Slashdot Mirror
Seattle City Council Unanimously Approves Income Tax For the Rich (geekwire.com)
reifman writes: Amazon, tech employees and those making $250,000 or more annually in Seattle will now pay a 2.25 percent income tax. "The Seattle City Council estimates that the tax would bring in an additional $140 million each year," reports GeekWire. "The revenue would go toward the city's housing affordability agenda and carbon reduction goals and supplant federal funds if they are cut. The revenue is also intended to alleviate the burden of Washington's property and sales taxes, which are often called the most regressive in the country." Anyone who's seen Amazon's impacts on Seattle and its low and middle income residents will appreciate how this tax will help the homeless, lower income and improve the environment. Not everyone is thrilled with the recently approved legislation. Jason Mercier, who directs the center for government reform with the Washington Police Center, said: "[The council is] going to unanimously adopt an illegal income tax that has no hope of taking effect and will waste taxpayer resources on litigation the city is sure to lose." The measure is expected to be challenged in court, as Washington's constitution states "a county, city, or city-county shall not levy a tax on net income." According to The Washington Post, Mercier said there is decade of case law saying that a graduated income tax is unconstitutional because income is property and under the constitution, property tax has to be taxed uniformly and no more than 1 percent.
Whenever I hear "top 1%" alarm bells go off. This isn't about needing to raise money to run the city, it's about heliopause SJWs trying to steal money.
Worth noting that according to Source Watch, the Washington Policy Center receives funding from the Koch brothers and pushes agenda items from American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in the state.. Take that as you will per your political leanings.
Yeah, that was my first thought, when did $250K a year define you as rich?
Sure in many parts of the US, that is a lot of money and you can live comfortably...but not excessive.
But in other parts, that is NOT a high salary....especially in the larger metropolitan areas on the east and west coast.
I don't think you should have to supplement people to live in a city...either you can afford to live there, or you can't...the US is plenty large enough, with cities and places that don't cost an arm and a leg, and yes...there are jobs there.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
$250K is plenty. I make half that, and live in the Seattle area, and I'm quite comfortable. Big house, 3 cars, 2 kids in private school. By the standards of a spoiled brat I'm just middle-class, but by any sane definition, I'm well-off. $250K a year in Seattle is rich, and anyone who says otherwise just needs to adjust their expectations.
I notice the American Right wing is all in favor of local government right up until they do something they don't like. Then they want the State gov't to step in and outlaw it. The State gov'ts seem about perfect. Big enough to oppress but not so big they can't just buy them all out.
I think that Seattle gets it wrong, but I support the ability of a local or state government to make this determination for themselves. In fact, I think that the federal income tax should be abolished entirely and that states should be funding the federal governments out of their tax revenues. Of course, this would mean that states would have to tax income more at levels like what the federal government does. In fact, if you study the federal republic concept that forms the basis of the US, that is how it should be. The federal government today is far larger, more bureaucratic, and more powerful than the founders could have imagined.
Right now, if the federal government lowers or raises income taxes, then your only choice is to comply or run afoul of the law. In the state-based arrangement I mentioned above, the federal government would have to convince the states that it is in their best interests to fund whatever thing the federal government is proposing. That would act as a very effective check on the ever increasing power and size of the federal government. On top of that, if states choose not to comply it effectively acts as a form of pocket veto (because you cannot through an entire state in jail). Same as when some countries refuse to pay their UN dues, or whatever. If a large enough amount of money gets withheld then the job can't get done. It would make sure only truly worthwhile things get funded.
But then, I also favor a return to state legislatures selecting Senators. I don not think it likely that either popular election of Senators or the federal income tax will be repealed. But I still think they are good ideas.
Note: I don'y really know why I am replying here, as it seems anytime I pop up in anything even remotely political my posts get hit with an avalanche of "overrated" mods; it seems moderators believe "overrated" == "disagree". At least some of them have the intestinal fortitude to mod troll (even if I am not trolling), but then they probably are secure in their thoughts and ideas and can handle their mods being metamoded. So, I'll probably get modded to oblivion, but oh well.
What I'd want to know that the article doesn't state is whether that's a marginal tax, or a total tax.
When it comes to federal income tax at least, the rates are all marginal. The top tax rate is 39.6%, but that doesn't mean if you make $500k you're paying 39.6% of that. Rather, you only pay 39.6% of everything you make over the limit. You'd pay 10% on the first $9325, 15% on $9326 to $37,950, etc etc on up the scale. You only pay 39.6% of the last $81,599, since the 39.6% kicks in at $418401+ (as of 2017 at least).
So if it's 2.25% of everything over 250k, that's not going to kill anyone making that sort of money, because the guy making $251k owes exactly $22.50.
Thanks for the link.
District of Columbia – 4% on the first $10,000, 6% between $10,000 and $40,000, and 8.5% over $40,000
I guess in that instance it's poetic justice, since so many people in DC feed at the public trough. They're basically just a digestive system transforming federal taxpayer money into municipal taxpayer money, removing 91.5% of the value in the process.
lucm, indeed.
At any rate, those rich aren't really paying much in the way of taxes even if this particular tax is allowed to take effect.
For someone making $250k, that's a $6k tax. It's not bankruptcy but it's like buying the city two venti mochas at Starbucks every day. Just so they can play Social Justice and throw money out the window on misguided programs. Fuck that.
lucm, indeed.
The trouble is that those on the low end INVARIABLY end up with some huge and impossible expense. Because life just throws that shit at people. And when you've never earned enough to cover more than the basics, saving money has never really been an option - and the expenses that dumb luck throws your way are usually bigger than you could ever possibly cover with those savings, so debt becomes the only option - and even those who had spent years or decades being responsible are driven to abject poverty by dumb luck.
You mentioned medical expenses but there are so much more - a 45 dollar parking ticket you can't pay, handed over to a private debt collector firm will likely end up being 3000 dollars or more by the time you manage to pay it off. That only ever happens to those who don't have the 45 dollars when the ticket comes of course. This happens with alarming frequency in America.
And of course, crap luck tends to come in bunches. I am a high-earner - and I was nearly destroyed by a series of bad luck events. It started when my daughter needed a life-saving operation -and the insurance refused to pay. Massive bill - and it had to go on a credit card that was only supposed to exist for emergencies (no remember - I was debt-free the month before). That same month my car's engine blew up - and since I have to get to work and have no feasible public transport in my city, that had to be paid on the credit card too. A few more bad things happened -and within 3 months I went from zero debt to owing roughly 5 times my monthly salary in short-term debt - most of it credit card debt.
Suddenly debt repayments was eating up 2/3rds of my monthly income - leaving just barely enough to cover the bills and food. I was actually shifting food money into a seperate account on payday so that, if I fall short, I guarantee my family can eat even if that means missing a bill !
I was lucky though - being a high earner I had made investments, specifically I owned an appartment in a very expensive neighbourhood which I was renting out. In the end - that gave me a way out of this debt trap. I sold the apparthment AND my house, and bought a nicer, bigger house which was, nonetheless, cheaper than the combined value of both properties - sufficiently so that I was able to pay of all the debt. I now only owe my house bond and my car financing. But how many of those 25K a year people do you know who own an upscale appartment to rent out ?
And of course, the price I paid for my decision was to lose that valuable investment. That appartment was worth far more in rental income over the long term than it would ever sell for. I had to cash in the smaller value, because that money comes today.
That income was supposed to be part of my retirement, now I'll have to make that up with other investments and hope I never again end up with a series of bad luck bills that force me to use up all my savings, go into debt and cash in my investments to survive.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Rich people have people to do their yards, clean their pool, cook their food, clean their houses and drive them where they want to go in a car that cost more than I'll make in my lifetime. That's rich. 250K is living comfortably with no worries.
You've just described a well paid techie's life in Seattle or the SF Bay Area
They buy a townhouse or highrise condo, so someone else takes care of the landscaping; the pool cleaning is included in the HOA; they get free food at work and when they are at home they get meals delivered; they have a cleaning service come once a week to clean the house; they have their Uber driver take them where they want to go.
I don't make nearly $250K but could lie such a lifestyle if I chose.
Did he work 5x longer or harder than the median Joe who only makes $51k? Or the guy working two full-time minimum wage jobs to make $32k?
Almost certainly not. He was in the right place at the right time, had the right connections, etc. Income in the US is based more on luck than effort or skill.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.