Talk:Tax bracket
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve Tax related articles to a feature-quality standard. |
Contents |
[edit] Removed a paragraph
I removed this:
- Notes - This does not cover employees national insurance, which is essentially another tax. This is taxed at a rate of 11% for money earned per week between £84 and £645 per week, and 1% for money earned above the £645 per week threshold. For most incomes this tends to work out around an additional 5-10% to the tax rate.[1]
National Insurance payments are used to pay for Social Security and State Pension. They are very similar to american Social Security payments, in that you get an NI number which is similar to an SS identification number. We are not including the Social Security amounts paid out in other countries. It makes no sense to include it here. This is a page about tax brackets, not other taxations.
If we wish to include it here, then we need to look at adding it to the other countries:
For example: America has a 7.5% Social Security taxation, which works out to an additional 7.5% tax rate on top of the above. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaylus (talk • contribs) 21:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
[edit] Removed a paragraph
I removed this:
- Some systems use an absolute tax bracket, where the entire amount is taxed at one rate. This can mean that someone earning just enough extra money to take them over the threshold to the next bracket, could pay even more than that extra in taxes.
This would be a good discussion and deserve its own section, but I don't know of any jurisdiction that does this, and "absolute tax bracket" gets 3 Google hits, which are all mirrors of this page. If anyone can support this paragraph, please put it back into the article with examples of locations where it exists — and with typical tax strategies people use in the region. Tempshill 23:21, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Tax brackets from other countries would be appreciated
Tax brackets from other countries would be interesting and appreciated! Tempshill 23:54, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Tax Bracket Myths
While not technically completely as a result of brackets, marginal tax rates through income-related benefits can be over 100% and encourage you to lower your income. While it is not entirely the result of the brackets, it could perhaps be mentioned in here to be clear that there still may be reasons to minimize income. -Nichlemn 07:26, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Removed a paragraph
This seemed redundant, since I think it means a "non-absolute tax bracket", which is what the article describes.
- In New Zealand the income is taxed by the amount that falls within each tax bracket. In other words if a person earns $60,000 they will only pay 34.2% on the amount that falls between $38,001 and $60,000 rather than paying this on the full $60,000.
Aruthra 19:50, 2 February 2006 (UTC) Related to tax bracket for New Zealand Also corrected the tax percentage as per the offcial web site rate ref : www.ird.co.nz --203.118.135.21 23:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)Ganesh
[edit] Question about deductions in the US
I noticed that the Canadian tax system allows for a personal deduction, but it seems to work so it's not like you didn't earn it and still have to pay higher brackets on the remainder. For instance, if someone earning $100,000 gets to write off the basic amount of $9,036 (which they don't), they would be taxed on $90,964. Instead it appears you pay tax on the entire $100,000, and then get back the 13% you paid on that $9,036. The result is a slightly higher overall tax rate.
In order to better compare the two, can someone comment on how the US system works in this regard? Is there an equivalent of the basic amount, and if so, is it taken off the income, or the taxes (as in the Canadian system)?
Maury 20:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
The personal exemption (one per dependent) and standard/itemized deductions (covering Schedule A deductible areas) in the US both reduce taxable income and are not after-tax credits. Because of this, the numerics given on the main page for the typical single US filer are not correct unless "earning" is replaced by "with a taxable income of". The standard deduction was $5000 for tax year 2005 for single filers and the personal exemption $3200 which reduces the taxable income from $100K adjusted gross earnings (AGI) for the example shown by $8200 to $91800.--Billymac00 18:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removed Opinionated Paragraph
- In 1981, the Reagan tax cuts brought a top tax bracket of 27% and today, under the George W. Bush Republicans, Dividends and Capital Gains are taxed at a maximum of 15% while many two earner families are in a 35% bracket plus they must pay 7.65% for Social Security and Medcare. There are no Social Security and Medicare taxes on Dividends, Capital Gains, Interest Income and Rental Income.
Although personally I agree with the intent, it is clearly politically motivated, and not relevant to a factual discussion of tax brackets. Also mis-spelled 'Medicare'. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.107.193.130 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. This at least needs citations. It's been readded without discussion. I'm going to remove it again. Does anyone disagree? Chovain 00:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dollar amount inaccuracies
Most of the dollar amounts given are off by a dollar. I'd change it myself but I'm not entirely sure I'm right. For example it says there is a tax bracket under $20,000, and then a tax bracket over $20,001. So what about $20,000 to $20,001? As a result, $1,999.99 is the most you would pay if you had income over $20K (or $2K if they use fractions of pennies and round up). So I'd say that either the language needs fixing, or the details do. If someone confirms I can change it. (anon)
