The only way to pay for generous social welfare programs is to tax a large number of people. The Nordic and other European countries have done this for a while. Programs cannot be paid for just taxing the "rich".
Most Americans, except for those in the high earning bracket, would like to have similar social and healthcare system, as in western EU countries. Yet, they cry if the income tax gets to 9,3% if you earn more than $66K/year.
I live in the country where income tax is 20% for everyone up until approx. 40K/year in US dollars, then it gets to 24% over this amount up until approx. 100K, and then to 28% over this amount. At the same time you HAVE to pay 14% healthcare "insurance" (another tax) and 18% social security (another tax) if you are entrepreneur/self employed/company owner. You don=t get to see that money - it goes straight into the "system" and is used instantly. You get only tokens for working years for the future pension, which is limited by a cap, no matter how much you have earned. Let's not even start on corporate taxes, double taxation of dividends, etc.
Overall, you are lucky if you bring home 50% of your earnings. Unless you have an army of accountants, several offshore companies in tax heavens, and you are a big time risk taker (for tax evasions you can get up to 15 years of imprisonment).
But you are complaining for 9.3% income tax? Consider yourself extremely lucky.
Just to be clear, you do realize this is simply the state income tax, correct? The federal tax rate is 37% for the highest earners. The state income tax is added on top of that. Some places even have city income taxes on top of that. Don't forget property taxes and sales tax(8% in California).
Close, but not exactly Germany. I have to admit I did not consider federal tax, plus other taxes (municipal, for self-employed). Well, CA is getting close, but without the welfare provided in EU countries. CA residents have to pay on top of that a true health insurance (not a tax like in EU), plus contribute towards pension (401K or similar), which is deductible, but you have to first earn it to be able to pay.
I can see now where the complaining is coming from for CA residents.
If you as a California single filer make $89076 in taxable income (wage or salary) your marginal rate is 7.5% (your SS tax) + 7.5% (your employer's SS tax on your income) + 24% (Federal tax) + 9.3% (CA state tax) + 1.45% Medicare tax. That's a marginal rate of 49.75%.
Just to be clear, you do realize this is simply the state income tax, correct? The federal tax rate is 37% for the highest earners. The state income tax is added on top of that. Some places even have city income taxes on top of that. Don't forget property taxes and sales tax(8% in California).
State taxes are deductible from federal taxes up to $10k. And you get to deduct your mortgage interest. And you're still confusing marginal tax rates with effective tax rates. Do you really not understand this? It's the tranche of earnings over ~500k that gets taxed at 37%. The actually average tax rate is much lower.
I live in California. Made ~$150k last year. I have a mortgage, 2 kids, filed head of household. My finances are extremely straight forward. I’m salaried and do nothing to try to gain any extra tax breaks. Paid $4,165 in California state income tax last year.
So the way the geniuses running the state have set things up, someone who makes $65,999 per year puts $65,999 in their pocket, while a person who makes 66,001 per year ends up getting taxed and getting to keep $59,862. A two dollar raise costs you $6,000...
Think about your average American (/\this guy), half of them are dumber than that. - George Carlin
If you make $67,000 TAXABLE (after deductions) then you pay $93 in tax for the extra $1,000 in TAXABLE income. Ouchie, boo-boo.
Rightwinger media-feed ignorance is beyond compare.
The only Republicans who understand how taxes work are the rich ones. For most people earning a salary of $66,000, you'd be much better off in a "high tax" state than a "low tax" one, because not only would you likely pay less, you'll get significantly more back in public services.
In California, a person making $66,000 would pay roughly $2565 in income tax. In New Jersey, they'd pay $2099.
In Missouri, they'd pay $2626. In Nebraska, $2913. Alabama, $3060. These are only "low tax" states if you're rich. The suckers don't know! Simply insane!
Except that in Nebraska, if you're making 66K, you ARE rich. OK, not rich exactly, but you can live comfortably. In CA, you're poor and likely qualify for various government handouts at 66K. So CA is worse.
The most telling statistic for me is that CA has the highest rate of poverty of any state when housing costs are taking into account. Whatever they're doing out there is not working.
Most people would increase their salary by more than 10% by taking a job in CA.
Many of us already have a job "in CA." We just don't live there. My husband and I both have CA jobs and we happily live out of state and just fly in on rare occasion.
Also, most people would get their 10% salary bump and take a 100% increase in housing costs and a clear decrease in QOL if they were to move to CA.
Serious question. It is supposed to be a fair weather state with many natural resources and few disasters.
It is not like a cold northern state where they have to spent countless $ fixing all the roads every summer.
It is not like a Florida or southern states where people waste tons of $ on AC and recovering from devastating hurricanes.
It has earthquakes, but only rarely do they do a lot of damage.
This should be a state of easygoing beach bums eating the crabs that wander ashore. Everyone self-sufficient. What's going wrong?
All of 10 seconds to find an answer on google. More than half to schools and health care, the majority of the rest going to higher ed, corrections, human services, and natural resources. I don't know what it actually in the Other category, but I assume it includes basically everything previously discussed in this thread.
If you as a California single filer make $89076 in taxable income (wage or salary) your marginal rate is 7.5% (your SS tax) + 7.5% (your employer's SS tax on your income) + 24% (Federal tax) + 9.3% (CA state tax) + 1.45% Medicare tax. That's a marginal rate of 49.75%.
Not how marginal rates work, buddy. In your last sentence I believe you mean to say effective tax rate, which is ~31%. Marginal rate refers to the specific rate within a specific bracket of income.
SmartAsset's California paycheck calculator shows your hourly and salary income after federal, state and local taxes. Enter your info to see your take home pay.
Close, but not exactly Germany. I have to admit I did not consider federal tax, plus other taxes (municipal, for self-employed). Well, CA is getting close, but without the welfare provided in EU countries. CA residents have to pay on top of that a true health insurance (not a tax like in EU), plus contribute towards pension (401K or similar), which is deductible, but you have to first earn it to be able to pay.
I can see now where the complaining is coming from for CA residents.
I’m in the highest brackets for US federal and state and local taxes for my state. If I add in the cost of health insurance and retirement plan contributions for my wife and myself, it comes to 52% of my gross income without even factoring in what it cost to send my two rotten kids to college.
Comparing notes with a Scandinavian relative, their total tax burden was about 10% higher, but their excellent education and healthcare systems cost basically nothing and they receive a generous old age pension.
This post was edited 12 minutes after it was posted.
If you make $67,000 TAXABLE (after deductions) then you pay $93 in tax for the extra $1,000 in TAXABLE income. Ouchie, boo-boo.
Rightwinger media-feed ignorance is beyond compare.
The only Republicans who understand how taxes work are the rich ones. For most people earning a salary of $66,000, you'd be much better off in a "high tax" state than a "low tax" one, because not only would you likely pay less, you'll get significantly more back in public services.
In California, a person making $66,000 would pay roughly $2565 in income tax. In New Jersey, they'd pay $2099.
In Missouri, they'd pay $2626. In Nebraska, $2913. Alabama, $3060. These are only "low tax" states if you're rich. The suckers don't know! Simply insane!
My last year’s tax filing was $311k. In CA, that would have cost me $22,010, in CO it was $12,972, in WY or TX, it would have been $0. I spent another $16,000 in property taxes last year. For the equivalent amount of Real Estate in San Diego, I would have had to pay roughly $60,000 in property taxes (price per square foot is about 3 times higher and the average property tax rate is about 50% higher). So about $82,000 in property + income taxes vs about $29,000 in property + income taxes. I’ll stay here, thanks.
Most people would increase their salary by more than 10% by taking a job in CA.
Many of us already have a job "in CA." We just don't live there. My husband and I both have CA jobs and we happily live out of state and just fly in on rare occasion.
Also, most people would get their 10% salary bump and take a 100% increase in housing costs and a clear decrease in QOL if they were to move to CA.
I moved from Seattle actually and took a job that pays 40% than my old one. My housing is cheaper than in Seattle and the weather sure is better. QOL is subjective though. Unsure why you have to speak with such fervor.
Serious question. It is supposed to be a fair weather state with many natural resources and few disasters.
It is not like a cold northern state where they have to spent countless $ fixing all the roads every summer.
It is not like a Florida or southern states where people waste tons of $ on AC and recovering from devastating hurricanes.
It has earthquakes, but only rarely do they do a lot of damage.
This should be a state of easygoing beach bums eating the crabs that wander ashore. Everyone self-sufficient. What's going wrong?
All of 10 seconds to find an answer on google. More than half to schools and health care, the majority of the rest going to higher ed, corrections, human services, and natural resources. I don't know what it actually in the Other category, but I assume it includes basically everything previously discussed in this thread.
That really explains nothing. You didn't even comprehend the question.
These are things every state spends tax money on. Why does CA have to raise more tax revenue per capita to sustain these basics, despite the luxury of environmental stability? No hurricanes, no roads destroyed by winter. This is a grape-growing shangri-la after all.
About its only real trouble is "drought," i.e. period of below-average rainfall. That happens everywhere from time to time, so letting it be a problem means poor planning.
California's schools are bad as a whole. There are only a few areas where they're good and these are in less woke areas; woke 'equity' ideas have ruined the best ones: just look at what happened to Lowell.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
