I don't think you are paying attention to what I've been saying. There is nothing that could be done to make the 'progressive' tax system in the US worse than it is now, because the rich already don't pay hardly anything. And it is not really possible for them to pay less than I do. That was my point. I've set up my finances in such a way, that I, personally, pay zero income taxes to the federal government. And I do so quite legally, by taking advantage of the numerous exemptions and deductions that both parties have carved out for their special interests. I pay nothing beyond my FICA taxes, which is less than what Rand Paul's Fair&Flat plan would cost me. It's not material if the top tax rate is 38% or 90%, if even the wealthiest of people can avoid those rates with massive exceptions and deductions. There are entire sections of this forum dedicated to the concept of paying zero taxes in retirement! No, that's not fair; but it is so.
Then you and I have a different idea of math.
I personally do not care what the name of the tax is, just the total % of income.
If I recall correctly in a previous post of yours you were stating that your income tax is 2.6% and the other (such as SS) accounted for 15% and change.
Total: 18% of what you make goes in taxes.
Actually, my net tax rate, including everything that goes to the federal government, is just over 7%. That includes FICA as well as state income taxes, but does not include my property taxes, which are substantial, honestly.
The super rich pay less than that, because SS taxes are capped to an amount that is trivial to them (not to you).
The Fair&Flat tax would effectively remove that cap as well.
Saying that you pay "nothing" and conveniently forgetting the 15% and change is... Uh... Strange?
Plus: I am happy you manage to do that but most employees (like me) pay significantly more than the "nothing" you pay, rendering the comparison with the uber wealthy (who ALL pay much lower %) even more obscene.
And that is exactly my point. As a net total tax rate, the average wealthy person pays less than the FICA rate. I know this because I use many of the same tricks to do the same thing. I can't say with any certainty that the wealthy will pay more on net or not, but they won't pay less.
We agree on the fact that today's system is unfairly rigged (to favor the very rich), I would just avoid any new system that would further lower their % of taxation.
It also favors the very (income) poor, which is one reason it so favors the early retiree. Agree with it or not, it's basicly the middle class that pays for everything that matters, from infrastructure to education.
If the flat tax proposal is to treat capital gains like income then count me in, that would mean a significant increase in taxation for the super rich.
I don't know why but I'm not super confident that's the proposal.
I am. It's right there in the press release. The Fair and Flat tax is exactly what you are looking for, and that is what I've been trying to tell you....
"I devised a 21st-century tax code that would establish a 14.5% flat-rate tax applied equally to all personal income, including wages, salaries,
dividends, capital gains, rents and interest.
All deductions except for a mortgage and charities would be eliminated. The first $50,000 of income for a family of four would not be taxed. For low-income working families, the plan would retain the earned-income tax credit."
https://randpaul.com/news/rand-pauls-fair-and-flat-taxThis would effectively double my net tax rate.