True to his brand of democratic socialism, he wants to boost the top income tax rate to 52 percent, add a new 2.2 percent income tax and 6.2 percent payroll tax for everyone, make the rich pay Social Security taxes, make corporations pay taxes on foreign profits as they're earned, tax carbon, tax financial transactions, and raise the top estate tax rate to 65 percent for billionaires, to name a few of his proposals.
Whether you love or hate those ideas, they add up. A new report from the Tax Policy Center, the leading nonpartisan think tank for tax and revenue issues, finds that Sanders's proposals would increase taxes by $15.3 trillion over 10 years, or about $1.5 trillion per year. That's a substantially bigger tax increase than Donald Trump's plan is a tax cut.
The biggest revenue raisers, the TPC report finds, are the new 6.2 percent employer payroll tax ($4.3 trillion over 10 years), repealing the tax exclusion for employer-provided health insurance ($4 trillion), the new 2.2 percent income tax surcharge ($1.8 trillion), increasing top rates (about $1.7 trillion), and the plan to apply Social Security taxes on income over $250,000 ($1.2 trillion).
The tax increases Sanders proposes are progressive. Over two-thirds of them would be paid by the richest 20 percent of Americans, and over a fifth would be paid by the richest 0.1 percent, who'd face an average tax hike of $3.1 million (or about 45 percent of their income). The poorest fifth of Americans, by contrast, would only see taxes go up by $165 on average, or 1.3 percent of their income.
By 2025, the poorest Americans would actually save money. That's because Sanders's carbon tax is paid back to households making under $100,000 in the form of a rebate; the tax increases by 5 percent plus inflation every year, so eventually that rebate becomes big enough to cancel out all the tax increases.
The middle fifth of Americans — those making between $45,153 and $80,760 a year — would see taxes go up by $4,692 a year, or 8.5 percent, in 2017. This chart by Vox's Javier Zarracina summarizes the hikes, compared to Hillary Clinton's plan which TPC analyzed yesterday.
Sanders's income tax increases are bigger than we thought
Bernie Sanders has to date touted his income tax plan as setting a top rate of 52 percent. But per the details the campaign supplied to TPC, it actually works a bit differently from that. Sanders actually eliminates the top three income tax brackets (33, 35, and 39.6 percent), leaving 28 percent as the top rate. He then adds surtaxes of 9, 15, 20, and 24 percent on top of the regular income tax.
This might seem like a technical distinction. It's not. That's because the surtaxes apply not to taxable income, but to adjustable gross income (AGI). If Sanders had merely increased the top rates, taxpayers would have still been able to enjoy their mortgage interest deductions, their charitable deductions, their state and local tax deductions, and so forth. But AGI measures income before you take deductions into account.
So Sanders's plan reduces the benefit rich people can gain from itemized deductions, including the charitable deduction. Effectively, he puts a 30.2 percent cap on their value: the 28 percent top rate, plus his 2.2 percent health care income tax. Interestingly, this is actually a somewhat more modest restriction than Obama or Clinton has proposed. They want a 28 percent cap on deductions by the rich, ever-so-slightly smaller than Sanders's 30.2 percent cap.
Sanders would also subject charitable gifts to capital gains tax. So if I were to, say, buy a painting for $200 dollars and then donate it to a charity when it's worth $200 million, under Sanders's plan I would be on the hook for tax on most of that gain. Under current law, that donation would be tax-free.
This helps explain why Sanders's proposal is so effective at raising revenue from the richest Americans. He's not just raising their tax rates; he's eliminating the best methods they currently have for minimizing their taxable income.
http://www.vox.com/2016/3/4/11161616/bernie-sanders-tax-policy-center
Those increases don't seem that high considering the savings.
i mean it would suck for me.
Being out of college with my loans already paid off and im pretty healthy and dont need to go to the doctor as much. I already 1196/yr in Insurance a year through my work and they wont pass on the savings of not having to provide HC if we get it through the state.
I would just be paying more for everyone else to reap :/
im only 29.
You won't be paying that insurance.
*Charts includes pay roll tax increases which would be paid by employees but doesn't figure in the fact that employer-provided health care will be eliminated. Sander's plan would provide universal health insurance for all.
Vox really fucked up. The report they're citing even say
In the hypothetical examples shown in table B1, total payroll taxes (including the portion paid by employers) would increase by between $3,900 and nearly $5,000 for middle-income workers. Despite the increase in payroll taxes, the workers covered by employer-sponsored health insurance plans would save enough in the switch from employer-sponsored health insurance coverage to the new government plan to more than offset the additional payroll taxes, and thus their take–home pay would increase. The worker without health insurance would have lower take-home pay but in return would gain health insurance coverage and coverage for paid family and medical leave (FML).
Theoretically, the employer would pass the savings onto you.
("theoretically")
What I'm wondering is if the medical taxes would still decrease your overall tax liability.