Should the U.S. raise taxes on the rich?
In 2022 individuals and families with a combined income of $647K or more pay the top US federal Income tax rate of 37%. Countries with higher top income tax rates include Japan (56%), Denmark (55%) and Israel (50%.)
62% Yes |
36% No |
56% Yes |
28% No |
6% Lower the income tax rate and remove all existing tax loopholes for large corporations |
3% No, but lower taxes for the poor |
1% Yes, and raise taxes on all income brackets |
3% Reform to a flat tax |
1% No, keep the current tax structure |
See how support for each position on “Taxes” has changed over time for 3.8m America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Taxes” has changed over time for 3.8m America voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from America users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@8L3YX3B3yrs3Y
Tax according to income. Rich should pay slightly more and adjust for those in lower income.
@Jones4Potus2024Independent 7mos7MO
Yes, and close the tax haven loop hole
@8C5GN894yrs4Y
Remove loopholes for the rich and ensure they are unable to use tax shelters.
@97Z2WVL1yr1Y
Yes, and close tax loopholes that only benefit the rich
@TruthHurts10111mos11MO
“The power to tax involves the power to destroy,” observed Chief Justice John Marshall. “The power to destroy may defeat and render useless the power to create.” He was right – entire civilizations have risen and fallen based on tax rates, and unthinkable economic damage has been wreaked by the wrecking ball called taxation: endless waves of recessions, supply-chain crises, and most notably the Great Depression, the most deadly economic disaster in modern history. This does not apply only in America – the devastating power of taxation has been a constant… Read more
@8J3FG9M4yrs4Y
Simplified tax rates, fewer deductions. Low tax rates overall but the wealthy should not be able to avoid paying a higher percentage than the middle class.
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Taxes” news articles, updated frequently.
@ISIDEWITH5 days5D
California has spent $24 billion to combat homelessness over the last five years—and what did it get for its money? More homelessness, according to a new state audit that should embarrass Sacramento and infuriate taxpayers.The Legislature charged state auditor Grant Parks with reviewing the state’s homeless spending as the numbers camping on streets rise. Alas, his report this week concludes that the state “lacks current information on the ongoing costs and outcomes of its homelessness programs.”The agency in charge “has not consistently tracked and evaluated the State’s efforts to prevent and end homelessness,” he adds. Translation: California has been wasting billions of dollars to no good effect.According to the audit, 181,399 people were homeless at some point in 2023, up from 118,552 in 2013 and 151,278 in 2019. “To address this ongoing crisis, nine state agencies have collectively spent billions of dollars in state funding over the past five years administering at least 30 programs dedicated to preventing and ending homelessness,” Mr. Parks writes.Yet he found that only two programs “appear” to be “cost-effective.” Emphasize “appear.” One program converted existing buildings such as hotels into homeless housing at a $144,000 cost per unit. This was less expensive than the $380,000 to $570,000 per unit it cost to build new affordable housing in 2019. But there’s little evidence that the program kept people off the streets.Another program provided financial assistance to people who were deemed at risk of homelessness, which cost about $12,000 to $20,000 per household. The auditor found this was less expensive than the $30,000 to $50,000 a year that each homeless person costs taxpayers, including public safety and healthcare.But getting the mentally ill and drug-addicted homeless into treatment and jobs is surely the most cost-effective solution. Progressives oppose the tough love required of both. They prefer pushing more money into housing that doesn’t address the dysfunction of the homeless.
@SoulfulC0nservat1ve1wk1W
Why are the politicians rushing to have taxpayers pay the full cost of rebuilding the Baltimore bridge when there is a shipping company and insurance companies who should pay. There is a long history of fixing maritime disasters being funded by the responsible parties. Why are Republicans rushing to…
@ISIDEWITH2wks2W
Moscow could potentially boycott certain French goods, Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokeswoman warned on Sunday, after Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo said Russian and Belarusian athletes were “not welcome” at the upcoming Olympics.”Do you think maybe we should pick up some French products that are now widely represented in Russia and announce that ‘they will not be welcome’?” Maria Zakharova wrote on Sunday on her Telegram channel.The mayor of the French capital, which is due to host the Olympics in July and August, made her comments last week during a trip to Kiev, where she visited a training center for Ukrainian athletes.”I want to tell the Russian and Belarusian athletes that they are not welcome in Paris,” she said, despite contestants from both countries being officially allowed to take part as neutrals.Responding on the mayor’s words, Zakharova noted that Russia has “a huge selection of [goods] that can be used to replace a number of French products.”She predicted that if further statements of that kind are made in Paris, “representatives of French business will storm the Paris City Hall, following the farmers.” She was apparently referring to agriculture workers rallying against rising costs, taxes, and strict EU regulations. In late February, protesting farmers stormed a major Paris farm fair ahead of a visit by President Emmanuel Macron, with many calling for his resignation.After the start of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) recommended that athletes from Russia and its close ally Belarus should not be allowed to compete in international events. In December last year, the body ruled that a limited number of people from the two countries could participate in the Olympics as AINs (individual neutral athletes).Earlier this month, the international body announced that the maximum number of Russians who can qualify for the Paris Games is 55, while Belarus is limited to 28 athletes. However, according to IOC director James Macleod, the teams are unlikely to meet the quotas, with some 36 Russian and 22 Belarusian athletes expected to make it to the games.Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that the IOC decision “destroys Olympic ideals and discriminates against the interests of Olympians.” The restrictions are “absolutely contrary to the entire ideology of the Olympic movement,” he added.
Explore other topics that are important to America voters.
