Report: Tax bills for rich families approach 30-year high

WASHINGTON (AP) - The poor rich.
With Washington gridlocked again over whether to raise their taxes, it turns out wealthy families already are paying some of their biggest federal tax bills in decades even as the rest of the population continues to pay at historically low rates.
President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress say the wealthy must pay their fair share if the federal government is ever going to fix its finances and reduce the budget deficit to a manageable level.
A new analysis, however, shows that average tax bills for high-income families rarely have been higher since the Congressional Budget Office began tracking the data in 1979. It's middle- and low-income families that aren't paying as much as they used to.
For 2013, families with incomes in the top 20 percent of the nation will pay an average of 27.2 percent of their income in federal taxes, according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a research organization based in Washington. The top 1 percent of households, those with incomes averaging $1.4 million, will pay an average of 35.5 percent.
Those tax rates, which include income, payroll, corporate and estate taxes, are among the highest since 1979.
The average family in the bottom 20 percent of households won't pay any federal taxes. Instead, many families in this group will get payments from the federal government by claiming more in credits than they owe in taxes, including payroll taxes. That will give them a negative tax rate.
"My sense is that high-income people feel abused by being targeted always for more taxes," said Roberton Williams, a fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "You can understand why they feel that way."
Last week, Senate Democrats were unable to advance their proposal to raise taxes on some wealthy families for the second time this year as part of a package to avoid automatic spending cuts. The bill failed Thursday when Republicans blocked it. A competing Republican bill that included no tax increases also failed, and the automatic spending cuts began taking effect Friday.
The issue, however, isn't going away.
Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress insist that any future deal to reduce government borrowing must include a mix of spending cuts and more tax revenue.
"I am prepared to do hard things and to push my Democratic friends to do hard things," Obama said Friday. "But what I can't do is ask middle-class families, ask seniors, ask students to bear the entire burden of deficit reduction when we know we've got a bunch of tax loopholes that are benefiting the well-off and the well-connected, aren't contributing to growth, aren't contributing to our economy. It's not fair. It's not right."
The Democrats' bill included the "Buffett Rule," named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett. It gradually would phase in a requirement that people making more than $1 million a year pay at least 30 percent of their income in federal taxes.
The rule targets millionaires who make most of their money from investments - capital gains and qualified dividends, which have a top tax rate of 20 percent.
"It's fairness," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. "We're not raising taxes with the Buffett rule as much as we are correcting an inequity in terms of, one guy can be working at one end of the hall and because he's working with hedge funds, he gets taxed at 20 percent. Another guy at the other end of the hall is on a salary at an insurance company and he has to pay (39.6 percent). That's just not fair."
On average, households making more than $1 million this year will pay 37.2 percent of their income in federal taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center. But there are exceptions.
For example, the Internal Revenue Service tracks tax returns for the 400 highest-paid filers each year. Those taxpayers made an average of $202 million in 2009, the latest year available. Their average federal income tax rate: 19.9 percent.
That's still higher than the tax rate paid by most middle-income families, but not by much.
The middle 20 percent of U.S. households - those making an average of $46,600 - will pay an average of 13.8 percent of their income in federal taxes for this year, according to the Tax Policy Center. Over the past three decades, the average federal tax rate for this group has been about 16 percent.
The Associated Press analyzed two sets of data to compare tax burdens over time.
The CBO produces data from 1979 to 2009; the center has overlapping data from 2004 through 2013. Both get tax data from the IRS, but they use slightly different methodologies to calculate federal tax burdens.
Still, their numbers track closely enough to make some general observations. For example, it is clear that for 2013, average tax bills for the wealthy will be among the highest since 1979. It also is clear that federal taxes for middle- and low-income households will stay well below their averages for the same period.
Liberals and many Democrats say rich families can afford to pay higher taxes because their incomes have grown much more than incomes for middle- and low-income families.
Average after-tax incomes for the top 1 percent of households more than doubled from 1979 to 2009, increasing by 155 percent, according to the CBO. Average incomes for those in the middle increased by just 32 percent during the same period while those at the bottom saw their incomes go up by 45 percent.
"You've got to think about the context," said Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank. "We just had three decades in the United States where we had a tremendous increase in inequality."
The growing disparity in income is a big reason why tax bills for the rich are approaching 30-year highs, Williams said. As the rich get richer, a greater share of their income is taxed at the top rate, he said.
High-income families also have been targeted by tax increases this year, including a new tax law passed by Congress on Jan. 1 as well as tax increases in the president's health care law.
The new tax law made the federal income tax more progressive, increasing the top tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, on taxable income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples filing jointly. Lower tax rates on income below those amounts were made permanent. Also, tax breaks for low-income families first enacted as part of Obama's 2009 stimulus package were extended through 2017.
Conservatives say raising taxes again on the wealthy would reduce their incentive to save and invest, hurting long-term economic growth.
"Raising taxes hurts the economy, and raising taxes on upper-income individuals - whether those who work for salaries or those who save and earn capital income - always hurts the economy the most," said J.D. Foster, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "Spite and envy are not sound bases for public policy."
Besides, Republican leaders in Congress say, one tax increase a year is more than enough.
"Let's make it clear that the president got his tax hikes on Jan. 1," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Friday. "This discussion about revenue, in my view, is over."
With Washington gridlocked again over whether to raise their taxes, it turns out wealthy families already are paying some of their biggest federal tax bills in decades even as the rest of the population continues to pay at historically low rates.
President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress say the wealthy must pay their fair share if the federal government is ever going to fix its finances and reduce the budget deficit to a manageable level.
A new analysis, however, shows that average tax bills for high-income families rarely have been higher since the Congressional Budget Office began tracking the data in 1979. It's middle- and low-income families that aren't paying as much as they used to.
For 2013, families with incomes in the top 20 percent of the nation will pay an average of 27.2 percent of their income in federal taxes, according to projections by the Tax Policy Center, a research organization based in Washington. The top 1 percent of households, those with incomes averaging $1.4 million, will pay an average of 35.5 percent.
Those tax rates, which include income, payroll, corporate and estate taxes, are among the highest since 1979.
The average family in the bottom 20 percent of households won't pay any federal taxes. Instead, many families in this group will get payments from the federal government by claiming more in credits than they owe in taxes, including payroll taxes. That will give them a negative tax rate.
"My sense is that high-income people feel abused by being targeted always for more taxes," said Roberton Williams, a fellow at the Tax Policy Center. "You can understand why they feel that way."
Last week, Senate Democrats were unable to advance their proposal to raise taxes on some wealthy families for the second time this year as part of a package to avoid automatic spending cuts. The bill failed Thursday when Republicans blocked it. A competing Republican bill that included no tax increases also failed, and the automatic spending cuts began taking effect Friday.
The issue, however, isn't going away.
Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress insist that any future deal to reduce government borrowing must include a mix of spending cuts and more tax revenue.
"I am prepared to do hard things and to push my Democratic friends to do hard things," Obama said Friday. "But what I can't do is ask middle-class families, ask seniors, ask students to bear the entire burden of deficit reduction when we know we've got a bunch of tax loopholes that are benefiting the well-off and the well-connected, aren't contributing to growth, aren't contributing to our economy. It's not fair. It's not right."
The Democrats' bill included the "Buffett Rule," named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett. It gradually would phase in a requirement that people making more than $1 million a year pay at least 30 percent of their income in federal taxes.
The rule targets millionaires who make most of their money from investments - capital gains and qualified dividends, which have a top tax rate of 20 percent.
"It's fairness," said Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. "We're not raising taxes with the Buffett rule as much as we are correcting an inequity in terms of, one guy can be working at one end of the hall and because he's working with hedge funds, he gets taxed at 20 percent. Another guy at the other end of the hall is on a salary at an insurance company and he has to pay (39.6 percent). That's just not fair."
On average, households making more than $1 million this year will pay 37.2 percent of their income in federal taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center. But there are exceptions.
For example, the Internal Revenue Service tracks tax returns for the 400 highest-paid filers each year. Those taxpayers made an average of $202 million in 2009, the latest year available. Their average federal income tax rate: 19.9 percent.
That's still higher than the tax rate paid by most middle-income families, but not by much.
The middle 20 percent of U.S. households - those making an average of $46,600 - will pay an average of 13.8 percent of their income in federal taxes for this year, according to the Tax Policy Center. Over the past three decades, the average federal tax rate for this group has been about 16 percent.
The Associated Press analyzed two sets of data to compare tax burdens over time.
The CBO produces data from 1979 to 2009; the center has overlapping data from 2004 through 2013. Both get tax data from the IRS, but they use slightly different methodologies to calculate federal tax burdens.
Still, their numbers track closely enough to make some general observations. For example, it is clear that for 2013, average tax bills for the wealthy will be among the highest since 1979. It also is clear that federal taxes for middle- and low-income households will stay well below their averages for the same period.
Liberals and many Democrats say rich families can afford to pay higher taxes because their incomes have grown much more than incomes for middle- and low-income families.
Average after-tax incomes for the top 1 percent of households more than doubled from 1979 to 2009, increasing by 155 percent, according to the CBO. Average incomes for those in the middle increased by just 32 percent during the same period while those at the bottom saw their incomes go up by 45 percent.
"You've got to think about the context," said Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank. "We just had three decades in the United States where we had a tremendous increase in inequality."
The growing disparity in income is a big reason why tax bills for the rich are approaching 30-year highs, Williams said. As the rich get richer, a greater share of their income is taxed at the top rate, he said.
High-income families also have been targeted by tax increases this year, including a new tax law passed by Congress on Jan. 1 as well as tax increases in the president's health care law.
The new tax law made the federal income tax more progressive, increasing the top tax rate from 35 percent to 39.6 percent, on taxable income above $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for married couples filing jointly. Lower tax rates on income below those amounts were made permanent. Also, tax breaks for low-income families first enacted as part of Obama's 2009 stimulus package were extended through 2017.
Conservatives say raising taxes again on the wealthy would reduce their incentive to save and invest, hurting long-term economic growth.
"Raising taxes hurts the economy, and raising taxes on upper-income individuals - whether those who work for salaries or those who save and earn capital income - always hurts the economy the most," said J.D. Foster, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "Spite and envy are not sound bases for public policy."
Besides, Republican leaders in Congress say, one tax increase a year is more than enough.
"Let's make it clear that the president got his tax hikes on Jan. 1," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Friday. "This discussion about revenue, in my view, is over."
How is this new news?  Our tax codes have been "spreading the wealth around" for some time
Wealthy Americans have an estimated $31 trillion socked away in tax-free Swiss bank accounts. If this money were taxed as it should be, we would have literally no deficit concerns.
Please spare us this "don't pick on the poor rich people" propaganda.
meanwhile, back in reality
http://www.inquisitr.com/553946/distribution-of-wealth-in-america-viral-video/
This is so much BS. 3-4-13 now being reported that mid and low income homes had the sharpest drop of personal income in years, another blow to the pocket book by 3.6% due to inflation and rising costs of goods. The ability of my take home pay to provide sure isn't what it was 25 years ago. Maybe I was making less money, but it sure went further.
@SargeMcC Obama inflation has just started. Have you noticed the price of bread lately, how about meat and gas? It will get worse and worse becasue of the fed's quanitary easing.Â
The policial establishment wants everyone to blame the rich for their woe's to deflect the fact that government policies are what have cause much of what is ailing the middle class...inflation!! Those on SSI have received next to nothing in increased income because of the way the government gauges inflation, according to them there is none. Will eveyone believe them or their own pocketbook.
People seem to forget that the rich are the ones who create the jobs and that nearly half of Americans don't pay any taxes at all. We need a low flat rate tax, this is getting out of hand.Â
@Isadora There are a record number of millionaires in the country today, where are all the jobs they have created?
People don't "forget" that point. People are just smart enought to know it isn't true.Â
Well, most people anyways.
@Isadora Now you can forget it also. The rich dont create jobs in a consumer based economy, demand does. Put a paycheck in the hands of your wife and she creates jobs. You can create 10,000 jobs making widgets and not sell one if you have no customers with money in their hands. Go ask Henry Ford what it takes to sell a model T.
The rich are the ones that want you to think they created everything but, it just isnt so. Labor and consumers are the ones that made rich men rich.
@Isadora Over half of Americans don't pay FEDERAL INCOME TAXES, they do not pay NO TAXES AT ALL. There is a huge difference between the two. These people who don't pay income taxes still pay Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, highway, and various excise taxes. They also generally pay various state, county, and city taxes.
Please stop pulling out this incorrect fact and use the correct one: Over half of Americans do not pay income taxes. If you feel like being more fair, you could use "Over half of Americans don't pay income taxes anymore but most of those used to before they were deployed or retired." The truth just doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?
More to the point, I'd say at least 99%%%% of Americans do not pay 4161(b)(2)'s $0.39/shaft excise tax on arrow shafts. I'm sure we absolutely must do something about this travesty too. All taxes do not apply to all people. What is relevant is how much total tax they pay overall relative to their disposable income unless you want to start taxing non-disposable income and find out how long it takes before you're paying extra taxes to house them at the nearest federal prison.
That leaves them with around $158 million to live off of every year and they are crying about it. I don't know about the rest of you but that is obscene to me!
I know this has nothing to do with the article but I have to say it . Obama is the KING of "class war" He's a modern day Robin Hood . What makes him so slick is he's doing it right in front of the wealthys face ! He hasnt been stopped. Obama is teaching politics to those that despise him. The Donkey is dead !
@armchairquaterback Class war? There isnt any war, its over and you lost 30 years ago. Now you are simply a citizen of a 3rd world country in a race to the bottom. Quit buying into the disinformation funded by the koch brother's think tanks.
What have you received from obama?
@T_BONE_WALKERÂ @armchairquaterback stop watching al sharpton
2 things: First, this article misses the largest part of the tax increases on the rich, Obamacare. Unearned income over 200k faces a 3.8% surtax plus another 0.9% surtax. Â
Secondly, the middle class and poor are paying extremely low tax rates, lower than during the Clinton era. This is not sustainable over the long run.Â
@lakeview Sounds like some folk are crying all the way to the bank.
48% of all americans pay no income taxes, so the middle class, 30% pay most of the taxes. the rich don't have income, or very little and only pay the 15 % capital gains. So unless they start charging everyone, even the 48% that pay no taxes at all 10% or more, it makes little sesne to force high income people to pay more. Besides the rich have all the tax loopholes to sock money in and pay litterally no taxes. It all goes back to the old saying, If you have money, you look for ways to hide and not pay taxes on it, if you don't you just pay and keep going
Funny notice how this article does not source the "new analysis" Â because this article is full of lies and distortions it cannot provide the source for the "new analysis" Â Â I wonder who did the "new analysis" Â FOX news perhaps, or in other words Richard Murdock and friends
http://nation.foxnews.com/taxes/2013/03/03/tax-bills-rich-families-approach-30-year-high
I concluded this after looking at the tax data following the CBO's shoddy analysis. And naturally, the simple-minded rabble poo-pooed me. This President, and everyone who thinks like him, are intellectually bankrupt with no solutions except to preach angry sermons demanding more of the same and damning those of us who won't sing in the choir.
What is the fair share of the 50% of Americans who currently pay no taxes? Â If those people have no share in America, what can expect in return for contributing nothing? Â How about nothing? Â
@Opus8no5 You really want retired folks taking in almost nothing to pay 30% in taxes? They've already contributed their fair share to America.
@Opus8no5Â A 6 year old or an infant might have problems with filing a Federal Income Tax form.
Also unlikely to have much money either.
@m9078jk3 believe it or not, most people do not even file a tax return till they are starting to work, like 16-18.... We are not talking about children, we are talking the 48-50 percent of adults are not paying taxzes.
@Opus8no5Â They don't pay 'no taxes at all' they pay 'no income taxes'. Please don't confuse the two. The number of people who pay no taxes at all would be very small indeed.
@m9078jk3Â Most of that >50% of no income taxes owed population fall into two categories: deployed military and retired persons. There really aren't that many adults earning little enough to have no taxable income without falling into either of those groups.
Jump to 00:50 for the good stuff!Â
http://video.foxnews.com/v/2200599264001/
P.S. Dems & Libs, don't bother to watch, you'll just get mad.
@PlumBUSTED! Nancy Graceless with her hair dyed? Sounds about the same.
Okay, so somebody came up with the idea of embedding a "poison pill" in the mix to keep Congress and the President on task on financial and budget matters. After all, it seemed to work during the Cold War - we called it Mutually-Assured Destruction, and while it was indeed an idea fit for the Mad Hatter, it nonetheless seemed to work. We never engaged in a nuclear exchange with the Soviet Union.Â
Unfortunately, it appears that Congressional Republicans have developed such hatred for the nation they profess to love, that like a misguided Romeo they are willing to let their Juliet drink the poison and die rather than allow another hand to guide her anywhere.
@PlumBUSTED!
Wait...she's upset about foreign aid to Egypt, Pakistan and Lybia?
Who started giving wheelbarrow loads of money to Pakistan and Lybia? Wouldn't that be...the Bush Administration.
And when she says the rather blanket statement of "this government" doesn't it apply to all our Congressional critters?
@Howard Beale Uh... let's not forget what Rocket Ronnie and Bush Sr. gave to Iraq in their efforts of proxy "containment" after being caught out red-handed on Iran-Contra and the promises they had made to Iran to prevent a Carter "October Surprise" on the embassy hostage crisis.Â
We used to make disparaging comments about honor (or lack thereof) among thieves; now the same question must surely be asked regarding all of the GOP. That party has been just festering in its own hatred ever since Tricky Dick was caught out on the Watergate coverup. They seem to have rendered themselves incapable even of feeling shame over the behavior of their own - from Newt Gingrich to Tom DeLay and on to scores more. In fact, "conservatives" and Fox News seem to feel that senescence and the memory lapses of Alzheimer's are some sort of moral high ground.
@PlumBUSTED! why would this make anybody mad?? It is so full of feces that it makes me nauseous. I think people who know the facts are laughing at any moron who believes this spin from FOX.Â
@Bob42263 @PlumBUSTED!
I love the camera angle, just low enough to show the boob job.
The best part was the rant against sick time and vacation. HOW DARE WORKERS EXPECT TIME OFF THESE DAYS!
Hint, those same elderly she refers to wouldn't take a job back in the day without sick pay, vacation and near fully paid health insurance. These were all perks developed in the 40's as incentives to recruit scant workers.
@Howard Beale How many raises, sick days, holidays, medical benefits, and retirement did she refuse to take? I also believe she just admitted to defrauding the public.
@PlumBUSTED! wait so fox news is now singing the praises of bill clinton? oy how times have changed! also the government handouts to foreign countries is so corporations can maintain their interests safely in those regions. bet you the republicans would complain if those went away. i would like a reliable source to verify anything else she said....(crickets)
@bestcoast88 @PlumBUSTED!
Yup - how quickly people forget Standard Fruit. US government money, weapons, training and advisors to fight Latin American "Civil Wars" so Standard Fruit could keep harvesting bananas.
It's where the term Banana Republic comes from.
@Howard Beale Republicans still pine for those days...
I used to work for a very well heeled couple and because of all of their deductions they actually paid less taxes than me and my husband who weren't making anywhere near what this couple were.
@Jatok  We need a straight tax and eliminate loop holes.
@scared_citizen @Jatok how about a "straight wage" first?
Why is it not fair for all to pay taxes at the same rate?
I been reading arguement after other that it's not fair. How so?
@bobalouie because when a person who "makes" a million $$ pays 30% in income tax they still have over $600,000 to live on. (take out S.S. and Medicare taxes too) When a Family makes $50,000 a year they have very little to live on after all the taxes they pay and the basic needs that they have to cover. If we want a flat tax to be "fair" maybe we should have a flat wage first? Income taxes were designed to make those that benefit the most from the economy pay the most. Considering that almost all other taxes we pay are regressive, having a very progressive income tax benefits us all. From 1950 until the 70's income taxes were between 70 and 90 % on the top wage earners(top marginal tax rates) This time in the USA was the best economy we ever had.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yvlf08XCecI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9lEd1ruz9o
@bobalouie  I absolutely agree. If we were all "created equal" and we all want the same protections under law, we should all have to pay the same PERCENTAGE of taxes. THAT is what is fair. I am not rich and my taxes would probably not be any different but fair is fair.
@bobalouie Fair is a word that really doesn't belong in a discussion on how to set taxes. Fair is very much in the eye of the beholder - there is n universal "fair" metric or fairness calculator out there.Â
When setting taxes, you want to look at things that are outcome centric - , economic impact, social impact, incentive impacts, and avoidance potential (does the tax get paid or do people find work arounds).Â
@bobalouie Because it places a larger burden on the poorest of our society. Say 50% tax rate, for someone making $500,000 a year that means they still have $250,000 a year to live off of. For someone making $20,000 a year it means they now have only $10,000 a year to pay the bills. Fine if you live in a cardboard box but you're not going to have a home at that rate. The best system would be not taxing the population at all, use import taxes instead. That creates jobs right here by increasing our manufacturing base which is where all the good paying jobs come from.
Bla, bla, bla...
15% is 15%. Why is that not fair for all? Larger burden is ok fer me but not the rest? I'm pretty sure my 15% is more a burden on me than the 0% others pay. Gays should get equal rights. Women should get equal rights. EVERYONE should get equal rights.
According to you, equal rights end at taxes paid. Tit fer tat, one on one, sames same... Till it comes to paying yer fair share? Fair is equal. Fair is 50/50. Fair is you do as I do.
What's not fair about it?
Poor folks get everything fer free and shouldn't pay taxes for all they get? Cuz it would be an extra burden on them? While folks like me are forced to support them?
That's a greater burden on them than me?
@Alert Eagle @Bob42263 No, he started with the US emerging a the most powerful, richest country the world had ever seen. The depression was over prior to '46 by about 5 years. You didnt miss the point, just the date.Â
But since were talking recessions: we had them in '49, '53, '58,'60-'61,'69-70, '73-'75, '80, then all through the early '80s, early '90s, early 2000. The second worse one was in '37-'38. Regan's was pretty bad also.
@Bob42263So you are starting with the end of the great depression (no place to go but up) and ending with Jimmy Carter taking over right before the second worst recession. Not exactly a success story.Unless I missed your point
@bobalouie maybe the fact that our economy is rigged to transfer most of the wealth created to the top. Why do you think our economy was it's best between 1946 and 1976? This is often called the "golden era" of America. The growth in the economy was steady, strong, and working people wages went up with their productivity. The top marginal tax rate during this time of strong economic growth, was between 70 and 90 + %. Â
When I was younger I worked for next to nothing. However I went to school and worked myself up the food chain, no hand outs just hard work. why is it that now almost 1/2 the population is getting hand outs... really dumbÂ
@bobalouie you're an imbecile. how can you not understand that there is a basic cost to clothe and feed oneself and one's family, hence why low-income people get a tax break? So no, to some families you're 15% is less of a burden than their 0%. Also the topic that gays, women and minorities should be protected from discrimination is a completely different unrelated topic but thanks for playing.
@bobalouie   Economic inequality... look it up...
@Blindman @bobalouie If a flat tax were implemented, estimates show it would probably be around 14%. A burden on low income families, but not undoable.