Chart of the Day: These Are The 47 Percent

inmytree

CHART OF THE DAY: These Are The 47 Percent
Brian Beutler | October 14, 2011, 5:45AM



If the left and the right are proxies in a class war, then they're currently fighting to win a battle of public perception. Each side wants the public to see them as on the side of the beleaguered many against the powerful few.

Democrats are vying for victory by supporting tax increases on millionaires and the "Buffett Rule," which posits that all millionaires should pay at least the same effective tax rates as the middle class. The Occupy Wall Street protesters have turned "We Are The 99 Percent" into a rallying cry.

How do you argue against that? By obscuring what the fight's really about, and perpetuating the sense that hundreds of millions of people are gaming the system. To do this, conservatives and Republican elected officials are citing recent data to create the impression that a small majority of people in the country pay all the taxes, and nearly half (a large minority) pay nothing at all. It's a false impression, and when you break down who comprises this now-famous "47 percent" -- the poor, the disabled, and the elderly -- it makes you wonder why anybody thought it was a good idea to pick a public fight with them.

What's really going on here is that about 47 percent of households paid no federal income tax in 2009. Either they owed nothing, or they got as much back from the federal government as they paid -- or more.

This ignores payroll taxes, state and local taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes and much more. But to hear conservatives talk about it, you'd think these people's entire tax burden was $0.00. In April, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), citing similar data, claimed "According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, 49 percent of households are paying 100 percent of taxes coming in to the federal government." Notice the absence of the key qualifier, "income." And Grassley's far from alone.

As Benjy Sarlin explained at length the Republican answer to this problem, remarkably, is that Congress should raise these people's taxes.

So who are these people? This chart, courtesy of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, explains just about everything you need to know.

Right now about one-third of the 47 percent are people who are too old to work, full time students, disability beneficiaries, long-term unemployed and other such despicable freeloaders. Because the 47 percent figure comes from using "households that file" as the denominator it includes people who have part time jobs and low paying jobs, Social Security and unemployment beneficiaries. The rest were people whose jobs paid little enough that, on net, they owed no income taxes. These people may have benefited from the stimulus' Making-Work-Pay tax credit, or saw their incomes drop enough during the recession to qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and so on.

In this regard, attacking the 47 percent for gaming the system is an implicit call for taxing Social Security income, taxing disability benefits, further taxing unemployment benefits, and so on.

Moreover, and this is key, the 47 percent is only 47 percent because of the recession. As CBPP wrote in May, the high number "reflects the unique circumstances of 2009, when the recession greatly swelled the number of Americans with low incomes and when temporary tax cuts created by the 2009 Recovery Act -- including the "Making Work Pay" tax credit and an exclusion from tax of the first $2,400 in unemployment benefits -- were in effect. Together, these developments removed millions of Americans from the federal income tax rolls. Both of these temporary tax measures have since expired. In a more typical year, 35 percent to 40 percent of households owe no federal income tax. In 2007, the figure was 37.9 percent."

As CBPP tax expert Chuck Marr explained to me, this is a good phenomenon, and one that helped prevent the economy from sinking even further in 2009.

"The place to start on this though is that the years discussed are just not typical -- this is the worst economic climate since the Great Depression," Marr said. The numbers have been bumped by about 10 percentage points "that's what you want -- should we argue that we should raise taxes on these people to keep it at 37 percent?"

That's what a lot of Republicans seem to want. But the result would be terrible for an already weak economy.


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011 ... hp?ref=fpa

cincybearcat

I find it funny that people want to fight this battle.

Whether or not you think the "rich" should be paying more taxes and paying a much higher % of their income in taxes then the "poor"... the bottom line is $ to $, it's not even close.

mickeyrat

Sorry , I quit as a senior in high school. When I was awake long enough to pay attention in math , I swear that 17 plus 13 equals 30 . Where the fuck does this 47 percent come from?

inmytree

mickeyrat wrote:

Sorry , I quit as a senior in high school. When I was awake long enough to pay attention in math , I swear that 17 plus 13 equals 30 . Where the fuck does this 47 percent come from?

70 + 17 + 13 = 100% of the 47%

does that help...?

inmytree

cincybearcat wrote:

I find it funny that people want to fight this battle.

Whether or not you think the "rich" should be paying more taxes and paying a much higher % of their income in taxes then the "poor"... the bottom line is $ to $, it's not even close.

I don't get your point...(being serious, not sarcastic)...

cincybearcat

inmytree wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I find it funny that people want to fight this battle.

Whether or not you think the "rich" should be paying more taxes and paying a much higher % of their income in taxes then the "poor"... the bottom line is $ to $, it's not even close.

I don't get your point...(being serious, not sarcastic)...

Yeah, nevermind.

inmytree

cincybearcat wrote:

inmytree wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I find it funny that people want to fight this battle.

Whether or not you think the "rich" should be paying more taxes and paying a much higher % of their income in taxes then the "poor"... the bottom line is $ to $, it's not even close.

I don't get your point...(being serious, not sarcastic)...

Yeah, nevermind.

ok...

Johnny Abruzzo

Bottom line is that the 47% have no money to pay income taxes (but still pay other taxes, of course), and the top 1% have all the loopholes and power to avoid paying their fair share of income taxes. It's the middle 52% that gets fucked. I'm in this 52%, and I want the FUCKING ONE PERCENT to FUCKING PAY UP!

Go Beavers

mickeyrat wrote:

Sorry , I quit as a senior in high school. When I was awake long enough to pay attention in math , I swear that 17 plus 13 equals 30 . Where the fuck does this 47 percent come from?

Just how long were you awake in math?

Go Beavers

It's interesting that this "47% don't pay (federal) taxes" thing got legs and continues to get attention. It seems like the ones who bring it up from the standpoint that people aren't paying their fair share are the same ones who complain about liberals trying to start "class warfare".

mickeyrat

inmytree wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

Sorry , I quit as a senior in high school. When I was awake long enough to pay attention in math , I swear that 17 plus 13 equals 30 . Where the fuck does this 47 percent come from?

70 + 17 + 13 = 100% of the 47%

does that help...?

yeah I get that. I do. Just where does this 47% come in? It doesnt seem to have anything to do with the chart you posted and the article seems to refer to something a politician said so we know its bullshit to start with.

IF that stat IS true , then along with the 30 % mentioned it would follow that 17% of the payroll tax paying public doesnt make enough to have to pay to begin with? THAT would suggest the pay v. tax disarity and the top "wage" earners SHOULD do more , hmnm? or the tax code blows monkey balls and needs completely overhauled. OR perhaps both need done. Because clearly what happens now is sustainable.

mickeyrat

Go Beavers wrote:

mickeyrat wrote:

Sorry , I quit as a senior in high school. When I was awake long enough to pay attention in math , I swear that 17 plus 13 equals 30 . Where the fuck does this 47 percent come from?

Just how long were you awake in math?

long enough to know that the math used doesnt add up. Maybe I should have stayed awake longer in social studies/goverment class.

Johnny Abruzzo

I think the real problem here is our country has obviously done a terrible job of teaching math.

When people talk about 30% it is "OF 47%". That's 14.1% (47% * .3).

Here we go:
53% of the population paid federal income taxes in 2009.

47% didn't. Of the 47%, 70% of THOSE (or 32.9% of the TOTAL) paid payroll taxes. So that means 85.9% (we'll just say 86%) of EVERYBODY paid income tax and/or payroll tax.

14% paid neither payroll tax nor income tax due to the fact that they were receiving Social Security (i.e. they're old) or they are students, have disabilities, are jobless, or have very low taxable incomes. That sounds a lot different than 47%, doesn't it? Those Koch Brothers are good, I gotta say.

How is it that hard?

Jason P

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Bottom line is that the 47% have no money to pay income taxes (but still pay other taxes, of course), and the top 1% have all the loopholes and power to avoid paying their fair share of income taxes. It's the middle 52% that gets fucked. I'm in this 52%, and I want the FUCKING ONE PERCENT to FUCKING PAY UP!

And I want the 535 members of Congress to learn how to BALANCE A FUCKING BUDGET!

Go Beavers

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

I think the real problem here is our country has obviously done a terrible job of teaching math.

When people talk about 30% it is "OF 47%". That's 14.1% (47% * .3).

Here we go:
53% of the population paid federal income taxes in 2009.

47% didn't. Of the 47%, 70% of THOSE (or 32.9% of the TOTAL) paid payroll taxes. So that means 85.9% (we'll just say 86%) of EVERYBODY paid income tax and/or payroll tax.

14% paid neither payroll tax nor income tax due to the fact that they were receiving Social Security (i.e. they're old) or they are students, have disabilities, are jobless, or have very low taxable incomes. That sounds a lot different than 47%, doesn't it? Those Koch Brothers are good, I gotta say.

How is it that hard?

Let's not mess this up with facts, okay?

Johnny Abruzzo

Go Beavers wrote:

Let's not mess this up with facts, okay?

The silence is deafening.

whygohome

A fantastic thread.
How in the world could anyone be on the wrong side working against the best interests of these individuals?

So if they aren't paying federal income taxes, it is at times due to their low salaries or being unemployed, right? Okay; but, isn't it their fault if they're unemployed or if they don't make a lot of money? :evil:

Smellyman

whygohome wrote:

A fantastic thread.
How in the world could anyone be on the wrong side working against the best interests of these individuals?

So if they aren't paying federal income taxes, it is at times due to their low salaries or being unemployed, right? Okay; but, isn't it their fault if they're unemployed or if they don't make a lot of money? :evil:

yes!!! and Herman Cain agrees. If you aren't rich, it's your own damn fault.

mikepegg44

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

Let's not mess this up with facts, okay?

The silence is deafening.

no one thought that 47% of the country who don't pay taxes were rich. I don't understand the importance of the breakdown I guess. The fact is 47% don't pay income taxes. Their breakdown doesn't matter. They are brought up when people talk about how half the country supports raising taxes on those richer than they are. I don't know too many people that think they should pay more...

Can someone explain why it isn't okay to talk about the 47%?

whygohome

mikepegg44 wrote:

Johnny Abruzzo wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

Let's not mess this up with facts, okay?

The silence is deafening.

no one thought that 47% of the country who don't pay taxes were rich. I don't understand the importance of the breakdown I guess. The fact is 47% don't pay income taxes. Their breakdown doesn't matter. They are brought up when people talk about how half the country supports raising taxes on those richer than they are. I don't know too many people that think they should pay more...

Can someone explain why it isn't okay to talk about the 47%?

The point is that these people--the 47%--aren't the lowlife, stoner on the couch, tax-evading losers that the Right wants them to be or paints them to be. The 47% who "don't pay taxes" either pay in the form of payroll and sales tax OR don't have any god damn money.
Over the past 3 decades, middle class and lower class wages are stagnant; the rich have never had it better. And, many in the top tax brackets are making their money in positions that do not offer nay type of service to society or they are making it on the backs of the middle-class and the working class. Remember 2007-2009? Remember mortgage-back securities? remember credit default swaps?

Cosmo

I would like to see a breakdown of the 70% in the chart listed as 'Working People".
I am curious to find out what income level these people are in... are some of these people self-employed? Small business owners? Working (minimum wage/part-time) poor? Uber rich? Paris Hilton?
I'm guessing it isn't Joe Ninetofive. Most reg'lur working Joe's don't have the tax shelters or Schedule A deductions to offset a regular paycheck income. But, I bet there are some of us that can... my guess it is a very small percentage of the 70% who don't pay taxes.