Was Buffett Wrong?

Mark Perry writes:

We now have a proposal for a tax policy - the "Buffett Rule" - based on Warren Buffett's anecdotal "evidence" of his and his employees' tax burdens. But that "evidence" seems pretty far-fetched and not consistent with: a) average federal income tax rates available from the IRS, nor b) average tax rates for all federal taxes paid, from the CBO. Buffett's anecdote has to be an outlier or exception, because under the current federal tax system, the average "super-rich" taxpayer pays taxes at a rate 2-3 times the average secretary. Instead of raising tax rates, we should probably figure out what kind of loopholes allow Warren Buffet to pay taxes of only 17.4% on his $40 million income last year.

Update: Steve Moore on The Kudlow Report tonight said in reference to myth that secretaries pay taxes at higher rates than the "super-rich," (and citing some of the same tax data that appear above) "It's almost as if Barack Obama and Warren Buffett made those numbers up."

source

Income Share for the Wealthy

Upper-income taxpayers have paid a growing share of the federal tax burden over the last 25 years.

A 2008 study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, for example, found that the highest-earning 10% of the U.S. population paid the largest share among 24 countries examined, even after adjusting for their relatively higher incomes. "Taxation is most progressively distributed in the United States," the OECD study concluded.

Meanwhile, the percentage of U.S. households paying no federal income tax has been climbing, and reached 51% for 2009, according to a new analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation. That was the first time since at least 1992 that more than half of households owed no federal income tax, according to JCT estimates.; earlier data were unavailable on Monday.

source

Income Mobility

1. For American households that were in the lowest earnings quintile (bottom 20 percent) in 2001, only 56% of those households remained in that quintile in 2007, and 44 percent had moved to a higher quintile by 2007. Five percent of low-income households in 2001 had moved to one of the top two quintiles in just six years.

2. For those households that were in the highest earnings quintile (top 20 percent) in 2001, 34 percent had moved to a lower quintile by 2007, and 5 percent of those households had moved all the way to the bottom quintile.

3. For those households in the middle earnings quintile (middle 20 percent) in 2001, about one-third moved to a higher quintile by 2007, more than one-fourth moved to a lower quintile, and only 42 percent remained in the same quintile.

4. More than half of the households in the second, third, and fourth quintiles in 2001 moved to a different earnings quintiles by 2007 (see bottom row in chart).

source

The Rich--A Changing Group

Robert Frank writes:

Researchers and journalists (myself included) often refer to the rich as a
fixed group. There are the “the rich” who keep getting richer, with ever-rising
shares of the nation’s income and wealth. And then there are “the rest,” who
aren’t getting much of either.

At a time when the American Dream is supposedly dead for most Americans,
while Wall Streeters seen as permanently ensconced in government-backed
luxury, the chances of moving up or down would appear slim.

But the rich and poor may be far more fluid than the conventional
wisdom would have us believe. What is most surprising is the churn at the top of
the income ladder.

A Census Bureau study shows that from 2004 to 2007, about a
third of the households in the highest income quintile (the top 20%) moved down to another income group. In the same period, a third of those in the lowest income group moved to a higher group.

This isn’t to say Horatio Alger is the norm, and America ranks below
many other developed countries when it comes to intergenerational mobility, or
the chances of rising higher than your folks did. And wealth mobility, which
measures accumulated assets over a lifetime, is more persistent than income
mobility. The period of 2004 to 2007 also is selective, since the country was
prospering from the real-estate bubble...

“One of the most enduring economic myths in our society is that the
rich keep getting richer, while the poor keep getting poorer,” he writes. “It isn’t true.”

source

Average Federal Tax Rates by Quintiles

source

Tax Rates by Quintiles

from Mankiw