Comments on: We’re #1! http://norunnyeggs.com/2008/12/were-1/ The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:40:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Shoebox http://norunnyeggs.com/2008/12/were-1/comment-page-1/#comment-36667 Shoebox Tue, 02 Dec 2008 22:19:41 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4006#comment-36667 Scott, it's based on actual taxes paid. Tax "rates" without the actual effect would be meaningless. No, it doesn't include any "usage taxes" i.e. sales or VAT, just individual income or income like i.e. Soc security taxes. OECD had a separate study looking at all taxes as a % of GDP. That study (if I remember correctly) showed he US as 4th amongst the OECD memebers in highest % of GDP..that included all taxes. Scott, it’s based on actual taxes paid. Tax “rates” without the actual effect would be meaningless.

No, it doesn’t include any “usage taxes” i.e. sales or VAT, just individual income or income like i.e. Soc security taxes. OECD had a separate study looking at all taxes as a % of GDP. That study (if I remember correctly) showed he US as 4th amongst the OECD memebers in highest % of GDP..that included all taxes.

]]> By: scott http://norunnyeggs.com/2008/12/were-1/comment-page-1/#comment-36665 scott Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:54:28 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4006#comment-36665 As it should be. Still I wonder if it's the official tax rate or the actual rate of taxation after incentives, loopholes, breaks, deductions, etc. As it should be. Still I wonder if it’s the official tax rate or the actual rate of taxation after incentives, loopholes, breaks, deductions, etc.

]]> By: steveegg http://norunnyeggs.com/2008/12/were-1/comment-page-1/#comment-36664 steveegg Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:35:20 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4006#comment-36664 The <a href="http://www.oecd.org/" rel="nofollow">Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development</a>, the original source of that chart, is a bit evasive on just what they include. However, judging by <a href="http://www.oecd.org/document/4/0,3343,en_2649_34533_41407428_1_1_1_1,00.html" rel="nofollow">a publicly-available chart from their report, "Revenue Statistics 1965-2007"</a>, that shows taxation in the US at about 27% of GDP, I would have to say that they include at least some of the state taxes. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the original source of that chart, is a bit evasive on just what they include. However, judging by a publicly-available chart from their report, “Revenue Statistics 1965-2007″, that shows taxation in the US at about 27% of GDP, I would have to say that they include at least some of the state taxes.

]]> By: scott http://norunnyeggs.com/2008/12/were-1/comment-page-1/#comment-36659 scott Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:21:26 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4006#comment-36659 Something about this doesn't seem right. How are these tax rates being figured? You say it includes Social Security. Does it include all payroll taxes? Does it include state taxes? Sales taxes? Fees? I suspect the real problem here, though, is that these are tax rates, not what people are actually paying. I happen to know, for instance, that while we have a pretty high corporate tax rate, most American corporations pay no federal income tax--and 90% of them pay 5% or less. Something about this doesn’t seem right. How are these tax rates being figured? You say it includes Social Security. Does it include all payroll taxes? Does it include state taxes? Sales taxes? Fees?

I suspect the real problem here, though, is that these are tax rates, not what people are actually paying. I happen to know, for instance, that while we have a pretty high corporate tax rate, most American corporations pay no federal income tax–and 90% of them pay 5% or less.

]]>