Reed Hastings, the CEO of Netflix, offered an interesting Op-Ed piece in the New York Times this week. Hastings joins the ranks of Ben Stein and Warren Buffet in calling for tax raises for… the ultra rich.
Hastings believes that those in the upper classes, like himself, can afford to pay more in taxes – and that to celebrate their contributions rather than shame their compensation – would be inspirational and helpful to all Americans. I’d say it’s a novel idea but it seems to be one attracting more and more popularity these days. Daschle aside, most wealthy Americans, it seems really want to pay their fair share.
Hasting suggests:
Perhaps a starting place for “tax, not shame” would be creating a top federal marginal tax rate of 50 percent on all income above $1 million per year. Some will tell you that would reduce the incentive to earn but I don’t see that as likely. Besides, half of a giant compensation package is still pretty huge, and most of our motivation is the sheer challenge of the job anyway.
A certain rate for income above a million is fine, as well as rates for say 100,000 to a million, 20,000 to 100,000 and income under 20,000 that applied to everyone and no matter what the source of income and with no deductions or credits would simplify things immensely.
His suggestion of 50 % seems a bit much though. Perhaps under a simple system it would be on congress to fix the rates for each level for the next tax year and signed into law by the president. Then you would really have politicians competing on who could keep taxes the lowest. The lowest tier would probably at or near 0% helping the poorest and each level would apply when the earner receives the income.
If most of CEO motivation comes from the “sheer challenge of the job” operating in these conditions should be enough challenge to keep them well enough motivated to work for the proposed $500k limit + limited sale of shares compensation. Paying more taxes is a noble gesture; however, 50% of what these folks make is still leaving them a fortune. I’m not against people earning more money, but for anyone to have the audacity to claim that they are worth 400 times the average salary is sick and almost criminal when this amount is being paid for by retirement fund investors.
How about 60% above $1million, ratcheting up as the income goes up so that the person’s net is $400,000 (the same as the income of the President of the US). No exclusions for personal incorporation or moving to another country. If you make money in the US, then your whole worldwide personal income is taxed as if its made in the US. That would mean that at a certain point the income is taxed 100%. No deductions for charity or business expenses at these levels, either. Buffett, Soros, Immelt, Gates, most movie celebrities, etc-they support progressive causes and should the ultra rich pay these rates, these rich would pay a majority of taxes in the US.
If we are going to make rich people pay more taxes, I’m not sure what’s more important: increase the tax rate or closing up the loopholes.
I am amazed that their are so many Marxists, Communists among us. Especially after this kind of thinking made the Nazis and the Soviets so lavish and desirable.
Although Nazis were neither Marxist nor Communist. 😉 Hitler was not a fan of either.
The Nazis were Socialist.
I see no problem with more brackets and higher rates for 1,000,000 plus, but to say most wealthy people want to pay more taxes based on the musings of some celebrities is just plain silly. I am sure if I polled my clients, the results would be far less than 50% who want to pay more.
Well that’s the progressive’s price of success. I dislike Limosuine Liberals. If the rich-progressive crowd wants the programs- then their brackets should so reflect.
Where does anyone get this idea that if I earn something and someone is willing to pay me a certain amount to perform a service, that somehow YOU are entitled to some of it?
And taking something from me…how does that help you? Whay are you a control freak? Didn’t anyone teach you to mind your own business instead of everyone elses?
As for Mr. Hastings….no one is stopping him, or anyone else from send any amount over the minimum that they want. If he wants, he can send 100% of his income to the IRS. Why does he think he has a right to take something from me?
(not that any of this affects me. I’m a long long way from any of these income amounts).
From that perspective, few could disagree with you Ken. Who really wants something they’ve earned taken from them? That is a very valid point, to be sure. Twenty years ago CEOs made, on average, 45 times that of an average employee. Over the past 20 years, the median wage of middle class workers hasn’t increased more than a few percentage points, while that of the top 5% has increased over 500%. I reject the notion that those people are the only ones, or even the primary ones who stand to benefit from the provision of said goods and services. Not to mention the various other things that benefit from taxes that everyone uses and takes for granted, like roads, fire departments, police departments, public schools, medical research, etc…
The fact of the matter is, without these services you wouldn’t be able to do business, and you wouldn’t have a customer base available to afford the goods and services you provide. We’ve got a hybrid of capitalism and socialism at work here, like it or not, and no pure version of either will serve Americans or citizens of any other democracy better. I don’t think anyway, I could be wrong.