Theoretically, public support for government spending on
higher education increases when taxation is progressive,
especially when income distribution is unequal.[43]

4

Psychological factors

“Tax The Rich” banner at an IUSY campaign for a financial
transaction tax.

ment social programs for low income earners, calls for increasing tax progressivity have sometimes been labeled as
envy or class warfare,[33][45][46] while others may describe
such actions as fair or a form of social justice.[46][47] Law
professor Marjorie Kornhauser has suggested that much
of the opposition to progressive taxation is caused by
ignorance, cognitive bias, and inflammatory rhetoric, and
would be reduced if a nationwide education campaign
taught the public about progressive taxation and told them
that it benefits their self-interests.[48]

5 Computation
There are two common ways of computing a progressive tax, corresponding to point–slope form and slope–
intercept form of the equation for the applicable bracket.
These compute the tax either as the tax on the bottom
amount of the bracket plus the tax on the marginal amount
within the bracket; or the tax on the entire amount (at the
marginal rate), minus the amount that this overstates tax
on the bottom end of the bracket.
For example, suppose there are tax brackets of 10%,
20%, and 30%, where the 10% rate applies to income
from $1 to $10,000; the 20% rate applies to income from
$10,001 to $20,000; and the 30% rate applies to all income above $20,000. In that case the tax on $20,000 of
income (computed by adding up tax in each bracket) is
10% × $10,000 + 20% × $10,000 = $1,000 + $2,000
= $3,000. The tax on $25,000 of income could then be
computed two ways. Using point–slope form (tax on bottom amount plus tax on marginal amount) yields:

Tax law professor Thomas Griffith, summarizing research on human happiness, has argued that because
inequality in a society significantly reduces happiness,
a progressive tax structure which redistributes income
would increase welfare and happiness in a society.[44] A
2011 social psychology study, using data from 54 countries, found that progressive taxation was positively associated with the subjective well-being, while overall tax
rates and government spending were not. The authors
added, “we found that the association between more- $3, 000+($25, 000−$20, 000)×30% = $1, 500+$3, 000 = $4, 500.
progressive taxation and higher levels of subjective wellbeing was mediated by citizens’ satisfaction with public Geometrically, the line for tax on the top bracket passes
goods, such as education and public transportation.”[17]
through the point ($20,000, $3,000) and has a slope of
Since progressive taxation reduces the income of high 0.3 (30%).
earners and is often used as a method to fund govern- Alternatively, 30% tax on $20,000 yields 30% × $20,000

4

7 SEE ALSO

= $6,000, which overstates tax on the bottom end of the Most systems around the world contain progressive astop bracket by $6,000 − $3,000 = $3,000, so using slope– pects. When taxable income falls within a particular tax
intercept form yields:
bracket, the individual pays the listed percentage of tax
on each dollar that falls within that monetary range. For
example, a person in the U.S. who earned $10,000 US
$25, 000×30%−$3, 000 = $7, 500−$3, 000 = $4, 500. of taxable income (income after adjustments, deductions,
and exemptions) would be liable for 10% of each dollar
Geometrically, the line for tax on the top bracket inter- earned from the 1st dollar to the 7,550th dollar, and then
cepts the y-axis at −$3,000 – it passes through the point for 15% of each dollar earned from the 7,551st dollar to
the 10,000th dollar, for a total of $1,122.50.
(0, −$3,000) – and has a slope of 0.3 (30%).
In the United States, the first form was used through 2003, In the United States, there are seven income tax brackets
ranging from 10% to 39.6% above an untaxed level of infor example (for the 2003 15% Single bracket):[49]
come based on the personal exemption and usually vari• If the amount on Form 1040, line 40 [Taxable In- ous other tax exemptions, such as the Earned Income Tax
Credit and home mortgage payments. The US federal tax
come], is: Over— 7,000
system also includes deductions for state and local taxes
for lower income households which mitigates what are
• But not over— 28,400
sometimes regressive taxes, particularly property taxes.
• Enter on Form 1040, line 41 [Tax] $700.00 + 15% Higher income households are subject to the Alternative
Minimum Tax that limits deductions and sets a flat tax
• of the amount over— 7,000
rate of 26% to 28% with the higher rate commencing at
$175,000 in income. There are also deduction phaseouts
From 2004, this changed to the second form, for example starting at $112,500 for single filers. The net effect is
(for the 2004 28% Single bracket):[50]
increased progressivity that completely limits deductions
for state and local taxes and certain other credits for indi• Taxable income. If line 42 is— At least $100,000 viduals earning more than $306,300.[52]
but not over $146,750
New Zealand has the following income tax brackets (for
the 2012–2013 financial year): 10.5% up to NZ$14,000;
• (a) Enter the amount from line 42
17.5% from $14,001 to $48,000; 30% from $48,001 to
• (b) Multiplication amount × 28% (.28)
$70,000; 33% over $70,001; and 45% when the employee does not complete a declaration form.[53] All val• (c) Multiply (a) by (b)
ues are in New Zealand dollars and exclude the earner
levy.
• (d) Subtraction amount $ 5,373.00

6

Australia has the following progressive income tax rates
• Tax. Subtract (d) from (c). Enter the result here and
(for the 2012–2013 financial year): 0% effective up to
on Form 1040, line 43
A$18,200; 19% from $18,201 to $37,000; 32.5% from
$37,001 to $80,000; 37% from $80,001 to $180,000; and
45% for any amount over $180,000.[54]

Examples

7 See also
• Land value tax
• Optimal tax
• Pigovian tax
• Property tax
• Proportional tax
• Redistribution of income and wealth
Distribution of US federal taxes from 1979 to 2013, based on
CBO Estimates.[51]

See also: Tax rates around the world

• Regressive tax
• Robin Hood effect
• Suits index

5
• Taxable income elasticity
• Tax evasion
• Tax incidence
• Wealth tax

8

References

[1] Webster (4b): increasing in rate as the base increases (a
progressive tax)
[2] American Heritage (6). Increasing in rate as the taxable
amount increases.
[3] Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: Tax levied at a rate that
increases as the quantity subject to taxation increases.

[15] Arnold, Jens (14 Oct 2008). “Do Tax Structures Affect
Aggregate Economic Growth? Empirical Evidence From
A Panel of OECD Countries”. OECD. Retrieved 2 Jan
2014.
[16] Becker, Gary S.; Murphy, Kevin M. (May 2007). “The
Upside of Income Inequality”. American Enterprise Institute. Retrieved Jan 8, 2014.
[17] Shigehiro Oishi, Ulrich Schimmack, and Ed Diener,. Progressive Taxation and the Subjective Well-Being of Nations.
Psychological Science 23(1) 86–92. (Published online before print December 8, 2011).
[18] Roman Taxes. Unrv.com. Retrieved on 2014-04-12.
[19] UK CPI inflation numbers based on data available from
Gregory Clark (2015), "The Annual RPI and Average
Earnings for Britain, 1209 to Present (New Series)" MeasuringWorth.

[4] Princeton University WordNet: (n) progressive tax (any
tax in which the rate increases as the amount subject to
taxation increases)

[20] “A tax to beat Napoleon”. HM Revenue & Customs. Retrieved 2007-01-24.

[5] Sommerfeld, Ray M., Silvia A. Madeo, Kenneth E. Anderson, Betty R. Jackson (1992), Concepts of Taxation,
Dryden Press: Fort Worth, TX

[21] Steven A. Bank (2011). Anglo-American Corporate Taxation: Tracing the Common Roots of Divergent Approaches.
Cambridge University Press. pp. 28–29.

[6] Hyman, David M. (1990) Public Finance: A Contemporary Application of Theory to Policy, 3rd, Dryden Press:
Chicago, IL

[22] James, Kathryn (2011). “Exploring the Origins and
Global Rise of VAT”. Journal of Economics 35 (4): 1522. Retrieved 3 October 2014.

[7] James, Simon (1998) A Dictionary of Taxation, Edgar Elgar Publishing Limited: Northampton, MA

[23] Philip B. Coulter: Measuring Inequality, 1989, ISBN 08133-7726-9 (This book describes about 50 different inequality measures.)

[8] Suits, Daniel B. (September 1977). “Measurement of Tax
Progressivity”. American Economic Review 67 (4): 747–
752. Retrieved 28 January 2014.
[9] Internal Revenue Service at the Wayback Machine
(archived August 16, 2007): The luxury tax is a progressive tax – it takes more from the wealthy than from the
poor.
[10] Luxury tax – Britannica Online Encyclopedia: Excise levy
on goods or services considered to be luxuries rather than
necessities. Modern examples are taxes on jewelry and
perfume. Luxury taxes may be levied with the intent of
taxing the rich...
[11] Clothing Exemptions and Sales Tax Regressivity, By Jeffrey M. Schaefer, The American Economic Review, Vol.
59, No. 4, Part 1 (Sep., 1969), pp. 596–599

[24] Duncan, Denvil, Klara Sabirianova Peter (October 2012).
“Unequal Inequalities: Do Progressive Taxes Reduce Income Inequality?" (PDF). Institute for the Study of Labor.
[25] The Economics of Welfare| Arthur Cecil Pigou
[26] Andrew Berg and Jonathan D. Ostry, 2011, "Inequality
and Unsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same
Coin?" IMF Staff Discussion Note SDN/11/08,
International Monetary Fund
[27] Alesina, Alberto;
Dani Rodrick (May 1994).
“Distributive Politics and Economic Growth” (PDF).
Quarterly Journal of Economics 109 (2): 465–90.
doi:10.2307/2118470. Retrieved 17 October 2013.

[12] Pickett, Kate; Wilkinson, Richard (April 26, 2011).
The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies
Stronger. Bloomsbury Press. ISBN 978-1608193417.

[28] Castells-Quintana, David; Vicente Royuela (2012).
“Unemployment and long-run economic growth: The role
of income inequality and urbanisation” (PDF). Investigaciones Regionales 12 (24): 153–173. Retrieved 17 October 2013.

[13] Moyes, P. A note on minimally progressive taxation
and absolute income inequality Social Choice and Welfare, Volume 5, Numbers 2-3 (1988), 227–234, DOI:
10.1007/BF00735763. Accessed: 19 May 2012.

[29] Shlomo Yitzhaki (1998). “More than a Dozen Alternative Ways of Spelling Gini” (PDF). Economic Inequality
8: 13–30.

[14] Piketty, Thomas, and Emmanuel Saez. “Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998”. Tech. 1st ed. Vol.
CXVIII. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2003.

[30] McBride, William (December 18, 2012). “What Is the
Evidence on Taxes and Growth?". Tax Foundation. Retrieved January 2, 2014.

6

[31] McBride, William (February 20, 2013). “Comments on
Who Pays? A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems
in All 50 States”. Tax Foundation. Retrieved January 2,
2014.
[32] Frank, Robert H. “Positional Externalities Cause Large
and Preventable Welfare Losses” (PDF). American Economic Association. Retrieved March 17, 2014.
[33] Frank, Robert H. (June 2003). “Are Positional Externalities Different from Other Externalities?" (PDF). Brookings Institution. Retrieved March 17, 2014.
[34] Becker, Gary S. (October 15, 2013). “Becker Explores
the Roots of Upward Mobility”. The University of
Chicago. Retrieved January 24, 2014.
[35] Campbell, Mary; Haveman, R.; Sandefur, G.; Wolfe, B.
(2005). “11 Economic inequality and educational attainment across a generation”. Focus 23 (3): 11–15. we found
that family income and wealth have positive and statistically significant links to attainment: children who grow up
in families with higher income and greater wealth receive
more schooling.
[36] Mueller, Richard (May 2008). Access and Persistence
of Students from Low ‐ Income Backgrounds in Canadian Post ‐ Secondary Education: A Review of the Literature. MESA Project. Educational Policy Institute. students from low income backgrounds are more sensitive to
changes in tuition and aid packages than their colleagues
from higher income families, as are students attending
community colleges compared to universities.
[37] Campbell, Mary; Haveman, R.; Sandefur, G.; Wolfe, B.
(2005). “11 Economic inequality and educational attainment across a generation” (PDF). Focus 23 (3): 11–15.
[Implications of increased economic inequality:] Average
achievement goes up slightly, but so does the variability of
achievement. Average years of schooling increase by less
than 1 percent. Inequality, in contrast, increases substantially, by over 8 percent when all four measures of inequality are considered together. Moreover, a higher proportion
of students do not complete high school or 11th grade.
[38] Checchi, Daniele (May 2001). “Education, Inequality
and Income Inequality”. Distributional Analysis Research
Programme Papers 52. Suntory and Toyota International
Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE. income inequality effectively reduces school enrollment,
mainly at secondary level.

9

EXTERNAL LINKS

[42] Krueger, Dirk; Ludwig, Alexander (May 2013). “Optimal
Progressive Labor Income Taxation and Education Subsidies When Education Decisions and Intergenerational
Transfers Are Endogenous”. American Economic Review
103 (3): 496–501. doi:10.1257/aer.103.3.496. Retrieved
28 January 2014.
[43] Ansell, Ben (2010). From the Ballot to the Blackboard:
The Redistributive Political Economy of Education. Cambridge University Press. p. 175. Under conditions of high
income inequality and tax progressivity, there will be even
greater support for higher education spending even if most
people do not receive it
[44] Griffith, Thomas D. (2004). “Progressive Taxation And
Happiness”. Boston Law Review. Retrieved March 17,
2014.
[45] Powell, Jim (October 17, 2012). “Class Warfare: The
Mortal Enemy Of Economic Growth And Jobs”. Forbes.
Retrieved February 3, 2014.
[46] Kim, Susanna (Sep 19, 2011). “Warren Buffett Rule:
Class Warfare or Tax Fairness?". ABC News. Retrieved
February 3, 2014.
[47] Egypt constitution panel rejects article on progressive taxation, Ahram Online, 11 Nov 2013, retrieved February 3,
2014
[48] Kornhauser, Marjorie (September 1, 2004). “Educating
Ourselves Towards a Progressive (and Happier) Tax: A
Commentary on Griffith’s Progressive Taxation and Happiness”. Boston College Law Review. Retrieved February
3, 2014.
[49] Form 1040 Instructions (2003), 2003 Tax Rate Schedules,
p. 74
[50] Form 1040 Instructions (2004), 2004 Tax Computation
Worksheet—Line 43, p. 72
[51] “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal
Taxes, 2010”. The US Congressional Budget Office
(CBO). 2013-12-04. Retrieved 2014-01-06.
[52] 26 USC 55. Also see IRS Form 6251 (individuals) and
Form 4626 (corporations).
[53] “Income tax rates for individuals”. ird.govt.nz. Inland
Revenue Department (New Zealand). Retrieved 15 May
2013.

[39] “Growth in Means-Tested Programs and Tax Credits for
Low-Income Households”. Congressional Budget Office.
February 11, 2013. Retrieved January 28, 2014.

[54] “Individual income tax rates”. ato.gov.au. Australian Taxation Office. Retrieved 15 May 2013.

[40] Rachel Johnson, James Nunns, Jeffrey Rohaly, Eric
Toder, Roberton Williams (July 2011). “Why Some Tax
Units Pay No Income Tax” (PDF). Tax Policy Center. Retrieved January 28, 2014.

9 External links

[41] Heckman, J., L. Lochner and C. Tabner, Tax Policy and
Human Capital Formation, American Economic Review,
88, 293–297. Accessed: 31 July 2012.

• The Progressive Income Tax: Theoretical Foundations
• What’s Wrong with the Progressive Income Tax

7
• Slemrod, Joel B. (2002). “Progressive Taxes”. In
David R. Henderson (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of
Economics (1st ed.). Library of Economics and Liberty. OCLC 317650570, 50016270 and 163149563
• Apps, P. F., & Rees, R. (2014). Optimal taxation,
child care and models of the household.

8

10

10
10.1

TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses
Text

• Progressive tax Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_tax?oldid=676014984 Contributors: Bryan Derksen, Ed Poor, SimonP, Maury Markowitz, BL~enwiki, Rbrwr, Sannse, Ronz, Stevenj, Mark Foskey, Deisenbe, Mydogategodshat, PaulinSaudi, Furrykef,
Grendelkhan, Tempshill, VeryVerily, Pakaran, Scott McNay, Naddy, Sverdrup, Henrygb, Wlievens, Kent Wang, Terjepetersen, Nikodemos, TOttenville8, Nadavspi, Inter, Peruvianllama, Everyking, Nayuki, PeterC, Decoy, Ellsworth, Ary29, Karl-Henner, Neutrality, Rich
Farmbrough, Smyth, Bender235, Commonbrick, Dgorsline, MBisanz, Shanes, Sole Soul, Cretog8, Yonghokim, Xevious, Psychobabble, Jerryseinfeld, La goutte de pluie, Eruantalon, PaulHanson, John Quiggin, Smoothy, Wtmitchell, Fourthords, RJII, Deathphoenix,
Coolgamer, Joriki, Firsfron, Vanished User 3388458, Plek, Kgrr, Wtfunkymonkey, DL5MDA, Deltabeignet, BD2412, Sjö, Rjwilmsi,
DeadlyAssassin, Ligulem, Pearlg, Firebug, Wragge, Fephisto, Emiao, Getzolt, Chobot, Hermitage, Bkhouser, YurikBot, Arzel, RussBot,
Gaius Cornelius, Morphh, Nicke L, Brandon, Nick C, BOT-Superzerocool, 2over0, JLaTondre, GrinBot~enwiki, Jaysscholar, SmackBot,
Lawrencekhoo, Timeshifter, Gilliam, Chris the speller, TDS, Ksenon, Jprg1966, Sceptic~enwiki, BrendelSignature, Nbarth, Colonies Chris,
Oatmeal batman, Famspear, Stevenmitchell, Ahallowell, Nrcprm2026, BullRangifer, Harryboyles, Dreslough, Isokrates, Hu12, Robertwb,
Tawkerbot2, TreyGreene, Eastlaw, Cyrusc, Ville Lehtonen, Rowellcf, Breister, DumbBOT, Legis, Omicronpersei8, Thijs!bot, Bobblehead, Paul from Michigan, Prolog, Pro crast in a tor, Gregalton, Mack2, Laikalynx, Kuteni, EECavazos, SiobhanHansa, Toddboyle,
MartinDK, SHCarter, X-factor, Bubba hotep, Benzocane, CosmopolitanCapitalist, Roy Langston, DGG, Doctors without suspenders,
Richard Katz, R'n'B, Mausy5043, Nbauman, Mattnad, Rhinestone K, Jlechem, JayJasper, EditorTM, DQJK2000, Foofighter20x, Fishbert, Someguy1221, Tanner-Christopher, Hughmanwho, MaCRoEco, ProfMike789, NHRHS2010, GirasoleDE, Carny, SieBot, Jauerback, Erik Jesse, Grundle2600, Freedomwarrior, Sbowers3, Veddharta, Perkinsms, Faradayplank, Firefly4342, Bombastus, Capitalismojo, Loren.wilton, ClueBot, Admiral Norton, Roewa, Rtminner, WDavis1911, Gacole, DragonBot, Excirial, Aitias, Tang23, DumZiBoT,
Doopdoop, Wiseguy316, Airplaneman, Addbot, Some jerk on the Internet, Download, Debresser, Deamon138, Dayewalker, Luckasbot, Yobot, Darx9url, AnomieBOT, DrChill, Xqbot, Skinsfann44, Srich32977, J04n, Papercutbiology, Tobito85, Shadowjams, FrescoBot, AnthonyBurton, Citation bot 1, Pinethicket, Peroxwhy2gen, Jonesey95, Jbsmathers, 5k61htv9l, LilyKitty, OlderIgor, RjwilmsiBot, Jjsqt365, Kaiomai, Joraejean, EmausBot, Howard41, Racerx11, Alpha Quadrant (alt), Resist272727, Ubikwit, Noodleki, SugarBaby-Love, Sew2wiki, ClueBot NG, MoondyneAWB, Somedifferentstuff, Chrisminter, Mystery Achievement, Frietjes, Helpful Pixie
Bot, Guest2625, ArtifexMayhem, Iselilja, Compfreak7, CitationCleanerBot, BattyBot, The Illusive Man, Thecrowsnest, Kendallestra82,
VictorD7, Lugia2453, Turetzsr, Cupco, SPECIFICO, Jamesmcmahon0, Lance Friedman, Neo Poz, EllenCT, Antoine.r.bonnet, NorthBySouthBaranof, MilesMoney, Nilshg, NazariyKaminski, Roccodrift, I.yeckehzaare, J Nick A Simpson, Monkbot, TheBigBlob123,
Josh9611 and Anonymous: 238

10.2

Images

• File:Average_US_Federal_Tax_Rates_1979_to_2013.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Average_
US_Federal_Tax_Rates_1979_to_2013.png License: Public domain Contributors: http://cbo.gov/publication/44604 Original artist: US
Congressional Budget Office, publication 44604
• File:Commons-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Original
artist: ?
• File:IUSY2011_Banner_Tax_the_Rich.JPG Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/IUSY2011_Banner_Tax_
the_Rich.JPG License: CC0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Timmaexx
• File:Income_Tax_Germany_2010.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Income_Tax_Germany_2010.
png License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Tomeasy
• File:Pitt’{}s_income_tax.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/dd/Pitt%27s_income_tax.jpg License: ? Contributors:
Original publication: Cartoon
Immediate source: http://www.liberal-vision.org/2010/04/14/a-warning-to-guinea-pigs-or-how-to-avoid-a-tory-tax/ Original artist:
James Gilray
(Life time: 18th century)
• File:Wikiquote-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fa/Wikiquote-logo.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: ? Original artist: ?

10.3

Content license

• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close