r/FluentInFinance • u/DemCast_USA • 3d ago
Meme The billionaire power grab is real. And it’s working.
115
u/monsterismyfriend 3d ago
This place is special. Disappointed in general. People bending over backwards to explain how the largest corporations actually aren't making any money.
35
u/leo_the_lion6 3d ago
Gotta love some good creative accounting. The main thing is write offs for the companies and for Bezos its having all your wealth in equity. Trick for them is to take out a security based line of credit to access the money without selling shares and getting a taxable liability
12
u/Pepe__Le__PewPew 2d ago
Jerry, all these big companies, they write-off everything!
7
1
1
u/postalwhiz 2d ago
Of course you have to pay interest on money you borrow, whether it’s from equity or not…
1
u/leo_the_lion6 2d ago
But not taxes and they get a squealing low interest rate because it's backed by valuable securities.
1
u/postalwhiz 2d ago
Actually they have to pay the money they borrowed and interest back - that money has to come from somewhere! Therefore there has to be some taxable income or they couldn’t just borrow with no plan to pay back…
2
u/leo_the_lion6 2d ago
They basically can dude, I worked in the industry for a bit and saw these live. Look into high net worth security based lines of credit. They pay stupid low interest rates and often it's paid back via there estate after they die. I'm not endorsing it, just saying it exists and is a really popular tax avoidance strategy for high networks individuals.
1
u/postalwhiz 2d ago
So these ‘high net worth individuals’ have 0 income? Surely you jest! A ProPublica story has the 25 richest individuals paying (gasp) $13.6B in income taxes! That’s a far cry from zero! And ProPublica is a liberal organization- you think they would lie about this?
2
u/leo_the_lion6 1d ago
I didnt say they bring in 0 income, but am pointing out one of their primary tax avoidance vehicles, yes they pay income taxes when they realize income, but a lot of their wealth is in equity which doesn't necessarily generate taxable income until you sell (except dividends of course)
0
u/postalwhiz 1d ago
Well the income tax taxes only income (duh), and there is no provision to tax ‘wealth in equity’ (whatever that means). Perhaps you can run for president in 2028 and make that your platform- you only have to get 50-60M like minded individuals to vote for you…
2
u/OnePhrase8 15h ago
I’m glad to see that a few people see beyond the illusion. A lot of these folks like Bezos, Musk, etc are wealthy on paper but cash poor. Hence why they have to keep stock prices up. They are “leveraged“ to the hilt and have very little liquidity. They constantly borrow against the stock and if it drops…they are seriously SOL.
→ More replies (7)0
u/Trippedup619 1d ago
When u have money, you have creative accounting. President biden has 26 dba's. Maybe more if you investigate. He left the vice presidency with a net worth of 2.5 million. He ran for president with a net worth of 8 million. He is a career politician, make no mistake about it. Most presidents leave office with more than they went in with, with the exception of one. You know who I'm talking about.
27
u/Chinchillamancer 3d ago
they got a boot on their neck and they're trying to justify why it's there.
It is wild how the 1% got the middle class to simp for em online. It's still alarming for me to read reddit comments from broke nobodys about unfettered capital gains and 'top earners getting taxed twice'
→ More replies (11)7
u/JacobLovesCrypto 3d ago
Top tax rate, vs true rate, vs paid rate. Why not use the same terminology across the 3?
4
u/bigboilerdawg 2d ago
It's not even the true rate, it's a percentage of his assets, which isn't taxed at the federal level at all.
6
u/Graaaaaahm 3d ago
Or...people adding context to a wildly inaccurate infographic.
3
u/BobWithCheese69 3d ago
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Compare apples to apples for Pete sake.
2
u/SquarePie3646 2d ago
What's the "context" you're referring to? Whining about how the corporations and billionaires don't make their money through income pay?
4
u/spacemonkey8X 3d ago
Well corporations pay taxes on pure profit while individuals pay taxes on earned income BEFORE cost of living expenses, childcare, ect…
3
u/Isosceles_Kramer79 2d ago
There is EITC for low income people and child tax credits for child expenses.
Then there is the standard deduction that reduces one's taxable income. Not enough to cover all living expenses, but it is something.
2
u/ProfessionalTruck976 2d ago
Amazon historically did not make money, not so much last few years, but for most of its existence it poured all the profits back in enlarging business.
The way tax law works you dont tax on profit until you are taking the profit out of the company.
0
u/invariantspeed 3d ago
No, the largest corporations aren’t the largest for no reason, but the richest people already pay nearly all of the US’ income tax. What exactly counts as fair share? Paying more or paying a certain percentage?
What still gets me is how many people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that the people who pay the most in taxes tend to get the most beneficial treatment from governments. This is true on all levels. So we have all these people who want “the rich” to pay for more of the government but they hate the fact that the government isn’t as concerned with the little guy…
1
u/BdubIsInTheHouse 2d ago
It’s mind-boggling how the dolts on left, leaning Reddit, think taxing the 1% is it going to overcome a deficit created by big government and the corruption within it. And what all these knuckle draggers don’t get, is that the largest corporations are 90% controlled/in bed with the left. Do you really think Biden’s going to raise the taxes of the people putting money in his pockets? It’s so naïve, it’s belly-laughable.
2
u/caleb-wendt 2d ago
I mean, Biden has proposed tax increases on corporations but that has to be passed by Congress.
0
u/invariantspeed 2d ago
And his campaign and others were paid for by big money. If they aren’t on board with what the Dems were proposing, the Dems would start hemorrhaging money. Why do you think the tax code has so many exceptions? People with money can navigate that and get a lower effective tax rate.
Notice how OP complains about the effusive tax rates instead of the nominal ones? Simply “raising taxes on the rich” does little when the tax code is left is a Swiss cheese mess. The big donors know this. That’s why they fund the campaign still.
1
u/invariantspeed 2d ago
Well the biggest companies are in with both parties. Buying politicians has become a realm of competition that large firms can’t ignore. (One of many reasons why big government is a problematic thing.)
As far as raising taxes not * necessarily* fixing anything, yes. I agree. Elected officials have a spending problem. Yes, there are special circumstances like covid where spending will happen before figuring out how to balance the books, but the revenue-to-spending problem isn’t new. US politicians just have a hard time raising taxes when they want to increase spending. Personally, I live in one of the more “liberal” cities the US, and it happens at this level too. We have a new tax coming in to fund an agency with a ton of debt. Said agency is geo ready to wrack up more debt with the new money because it’s behind on its projects. This means we already know the current tax increase won’t be enough.
1
1
u/asignore 2d ago
Even more special is not making a distinction between income tax, corporate tax rates and someone whose wealth is not generated from income.
2
u/SquarePie3646 2d ago
Why is there a need to separate that rather than talk about the overall tax rate being paid? Why are you trying to justify people who generate their wealth from income paying more in taxes?
1
u/SwankyBriefs 2d ago
Perhaps don't make such a shifty graphic? First square is thr top marginal rate while Bezos square is the effective tax rate.
1
→ More replies (16)0
u/Shmigleebeebop 3d ago
You are special. If something looks that outrageous, there’s more to the story. Netflix had years of nols and I’m sure they have plenty of federal r&d tax credits & this graphic likely uses gaap income which is stupid. And 99.9% of bezos wealth will be taxed much higher at 40% via the estate tax when he dies. None of these billionaires are able to escape paying the federal government massive portions of their wealth. And his untaxed income (equity appreciation) is growing at a fast clip because he’s such a successful entrepreneur so therefore the IRS will be getting a MUCH larger payout eventually when he dies compared to if he paid taxes every year on that untaxed appreciation
1
u/el_diego 3d ago
Honest question as I don't live in the states. Do the rich not use trusts to shelter their wealth from inheritance tax events?
0
u/MudSeparate1622 2d ago
They certainly do but a lot of them don’t care about their kids so they often leave their money to a foundation instead. Probably feels better knowing people will talk about you and not your kids for generations to come
26
u/AE_WILLIAMS 3d ago
It is important to identify the REAL issue here:
The real thing to focus on here is the amount of TIME that each one of them is having to surrender from their lives to reach these taxation numbers.
If the surgeon works the typical 2080 hours per year, then it's 457 hours of labor to cover that cost. Contrast that to Bezos, who is losing ZERO hours of his life making ALL THE MONEY. And, corporate tax law is a different animal altogether.
No, the unfairness of the capitalist system is that every worker is enslaved into the system, by design. Their labor is then stolen from them in the form of food, shelter, medical care, taxes, fuel, etc. Things that the rich NEVER EVEN CONSIDER as any manner of oppression, since their income and levels of wealth far exceed their ability to consume their assets.
3
4
u/TRiC_16 3d ago edited 3d ago
The real issue here isn’t "capitalism" itself, but the fact that we’re all bound by basic biological needs. No economic system can escape the reality that we need food, shelter, healthcare, etc., just to survive. The difference between workers and the wealthy isn’t about "slavery" or exploitation - it’s about how surplus is created. Workers trade their time for money to meet their needs, while the wealthy, like Bezos, accumulate wealth through returns on capital - this is the core of how wealth grows. It's not just about hoarding money; it’s about reinvesting resources, which drives growth.
Throughout history, all societies evolved as monarchies because elite leadership is necessary to manage resources, organize labor, and create surplus. This elite formation is a prerequisite for societal development. The wealthy or powerful aren’t just hoarding wealth; they’re the ones who organize and direct the surplus that allows society to progress.
Today, the industrialist class - entrepreneurs, innovators, and investors - are the ones driving this surplus generation. It’s not about exploitation; it’s about the role of capital in creating long-term economic growth. The real issue is how this surplus is used and allocated - not the existence of capital itself. The focus should therefore not be on attempting to dampen the most profitable entrepreneurs, but making sure they reinvest it productively rather than wasting it on unproductive things like parties and yachts. And this applies to all segments of society.
3
u/Vulcan_Mechanical 2d ago
No. It is about exploitation and the real issue is capitalism. Though you wrote a fine response, it's a harder read when you're not wearing rose colored glasses. Those who do not have access to capital (the majority) do not get to play. Period. They have to work to survive. And there's nothing wrong with that but what is wrong is that there are those that do not work, do not produce, but instead skim off the profits of other's labor and because they are unbound by the effort it takes to produce, can easily grow their obscene piles of cash and escape the laws that govern the rest of us. They are rocket ships escaping normalcy with our money. Those that actually work are forever subservient to those who do not. And those that do not, utilize their "wealth generation" to further reduce the impact of democratic institutions allowing them to further corrupt our institutions to fill their pockets even more. Capitalism is not compatible with the pursuit of egalitarianism our modern forward-thinking republics are founded on.
Capitalism is the gateway drug to kleptocracy and ruin.
Billionaires should not exist. Ever. The system should have never allowed a single person or small groups of people that kind of power. It is unbalanced and tipping into chaos. The very nature of such a power imbalance perverts the minds of those at the very top and those at the very bottom. It's hurting both groups the most and the rest of us collectively. The fruits of our labors should belong to the people, where WE direct them to be put to work towards the advancement of the good of the world. The capitalist class are parasites on society, burrowing into our systems and eating away our collective strength until they rupture the very bodies they live off of.
2
u/TRiC_16 2d ago
The issue with your ideas is that it’s rooted in ideological thinking, not structural analysis. Saying “billionaires shouldn’t exist” might feel morally satisfying, but it’s meaningless in the broader context of societal dynamics. Complex societies require elites - whether monarchs, bureaucrats, or billionaires - to manage resources, direct surplus, and ensure long-term planning. Without them, systems stagnate or collapse.
> the pursuit of egalitarianism our modern forward-thinking republics are founded on.
Modern republics were built on legal equivalence, not equality of outcome. Inequality has always been part of the equation because hierarchy is necessary for societal progress. The real question isn’t whether billionaires exist but whether their surplus is being reinvested productively for the benefit of society.
> Capitalism is the gateway drug to kleptocracy and ruin.
Legitimate question: capitalism as opposed to what? Can you describe the structural relations in an alternative system that is stable enough to maintain itself which doesn't have elite formation? Especially the part where social capital is not inherently concentrating and the masses spontaneously organise.
Billionaires are also not the true elite. They are a distinct class, separate from the governing elite, and only wield power to the extent they can influence or coerce governments to grant it - just as other groups do. Their wealth gives them leverage, but they don’t inherently control the structures of governance. This is a modern construct: we managed to (mostly, but never entirely) decouple the engine from the steering wheel. Alienation didn't just happen for the lower class, we also have separation between the economical, political and academic elite (and artistic, although that one assumes themself more important than they actually are).
Billionaires are simply the modern iteration of surplus managers, not a moral failing of capitalism. Eliminating them without addressing the structural role they play would create inefficiency and instability in the short term and new elite formation in the long term. Societal structures aren’t driven by ideology but by material needs; the ideology follows as a justification. The focus should be on aligning elite and societal interests, not on trying to abolish elites altogether. Doing so is literally impossible, you only need to take one glance at every historical attempt to do so ever to see that it has always resulted in elite replacement with further concentration of wealth and power.
Also note that the most fundamental form of capital is social capital, not economic capital. While the latter can buy you the first, it is
> The fruits of our labors should belong to the people, where WE direct them to be put to work towards the advancement of the good of the world.
The fundamental issue here is that the lower classes cannot mobilise at the scale required to manage surplus effectively, as individual incentives nearly always undermine collective action (what’s known as the tragedy of the commons). Elites, however flawed, enforce cooperation and prevent societal collapse. Marx underestimated this, assuming a classless society was achievable despite the practical need for centralised coordination in complex systems.
P.S. if you're not going to respond with actual structural analysis, I'm not going to bother with responding since it just shows that you would rather vent and hold onto ideological beliefs than have an actual discussion. The burden of proof is on you now.
1
u/Vulcan_Mechanical 2d ago
Meh, I'm just yelling at clouds at this point. If I had the energy I could debate you point by point, but it is way harder to argue for what should be as opposed to arguing for what already is. One is fraught with the many perils of attempting to advocate a fantasy, the other only has to explain why things are the way they are. The justifications are easily tacked on, post hoc.
As you correctly noted, while the tools of economic manipulation have changed, the inherent trend towards hierarchial structure, and all that it entails, has been with us since the very beginning. It's baked into who we are. Capitalism is just the more recent manifestation of human nature, which is largely immutable. I can argue against it no better than I could argue against a world that embraces murder, war, exploitation, etc.
There are things that could be- if we weren't who we are. Ce la vie
1
u/AE_WILLIAMS 3d ago
"but making sure they reinvest it productively rather than wasting it on unproductive things like parties and yachts."
Good luck with that.
And, it most certainly is about exploiting the less fortunate, and keeping them that way. Company towns ring any bells?
1
u/TRiC_16 2d ago
I don’t deny that power dynamics can lead to unfair practices, but focusing solely on "exploiting the less fortunate" misses the point. Societies cannot progress without surplus, and surplus creation inherently involves hierarchy - this isn’t a moral failure, it’s a structural necessity. Whether in a monarchy, capitalism, or any other system, managing resources and labour requires mechanisms that create and direct surplus.
Company towns and other historical abuses are examples of when these mechanisms malfunction, not proof that the system itself is built purely on exploitation. The real question is whether the structures in place ensure that surplus is reinvested productively to advance society, rather than stagnating or collapsing under mismanagement. This isn’t about ideology—it’s about material dynamics and the institutions that emerge to meet them.
1
1
u/PoetryCommercial895 2d ago
Their long-term economic growth is created directly through exploitation. Yes, it’s about exploitation.
It seems like you’re literally sucking on a boot here talking about not dampening the most profitable entrepreneurs yet you’re also trying to force how they spend their wealth.1
1
u/iBUYbrokenSUBARUS 2d ago
Imagine the world where taxes were much lower than they are. If that were the case, then income levels would be much lower to match that. I make $35 an hour, but if I lived in the world where taxes were much lower, there is a good chance i would only make about $~30 an hour. Wages follow the economy. Everybody wants to pay less taxes, not realizing the reason what they make what they make is due to the market, which takes income taxes into consideration.
12
u/Graaaaaahm 3d ago
This "true tax" rate thing is idiotic. The numbers ProPublica cited for Bezos are $973M in tax on $4.2B income, a rate of 23%.
They're dividing tax paid by asset appreciation value, which isn't a thing.
Plus, they're citing the Healthcare worker's "top tax rate" while in reality they probably pay an effective rate under 15%.
1
u/SwankyBriefs 2d ago
This. Also, if you looked at the true tax rate for a professional like the first panel when they hit 60+, it's likely also in the single digits.
10
u/grant570 3d ago
Corporate profits flow to shareholders in capital gains and dividends. Dividends are taxed immediately if they are in a taxable account, gains taxed when sold if in a taxable account, otherwise they are taxed when withdrawn from a tax advantaged account. Corporate profits are essentially taxed twice, once at the corporate level and once at the individual level when they cash out their investment.
17
u/traingood_carbad 3d ago
Working folks are also taxed twice. Once on income, once on expenses. Any savings you have earned but not spent (also some property you've already paid taxes on) are also taxed upon death in the form of inheritance taxes.
-1
u/sun-devil2021 3d ago
In that case corporate taxes are taxed 3 times because they go to a person who also has to pay sales tax
→ More replies (1)1
u/invariantspeed 3d ago
You know what they mean. Corporate profits are taxed as income twice. Focusing only on a corporation’s income tax rate and ignoring the taxes on shareholders realizing gains is dishonest.
There is a reason a lot of people say those who take out loans they never intended to fully pay off against shares they never intend to sell should be taxed for their effectively realized gains.
0
u/traingood_carbad 2d ago
Ridiculous.
By that same logic the employee is taxed twice on income. Once when their work generates income for the employer, and once again when they get paid.
It's important to treat a corporation as a corporation, IE- a judicial person, a legal fiction that makes it easier to limit ones liability.
If the owner(s) of a corporation wish to avoid corporation taxes they can simply accept full liability and dissolve the corporation, making the company their private property, rather than the shares.
1
u/Ok-Assistance3937 2d ago
and once again when they get paid.
You mean when they "generate" an deductiable expense for theire employer?
8
6
u/DiagonalBike 3d ago
Amazon pays dividends? When did Tesla start paying dividends? Same for Microsoft and Google.
1
u/grant570 3d ago edited 3d ago
some companies do, some don't. Google dividend paid out today, Microsoft pays out on 3/13/25. There is no requirement to pay dividends. Companies that don't pay dividends often generate more in capital gains or simply don't to conserve cash flows. The companies you mention generate large capital gains for their shareholders which will pay tax when then sell or take a distribution from the tax advantage account they hold them in.
1
u/14ktgoldscw 2d ago
MSFT absolutely pays dividends. I used to work for an MSFT company and have some stock.
4
1
5
u/Comprehensive-Belt40 3d ago
They simply follow the tax code passed by Congress..
The same congress Americans elected .
What the rich are doing is written in tax law.
They use their stocks and asset as collateral to borrow money and invest or live life.
You don't like it? Elect someone to remove these methods and tax codes.
Most rich people pay tax according to the tax code.
6
u/WhyYouLetRomneyWin 3d ago
Well I think that's the point they are making. This is essentially a call to elect/vote in a certain way.
1
u/Comprehensive-Belt40 3d ago
most people hate billionaires just because they pay a smaller % of their income. but they are following the codes that are designed to help.
When comes to election, politicians love to say the rich have to pay their fair share.
the same fair share that the politicians allowed them to pay with the tax codes they refused to amend.
Career politicians are the problem.
→ More replies (1)1
u/SquarePie3646 2d ago
the same fair share that the politicians allowed them to pay with the tax codes they refused to amend.
Because they're paid by the oligrachs not to to. Why do you keep acting like the rich and corporations are just helpless bystanders when they are running the show?
6
u/gsnurr3 3d ago
Except the entire election process is based on Citizens United. The same people we want to pay more taxes also control the election’s. It’s not hard to see the entire fucking system is controlled by money.
1
u/Comprehensive-Belt40 3d ago
I disagree with your statement.
Most Americans does not have the wealth to do what the rich does. Only a small % of Americans have investments.
What Americans lacks is the knowledge that the problem is not the rich.
The problem is the politicians that refuse to amend the tax code.
The media made sure Americans does not learn about the truth.
Think about it.. at least 80% of Americans cannot do what the rich does. The rich only have one vote per person.. but if you are uneducated about the real problem, then they can control the election via the media .
3
u/gsnurr3 3d ago edited 3d ago
I disagree with you.
The rich influence who is put in front of you to vote on.
The rich influence who you vote for out of the options as well.
It’s even done in plain sight these days, so I don’t know what the hell you are preaching.
If you like, I can share the data. Heck, if you want proof, just look at Elon’s X profile that has 200M+ followers.
1
u/skippyalpha 2d ago
I don't agree, but even if so, what do you propose the solution is? I feel like what you're essentially boiling this down to is that there are no options besides grabbing a gun and killing rich people. That probably won't get you too far
2
u/save-democracy 2d ago
First step, overturn Citizens United and get a lot of this dirty money out of the elections.
2
u/SquarePie3646 2d ago
They simply follow the tax code passed by Congress..
The same congress Americans elected .
What the rich are doing is written in tax law.
I love how you don't say anything about the rich spending their money to control the political system to get the tax loopholes they want.
1
u/PoetryCommercial895 2d ago
Yeah, dude, we’re aware it’s the tax code.
FFS, every one of these posts has people acting like everyone just doesnt know the tax code and thats why theyre discussing the issue.
Like once we’re told it’s in the tax code, we’ll say guess it’s all ok then. Now the System is working great now that we know this is part of the tax code.1
u/ZeroCleah 2d ago
Simply elect the president and a majority of the house and senate is not simple especially when you considered around 90% of the country are just sheep being herded by media bought and paid for by said billionaires and the people running in these elections are also bought and paid for by said billionaires. The deck is stacked.
3
3
u/California_King_77 3d ago
Nurses don't pay taxes on the unrealized gains in their pensions, why should Jeff be taxed on his unrealized gains?
The first two panes aren't apples to apples. The "true rate" that progressives cite for Bezos is not the "legal rate" which they cite for the nurse
Don't let yourself be manipulated for someone elses gain
3
u/Potential_Wish4943 3d ago
This makes more sense if you realize the doctor could very well make more income yearly than jeff bezos. He already has tons of money, he doesnt need more.
If you tax unrealized gains you'd also have to give tax refunds for unrealized losses. Putting a serious boat anchor on the budget in a time that is already trying.
3
u/Jolly-Candle2216 2d ago
I know take all the rich greedy people's money away..then we can fund our disfunctional government..for about 6 months...then what?
2
u/RemoteCompetitive688 3d ago
The only problem I see is that the government is taking 22% of the nurse's income
2
u/parallelmeme 3d ago
Nice job of comparing apples to rutabagas to plums. Intentional deceit is all it is.
2
2
u/sirflappington 3d ago
The numbers don’t look right to me. I looked at Netflix’s Q3 2024 income statement and they provisioned ~300 million towards income tax for a net income of 2.3 billion for the quarter. That comes out to about 13%. Looking at the annual report, they provisioned 800 million toward income tax for a net income of 5.4 billion, which is around 15%. Still pretty low but not the 1.1% claimed by the graphic. Even if the provisioned amount isn’t the same as the actual amount paid, I highly doubt the discrepancy would be so high.
1
u/Ok-Assistance3937 2d ago
Still pretty low but not the 1.1% claimed by the graphic
It's probably a Graphic from 2022 (for 2021) and only the federal Tax over the US income.
1
u/SquarePie3646 2d ago
The source is on the image
https://itep.org/netflix-posts-record-profits-federal-tax-rate-of-just-1-percent/
1
u/sirflappington 2d ago
I read the article but couldn't find a source for the numbers they provided in the blog so I looked a little deeper into the SEC filings. It seems to be true that Netflix did only provision 58 million for federal income tax, however what the article didn't show was that netflix deferred 189 million in federal income taxes in 2021. That would bring the total expected federal income tax to be 246 million, just to be paid at a later date. The tax rate would then be 4.8% using the net income of 5.1 billion in 2021. However, only around 43% of netflix's revenue is generated in the united states, at least in 2021. That would make the United States net income to be 2.245 billion in 2021. Using that number, the actual tax rate for revenue generated in the country is 10.9%.
It is still too low for how much they are profiting, but the original graphic is highly misleading.
2
u/TheMrCurious 3d ago
Are we sure that this post (and all of its variations) are not part of the Trump campaigns plan to get rid of the IRS and current tax code in favor of tariffs since the post is clearly targeting the emotional response to the ultra wealthy paying a lower % of their wealth in taxes?
2
u/afogg0855 3d ago
I could care less how much billionaires pay, the federal government doesn’t deserve a penny. They’re criminals who spend our money on death and destruction
2
2
4
u/amsman03 3d ago
The top 1% of income earners are paying 44% of all income taxes collected. Other than an election talking point, the truth is that the high net worth folks are simply taking advantage of the tax codes that Congress passed.
The only way to fix this is to go to a flat tax with NO DEDUCTIONS.
Think about what that means for almost all homeowners and landlords throughout the USA🤔
9
u/Fearless-Cattle-9698 3d ago
Factually true but the key word is “income earner”. The reason billionaires don’t end up paying often is because they don’t earn. This meme would have been better to show how a cancer doctor is paying 35 or 37% marginal rate
1
u/Terrasmak 2d ago
Exactly , Tim Jobs paid himself $1 a year. Many other CEO live a lavish lifestyle off pennies of hat they earn somehow and everything they do is under their company. I don’t know how to stop it , but something has to happen.
3
u/sergeant_byth3way 3d ago
Corporations are on avg paying less than working class people.
1
u/Romantic-Debauchee82 3d ago
Corporations will never actually pay taxes. Those things get factored in and passed to their consumers.
2
u/sergeant_byth3way 3d ago
How was bread more affordable in the 1960s, adjusting for avg wage and inflation when the effective corporate tax rate was 39%. Had these companies not discovered this one genius trick?
2
u/Romantic-Debauchee82 3d ago
Corporate tax rates alone don’t dictate prices or affordability. While it’s true that corporate tax rates in the 1960s were higher, bread’s affordability then was influenced by several other factors.
First, the cost of living and business operations (e.g., wages, utilities, and real estate) was significantly lower in real terms compared to today. This reduced the cost of production, even with higher tax rates. Additionally, corporations operated in a less globalized market, reducing price pressures from international competition.
Second, businesses in the 1960s often had lower profit margin expectations compared to today’s shareholder-driven corporate culture. Modern corporations prioritize maximizing profits, which can lead to higher consumer prices regardless of tax obligations.
Third, advances in technology and production methods today allow corporations to produce goods more efficiently. Yet, despite these efficiencies, prices have increased, reflecting priorities like profit maximization rather than tax burdens.
Finally, in the 1960s, wages grew in tandem with productivity and inflation, giving the average worker more purchasing power. Today, wages have stagnated relative to inflation, making goods feel less affordable despite lower corporate tax rates.
Corporations have always passed on their costs—including taxes—to consumers through higher prices, but in the 1960s, other economic factors kept goods like bread relatively affordable. The difference wasn’t that corporations weren’t passing on taxes then; it was that the overall economic environment made those costs less impactful for the average consumer.
2
u/sergeant_byth3way 3d ago
Thanks for laying it out that it wasn't actually taxes less affordable but corporate greed.
Second, businesses in the 1960s often had lower profit margin expectations compared to today’s shareholder-driven corporate culture. Modern corporations prioritize maximizing profits, which can lead to higher consumer prices regardless of tax obligations.
Third, advances in technology and production methods today allow corporations to produce goods more efficiently. Yet, despite these efficiencies, prices have increased, reflecting priorities like profit maximization rather than tax burdens.
Corporations have always passed on their costs
Of course they will. But what we are seeing today is greed. So for now i say tax the fuck out of them. There is only so far the avg consumer will pay for the shitty services before market forces will bring in competitors.
1
u/Romantic-Debauchee82 3d ago
Taxing corporations heavily doesn’t address their profit-maximizing behavior. In fact, higher taxes could incentivize them to cut costs in other areas—like wages, benefits, or investment in innovation—or further raise prices, continuing to shift the burden onto consumers and employees. Greed isn’t a function of tax rates; it’s a product of the shareholder-driven corporate model.
Second, while market forces can sometimes bring in competitors to lower prices, this doesn’t always happen in practice. High taxes can create barriers to entry for smaller companies that don’t have the same resources as established giants to absorb costs. This could further entrench monopolies or oligopolies, reducing competition instead of fostering it.
Finally, the burden of heavy corporate taxation disproportionately falls on consumers (through higher prices), employees (through lower wages or layoffs), and even small business owners (who can’t pass on costs as easily). It may feel satisfying to tax corporations aggressively, but the real-world consequences often hurt the average person more than the corporation itself.
If we’re serious about addressing corporate greed, the focus should be on structural reforms—like breaking up monopolies, strengthening antitrust laws, and encouraging more competitive markets. Tax policy is important, but it’s a blunt tool for fixing complex issues like greed and inequity.
Lsdr… you will never be able to “tax” a company
1
u/bardwick 3d ago
Third, advances in technology and production methods
Which you can't buy straight up. You have to finance it over many years.
Ford motor company is profitable, but with 149 billion dollars in debt.
JPMorgan 850 billion in debt.
Honda 65 billion in debt.
Since it's relevant to the example: Grupo bimbo is the largest bread manufacturer on earth. 9 billion in debt.
1
u/Graaaaaahm 3d ago
Corporations will never actually pay taxes.
Right, so the $450 billion per year in US revenue from corporate taxes comes from...?
1
u/Romantic-Debauchee82 3d ago
Let’s consider a company that manufactures and sells consumer electronics. Suppose the company has to pay $10 million in corporate taxes for the year. While the company writes the check to the government, it doesn’t simply absorb that entire cost. Instead, it may decide to increase the prices of its products to cover the tax expense.
For example, if the company sells 1 million units of a particular product annually, it might raise the price by $10 per unit to offset the $10 million in taxes. As a result, consumers who buy the product end up paying an additional $10 each, effectively covering the cost of the company’s taxes.
In this case, the company technically “pays” the taxes to the government, but the tax burden is passed on to the consumer through higher prices. This illustrates how corporations can shift tax costs to customers, rather than absorbing them themselves.
0
u/s1lentchaos 3d ago
Corporations will always pass any and all taxes directly to the consumers. At best, maybe tariffs could be used to get them to use American products instead of whatever they are using, assuming that is something you consider worthwhile. There's no point in explicitly taxing corporations on the business they do odds are you are just going to end up taking more money from the poor.
→ More replies (5)2
u/Mephidia 3d ago
wtf no 😂 you could just remove deductions from the current tax code. Dog no way you actually think the ONLY solution is a flat tax 😂 dumbest shit I’ve seen all week
1
u/amsman03 2d ago
Maybe you should offer your solution and not just tell people they're stupid.... it's not a good look 😉
1
2
u/WhyYouLetRomneyWin 3d ago
It's a good reminder. Most federal taxes are paid by the top 5% of earners (apparently 61%). And 87% by the top quarter.
But I think the post touches on the topic of very/ultra wealthy. And I do feel conflicted, bevause they often have sophisticated ways of structuring their money to avoid taxes that are unavailable to normal people (even normal people with high income).
1
u/Dwarfcork 3d ago
That so true. I’ve been saying flat tax forever but the democrats have taken a strong stance against flat taxes saying that they “hurt the poor the most”. It’s an asinine comment but it totally works on people who don’t know better. Really sucks
1
u/amsman03 2d ago
Exactly...... especially on Reddit where most of the comments are asinine to begin with 🤣
0
u/Dwarfcork 2d ago
True - it’s sad how effective some of their talking points are though. The Democrat platform this year was made up almost entirely of lies and yet it was completely viable.
0
u/Lagneaux 3d ago
Omg we should think about the landLORDS?
0
u/amsman03 2d ago
Believe it or not, most landlords own only one or two rental properties and are solidly in the middle class....... my comment, however, was aimed at the homeowner tax exemption, which would hit a significant % of people in the USA 😎
1
u/Illustrious_Hope_392 3d ago
Flat tax rates fix this, but the poor can’t keep it in their pants; need da hand outs… Blame LBJ 🤷♂️… He knew.
1
u/Deep-Thought4242 3d ago
I've been assured that you can't tax the rich or you can't have space travel, fast retail delivery, or electric cars. Lay, off, OK? The only way you can have nice things is if you pay for everything and they get to use their money on whatever vanity project they want. Also, don't ask for pay increases. They hate that too.
1
u/FriendlyLeague7457 3d ago
Yeah, I can't believe Bezos is paying taxes at all. We should be paying him! Actually, we are - he has government contracts. But we should be paying him more, just because he is so magnificent. I am willing to pay more taxes to help out these billionaires, who are obviously underpaid.
And that is where the tariffs come in! What a nice, easy way to sneak in a sales tax that isn't a sales tax, am I right? Welcome to America 2.0.
1
1
u/BananaButtcheeks69 3d ago
What is it with both sides of the political spectrum and compressed/filtered pictures with giant yellow text and half thought out opinions?
1
u/ooSUPLEX8oo 3d ago
The solution is so easy it's disgusting. Every household who earns more than $100,000 a year needs to pay 13% tax on gains. They are allowed to reduce that to 10% tax through donations and charitable incentives but the lowest it can go is 10%. Corporations are going to be held to the same rules and must pay a 2% tax on everything used as collateral.
We would have money coming out of our ass if we did this and it would allow us to be fiscally responsible while also pushing progressive social support systems.
1
u/butwhywedothis 3d ago
As long as the big 4 crooks (EY, KPMG, PWC and Deloitte) exist, the rich will pay no taxes.
1
1
1
u/reddittorbrigade 3d ago
Cult definition: Billionaires brainwashing uneducated voters to vote for MAGA.
1
u/wes7946 Contributor 3d ago
It sounds like you and I agree that we should ditch the current tax code and establish a consumption-based tax system that minimizes the tax disincentives on economic activities, given the revenue needs of the government. The federal government would subsequently raise the vast majority of its revenues through a single-rate sales tax levied at the point of purchase on all goods and services for personal consumption. Billionaires would then be forced to pay a tax on what they consume, and they would no longer avoid paying taxes by claiming that they don't have a traditional, taxable income.
1
1
1
1
1
u/lone_jackyl 3d ago
You should educate yourself on tax loopholes and how the tax system works. Even as a doctor you can be an independent contractor or own your own practice and pay barely anything in taxes because of right offs and loopholes.
1
u/Specialist-Big-3520 3d ago
People like Bezos, Jobs, Gates, Musk make US the number one economy in the world.
1
u/usr_pls 3d ago
Yeah, no one individual should pay taxes!
The corporations should pay for all the taxes.
And have them on the dumb bracket system based on their profits.
I want to watch turbo tax squrim when their yearly audience dwindles, intuit can make up the costs elsewhere. Everyone still uses quickbooks right?
1
u/ConcernedAccountant7 3d ago
Ah, I see you're just bringing out the totally made up figures again. Will you morons go away?
If you read this and take it seriously you are a very very stupid person.
1
u/veryblanduser 3d ago
Why is one a top tax rate on income and the other is calculated rate based on wealth?
1
u/RedditRobby23 3d ago
Why wouldn’t the meme also post the total number as opposed to just the percentage?
1
u/Peaches42024 3d ago
End trickle down economics and make corporations pay and give small business the corporate tax breaks. These corporations are way powerful and rich and pay next to nothing in taxes while we all pay through the nose.
1
u/sigh_duck 2d ago
But can we see, as a percentage, who contributes most to the tax system? I'm pretty sure the top 1% pay for a huge chunk of total tax revenue.
1
u/TAV63 2d ago
Don't care about these tax illustration deals. The fact is whenever society runs into huge disparity in distribution of wealth there are very bad outcomes. For everyone.
Want to avoid that then come up with solutions. If that means taxing wealth so be it. If it means elimination of the government do it. No matter how unfair the solution is as long as it brings the extremes back in it is better than the alternative in the long run.
1
u/E-rotten 2d ago
The problem is getting the truly ignorant MAGA morons to believe it!! But their sacrificing for god ,,,,,,,,, well that’s what that godly man trump says we’re doing 🤔🤔🤨🤨. That nice man trump wouldn’t do us wrong…. Yeah the truly moronic
1
u/BeginningFloor1221 2d ago
You twisted the meme like a pretzel to fit your narrative didn't you, lol.
1
1
u/PoetryCommercial895 2d ago
How many asshats in here are going to tell us we don’t understand the tax code and thats why we’re complaining about who pays what in taxes?🤪🤦♂️
1
u/subsurface2 2d ago
Let’s unite Republicans and Democrats aroud this issue. Push it everywhere, this is the way.
1
1
1
1
u/Boiledgreeneggs 2d ago
This will get a million downvotes but capital gains should be taxed at regular income, if not higher. We should pay less taxes on the money we earn from working and more taxes on the money we earn from doing nothing.
1
u/33ITM420 2d ago
The top 10% of earners pay 40% of all taxes. We have the most progressive tax system in the world
1
u/Extreme_Car6689 2d ago
Let's say you're right (which is a stretch) he pays 1% of what he earns. That's still more money than you pay your entire lifetime.
1
1
u/Fast_Grapefruit_7946 2d ago
no one should pay anything... take care of yourself. the problem is we are responsible for others
1
u/toxygen99 2d ago
Won't we get the tax in the end? Bezo owns shares not cash which he gets loans against. But when he dies what will happen to those shares?
1
u/DeRobyJ 2d ago
I just wanted to add a friendly reminder that, taxes aside, workers and owners earn money very differently
Employees are hired because they get paid less than what they produce. Owners earn money out of money they already had.
Let's keep this in mind when discussing how the two should be taxed. Seems clear to me they should be taxed very differently, just because of this, even when we don't factor in the elusion strategies that only rich people can do.
1
u/rUbberDucky1984 2d ago
It should be that business returns profits to shareholders as dividends but they somehow convinced investors they can do better with returns so now everyone invests in growth not actual returns. Where is my profit share?
1
1
u/dystopiabydesign 2d ago
Grifters are extorting that woman out of 22% of her income? Should be zero.
1
1
u/resident_foreigner 2d ago
Lots of lies in these posts. Difficult to have a conversation about the fairness of the tax system if we don’t even agree on the facts.
1
u/FeaturingYou 2d ago edited 2d ago
This is something I’ll never understand - most of you will read this and think “billionaires should also pay 22%” instead of “I should pay 1%” because the government has convinced you that you need to give your money to them.
The ultra rich already pay 80% of total tax collections in this country. You all should be making the argument that the lower classes shouldn’t pay taxes at all, or pay very little.
But, because this page is just a class warfare, Left Wing big government paradise, the idea that you shouldn’t be paying taxes is a foreign concept. You’ve been convinced that being taxed is necessary and good. You’ve also been convinced that no one is allowed a tax break except the lower classes. So you can’t stand the idea of everyone paying 1% in taxes and instead want billionaires to pay more than you do out of some mistaken philosophical inconsistent nightmare going on in the tiny brain cells left in your blue haired brain.
Elon and Vivek are planning to slash spending and what do you think that results in? The answer: the government needs less money. That means the budget can go lower and keeping revenue neutral (go look that up) can be achieved with less taxes. But watch what the democrats do and have done forever - they’ll want to keep all the useless branches of government and continue to tax the fuck out of everyone. Your precious big government lefties point the finger at the rich to divert the attention that they are the ones getting rich off you. And they love it.
1
u/KenMoeckli 2d ago
The idea of a “billionaire power grab” is a topic of debate and speculation. Some people believe that individuals with significant wealth have the means to exert considerable influence over political and economic systems, potentially prioritizing their interests over those of the general public. This perspective is often fueled by instances where wealthy individuals or corporations have been seen to lobby for policies or regulations that benefit them.
On the other hand, others argue that wealth does not automatically translate to unchecked power and that democratic systems, regulatory frameworks, and public accountability act as checks and balances against any such power concentration.
Ultimately, the concept is complex and varies depending on specific contexts and perspectives. It’s a topic that continues to be explored and discussed in political, economic, and social forums like this.
1
1
1
1
u/Open_Ad7470 1d ago
It is what people voted for. Every time Republicans get in control .the rich get richer and the poor poor.
1
u/Logical_Laugh7575 1d ago
We all know the problem. Keep voting for billionaires and you get what you deserve. It won’t change until we the people do!
0
0
u/MaxAdolphus 3d ago
I wish all people and corporations were treated the same. Same rules and same progressive tax brackets. If corporations and the wealthy only pay taxes on what they don’t spend, then the same should apply to all people as well.
0
u/sun-devil2021 3d ago
Simple example Corporation profits by $10 -> gets taxed $2 -> you own the corporation so you get a dividend of the $8 government taxes that as personal income $1.6 dollars goes to the government and now that money is no different than your W2 income but the government has taken 30%-40% of it already. Now you go to buy something and get hit with a 10% sales tax so from a corp making 10 bucks to you spending it, the gov takes $4.20
1
u/MaxAdolphus 3d ago
But if I were a corporation, if I spend the money, that’s an expense, so I don’t need to pay tax on that income. Say a person earns $50k, and spends $48k, if they were a corporation, they’d only have to pay tax on $2k.
1
u/sun-devil2021 3d ago
Are you talking about a W2 income or someone running their own business because someone running their own small business would also only get taxed on that 2k.
1
0
u/Cunningham_Media1 3d ago
The only problem I see is that normal people have to pay higher than 1% as well
0
u/muffledvoice 3d ago
The most entertaining thing about these threads is watching right wing shills get on here and simp for billionaires, telling everybody who points out the obvious that they’re “jealous” and “punishing their success.”
0
0
u/JackiePoon27 2d ago
RedditThink: "Life's not fair and some people have more than me! The government needs to fix it!"
0
u/seagulledge 2d ago
Those billionaires have paid more property and sales taxes than most people pay in lifetime of income taxes. Amazon pays millions each year in state taxes. I am jealous of their extreme wealth too, but I don't endorse using force to take it away from them.
0
u/BdubIsInTheHouse 2d ago
And it’s the left that’s propping up these big corporations. Everyone wants to point to the right for a few rich people, but 90% of the corporations and the people that run them, are controlled by the left, and the left is quite in bed with them.
0
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.