Should Taxes Over $ 250, 000 A Year Be Changed?
Should Taxes On People Making Over $250,000 A Year Be Changed?
Brandon Hall
Strayer University
English 215 Research and Writing
Professor Julie Davenport
November 2, 2014
Remittance or paying of taxes is both a civil and social duty for all citizens who earn incomes. However, the rate at which tax is charged and the means of paying taxes varies depending on the source of the income, the amount of income and more importantly due to the relevant tax legislations. In America, the government has established rates of taxation for various income brackets considering factors such as marital status, physical impairment and economic factors such as the amount of disposable income (Urban Institute, 2010). Usually, the government imposes taxation with various considerations in mind. In particular, the government considers the level of income. As such, most revenue collection …show more content…
authorities tend to charge people in higher brackets of incomes higher rates than those in the lower brackets. The above tendency is premised upon the fact that tax reduces a taxpayer’s income (Finkelman, 2014). Hence, the taxation system should target persons with more disposable income. If the government taxed persons in lower income brackets at a higher rate it would reduce their disposable income, which would gradually, make people in the lower groups poorer. The taxation system’s work is not only to gather tax, but also to address other social and economic issues such as income inequality by redistributing incomes to the marginalized or vulnerable groups.
People earning over $250,000 are in the upper middle class, which means they have a considerable amount of disposable income.
Increase in taxes would have minimal economic implications on people earning such amounts of money. By contrast, the disposable income of people earning below $ 250,000 reduce significantly once they tax rate in their bracket increases. Therefore, to address income inequality the government should increase taxes for people earning over 250,000 annually. This would ensure that middle and lower income earners have adequate disposable funds. From an economic perspective, people earning over 250,000 should pay more tax since they have the capacity to do so without reducing their disposable income significantly (Pollack, 2010). From a moral perspective, people with higher incomes have a duty to support the other economic groups so that the economic and social development is even. In addition, the extra tax charged on such a group would enable the government to support social programs that will address the plight of the economically and socially marginalized
people.
Presently, the government provides significantly higher tax reliefs for the affluent, which means that they pay relatively lower amounts tax relative to their earnings. As such, they are able to contribute to their terminal benefits and health schemes easily without suffering any financial strains (Pollack, 2010). By contrast, people earning an amount lower than 250,000 dollars suffer financial strain, as a result, such people may not have adequate medical cover. Such problems may be addressed by tweaking the current taxation regime to ensure that lower income groups are taxed at lower rates. The tax regime affects various forms of savings such as retirement schemes and terminal benefits, which are vital for any population (Urban Institute, 2010). The government can enhance retirement savings and uptake of medical cover via an appropriate and well thought- out tax regime. Most of the income in the lower income brackets goes towards consumption or meeting of basic needs, which contributes, directly to the economy. Reducing such incomes via taxation will take away disposable income, which would lead to a poorer low-income group.
To resolve the economic and social problems that have resulted from the present taxation regime, which favours the affluent, it is vital to consider the enactment of taxation regimes. The federal government alongside the state authority develop tax rates, which are later passed and implemented as law. The federal and the state authority should consider the impacts of the current tax regime and review it appropriately. The respective authorities should not only consider the amount of tax, but also the indirect impacts of higher taxation on the low-income groups or individuals who earn below 250,000 dollars. The authorities should use the tax regime as a means of protecting the vulnerable such as families with one income earner while also reducing income disparity in the society. The authorities that develop the tax regime should therefore change their approach in the drafting of taxation regimes.
In light of the existing taxation regime, it is morally and economically advisable to increase the taxation for individuals who earn over 250,000 dollars annually. This is primarily because they have more disposable income, which means they have the capacity to pay more tax without suffering any substantial financial constrains. Increasing the tax rates among the affluent would enable the government to reduce the tax rate in the lower income groups. This would increase the disposable income among low-income earners enabling them to save more in retirement scheme, take up health policies. Such a measure would have significant impacts since there is an enormous number of a low-income earner. The reduction in taxation would result in more income going towards activities, which would improve living standards in general such as retirement schemes and health policies. By contrast, the affluent would spend such funds on activities, which would in no way improve the living standards of the nation. References
Finkelman, P. (2014). The Supreme Court: Controversies, Cases, and Characters from John Jay. New York, NY: ABC Clio Publisher.
Pollack, S. (2010). Failure of U. S. Tax Policy: Revenue and Politics. New Jersey, NJ: Open State Press. Urban Institute. (2010). Tax Expenditures: Why are they controversial?. Retrieved On November 02, 2014 from http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/expenditures/controversial.cfm#
Brandon Hall
Strayer University
English 215 Research and Writing
Professor Julie Davenport
November 2, 2014
Remittance or paying of taxes is both a civil and social duty for all citizens who earn incomes. However, the rate at which tax is charged and the means of paying taxes varies depending on the source of the income, the amount of income and more importantly due to the relevant tax legislations. In America, the government has established rates of taxation for various income brackets considering factors such as marital status, physical impairment and economic factors such as the amount of disposable income (Urban Institute, 2010). Usually, the government imposes taxation with various considerations in mind. In particular, the government considers the level of income. As such, most revenue collection …show more content…
authorities tend to charge people in higher brackets of incomes higher rates than those in the lower brackets. The above tendency is premised upon the fact that tax reduces a taxpayer’s income (Finkelman, 2014). Hence, the taxation system should target persons with more disposable income. If the government taxed persons in lower income brackets at a higher rate it would reduce their disposable income, which would gradually, make people in the lower groups poorer. The taxation system’s work is not only to gather tax, but also to address other social and economic issues such as income inequality by redistributing incomes to the marginalized or vulnerable groups.
People earning over $250,000 are in the upper middle class, which means they have a considerable amount of disposable income.
Increase in taxes would have minimal economic implications on people earning such amounts of money. By contrast, the disposable income of people earning below $ 250,000 reduce significantly once they tax rate in their bracket increases. Therefore, to address income inequality the government should increase taxes for people earning over 250,000 annually. This would ensure that middle and lower income earners have adequate disposable funds. From an economic perspective, people earning over 250,000 should pay more tax since they have the capacity to do so without reducing their disposable income significantly (Pollack, 2010). From a moral perspective, people with higher incomes have a duty to support the other economic groups so that the economic and social development is even. In addition, the extra tax charged on such a group would enable the government to support social programs that will address the plight of the economically and socially marginalized
people.
Presently, the government provides significantly higher tax reliefs for the affluent, which means that they pay relatively lower amounts tax relative to their earnings. As such, they are able to contribute to their terminal benefits and health schemes easily without suffering any financial strains (Pollack, 2010). By contrast, people earning an amount lower than 250,000 dollars suffer financial strain, as a result, such people may not have adequate medical cover. Such problems may be addressed by tweaking the current taxation regime to ensure that lower income groups are taxed at lower rates. The tax regime affects various forms of savings such as retirement schemes and terminal benefits, which are vital for any population (Urban Institute, 2010). The government can enhance retirement savings and uptake of medical cover via an appropriate and well thought- out tax regime. Most of the income in the lower income brackets goes towards consumption or meeting of basic needs, which contributes, directly to the economy. Reducing such incomes via taxation will take away disposable income, which would lead to a poorer low-income group.
To resolve the economic and social problems that have resulted from the present taxation regime, which favours the affluent, it is vital to consider the enactment of taxation regimes. The federal government alongside the state authority develop tax rates, which are later passed and implemented as law. The federal and the state authority should consider the impacts of the current tax regime and review it appropriately. The respective authorities should not only consider the amount of tax, but also the indirect impacts of higher taxation on the low-income groups or individuals who earn below 250,000 dollars. The authorities should use the tax regime as a means of protecting the vulnerable such as families with one income earner while also reducing income disparity in the society. The authorities that develop the tax regime should therefore change their approach in the drafting of taxation regimes.
In light of the existing taxation regime, it is morally and economically advisable to increase the taxation for individuals who earn over 250,000 dollars annually. This is primarily because they have more disposable income, which means they have the capacity to pay more tax without suffering any substantial financial constrains. Increasing the tax rates among the affluent would enable the government to reduce the tax rate in the lower income groups. This would increase the disposable income among low-income earners enabling them to save more in retirement scheme, take up health policies. Such a measure would have significant impacts since there is an enormous number of a low-income earner. The reduction in taxation would result in more income going towards activities, which would improve living standards in general such as retirement schemes and health policies. By contrast, the affluent would spend such funds on activities, which would in no way improve the living standards of the nation. References
Finkelman, P. (2014). The Supreme Court: Controversies, Cases, and Characters from John Jay. New York, NY: ABC Clio Publisher.
Pollack, S. (2010). Failure of U. S. Tax Policy: Revenue and Politics. New Jersey, NJ: Open State Press. Urban Institute. (2010). Tax Expenditures: Why are they controversial?. Retrieved On November 02, 2014 from http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/background/expenditures/controversial.cfm#