Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: What is my "fair share"?

Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 11, 2011, 1:12 p.m. EST by MisterG (53)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I run a small company with 12 employees, who are paid above market and work locally (in San Francisco). The business is very profitable and I make more than $344k or whatever is being called 1%. After federal and state, my taxes come out to around 49%, so about half of my money. I am not aware of any obviously tax loop holes...I just pay my taxes. Perhaps my accountant is not very savvy but I don't like to do dodgy things anyway.

I keep hearing that the 1% is not paying their 'fair share' and that we need to 'increase taxes on the rich'.. I know I pay much more than most people in both absolute amounts and in percentage. So how much IS my 'fair share'?

43 Comments

43 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by pitmaster (16) 12 years ago

I have also expressed this concern; I'm in senior management at a small company; well-educated, worked extremely hard and long to get where I am, my family enjoys a very confortable lifestyle. Our pre-tax income averages low seven-figures; our adjusted tax rate is also around 49% . We financially support many programs that aid the needy; I willout support any entitlement programs. What is my 'fair share'?......how much more should my family contribute?

[-] 2 points by BrainC (400) from Austin, TX 12 years ago

It is in the mentality. They, the ones saying you should pay more, have a zero-sum mentality. See this thread for a discussion on it.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/who-here-believes-that-wealth-is-static/

So, since they have a zero-sum mentality, you can only make money by taking it away from someone else, stealing, tricking, cheating. Now you and I know this is not true, but they seem to have this mentality. So this makes it acceptable for the government to TAKE that money that you stole, back from you.

So your question on what is your "fair share" is arbitrary. More than what you pay now! To the point of lowest common denominator.

However, I somehow think you already knew this, and you simply posed the question to provoke thought.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 12 years ago

Why is it that the people in these kinds of threads run "generic companies"?

Every single one of them.

[-] 1 points by hahaha (-41) 12 years ago

Why is it that you sidestep the question?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 12 years ago

Because, without a valid definition of the term "fair share". It's not a valid question.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

The point of this thread is exactly that-- what is my 'fair share'? How much should I be paying, if 49% is not enough?

If "more than almost everyone" is not my 'fair share' of taxes, then I would like to know what is.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 12 years ago

You should offer your own definition.

[-] 0 points by hahaha (-41) 12 years ago

And isn't that the point? Nothing like whipping out 'not valid' when you're being asked to validate 'fair share.'

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

I run a small software development studio in San Franciso. We make applications for several platforms, but lately primarily iOS and Android. I just did not think it was particularly relevant.

[-] 0 points by foreverleft (233) 12 years ago

Here's what I want. I want to be able to plan a trip on google or yahoo maps on my PC (not Apple) in the comfort of my living room and by email or some other means, get it into my iPhone and somehow load that trip into the nav in my car.

Or it could be application specific, my GPS is a Garmin in a Kenwood HU which my iPhone communicates by BT, I don't really care how it all works out but the concept of planning a route in comfort and transferring it to a car GPS is a gold mine get to work on it and cut me in later. You get that app into the app store and I will pay you for it.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

You see? This is how little startups happen. Build the app and sell it. Sounds like a good idea. You can be in the 1% too.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

I knew you were full of shit.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

Woah, no need to get nasty, GirlFriday. What about that was full of shit? He was obviously being tongue-in-cheek but its a good idea for an app, and people do exactly this--start up a small company with a little idea that is relatively affordable to implement. And they get rich doing it.

Anyway this is a tangent on the real point of this thread. I am trying to be polite and reasonable to everyone-- I would hope that this could be reciprocated.

[-] 0 points by USCitizenVoter (720) 12 years ago

Ford Motor company has the technology in their vehicles it's microsoft sync. go on the internet, map out trip, send to your phone number, get in your ford vehicle, the download happens automatic, the vehicles system gives you voice turn by turn directions. Sorry your too late. that's sync services traffic and directions

[-] 0 points by Spankysmojo (849) 12 years ago

They fear reprisal...unfair unwarranted reprisal. Not all rich people are evil. It's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to pass through the gates of heaven....but not impossible!

[-] 1 points by PandoraK (1678) 12 years ago

I really don't think it's you, personally, that is included in the issue over fair share, I think it's more likely it's those who accumulate money for the sake of accumulating money that is the issue.

I'm not even all that fond of the 'numbers' games that get played so often, statistics can be manipulated pretty easily.

The guy who earns $250,000.00 gross, probably does make more annually than at least 80% of the general population, that doesn't mean he has that much disposable income. The guy who 'earns' $25,000,000.00 gross, definitely makes more than 99% of the general population, which also includes you.

It's a pretty safe bet the second guy has a good bit more disposable income than you do.

So if you are paying around 49% of your gross and he's paying around 20% of his gross, it would appear that you are the one getting the short end of the stick.

So compared to your contribution his contribution would not seem like much of a fair share would it?

I think though I've seen the proposal of a 1% increase for the wealthiest portion of our citizenry...1% of the adjusted gross isn't that much when you get right down to it.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 12 years ago

The effective tax rate on the top 400 "earners" in the US is 16%.

I suggest that in the grand scheme of things you are paying far closer to your "fair share" than many people who make far more than you.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

Yes, one detail to keep in mind when looking at that kind of statistic: top earners who pay rates that low are generally paying dividend income rates as opposed to regular income. Dividend income is, of course taxed at a much lower rate, but the money has already been taxed once at the corporate rate of 35%. As a shareholder in those companies, these earners own a piece of them. The money made by the company is taxed, and THEN given to this 'owner', and then again taxed at 15% or so. It's still not an unreasonable rate, even combining the two taxations I suppose, but I get nervous about math that is being used to mislead or tell an incomplete story.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 12 years ago

S-Corps and partnerships do not tax, they distribute income as pass-through, so there is no double taxation. Many corporate deductions go to things like executive pay, decreasing tax liability. Tax law is riddled with loopholes and exemptions for corporations.The "effective" corporate tax rate is nowhere near 35%, and many corporations pay no taxes and get substantial subsidies from the government (taxpayer).

The taxing of dividends and capital gains at rates far far below those for services and labor devalues services and labor and rewards people with lots of money who produce nothing (the so-called "job creators").

[-] 1 points by motherof4 (44) 12 years ago

To MisterG, I just read your article and all the comments; I agree with your position and I think you point out a very key vulnerability in the OWS movement - who exactly are they against when they speak of the 1%? By identifying themselves as the 99%, they've presumed to speak for almost the entire country, but obviously, many people such as yourself are guilty of nothing and already taxed at a practically socialist rate.

OWS should focus on the obscenely wealthy, the .1% if you will, particularly those who have benefitted from crony captialism. Addressing systemic problems of abuses in the system, like Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac directors getting bonuses for each (undocumented) mortgage it purchased - most of which are now in default. Why haven't any of those individuals ever been indicted?

How about trying to change STATE laws to make it far, far easier to hold the directors of companies liable for breach of their fiduciary duties when they rubber stamp grotesque pay packages, bonus, exit packages, etc to their officers - whether the company is private or public? Maybe then we'd have some people paying attention.

OWS needs to just focus and make an effort not to alienate hard working people, like you. Without the thousands of small business owners in this country, we'd be up the creek.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

Thanks, motherof4.

[-] 1 points by Spankysmojo (849) 12 years ago

That is a personal issue. No one here knows what your expenses and donations are. Sounds like you're one of the good guys so that's why the people on this forum that want to punish the criminals are right on. You can't punish people who earned it fairly. If that were the case we'd have to occupy Oprah and all the pro athletes and movie stars, rock stars, rappers... You may get a break if OWS gets this point across.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

Hm when celebrities (like Kanye) show up at OWS they get royal treatment. I don't think anybody is going to be 'occupying' celebrities. Anyway, thanks for saying I'm one of the good guys, and I do try to play fair. Still, I remain a target of desired tax increases, so I still am having trouble finding out what my 'fair share' is supposed to be.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage. They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses. They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization. They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices. They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions. They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right. They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay. They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility. They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance. They have sold our privacy as a commodity. They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press. They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit. They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce. They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them. They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil. They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit. They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit. They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media. They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt. They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad. They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas. They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.*


Are you involved in any of the above? Probably not. Top 1% would include people like John Corzine, David M. Rubenstein, or Wilbur Ross Jr.

Are you running insurance and denying health care? Are you a war profiteer? Are you hiring scientists to kick out false studies? Then I fail to see what the problem is.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

Then why are they trying/threatening to increase MY taxes?

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Who is "they"?

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

Obama is pushing hard for increased taxes that would affect me (and my small business) and a great many people on this forum are in favor of increasing taxes on "the 1%", which apparently includes me.

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

OWS is not affiliated with Obama. Get your facts straight.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

OK forget Obama. Lost of OWS protestors and posters are calling for increased taxes on the 1%. Is that a fair statement?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 12 years ago

Did you not just say that you made somewhere around $350,000 a year?

$350,000 a year does not look like the millionaires or billionaires that do not pay taxes. You knew this already. This isn't about small businesses. You knew this already.

[-] 1 points by laffingrass (362) from Normal, IL 12 years ago

Many would argue that you aren't in the 1% because you don't use that money to lobby politicians in return for favorable legal consequences.

Unless you do pay them, then you are.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

I agree that the most common statement from OWS is that about the lobbyists. The definition of 1%, however, does seem to include me as it is most commonly based on income earned. The tax increases suggested here and by the current administration also seek to target me, because as they say I am not paying my 'fair share'. Just wondering how much of my income would be my 'fair share'.

[-] 1 points by laffingrass (362) from Normal, IL 12 years ago

You'll have to get someone else's opinion. I believe that what you're paying right now is too much, honestly.

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 12 years ago

Hmmm...the beginnings of a Tea Party member. You're starting to come around.

[-] 1 points by laffingrass (362) from Normal, IL 12 years ago

I've never expressed distaste or animosity towards them, at least not towards what they actually stand for. Palin kinda fucked that one up.

[-] 0 points by velveeta (230) 12 years ago

"I make more than $344k or whatever is being called 1%..."

I wouldn't call that 1%. The 1% are the multi-billionaires. You are part of the 99%. You have no power over senators, presidents, central banks, laws, treaties, or such things that effect everybody. You have no goon squad in riot gear to protect your speeches, your properties, your travels. You get frisked at the airport like the rest of us, brother.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

This is probably true. I should probably focus my energy on supporting a clarification of the definition of 1% because I constantly feel unfairly targeted, and then when I talk to people they inevitably seem convinced that I am not the intended target of this movement.

[-] -1 points by betuadollar (-313) 12 years ago

The feeling most commonly expressed is that YOU are entitled to a living wage; anything else constitutes greed of the highest order.

This is not what it appears to be and I don't think you should allow yourself to be so easily duped - this is an UPPER class war, highly calculated.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

I make a living wage, as well as enough to save for retirement, travel from time to time, have a home and cars, and prepare for my kids to go to college. I make much more than my employees, but then I stuck my neck out to create this business from my own money (no loans). Does this constitute greed? At what point am I greedy?

[-] -1 points by betuadollar (-313) 12 years ago

I'm just saying you shouldn't take this all to heart... the anti-zionists are burning cars here in Brooklyn now. This entire movement is an upper class war; it's not what it appears to be.

I'm a devout Capitalist; not that we don't have problems, we do... it's just that I see it as the American Way.

[-] 1 points by MisterG (53) 12 years ago

I appreciate your sentiment. Unfortunately whether or not I take this to heart, Obama (and many in this forum) are calling for me to pay more than I do presently, because I still need to pay my 'fair share'.

[-] 1 points by foreverleft (233) 12 years ago

The welfare state is in it's death throes and OWS are the mourners. Now, quit screwing around with these losers and start developing my pc to gps app!