How much are we effectively paying in taxes?

[BenT]

I made this and put it out on Facebook, but I can't get a response to prove me wrong:

The American Dream was hocked.

I was trying to figure out how much of our money goes into taxes. Not just simple things like payroll and income taxes, but in everything you buy and do. Example:

If you buy a metal fork... It started out as ore in the ground and various fuels to produce electricity and heat. The land it was extracted from is taxed, the mine/well is taxed, the refining company is taxed, the company that processes metal into fork shapes is taxed, the transportation is taxed, the power plant is taxed, sales tax is paid every time a material is bought and sold between entities down to you... Everyone builds the cost of taxes into what they charge the next guy until it gets to the final end user.

Obviously, that's pretty tedious and darn near impossible to track because not everyone buys the same amount and kind of goods. So I decided the simplest way to get an idea for it is to look at total government revenue (Federal, state, and local) and divide by the total workforce. The best estimates I have are about 7 trillion dollars and 158 Million workers of all types. Again, everyone passes their taxes down to the next guy, so I think this is a valid approach.

If this is true, the average wage earner effectively pays $44,303 a year in taxes. The average yearly wage is $50,756...
If you're thinking international trade helps this number, remember that we are a trade deficit country. We bleed about $40 billion a month.

You want to know why there are countries like Ukraine where people make about $230 a month and yet don't die of starvation? Because their government isn't out of flipping control (yet.)

Maybe I'm wrong, and I would love to hear an explanation, but. I think there's something horribly wrong with our country and monetary system. I'm tired of these elected tyrants spending us into oblivion for one pet project or another.

America: The land of the fee and the home of the slave.

*****
So am I completely off base here? Are we living under far greater oppression than we could ever imagine? In medieval days, materials didn't pass through nearly as many taxed entities before reaching the average end user, thus less exponential growth of taxes.

The central bank, as vile and evil an institution as it is, only accounts for a portion of this. Social security is a Ponzi scheme that effectively spends more than it takes in. Even then, you're taxed on SS payments.

Does it track that effectively 87% of a wage-earner's income goes towards propping up our government?

[Kradmelder]

company tax on profits
company payroll tax
VAT (what you call sales tax at the till?)
fuel tax
annual income tax
alcohol, tobacco and sugar tax
import duties
transport tax on plane tickets and such
transfer duties on property
licence fee taxes on vehicles
capital gains tax
even estate tax when you die
skills levy tax
stamp duties on documents



http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/arch ... every-year

our taxes

Air passenger tax
Capital Gains Tax (CGT)
Corporate Income Tax
Customs Duties
Diamond Export Levy
Dividends Tax
Donations Tax
Estate duty
Excise duty
Income Tax
Mineral and Petroleum royalties
Pay As You Earn (PAYE)
Provisional Tax
Securities Transfer Tax*
Skills Development Levy (SDL)
Stamp duty
Transfer duty
Uncertificated Securities Tax*
Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF)
Value Added Tax (VAT)
Withholding Tax on Interest
TV licence


According to this, america is not so high on the tax list. Not even top 20
https://businesstech.co.za/news/wealth/ ... th-africa/

[BenT]

I'll quickly burn through some numbers for SA. I can't claim accuracy because I'm on a break.


Total tax collection for 2014/2015 1.22 Trillion
Divided by total employed (we'll average to 9 million)
135,555 ZAR

Average wage looks to be about 16K a month
192,000 ZAR

So that would effectively be 69.5% of wages pay taxes.

[Kradmelder]

I'll quickly burn through some numbers for SA. I can't claim accuracy because I'm on a break.


Total tax collection for 2014/2015 1.22 Trillion
Divided by total employed (we'll average to 9 million)
135,555 ZAR

Average wage looks to be about 16K a month
192,000 ZAR

So that would effectively be 69.5% of wages pay taxes.

there are only 4.8 million tax payers
https://www.moneyweb.co.za/archive/less ... olidarity/

1% of people pay 61% of all taxes. and 3 million pay 99% of all tax. Whitey of course

http://www.rollingalpha.com/2015/10/22/ ... ricas-tax/

This guy has a whole series of tax articles and it is pretty good. the above link is only 1.

[Moretorque]

They don't need the taxes they can just print the money if you have a national currency such as the US does, this is done so you cannot figure the system out and make you believe they need the taxes and to also slowly implement total control over the entire world.

Deficit spending also causes alot of the inflation we see and that is another tax. The same people who control the SA Rand control the $ as well.

If you have any complaints with this world wide dictatorship being erected about file them with the CITI, this is total top down control implemented through world wide monetary policy and ultimately enforced at gun point for those who object.

" Allow me to issue the currency and I care who not makes the laws " I believe who ever stated this has proven themselves to be correct!

[BenT]

@Krad You're looking at a very small piece of the puzzle. Income/payroll tax is basically front-loaded. What I'm talking about is that in addition to what you pay in the end. Every good and service you pay for with your income has been taxed multiple times as material and energy has changed hands multiple times.

Let's imagine you buy a product that's been through six different companies; from the raw materials to your hands. Ignoring all other taxes on services and processes, let's just look at what sales tax does.

Let's say it started with one dollar of material. Six companies to the shelf, each is adding only %10 to the cost to make a profit.

1.10^6= 1.77 or 77 percent increase.

Now if sales tax of 5% is added on top of that.
1.15^6= 2.31 or a 30 percent increase over cost.

But wait, you get to pay an additional 5% for sales tax. ($2.42)

So a mere 5% sales tax on our theoretical product increases your cost by 37%.

When you consider the cost structure of all other taxes built into product and services, it's truly staggering. And that is what I'm really getting at.

[Moretorque]

Your just figuring this out ? that's nothing. The average cost of a house in 1971 before they decoupled the $ internationally from gold payment was 30,000 $ and before the economy collapsed in 2008 was around a peak price of 315,000 say in 2006. That's over 10 fold inflation on housing in 35 years and they tell us inflation is around 3 % max...

Go research how much it cost to run the American government in 1913 before the Federal Reserve act and what the true inflation rate was as well at that time.

Lenin said we will get rid of the middle class with inflation and taxes, the government has stolen so much wealth from it's citizens it is incredible what con artist the people are who set this up.

Walter Burien had a site explaining where the stolen loot is the states have extracted out of it's debt serfs. It's called CAFR 1 I believe.

[BenT]

I've known the issue for a while, but I couldn't pin down a figure of how bad it was; to make it relatable.

Now the issue is how to fight back and make a profit off of this scenario. None of the sheeple around me will listen, let alone act. It's like being the only slave who will run away from the plantation.

Lord willing, I'm basically going to retire in a year or two. I'm 30, don't have a college degree, only ever worked blue collar, and I'm still going to leave behind the plantation 30-40 years... before >95% of my generation will even be able to.

That's insane. But it's actually possible.

[Kradmelder]

@Krad You're looking at a very small piece of the puzzle. Income/payroll tax is basically front-loaded. What I'm talking about is that in addition to what you pay in the end. Every good and service you pay for with your income has been taxed multiple times as material and energy has changed hands multiple times.

Let's imagine you buy a product that's been through six different companies; from the raw materials to your hands. Ignoring all other taxes on services and processes, let's just look at what sales tax does.

Let's say it started with one dollar of material. Six companies to the shelf, each is adding only %10 to the cost to make a profit.

1.10^6= 1.77 or 77 percent increase.

Now if sales tax of 5% is added on top of that.
1.15^6= 2.31 or a 30 percent increase over cost.

But wait, you get to pay an additional 5% for sales tax. ($2.42)

So a mere 5% sales tax on our theoretical product increases your cost by 37%.

When you consider the cost structure of all other taxes built into product and services, it's truly staggering. And that is what I'm really getting at.

It was mentioned in one of the links. Income tax is 35% of all tax, but most of the other taxes like the fuel levy, VAT, capital gains, company tax etc are paid largely by the rich because they spend far more, who are the same as the ones who pay most of the income tax. You can see in the Lorenz curve in link below 10% of population is paying over 60% of the VAT, fuel levy, and customs and excise tax. And all of this I buy with income I have already been taxed on. So a small fraction of the population (whitey) carries the rest who pay no tax at all.

This article shows that the top 10% pay 71% of all tax, a higher proportion than their share of income tax. 70% of the population score more than they pay in tax by direct transfers (handouts). These are almost 100% black. The upper decile (largely white) lose out big time. This does not include that whitey must also pay his own medical aid, pension, school fees, security etc even though he pays taxes for this for darkie to get free health care, education and policing. It would not be included because it is not a tax nor compulsory. But no white man would send his kid to a black school, rely on black police, nor go to a black hospital. We literally carry the monkey on our back. So do you in america, but your monkeys are just 15% of the population, not 90%. The FBI stats show that 75% of them are in prison, on parole, or have records. That means you not only pay their welfare, but the whole prison, correctional services, insurance and impacts of crime and the police system, albeit with far more people to subsidise it than us 4.5 million whites.

http://www.rollingalpha.com/2015/10/23/ ... -are-paid/

The obvious solution to reverse this trend is cull the ones taking far more than they contribute, and then making it worse by costing the prison system to house and feed and cloth them. The useless parasitic destructive mouths to feed. But that would be 'racist'. Things like commit certain classes of crime means you forfeit all rights to free medical, pension etc because you forfeit your place as a productive citizen. Use prisoners as slave labour on big infrastructure projects to pay back what they cost. Old style chain gangs. Or pay them a minimum wage minus costs of food clothes, breakages, and cost of the wardens. It wont happen as the parasites are the majority, hence the voter base.

In the USA the problem so probably not so much carrying a 75% parasite population but the cost of the huge military and all the foreign wars, as well as cash payouts to Israel and other nations. That eats up your tax. In america it is your middle class footing the bill through all the taxes. In SA it is largely upper class whites. Either way, the person paying the tax does not really get a fair return on his investment as it is being used to benefit others than those paying taxes.


Hausers law as shown in the link below. It shows government income does not change with changing tax rates, And increasing tax rate can result in less income as people will find no incentive to work more and starting cheating.

http://www.rollingalpha.com/2016/04/25/ ... fer-curve/

For sure this works here. I work only 25 hrs per week now and earn more than i need. If I generate a profit, the BEE partner takes 35% for doing nothing. For my share of the profit it is not worth it. So I only work enough to sustain my needs. The income on profit is not worth it if I hand over to darkie far more than I get for my effort. If they said hadn over 5 pct to darkie for doing nothing and I got 30% it would be worthwhile. So taxing productive people doesnt work. Alternatively, I could take leave and work offshore and bank it offshore. But I dont need the money so why go stay in some place I dont want to be?

Surely america is there. The productive find all sorts of ways to offshore to not pay tax for welfare and jew wars.

[Kradmelder]

I'll quickly burn through some numbers for SA. I can't claim accuracy because I'm on a break.


Total tax collection for 2014/2015 1.22 Trillion
Divided by total employed (we'll average to 9 million)
135,555 ZAR

Average wage looks to be about 16K a month
192,000 ZAR

So that would effectively be 69.5% of wages pay taxes.

My income tax alone is close to double that. You cant average as the vast majority pay no tax at all. so you need to average by the employed people that pay tax. say 3 million. That pushes up the average to R400k for every tax paying person. I am not sure what teh average wage is of those qualifying for tax is, but say 500k.

As an example of what an upper class person earns, lets work on R 1million per annum, as a low end and a round number. Assume i only worked enough to make no profit to avoid company tax. But i still had to pay 35% to a BEE partner who does nothing. This is a tax on a company if you make a profit or not, you must pay it. his is not a joke (1/8 of our salary bill for 40 people goes to 2 black people who do nothing and dont even come in to work and never bought shares. You have to give it to them), UIF and skills development levy, say another 50 000. So that is 400 000 before I made an income.

Income tax would be 250 000. If you spent another 600 000 of the remaining 70k, that would be another 84 000 just on VAT at 14%. of the remainder, you put the 150k into retirement savings are those are only taxed after you retire. Of that 600 000-84000, much of that is tax. Anything imported (all big purchases), could be up to 50% so say R100 000 , vehicle taxes of R1000, sin taxes another 5000.

I am already at R840k in taxes and i probably forgot a few. Dont forget when I die if I have 10 million, they take 15% of that as well.

[Kradmelder]

Interesting discussion. How long till it gets derailed with personal insults, aliens or conspiracies.

I also found this:

People pay up to 65 percent in direct and indirect taxes, says a retired bank economist in a report commissioned by the trade union Solidarity.

Although not everyone agrees, the union's general secretary, Flip Buys, said according to the research carried out by retired Absa Bank economist Adam Jacobs, the average taxpayer forks out around 25 percent of his salary in direct taxes and another almost 25 percent in indirect taxation like VAT, fuel levies and local government taxes.

He then pays another approximately 15 percent of his income for medical premiums, school fees, security company payments and other necessities for which he has, in fact, already paid through his taxes.


This double taxation means that the average taxpayer spends around 65 percent of his income before he can begin to take care of his family.

Buys said the average employee's net tax burden had gone up by approximately 200 percent since 1994. "The reason is that people are taxed to pay for services from the state, but they then have to pay extra for their own health care, education, safety, electricity, housing, pension and other services.

"In other words, the average employee works for the state from Monday to Wednesday. On Thursday he works for services like healthcare and education, which only leaves Friday's income for his family."

Of the country's 47 million people, eight million are employed in the formal sector. Only 4,6 million of these are taxpayers. The rest probably do not earn enough to be registered as taxpayers.

"Direct taxation comes to around 25 percent, which compares favourably with other countries," said Buys, "but only around 10 percent of taxpayers account for approximately 50 percent of taxes."

One out of four people in South Africa receive some kind of social grant from the government as opposed to only 4 percent in comparable countries like Brazil and Mexico. This means South Africa as a country has the largest welfare net outside Western Europe. The number of people receiving government grants has increased from around 2,6-million in 1994 to an estimated 12-million in the next financial year.

Head of tax at Mallinicks, Des Kruger, said these figures highlighted a very important issue: that while there had been significant income tax relief to taxpayers over the past couple of years, taxpayers continued to have to pay a number of indirect taxes that should be factored into any discussion of overall tax burden.

If one took all taxes paid as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, the overall tax burden had in fact increased slightly over the past couple of years. It was 23,2 percent in 2003/2004; 24,3 percent in 2004/2005; 26,1 percent in 2005/2006 and 27,1 percent in 2006/2007.

While a number of industrialised countries had higher tax-to-GDP ratios, these were usually those, such as the Scandinavian countries, that provided their citizens with a high level of social services, said Kruger.

http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/ ... pay-365848

So on average 65% for the 4.6 million taxpayers, and higher for the upper classes.

I dont believe the 1 in 4 gets handouts. Lately on the news with the corruption around social services they said there are 17 or 18 million REGISTERED grant recipients. that is is more like 30% of 55 million people receiving handouts. If they each have one kid on average, double that.

Data from KPMG which ranks the countries with the highest personal income tax, found that South Africa features among the top 50 highest income tax paying nations in the world.

With a peak income tax of 41%, the country ranks as the 31st highest tax-paying nation in terms of individual tax.

Previously, the country tied with Chile, Croatia and Uganda in 32nd position with a maximum tax rate of 40%.

In the 2016 tax year (1 March 2015 – 29 February 2016), South Africa’s highest tax rate increased to 41% for individuals earning over R701,301. All South African tax brackets have a base payment, with the percentage applying to the amount over that.

The data from KPMG looks at the highest possible personal income tax in the country, discounting the various tax brackets and conditions required to hit that level.

For example, in South Africa those earning below R70,700 per annum do not get taxed (R73 650, in 2016), while the entry bracket of 26% applies to those earning over R181,900.

According to a quarterly Labour Market Report by Solidarity, published earlier this week, only 3.3 million out of a total 33 million eligible tax payers in the country pay 93% of all personal income tax.

Worse still, only 3.7% – or 1.1 million people – pay just short of 70% of the total income tax received.

https://businesstech.co.za/news/wealth/ ... th-africa/

so 3.7% or 1.1 million people are basically paying a 'white tax', to carry 70% of the people. Each white that gets murdered or emigrates means a big decline in the revenue to dish out to parasites, or to steal.

[BenT]

GDP numbers are always suspect and incredibly misleading. Hauser's Law has been debunked. And what good is it when I have state and local taxes built in, too? That's way way more than 20%.

The reason I use averages is because 1) it affects everyone, albeit disproportionally. 2) I'm searching for a rate or percentage of taxation that can be compared across borders.

There's an adage that companies do not pay taxes, customers do. Even if they don't pay taxes, anybody who works for a wage suffers because of this. Leaches are a different subject all together.

[MrMan]

Your just figuring this out ? that's nothing. The average cost of a house in 1971 before they decoupled the $ internationally from gold payment was 30,000 $ and before the economy collapsed in 2008 was around a peak price of 315,000 say in 2006. That's over 10 fold inflation on housing in 35 years and they tell us inflation is around 3 % max...

I did a little work on a spreadsheet. At 3% the price should be around $89k. At 3.5% inflation, that would be about $107.3K. You could argue that land is more scarce because of population growth. With 31% more population that would be about $141K per house.

But square footage of the average US home has gone up over time. Estimating based on this chart, I'd say average square footage was 1500 in 1971. The chart starts at 1973.
https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sft ... vgsqft.pdf

Anyway, using those numbers and assumptions, we are looking at what should be about $67 a square foot costing about $94 a square foot in 2008. That was at the peak of a bubble, wasn't it? Or do you mean right after?

Based on this https://www.census.gov/construction/nrs ... icemon.pdf your price assumptions are probably off.

We should also consider that there may be reasons the price of housing is more expensive now. One reason may be building materials. Asbestos was a cheap material, I hear. Did they use it a lot in homes?

[Moretorque]

Your just figuring this out ? that's nothing. The average cost of a house in 1971 before they decoupled the $ internationally from gold payment was 30,000 $ and before the economy collapsed in 2008 was around a peak price of 315,000 say in 2006. That's over 10 fold inflation on housing in 35 years and they tell us inflation is around 3 % max...

I did a little work on a spreadsheet. At 3% the price should be around $89k. At 3.5% inflation, that would be about $107.3K. You could argue that land is more scarce because of population growth. With 31% more population that would be about $141K per house.

But square footage of the average US home has gone up over time. Estimating based on this chart, I'd say average square footage was 1500 in 1971. The chart starts at 1973.
https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sft ... vgsqft.pdf

Anyway, using those numbers and assumptions, we are looking at what should be about $67 a square foot costing about $94 a square foot in 2008. That was at the peak of a bubble, wasn't it? Or do you mean right after?

Based on this https://www.census.gov/construction/nrs ... icemon.pdf your price assumptions are probably off.

We should also consider that there may be reasons the price of housing is more expensive now. One reason may be building materials. Asbestos was a cheap material, I hear. Did they use it a lot in homes?

That is true only to a point, first off the new houses are so poorly made that if you let a good fart you could knock one down. The old block n Brick houses of smaller footage are going up in value just as much if not more because people with a brain want better made homes.

In my neighbor hood even when other areas go down in price like in the 08 crash prices stay high here because the old homes were made so much better.

The new houses are way easier to make, if you tried to build our house with the materials and craftsmen ship they used 60 and 100 years ago the prices would have been at least double the inflated prices they are now.

Simply put the banks ( credit monopoly ) are running a con job on the citizens of the world as they stated they would in the communist writings....We need monetary reform quick because only the credit monopoly and their party members will own anything shortly. This is nothing but taxes and inflation based on legalized counterfeiting at the core designed to strip the citizenry of this planet of the fruits of their labor.

[Kradmelder]

Your just figuring this out ? that's nothing. The average cost of a house in 1971 before they decoupled the $ internationally from gold payment was 30,000 $ and before the economy collapsed in 2008 was around a peak price of 315,000 say in 2006. That's over 10 fold inflation on housing in 35 years and they tell us inflation is around 3 % max...

I did a little work on a spreadsheet. At 3% the price should be around $89k. At 3.5% inflation, that would be about $107.3K. You could argue that land is more scarce because of population growth. With 31% more population that would be about $141K per house.

But square footage of the average US home has gone up over time. Estimating based on this chart, I'd say average square footage was 1500 in 1971. The chart starts at 1973.
https://www.census.gov/const/C25Ann/sft ... vgsqft.pdf

Anyway, using those numbers and assumptions, we are looking at what should be about $67 a square foot costing about $94 a square foot in 2008. That was at the peak of a bubble, wasn't it? Or do you mean right after?

Based on this https://www.census.gov/construction/nrs ... icemon.pdf your price assumptions are probably off.

We should also consider that there may be reasons the price of housing is more expensive now. One reason may be building materials. Asbestos was a cheap material, I hear. Did they use it a lot in homes?

That is true only to a point, first off the new houses are so poorly made that if you let a good fart you could knock one down. The old block n Brick houses of smaller footage are going up in value just as much if not more because people with a brain want better made homes.

In my neighbor hood even when other areas go down in price like in the 08 crash prices stay high here because the old homes were made so much better.

The new houses are way easier to make, if you tried to build our house with the materials and craftsmen ship they used 60 and 100 years ago the prices would have been at least double the inflated prices they are now.

Simply put the banks ( credit monopoly ) are running a con job on the citizens of the world as they stated they would in the communist writings....We need monetary reform quick because only the credit monopoly and their party members will own anything shortly. This is nothing but taxes and inflation based on legalized counterfeiting at the core designed to strip the citizenry of this planet of the fruits of their labor.

I see the same thing. The build quality on new homes is so poor. They crack so quick and the design is entertainment rather than family home. Everything breaks fast. They are also small bedrooms and small plot and garden, only large open plan entertainment area.

Talking of appreciation, my current house i bought 19 years ago and paid of in 10 so didnt pay much interest to the jews. Market value is 10 times what i paid.

I added on and renovated maybe 75 pct of purchase price.

But our inflation rate and interest rate is higher than yours