Download the PDF of this article
Fifteen years ago, socialite Leona Helmsley bragged, “only the little
people pay taxes,” but then she went to jail for tax fraud. Unfortunately,
Helmsley's statement is even more accurate today than it was at the time.
Tax fraud is estimated at $311 billion this year, more than the entire
budget for Medicare, and more than last year's revenues at Walmart or General
Electric. Most cheaters go unpunished. What’s
worse, the legal tax system is rigged to favor rich people and large
corporations at the expense of ordinary citizens and small businesses.
Even when everybody
abides by the law, middle-income households pay more taxes than rich ones. And politicians
keep handing out tax favors to their campaign contributors – at
our expense.
A chorus of academics, journalists, and private citizens are warning
that a tax system favoring the rich fuels the growing concentration
of wealth
in
America – and therefore threatens our economic growth and even
our democracy.
Middle class spending is the growth engine in a free market
economy, and when
taxes rob the middle class in favor of the rich, the economy shuts down. Huge fortunes also produce political power that is hard to control. That’s
why all modern democracies use their tax laws to prevent excessive concentration
of wealth. And that’s why we need a fair taxes campaign in America.
In this election year, both candidates are certain to say a lot of things
about taxes. But neither of them is likely to talk about fraud, favoritism
and abuse
of power – unless voters raise these issues and ask for reforms.
Who Pays Taxes?
The Tax Code Fuels Wealth Concentration
The Inherent Unfairness of Income Taxes
The Estate Tax Gets a Death Sentence
Social Security Taxes Subsidize Income Tax Cuts
States Raise Taxes to Compensate for Federal Cuts
Fraud Costs More than Medicare
Corporate Tax Incentives Fail to Deliver
Practical Solutions to the Tax-Based Class War
Books and Internet Resources
Who Pays Taxes?
The short answer is this: you and I pay the taxes that rich and powerful
people ought to pay, but don’t.
In the year 2000, at the height of the last economic boom and before the most recent round of tax cuts were enacted, IRS data shows that the richest 400 taxpayers paid 27% of their income in federal, state, and local taxes. On average, these 400 taxpayers each had taxable income of $151 million. All other taxpayers had average taxable income of only $34,600, and yet their tax burden was 40%.

Political candidates always focus on income taxes. But we have to look at
all taxes people pay to grasp how our tax system has been quietly transferring
the tax burden from the wealthiest households to the rest of us for the last twenty years.
Journalists Donald Barlett and James Steele point out that this inequity results from a political system that has been put up for auction: “Over the last three decades, America’s elected officials have turned a reasonably fair tax code into one crafted for the benefit of those who give the largest campaign contributions, enjoy the greatest access, hire the most influential lobbyists, or otherwise exercise power beyond that enjoyed by average citizens.”
Corporations have been profiting in Washington, too. In 1965,
individual taxpayers paid 66% of all US income taxes, and corporations paid
about a third. But by 2000, the corporate share had dropped to 18%, just
about half what it used to be.
 A recent Congressional study reported that 63% of US corporations paid no income taxes at all
in 2000. Six in ten American corporations reported no tax liability for the five years from 1996 through 2000, even though corporate profits were growing at record-breaking levels during that period.
BACK TO TOP
The Tax Code Fuels Wealth Concentration
Not since 1929 have so few people controlled so much of the wealth
in our country. In his new book, Perfectly Legal, New York Times
reporter David Cay Johnston reports that between 1970 and 2000 average
income
for
the
top 13,400 households
in America increased from $3.6 million to nearly $24 million. That’s
a staggering 538% increase. At the same time, the average income
for 90% of US households actually fell from $27,060 to $27,035. These
13,400 households
account for just .01% of the population, according to Johnston.

Income distribution in the United States is the most unequal among all developed nations, according to OECD data.
Prosperity that was supposed to ‘trickle down’ has instead flowed straight
uphill. Between 1990 and 2000, the average CEO pay went up by 571% and corporate
profits grew by 93% while worker pay barely stayed ahead of inflation.

BACK TO TOP
The Inherent Unfairness of Income Taxes
Investors pay lower income taxes than workers. Roughly 85% of stock market wealth is owned by 10% of
American households and there is no logical reason why
income from those investments (called “capital
gains” by the tax code) should be taxed less than
income from work. But the top tax rate on wages is 35%
while the top tax rate on capital gains is only 15%.
This rate structure gives the richest households enormous
advantages without producing any obvious social benefit.
If we reversed the favor – and let workers pay
lower tax rates than investors – then working families
might have greater opportunity to accumulate wealth.
Historians point out that more people moved up into the
middle class during the 1950s and 1960s – and American
wealth was much less concentrated – when the top
income tax rate was 91%, impacting salaries and capital
gains equally. According to IRS data for 2000, most American
households earned 70% of their income from work and only
10% from capital gains. But in the highest tax brackets,
the situation is completely reversed.

Eliminating the special rate for capital gains taxes would reverse a major
inequity in the current income tax. And we could
reduce rampant under-reporting of capital gains income by instituting automatic
withholding, just as we do with salaries.
BACK TO TOP
The Estate Tax Gets a Death Sentence
The Federal Estate tax is the only tax that directly
combats the problem of excessive wealth accumulation. Public investments provide American entrepreneurs with a literate work force, court-enforced property laws, and a stable business environment, among many other benefits. The estate tax recaptures some of those investments and makes them available to future generations. Oftentimes, the assets in an estate have never been taxed.
In 2000, only 52,000 estates out of over 2 million deaths that
year were large enough to
pay estate taxes . Even though the heirs of rich families kept
75% to 80% of their family’s fortunes, the
tax generated vast sums for the government. According
to the analysts at United for a Fair Economy, “In
2000, the estate tax alone raised more than double
the total amount of federal income taxes paid by
the bottom half of American taxpayers.” And
yet the tax is slated for extinction by President Bush.
Analysts across the political spectrum recommend keeping the estate tax.
And dozens of wealthy individuals are actively working
to reform but retain the estate tax, including Bill
Gates Senior who is father to the world's richest man, and Warren Buffett, who owns the world's second-largest private fortune. Gates has recommended
earmarking the proceeds for public investments, like
education, that create broad-based economic opportunities.
BACK TO TOP
Social Security Taxes Subsidize Income Tax Cuts
The government collects more Social Security taxes than it
needs for current benefits, and yet we face enormous shortfalls when the
Baby Boomers retire. David Cay Johnston reports, “From 1984 to 2002,
the government collected $1.7 trillion more in Social Security taxes than
the agency paid out in benefits to retirees, widows, orphans, and in disability
benefits. Instead of investing that surplus to pay for the looming retirement
of baby boomers, as promised, that money was used to pay the ordinary bills
of the government, making up for the taxes that were no longer being paid
by the rich because of the 1981 tax cuts created by Ronald Reagan.
The only way that the taxes Americans have paid in advance for their Social
Security benefits can be turned into retirement checks is by a new round
of taxes.” Because their money is gone now, “People have lost
not just what they paid, but the opportunity to invest the money for
themselves.”
Three quarters of US households pay more Social Security taxes than
income taxes. Employers deduct the tax straight out
of paychecks and send the money directly to the Federal
government. A middle-income household pays 9.6% of
its income in social security taxes, while households
in the top 1% of income pay less than 2%.

Social Security tax rates have increased since 1980, while income tax rates have been cut repeatedly.
During the last presidential campaign, both candidates promised not to spend
the Social Security surplus. And candidate Bush specifically promised not
to use the surplus to finance tax cuts. But as Johnston reports, that’s
just what he did: “In June 2001, President Bush signed his tax cut
package that lowered rates on the rich, eliminated the estate tax for one
year, and gave more than half of the $1.3 trillion tax cut to the richest
1% of taxpayers. It was a tax cut that also promised years of budget deficits
. . . and more raiding of Social Security so that the middle class could
subsidize the rich.”
The Social Security tax only applies to income up to $87,000 and people earning above that ceiling get a break from paying the tax.
Refunding excess Social Security payments now will not repair the damages
already done. But we could fix the Social Security system by taxing all salaries
equally – even salaries over $87,000 that are currently exempt from
the tax – and by investing the funds in real assets, not government
IOUs.
BACK TO TOP
States Raise Taxes to Compensate for Federal Cuts
When Congress cuts Federal income and estate
taxes it ends up sending less money to the states,
and each state has to make up the lost revenue
somehow.
And most states have responded by increasing
their sales and excise taxes, or by cutting essential
programs, or both. Many
states have also cut taxes for their best-off
residents. As a result, people in every state
are losing libraries, childcare centers and fire
stations, while paying bigger bus fares, bridge
tolls and sales taxes.
The federal income tax which made up 11% of
GDP in 1965, now consumes under 9% of our national income. Total taxes increased from 25% of GDP to
29% during those years, according to data from
the Office of Management and Budgets (OMB), but
the burden has shifted from the national government
to the states.

States rely on regressive taxes, like sales taxes, car taxes and property
taxes. Because they impact everyone,
regardless of ability to pay, these taxes take a bigger
bite from modest incomes than huge fortunes, even if the rich folks own very
expensive property or buy more expensive goods.
Because state and local taxes are regressive, as one study recently reported, “Only
four states require their best-off citizens to pay as much of their incomes
in taxes as middle-income families have to pay.” Therefore, when we
shift taxes from the national government to the states, we are once again
shifting the burden from wealthy people to poor and middle class people.
The Bush budget for 2005 cuts another $6 billion in federal support to states, and yet public investment in education, job training, child care, the environment, energy, and research is already less than half what it was during the 1960s and 1970s.

Raising taxes and collecting more revenue at the national level – and
then passing the resources back to the states – would greatly increase
tax equity in America.
BACK TO TOP
Fraud Costs More Than Medicare
“If tax dodging
were a business, it would be the nation’s
largest corporation,” said journalists Barlett and Steele.
The current $311 billion tax gap is the equivalent of
the total income taxes paid annually by
all individuals and families earning less
than $75,000.
If we simply collected taxes that cheaters are withholding from
the system, we would have enough to give
a free college education to every child
in America, or to provide health insurance
for small business employees, or to cut
social security taxes in half. It amounts
to more money than we spent for Medicare
in 2003, almost as much as the Defense
budget, and almost enough to pay last year’s
deficit.

Large corporations
and rich individuals have greater incentive and many more opportunities to
cheat – by understating income or shipping money to foreign tax havens,
by inflating deductions or claiming expenses that never existed, or by speculating
in the stock market and then not reporting the gains. People with a job or a pension have no similar opportunity to lie about income or evade taxes.
Unfortunately, as their biggest donors turned into the biggest tax cheaters,
politicians have reacted by handcuffing the tax police. Congress has consistently
under-funded IRS enforcement efforts and computer upgrades that would catch more tax dodgers.
Congressional misdirection of IRS resources is even worse than their failure to properly fund the agency.
Statistics cited by Johnston show that the IRS polices the poor more than
the rich, even though the rich have greater opportunity and incentive to
cheat.

Corporate tax dodgers get off easy, too: in 2002, the IRS assessed just
22 penalties against corporations, a decline of more than 99% from 1993 when
2,400 penalties were imposed. Audits of corporate returns fell sharply
from 26 per 1000 returns in 1997, to only 7 audits per 1000 returns in 2003.

The independent IRS Oversight Board recommends beefing up the IRS enforcement budget, targeting the
biggest cheaters first (not the smaller ones), and modernizing or automating
more of the IRS enforcement systems. Others have also suggested de-criminalizing
tax fraud, arguing that we can catch more people – and recapture more
revenue – if the penalty is a fine instead of jail.
BACK TO TOP
Corporate Tax Incentives Fail to Deliver
Corporate tax incentives have been used in the past to encourage socially valuable behavior, like locating a factory in an inner city, for example, or cleaning up pollution levels. But with corporate taxes already at their lowest levels in history, there is very little room left for further incentives. In 2000, only 8% (of more than 27 million American businesses that filed tax returns) were subject to the corporate income tax.
Current tax law favors the wrong kind of corporate behavior. Global companies can park assets overseas, for example, and evade taxes that smaller, local companies still have to pay. Corporations can also justify excessive CEO compensation and executive perks (like private jets) because the tax code makes those expenses tax deductible. Economists argue that the current tax code encourages waste and fraudulent accounting.
Some claim that expensive US income taxes give advantages to foreign corporations who pay less tax in their home countries, but the evidence does not support this claim. Total federal and state corporate income taxes in the US were less than the average for other developed countries.

Corporate taxes that were common in earlier generations have quietly dropped
from public discussion. War profits taxes, for example, were once widely
used to offset the costs of war, to share the sacrifices
fairly among foot soldiers and financiers, and to prevent outright profiteering.
Special windfall profit taxes were levied against companies in the past when an
unfair business advantage resulted from unusual circumstances. For instance, when
the Arab oil cartel (OPEC) hiked the world oil prices in 1973, the US government
initially responded by setting price controls on American crude oil, but
then switched to a windfall profits tax. The proceeds were earmarked for
energy conservation research.
Both candidates talk about corporate tax incentives, but before we consider additional tax breaks for corporations, we should evaluate the effectiveness of existing programs. Are we keeping jobs where we want them? Are we encouraging openness with shareholders and employees? Are we rewarding efficiency?
Many analysts recommend reducing corporate tax evasion, closing loopholes, and increasing economic efficiency by making corporations pay taxes on the income they report to stockholders, not a separate figure cooked up for the IRS. Another recommendation: boost IRS audit rates for companies that use aggressive tax avoidance tactics.
BACK TO TOP
Practical Solutions
to the Tax-Based Class War
Warren Buffett has famously said, “if
there is a class war in America, my side is
winning.” In his annual letter to shareholders
this year, the billionaire investment guru urged corporations
to pony up on taxes, saying, "We hope
our [Berkshire Hathaway corporate income] taxes
continue to rise in the future—it will
mean we are prospering—but we also
hope that the rest of corporate America
antes up
along with us.”
Another voice from the billionaire class,
Bill Gates Senior, reminds us that public
investments
in our courts, schools, transit systems,
public utilities, and research programs
have pushed
the United States to the top of the world’s
economy. No other investment scheme in the
history of the world has been so successful, says Gates. “As taxpayers, we should take
pride in the fact that the US government is
the world’s largest venture capitalist.”
We can end the apparent abuse of economic power and political influence that has led us where
we are today, and get the economy growing,
by revamping our tax laws and boosting
public
investment with the proceeds. Beyone the recommendationa already offered, here are three keys ways we can accomplish this goal:
- Increase Federal investments in the states,
by providing funds for universal public
pre-school, for example, or by offering low-cost health
insurance for small businesses.
- Reinstate War and Windfall Profits taxes in
selected circumstances and invest
the proceeds in an all-out public effort to reduce American
dependence on foreign oil.
- Sunshine the tax code so that politicians must
name the beneficiaries from tax
legislation they propose, and disclose donations received
from them.
Previous generations of Americans addressed
the political problem of concentrated wealth and
power by actively breaking up monopolies, jailing
people who put undue pressure on politicians,
and helping disenfranchised people win
the right to vote. This generation must find solutions appropriate
to our own times.
BACK
TO TOP
Book and Internet Resources
The Tax Policy Center (www.taxpolicycenter.org) provides a wealth of tax statistics
and analysis.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (www.cbpp.org) goes beyond taxes
to look at issues of budget priorities and economic development.
Citizens for Tax Justice (www.ctj.org) advocates for poor and middle-income
families.
Responsible Wealth (www.responsiblewealth.org) is the advocacy organization
headed by Bill Gates Senior and Chuck Collins.
United for a Fair Economy (www.ufenet.org) is a group working to preserve democracy
from the corrupting influences of concentrated wealth.
Perfectly Legal: The Covert Campaign to Rig our Tax System to Benefit the
Super Rich—and Cheat Everybody Else, by David Cay Johnston, Penguin
Books, 2004.
Wealth and Our Commonwealth: Why Americans Should Tax Accumulated Fortunes,
by William H. Gates Sr. and Chuck Collins, Beacon Press, 2003.
America: Who Really Pays the Taxes, by Donald L Barlett and James B Steele,
Simon and Schuster, 1994.
Fuzzy Math: The Essential Guide to the Bush Tax Plan, by Paul Krugman, W.W.
Norton Company, 2001.
The Great American Tax Dodge: How Spiraling Fraud and Avoidance are Killing
Fairness, Destroying the Income Tax and Costing You, by Donald L Barlett
and James B Steele, Little, Brown,and Company, 2000.
Warhogs: A history of War Profits in America, by Stuart Brandes, University
Press of Kentucky, 1997.
BACK TO TOP |