General Discussion

ProfessorGAC

(76,658 posts)

10. Same Page, Except...

Wed Mar 25, 2026, 03:12 PM

Wednesday

...I'd make the dividend tax rate the sanecascearned income a much higher number than $100,000. Unless we consider true retirement income (up to a certain amount) to be different than high dividend yields for much younger people. At some point, one is only "retired" in name only. That they separated from daily work isn't really retirement. It just being wealthy.
But, I also support raising the dividend tax rate in three more tiers at 25%, 28% & 30%.
More progressivity in dividend tax rates seems appropriate.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Wednesdays

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

MURRAY: Is it true that people making under $184k pay a 12.4% Social Security tax rate? [View all] LiberalArkie Wednesday OP

this is correct Henry203 Wednesday #1

It is correct that there is a cap. Ms. Toad Wednesday #4

Yeah, but the billionaire creates jobs, don't he? 3Hotdogs Wednesday #28

There was a arithmetic error in calculating the "billionaire" percentage Ilikepurple Wednesday #29

It is fundamentally wrong to describe the relative burden on the taxpayer as 12.4%, when it isn't. Ms. Toad Wednesday #30

Slightly Misleading ProfessorGAC Wednesday #2

I believe they are referring to a self employed worker, much like the billionaires are. LiberalArkie Wednesday #7

That May Be ProfessorGAC Wednesday #9

Nope. The percentage for a self-employed worker is 11.45. Ms. Toad Wednesday #32

It's the assumption in the wording. haele Wednesday #12

And the employer may reduce the wages in order to cover his/her half of the FICA. erronis Wednesday #13

Yes. Employers' share of FICA is just another component of labor cost. Ilikepurple Wednesday #23

Certainly Possible ProfessorGAC Wednesday #24

15.3% for most of my adult life as a self employed person. progressoid Wednesday #20

Not accurate in the details (albeit generally accurate in broad strokes). Ms. Toad Wednesday #3

What is a self-employed person pay? 12.4% LiberalArkie Wednesday #8

If I am not mistaken a self-employed person pays 12.4% payroll tax; state of stupid Wednesday #17

Maybe so, I had to always pay the full amount. But that is what Murray was referring to when they said 12.4% LiberalArkie Wednesday #26

15.3% - 12.4% for Social Security and 2.9% for Medicare progressoid Wednesday #21

Nope. 11.4514%. Ms. Toad Wednesday #33

I agree with your distinction of a "billionnaire" (wealth) vs. income (wages, taxable gains, etc.) erronis Wednesday #14

We do our best to fluff the rich and trivialize financial disparity Torchlight Wednesday #5

Benefits are also capped Dave says Wednesday #6

Same Page, Except... ProfessorGAC Wednesday #10

I'd treat dividends the same as earned income Dave says Wednesday #18

I Buy That To A Degree ProfessorGAC Wednesday #25

They could uncap the tax until the funds had a 75 year balance. Captain Zero Wednesday #11

That's a thought. Dave says Wednesday #19

If the cap is raised, then the benefits should also be increased MichMan Wednesday #37

I already pointed that out Dave says Wednesday #39

Double it for those making over $180,000.00 multigraincracker Wednesday #15

For 2026 Social Security wages are capped at $184,500 and it rises just about every year ... aggiesal Wednesday #16

I don't understand the reasoning behind creating a donut hole MichMan Wednesday #38

I was slow to realize tax code favors wealth hibbing Wednesday #22

And if you have your own business or are a 1099 contractor, double that rate! SheltieLover Wednesday #27

No. The rate cited IS the rate for self-employed individuals (after reducing their income to 92.35%) Ms. Toad Wednesday #35

Yes, 12 percent taken out dlilafae Wednesday #31

No. 6.2% is taken out for social security. n/t Ms. Toad Wednesday #34

WTF it is going broke time to tax the rich accordingly..... Historic NY Wednesday #36