Kentucky has a 5% Capital Gains rate, Florida has none.
Kentucky has a State level property tax, Florida none.
Kentucky has an Occupational Tax, Florida none.
Vehicle Property Tax, that's Kentucky...
It's the totality of an individual's tax liablities that we should be measuring.
This is a fun conversation about wealth inequity to which I offer my own numbers according to my 2024 tax forms. Percentages represent portion of my overall pay.
Federal Withholding $181,591.02 (36.25%)
State Withholding - Maryland $28,664.35 (5.72%)
Local - Anne Arundel County $16,024.80 (3.2%)
Social Security $10,918.20 (2.18%)
Medicare $9,973.50 (1.99%)
Federal Marginal Rate - 37%
State Marginal Rate - 5.75%
Throw in another $13,000 on property tax, $300 to register my car.
Admittedly I drink 3 beers a year and don't smoke, so Pigovian Taxes don't come into play.
No Mortgage, lived in same house for a rather long time.
In the end, I pay roughly 52% of my takehome in taxes/fees. Haven't contributed to health care yet, any insurance for home or car or a single dollar towards retirement. (some of those services have their own taxable events.)
The reason I posted this was to offer an example of how higher earners not only have higher tax exposure, but the raw data that sometimes gets hidden behind class/income discussions. My overall consumption of goods isn't out of norm for a household of 2. Out to eat once a week, nothing crazy unless it's my Anniversary.
The challenge for others becomes creating a cogent argument for why my liabilities should increase. Note I didn't say decrease. While I believe there are programs that should be removed at both Federal and State levels or significantly reduced, I accept my tax burden.
Excellent explanation!! The part that is underemphasized is that when times are bad and consumption dips, the areas that suffer significantly are critical (public safety and education) - and those impacts last for years. (I lived in Tennessee for a while and would not choose to go back to a state that does not have an income tax)
Unless the model is utilizing exact consumption rather than "similar" the savings rates are going to be volatile with a variable delta. We overcalculate the shift trading down but don't properly account for the substitution effect moving in the other direction.
The consumption for differing income strata are pockets of area variations even within the same bracket.
This is why States opt for fee driven income as revenue drivers because they can also claim the optionality of the consumption. The offsets are the Devil-in-the-detail that often get overlooked. (I'm in Maryland and they just increased the fees on most items, but touted having not increased the tax rate. Those fees captures a larger pool where the revenue can easily be calculated y/y whereas income tax revenue is variable in a State dependent on Federal employment and it's secondarily necessary employment)
Kentucky has a 5% Capital Gains rate, Florida has none.
Kentucky has a State level property tax, Florida none.
Kentucky has an Occupational Tax, Florida none.
Vehicle Property Tax, that's Kentucky...
It's the totality of an individual's tax liablities that we should be measuring.
This is a fun conversation about wealth inequity to which I offer my own numbers according to my 2024 tax forms. Percentages represent portion of my overall pay.
Federal Withholding $181,591.02 (36.25%)
State Withholding - Maryland $28,664.35 (5.72%)
Local - Anne Arundel County $16,024.80 (3.2%)
Social Security $10,918.20 (2.18%)
Medicare $9,973.50 (1.99%)
Federal Marginal Rate - 37%
State Marginal Rate - 5.75%
Throw in another $13,000 on property tax, $300 to register my car.
Admittedly I drink 3 beers a year and don't smoke, so Pigovian Taxes don't come into play.
No Mortgage, lived in same house for a rather long time.
In the end, I pay roughly 52% of my takehome in taxes/fees. Haven't contributed to health care yet, any insurance for home or car or a single dollar towards retirement. (some of those services have their own taxable events.)
The reason I posted this was to offer an example of how higher earners not only have higher tax exposure, but the raw data that sometimes gets hidden behind class/income discussions. My overall consumption of goods isn't out of norm for a household of 2. Out to eat once a week, nothing crazy unless it's my Anniversary.
The challenge for others becomes creating a cogent argument for why my liabilities should increase. Note I didn't say decrease. While I believe there are programs that should be removed at both Federal and State levels or significantly reduced, I accept my tax burden.
I appreciate the transparency. This is the information the people need to see
Excellent explanation!! The part that is underemphasized is that when times are bad and consumption dips, the areas that suffer significantly are critical (public safety and education) - and those impacts last for years. (I lived in Tennessee for a while and would not choose to go back to a state that does not have an income tax)
Unless the model is utilizing exact consumption rather than "similar" the savings rates are going to be volatile with a variable delta. We overcalculate the shift trading down but don't properly account for the substitution effect moving in the other direction.
The consumption for differing income strata are pockets of area variations even within the same bracket.
This is why States opt for fee driven income as revenue drivers because they can also claim the optionality of the consumption. The offsets are the Devil-in-the-detail that often get overlooked. (I'm in Maryland and they just increased the fees on most items, but touted having not increased the tax rate. Those fees captures a larger pool where the revenue can easily be calculated y/y whereas income tax revenue is variable in a State dependent on Federal employment and it's secondarily necessary employment)