417
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
417 points (97.5% liked)
People Twitter
9132 readers
213 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Could you give an example of a year in which the top 1% paid enough taxes to satisfy this condition?
To support around a 1% shortfall in fica, fica is about .5% of all income (feel free to fact check, I guessed a bit), 1950 fits the bill for their actual paid percentage of 41% vs their statutory 89%.
Edit: it'd be interesting to know how much of a fica shortfall 4% taxes on the 1% would cover. Somewhere in the range of 50-150% is my guess. Seems more than the projected shortfalls. Now, if they got taxed at 91% for real, noone else would have to pay [much] income tax, and they could raise fica on the rest of us without objection.