Author Topic: Your 2016 net income tax rate  (Read 22248 times)

Morning Glory

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4866
  • Location: The Garden Path
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #50 on: March 26, 2017, 05:58:03 PM »
Just did my taxes, this is interesting.
Federal: 7%
State: 4.5%
Total (federal, state, social security, Medicare, and property tax)=22%
Did not include sales taxes because they are optional (no sales tax on food or "necessities" in my state.

lutorm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Location: About the middle of Sweden
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #51 on: March 27, 2017, 12:20:14 AM »
I win... Just a tad over 50%!

This due to the wonderful confluence of AMT and ISO exercises...

frugalnacho

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5055
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #52 on: March 27, 2017, 10:30:18 AM »
About $70k income.  $18k to 401k, $11k to IRAs.  About $28k in itemized deductions (we did IVF this year so lots of medical bills).

Total federal tax: $0
Total Michigan tax: $1,322

GetItRight

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 627
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #53 on: March 28, 2017, 04:58:15 PM »
30% for the direct income taxes + property tax, on a high 5 figure income. The government needs to be reigned in, this level of theft is abhorrent.

Proud Foot

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #54 on: March 29, 2017, 08:45:26 AM »
Just got mine completed last night. From a $96k AGI I had a net rate of 2.2% Federal and 2.3% state.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #55 on: March 29, 2017, 03:58:06 PM »
30% for the direct income taxes + property tax, on a high 5 figure income. The government needs to be reigned in, this level of theft is abhorrent.

If you think of it as the costs required for you to make so much money, maybe it will feel less like theft and more like payment for services rendered.

Lots of places require less taxes, and you could work in one of those places instead, if you wanted to.  Freedom!

You could also pay no taxes by making less income, or taking more deductions (children, mortgage, education, charity, etc).  More freedom!

In the US, the median income family with the median number of children pays approximately zero income taxes.  Some of us pay more, some less, but I think "zero" is a pretty good number for the typical tax burden, considering all of the great stuff we get from our government in return.

Most people in this thread are reporting state/federal income tax, not property taxes, sales taxes, oasdi taxes, and other random stuff we also pay.  I can pretty easily make my tax burden look like it is nearly 100% of my income, by careful manipulation of the numbers.  I still think this is a great deal.

CCCA

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 631
  • Location: Bay Area, California
  • born before the 80's
    • FI programming
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #56 on: April 04, 2017, 12:11:44 AM »
Total income after retirement savings: $95k
Taxable Income: $45k
Total Fed Tax: $1.2k
Total CA Tax: $0


Net rates are 1.2% Federal and 0% State


We have lots of deductions and exemptions totaling about $50k.






Prairie Stash

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1795
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #57 on: April 04, 2017, 04:19:26 PM »
30% for the direct income taxes + property tax, on a high 5 figure income. The government needs to be reigned in, this level of theft is abhorrent.

If you think of it as the costs required for you to make so much money, maybe it will feel less like theft and more like payment for services rendered.

Lots of places require less taxes, and you could work in one of those places instead, if you wanted to.  Freedom!

You could also pay no taxes by making less income, or taking more deductions (children, mortgage, education, charity, etc).  More freedom!

In the US, the median income family with the median number of children pays approximately zero income taxes.  Some of us pay more, some less, but I think "zero" is a pretty good number for the typical tax burden, considering all of the great stuff we get from our government in return.

Most people in this thread are reporting state/federal income tax, not property taxes, sales taxes, oasdi taxes, and other random stuff we also pay.  I can pretty easily make my tax burden look like it is nearly 100% of my income, by careful manipulation of the numbers.  I still think this is a great deal.
As a Canadian I find the comparisons fascinating. I wish y'all would include your medicare payments.

I'm roughly 26% provincial, federal and city property tax. I also pay sales tax on some stuff I purchase, its probably 1% of my total income. 
Spouse is 9%, less if I count the child cheques she gets...so many ways to calculate the numbers

Roboturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Age: 35
  • Location: MCOL
  • No Snacks, Just Math
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #58 on: April 04, 2017, 04:38:09 PM »
27.3% Fed
3.6% State
30.9% All in

:( the theft is real - that was maxing both sides of a i401k (53k) and an HSA (3.35k)

Roboturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Age: 35
  • Location: MCOL
  • No Snacks, Just Math
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #59 on: April 04, 2017, 04:41:34 PM »
30% for the direct income taxes + property tax, on a high 5 figure income. The government needs to be reigned in, this level of theft is abhorrent.

+1

tralfamadorian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1217
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #60 on: April 04, 2017, 05:18:56 PM »
6.3% Fed
2.9% State

jim555

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3235
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #61 on: April 05, 2017, 04:56:40 AM »
0% Federal
Minimal $ for state

Thanks qualified dividends!

Laserjet3051

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 904
  • Age: 95
  • Location: Upper Peninsula (MI)
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #62 on: April 07, 2017, 09:01:20 AM »
as % of gross:
Fed: 2.37%
State (CA): 1.46%

as % of AGI:
Fed: 3.50%
State (CA): 2.16%

 Thank you ACA PTC!
« Last Edit: April 07, 2017, 09:03:19 AM by Laserjet3051 »

Heroes821

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 604
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #63 on: April 09, 2017, 12:42:28 PM »
Total Income $75,000.

Income tax rate 0%

With Tax credits About $7000 paid in all taxes or 10%!

BlueHouse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4136
  • Location: WDC
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #64 on: April 10, 2017, 08:56:00 AM »
Federal = 24%  Using Total Income Tax / AGI  (Line 63/37) 
State = 7.1% 

You know, I still have a shit load of money left over and I get a ton of services with the money I pay in to State, Fed, and other taxes/fees.  I do try to minimize my taxes, but I have no quarrel with what I'm paying. 

Here are the biggest benefits I can think of off the top of my head.
From age 6-18, I received SSI Survivor Income benefit.  ( I think it was $100 per month, but not sure...it went to my mom)
From age 5-17, I received a free education.  I could make the most of it, or I could squander it.  It was my choice.  (I know this was funded by property tax, but I'm thinking of the bigger picture of what all taxes make available). 
Now, I get to go to any Smithsonian museum I want any time I want for free.
Clean water, safe streets, laws that protect my health and safety. 

Overall, I think it's more than fair. 


ETA:  As a resident of the District of Columbia, the only thing that is NOT fair is that I do not have representation in Congress, and instead have the a-holes from other parts of the country deciding that what DC voters want is not what they can have. 
« Last Edit: April 10, 2017, 08:58:19 AM by BlueHouse »

TheFixer

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 79
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Middle 'Murikah
  • Getting smarter, 1 facepunch at a time
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #65 on: April 10, 2017, 01:25:42 PM »
Line 63 total tax/Line 22 income= 1477/37778=3.9%.
That includes deductions/credits for IRAs, 401K, health ins premium partial refund... It's good to show low earned income.

Drifterrider

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #66 on: April 12, 2017, 05:23:26 AM »
Rather than manipulate numbers do this:

How much did you make?  How much did you pay?  Do the math.

For me:  8.9% Fed, 5.75% to one state, 6% to another state.  7.65% to the "other" federal income tax.

It don't suck being me. :)

thedigitalone

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 192
  • Location: PNW
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #67 on: April 12, 2017, 11:35:00 AM »
63/37 was 18.33% on our return, the summary on the tax forms shows marginal tax rate = 28.0% and effective tax rate = 22.1%

We need to find some more tax shelters!

Drifterrider

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #68 on: April 13, 2017, 09:55:19 AM »
63/37 was 18.33% on our return, the summary on the tax forms shows marginal tax rate = 28.0% and effective tax rate = 22.1%

We need to find some more tax shelters!

63/37 = 58.7%

You need a better calculator first.  OR, you made a typo :)

Errol Flynn

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #69 on: April 13, 2017, 01:08:39 PM »
They were referring to lines 63 and 37 on their 1040

Proud Foot

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #70 on: April 13, 2017, 01:37:16 PM »
63/37 was 18.33% on our return, the summary on the tax forms shows marginal tax rate = 28.0% and effective tax rate = 22.1%

We need to find some more tax shelters!

63/37 = 58.7%

You need a better calculator first.  OR, you made a typo :)

Before accusing someone of needing a better calculator you might want to check yours first.  63/37 = 170%.  My guess is he was referring to the line numbers on his 1040. 63 =  Total Tax, 37 = AGI.


Grande

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #71 on: April 14, 2017, 07:43:07 PM »
Gross (W2s): $94,417
AGI: $53,891
Taxable Income $25,091
Tax: $2262
Effective Rate (per Turbotax): 0.31%
Tax/Gross: 2.40%

Anyone know how Turbo tax calculates effective tax rate?

Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5742
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #72 on: April 14, 2017, 07:45:54 PM »
Gross (W2s): $94,417
AGI: $53,891
Taxable Income $25,091
Tax: $2262
Effective Rate (per Turbotax): 0.31%
Tax/Gross: 2.40%

Anyone know how Turbo tax calculates effective tax rate?

My guess is tax/gross.

That's how I personally look at it.  And if I were selling tax software that was marketed on "you'll get a really low rate even if you're in the 15% bracket"... I'd REALLY look at it that way.

edit:my  fingers put the numerator/denominator upside down in my guessed formula

edit2:  Blargh.  I was looking at your tax/gross result on the right side while looking at "effective rate per turbotax" on the left.  Now I see those are on 2 different lines.   There is just no way in hell for me to come up with .31%.

If I solve for X:
Taxpaid / X = 0.0031
2262 / X = 0.0031
X = 729,677

In other words, to get .31%, your income would have to have been $730k.  I'm guessing somehow that is off by one order of magnitude -- either Turbotax slipped a decimal or maybe you did.

*IF* you are married filing jointly:
$94,417 - 12,600(standard deduction) - 2*4050(exemptions) = 73,717
2262 / 73,717 = 0.0306 or about 3.1%
« Last Edit: April 15, 2017, 08:45:32 AM by Spork »

ulrichw

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 86
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #73 on: April 14, 2017, 08:30:07 PM »
Federal: 23.5%
State (CA): 7.5%

Effective 31% income taxes combined.

Based on gross income.

Even though I hate some of the inefficiencies in our government, I've benefited from being born, living and working in this country, so I don't resent paying my way.

dude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #74 on: April 17, 2017, 11:10:21 AM »
Just finished mine.  16.33% effective income tax rate overall; 12.42% Fed, 3.91% state.

Didn't calculate overall tax burden (i.e., OASDI, Medicare, property taxes, sales taxes)

Gross income was $237,879, but deferred $42,000 in 401k's, $6,155 in non-taxed health benefits, plus deducted $13,693 in mortgage interest.

Non complaints at all about what I paid in taxes, other than the fact that a coterie of mindless GOP shitgibbons is now in charge of spending them.

TheFixer

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 79
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Middle 'Murikah
  • Getting smarter, 1 facepunch at a time
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #75 on: April 17, 2017, 02:36:00 PM »
Don't insult the gibbons. They're one of my favorites at the zoo.

Scortius

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 475
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #76 on: April 17, 2017, 10:23:48 PM »
Just filed on ~100k of reported wages.

Federal: 5.8%
State: 2.5%

That's insane!  Thank the Lord above for traditional retirement contributions and tax exemptions and credits for making and supporting babies!

Drifterrider

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #77 on: April 18, 2017, 07:50:12 PM »
Just filed on ~100k of reported wages.

Federal: 5.8%
State: 2.5%

That's insane!  Thank the Lord above for traditional retirement contributions and tax exemptions and credits for making and supporting babies!
Does this mean you have unreported wages?????

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 633
  • Location: Canada
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #78 on: April 18, 2017, 08:36:15 PM »
Just filed on ~100k of reported wages.

Federal: 5.8%
State: 2.5%

That's insane!  Thank the Lord above for traditional retirement contributions and tax exemptions and credits for making and supporting babies!
Does this mean you have unreported wages?????

As MMM says, your money is your employees. 401K money doesn't need to report their income.

Grande

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #79 on: April 21, 2017, 05:56:56 PM »
Gross (W2s): $94,417
AGI: $53,891
Taxable Income $25,091
Tax: $2262
Effective Rate (per Turbotax): 0.31%
Tax/Gross: 2.40%

Anyone know how Turbo tax calculates effective tax rate?

My guess is tax/gross.

That's how I personally look at it.  And if I were selling tax software that was marketed on "you'll get a really low rate even if you're in the 15% bracket"... I'd REALLY look at it that way.

edit:my  fingers put the numerator/denominator upside down in my guessed formula

edit2:  Blargh.  I was looking at your tax/gross result on the right side while looking at "effective rate per turbotax" on the left.  Now I see those are on 2 different lines.   There is just no way in hell for me to come up with .31%.

If I solve for X:
Taxpaid / X = 0.0031
2262 / X = 0.0031
X = 729,677

In other words, to get .31%, your income would have to have been $730k.  I'm guessing somehow that is off by one order of magnitude -- either Turbotax slipped a decimal or maybe you did.

*IF* you are married filing jointly:
$94,417 - 12,600(standard deduction) - 2*4050(exemptions) = 73,717
2262 / 73,717 = 0.0306 or about 3.1%

Don't know. Last year Turbotax spat out an effective tax rate of -0.91%. Yes that is a 'negative' sign in front of the zero. My tax paid bill was $1961. Gross income was essentially the same as this year. I put more into my wife's 401k. But the point is the negative tax rate yet positive tax bill.

I don't get it.

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7400
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #80 on: April 21, 2017, 06:08:14 PM »
Tax paid/AGI method:

19.4% Federal
7.9% State

27.3% total effective tax.

Could be worse, but depressingly high comparing to a lot of posts ahead of me(presumably many of those posts are from folks with spouses and/or children).

Grande

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #81 on: April 22, 2017, 04:37:06 AM »
Tax paid/AGI method:

19.4% Federal
7.9% State

27.3% total effective tax.

Could be worse, but depressingly high comparing to a lot of posts ahead of me(presumably many of those posts are from folks with spouses and/or children).

It is in my case. Married status and kids and you have some serious tax benefits. That and we went from two incomes to about 1.2 incomes with wife working only a few hours a week.

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #82 on: April 22, 2017, 09:03:03 PM »
18% federal and 3% state. Not bad, we could've put more into 401ks and brought them down a notch but plan to next year!

Exflyboy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8398
  • Age: 62
  • Location: Corvallis, Oregon
  • Expat Brit living in the New World..:)
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #83 on: April 26, 2017, 03:05:36 PM »
AGI was $80544.

Fed was 6% (line 63/line 37)
State was 6.75%... Greedy bastards in Oregon!

RE taxes are about $2100/yr.

Sales taxes are $zero.

Of course we maxed out our 401ks and Traditional IRAs.. so thats nearer 4.2% Fed and 5% state.

canonizer

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #84 on: April 26, 2017, 08:51:12 PM »
Is there an MMM mentality against Roth IRAs/401ks? My total was ~23% federal was 14.5% State 5.5% City 3.3%. Certainly could have reduced my taxable burden at the federal level by capping traditional retirement accounts instead of Roth but am 35...

Expensive housing costs (incl a healthy mortgage deduction) largely to thank.

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7400
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #85 on: April 27, 2017, 04:19:15 AM »
With MMMers the default assumption is often that we'll be living off significantly less annual income in FIRE than our annual income during the accumulation phase. This means we'd likely pay lower taxes in FIRE than our marginal rate today. That's the textbook definition of when traditional IRA/401k contributions are a better choice than Roth contributions.

The above is not a hard and fast rule that will work in every person's individual situation, but I think it does explain the general trend you are seeing.

Fomerly known as something

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1627
  • Location: CA
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #86 on: April 27, 2017, 05:15:26 AM »
All numbers are approximate, I did sell a rental last year so that didn't help.  The rental property was a holdover from being my primary residence in 2008 and it was not structured to be a good rental (out of state, building rules making finding renters a PITA.)  The structure of the sale (I really wanted it gone) also made it look like there was an additional $15,000 in profit since I gave back a sizeable credit. 

Federal:  18.5%
State:  3.8%
Property:  3.9%
City:  1%
NY non resident sale:  1.3%
FICA:  4.8%
Medicare: 1.4%

34.7% total.

Yes it sucks being single, but I'm overall OK with paying taxes.  Can't say I'm thrilled but I understand that it is paying for services that would not get funded by "donations." 
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 05:36:13 AM by neverrun »

canonizer

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #87 on: April 27, 2017, 06:42:09 AM »
With MMMers the default assumption is often that we'll be living off significantly less annual income in FIRE than our annual income during the accumulation phase. This means we'd likely pay lower taxes in FIRE than our marginal rate today. That's the textbook definition of when traditional IRA/401k contributions are a better choice than Roth contributions.

The above is not a hard and fast rule that will work in every person's individual situation, but I think it does explain the general trend you are seeing.

Got it and I've toyed w it in the past. I only moved to a Roth 401k last year so was effectively following the strategy in reverse (ie, my 20s were invested in a traditional 401k when a Roth didn't exist but would have made sense). Maybe I'll split the difference. AA is pretty aggressive at 50/50 VTI/VUG, with some residual exposure to single stocks picked up earlier in life.

edit: hmm, Roth probably still makes sense for me. Love my job, planning to work into my 40s or well beyond if it continues like it has. Retirement tax rate could easily exceed 14%. Maybe will examine flipping when earning more money, hopefully not too many years from now.

I don't mind 20 of the 23% but I cannot stand the way the state paws out my local tax money and then makes us feel grateful for whatever comes back.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 07:00:39 AM by canonizer »

Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5742
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #88 on: April 27, 2017, 07:59:20 AM »
Is there an MMM mentality against Roth IRAs/401ks? My total was ~23% federal was 14.5% State 5.5% City 3.3%. Certainly could have reduced my taxable burden at the federal level by capping traditional retirement accounts instead of Roth but am 35...

Expensive housing costs (incl a healthy mortgage deduction) largely to thank.

We went hard into Roths from the beginning.  We were sort of driven off of gut feelings.  (This was 1997, way before MMM.)   We also did 401ks, though didn't max them.

The funny thing: Post MMM, I would probably have gone heavier towards Traditionals/401ks due to the math presented here.  However, life happens and (for me) it looks like we actually did the right thing.  I inherited an IRA and the RMDs will actually invert the whole "taxes lower in retirement" philosophy.

BayAreaFrugal

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 62
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #89 on: April 27, 2017, 11:08:31 AM »
Total income after retirement savings: $95k
Taxable Income: $45k
Total Fed Tax: $1.2k
Total CA Tax: $0


Net rates are 1.2% Federal and 0% State


We have lots of deductions and exemptions totaling about $50k.

I had quite a similar year, but with a lower gross income due to maternity leave. Ended up at 0% CA tax and 2% Fed tax. I'm expecting it to be a bit higher this year, but not too much.

Philociraptor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1131
  • Age: 34
  • Location: NTX
  • Eat. Sleep. Invest. Repeat.
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #90 on: April 27, 2017, 12:37:44 PM »
With MMMers the default assumption is often that we'll be living off significantly less annual income in FIRE than our annual income during the accumulation phase. This means we'd likely pay lower taxes in FIRE than our marginal rate today. That's the textbook definition of when traditional IRA/401k contributions are a better choice than Roth contributions.

The above is not a hard and fast rule that will work in every person's individual situation, but I think it does explain the general trend you are seeing.

Got it and I've toyed w it in the past. I only moved to a Roth 401k last year so was effectively following the strategy in reverse (ie, my 20s were invested in a traditional 401k when a Roth didn't exist but would have made sense). Maybe I'll split the difference. AA is pretty aggressive at 50/50 VTI/VUG, with some residual exposure to single stocks picked up earlier in life.

edit: hmm, Roth probably still makes sense for me. Love my job, planning to work into my 40s or well beyond if it continues like it has. Retirement tax rate could easily exceed 14%. Maybe will examine flipping when earning more money, hopefully not too many years from now.

I don't mind 20 of the 23% but I cannot stand the way the state paws out my local tax money and then makes us feel grateful for whatever comes back.

Keep in mind that when you are adding to your traditional 401k you are saving taxes at your marginal rate, probably 25%. When you withdraw from it you take out at the effective rate, which is the ~14% you paid. So it makes sense to go traditional if you think your effective rate in retirement will be above your current marginal rate.

Laserjet3051

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 904
  • Age: 95
  • Location: Upper Peninsula (MI)
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #91 on: April 27, 2017, 02:21:16 PM »
AGI was $80544.

Fed was 6% (line 63/line 37)
State was 6.75%... Greedy bastards in Oregon!

RE taxes are about $2100/yr.

Sales taxes are $zero.

Of course we maxed out our 401ks and Traditional IRAs.. so thats nearer 4.2% Fed and 5% state.

Is 0% sales tax technically possible? No toilet paper for you in 2016?

dandarc

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5454
  • Age: 41
  • Pronouns: he/him/his
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #92 on: April 27, 2017, 02:29:05 PM »
AGI was $80544.

Fed was 6% (line 63/line 37)
State was 6.75%... Greedy bastards in Oregon!

RE taxes are about $2100/yr.

Sales taxes are $zero.

Of course we maxed out our 401ks and Traditional IRAs.. so thats nearer 4.2% Fed and 5% state.

Is 0% sales tax technically possible? No toilet paper for you in 2016?
When you live in a state with no sales tax, not too difficult.  Now, probably some sales tax was paid when out of state, but who wants to track that only to find out you paid more in state/local income tax and so can't deduct the sales tax anyway?

Malum Prohibitum

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #93 on: April 27, 2017, 03:05:53 PM »
0% fed - first time ever in my life
2.1% state

Actually, the fed rate should be negative (2%).  Some sort of child tax credit.


Of course, this favorable tax treatment came along with a terrible income year, so it is not all good news.


Do I win?
 

Exflyboy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8398
  • Age: 62
  • Location: Corvallis, Oregon
  • Expat Brit living in the New World..:)
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #94 on: April 27, 2017, 03:12:13 PM »
AGI was $80544.

Fed was 6% (line 63/line 37)
State was 6.75%... Greedy bastards in Oregon!

RE taxes are about $2100/yr.

Sales taxes are $zero.

Of course we maxed out our 401ks and Traditional IRAs.. so thats nearer 4.2% Fed and 5% state.

Is 0% sales tax technically possible? No toilet paper for you in 2016?
When you live in a state with no sales tax, not too difficult.  Now, probably some sales tax was paid when out of state, but who wants to track that only to find out you paid more in state/local income tax and so can't deduct the sales tax anyway?

Yup no sales tax in OR.. then we did spend some time in other States.. But also almost 8 weeks in the far East so who knows what those taxes were?..:)

effigy98

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 555
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #95 on: April 27, 2017, 03:31:49 PM »
I lump them all together to see how much "THE MAN" is getting from us.
18% Federal Tax
3.5% Property Tax
1.5% Sales Tax
1% Misc state/county taxes and fees
2.8% Social Security
1.2% Medicare
Total 28% of all income is not going to my stache.

260k Gross Income
  8 months of work, both of us took child leave so reduced income this year
12% Side Hustles, 88% W2
1 Child
2 properties
No state tax (WA)
Maxing out HSA, 401k, Roth (backdoor)

Edit... forgot some taxes
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 03:40:55 PM by effigy98 »

valsecito

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 116
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #96 on: April 27, 2017, 04:58:42 PM »
35k€ in net taxable income (after 13.07% of employee side social security contribution and 35.x% employer side social security contribution).
marginal tax rate from ~20k€ is 48.5%.
29.5% federal tax after every possible tiny tax optimisation: ~1.3k€ mortgage, 0.9k€ pension fund contrib, ...
2.21% local tax
21% VAT on most of the things I buy
250€ property tax on my small house
30% on the tiny bit of dividends I collect (up to 60% on some foreign dividends)
no capital gains tax

For next year's income, I'll be able to file jointly with my gf. That should offer some significant  optimisation opportunities. Either she will earn some money, or we will pay about 4k€ less taxes.

These taxes are much much higher than in the US, and I do feel they are too high. The other side of the medal is that they do help pay for quite a bit more than what one gets in the US: (almost) free very high quality universal healthcare, world class education at <1k€/year, decent care for all disabled, unlimited time unemployment benefits, quite good quality public transport, ...


The_Dude

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 203
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #97 on: April 27, 2017, 06:10:30 PM »
I paid 37.4% of gross wages in taxes.  It sucks.  If I apply that to AGI then the number is 41.2%

Break down compared to gross wages is:
Fed 25%
State 8%
SSN & Medicare 5%

Exflyboy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8398
  • Age: 62
  • Location: Corvallis, Oregon
  • Expat Brit living in the New World..:)
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #98 on: April 28, 2017, 04:22:48 PM »
I paid 37.4% of gross wages in taxes.  It sucks.  If I apply that to AGI then the number is 41.2%

Break down compared to gross wages is:
Fed 25%
State 8%
SSN & Medicare 5%

What you making a million a year or something?..:)

ibleedirish

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: Your 2016 net income tax rate
« Reply #99 on: May 23, 2017, 09:25:39 PM »
For 2016 I am paying 15.3k to federal, and 8.3k to state on 154k gross (another 6k in 401k matching).

Nets out to 14.7% in income taxes.  For as much as people whine about high taxes in the USA, I find my taxes are consistently lower than I think they should be given the state of our roads and schools.

All due respect, and i get your point, but isn't there also greater than 7% going to medicare and ss? It seems a little disingenuous not to include that in your 14.7% does it not? Maybe I'm thinking about this incorrectly though..

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!