General Discussion

Ilikepurple

(800 posts)

29. There was a arithmetic error in calculating the "billionaire" percentage

Wed Mar 25, 2026, 04:53 PM

Mar 25

But I disagree that taking both employer and employee contribution percentages is fundamentally wrong when making a policy point. Furthermore, the point isn’t lost if you cut all the percentages in half. 12.4, 2.2, .0022 vs 6.2, 1.1, .0011? Even though I encourage corrections, because accuracy is often beneficial, I don’t think the point is lost by moving the decimal point over one space for those with a billion dollar income. Although I agree that Senator Murray’s use of the terms “millionaire” and “billionaire” was unfortunate, I am guessing that most understood the meaning. To my knowledge we do not have widely used terms for people passing those income thresholds, so unfortunately this usage has gained traction.
I think what is interesting is the impact of these taxes on the various levels of wage earners. I also am encouraged by the discussion FICA and Medicare contributions in relation to unearned income, not that I want our tax code to get any more Byzantine.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

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 Mar 25 OP

this is correct Henry203 Mar 25 #1

It is correct that there is a cap. Ms. Toad Mar 25 #4

Yeah, but the billionaire creates jobs, don't he? 3Hotdogs Mar 25 #28

There was a arithmetic error in calculating the "billionaire" percentage Ilikepurple Mar 25 #29

It is fundamentally wrong to describe the relative burden on the taxpayer as 12.4%, when it isn't. Ms. Toad Mar 25 #30

Slightly Misleading ProfessorGAC Mar 25 #2

I believe they are referring to a self employed worker, much like the billionaires are. LiberalArkie Mar 25 #7

That May Be ProfessorGAC Mar 25 #9

Nope. The percentage for a self-employed worker is 11.45. Ms. Toad Mar 25 #32

It's the assumption in the wording. haele Mar 25 #12

And the employer may reduce the wages in order to cover his/her half of the FICA. erronis Mar 25 #13

Yes. Employers' share of FICA is just another component of labor cost. Ilikepurple Mar 25 #23

Certainly Possible ProfessorGAC Mar 25 #24

15.3% for most of my adult life as a self employed person. progressoid Mar 25 #20

Not accurate in the details (albeit generally accurate in broad strokes). Ms. Toad Mar 25 #3

What is a self-employed person pay? 12.4% LiberalArkie Mar 25 #8

If I am not mistaken a self-employed person pays 12.4% payroll tax; state of stupid Mar 25 #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 Mar 25 #26

15.3% - 12.4% for Social Security and 2.9% for Medicare progressoid Mar 25 #21

Nope. 11.4514%. Ms. Toad Mar 25 #33

I agree with your distinction of a "billionnaire" (wealth) vs. income (wages, taxable gains, etc.) erronis Mar 25 #14

We do our best to fluff the rich and trivialize financial disparity Torchlight Mar 25 #5

Benefits are also capped Dave says Mar 25 #6

Same Page, Except... ProfessorGAC Mar 25 #10

I'd treat dividends the same as earned income Dave says Mar 25 #18

I Buy That To A Degree ProfessorGAC Mar 25 #25

They could uncap the tax until the funds had a 75 year balance. Captain Zero Mar 25 #11

That's a thought. Dave says Mar 25 #19

If the cap is raised, then the benefits should also be increased MichMan Mar 25 #37

I already pointed that out Dave says Mar 25 #39

Double it for those making over $180,000.00 multigraincracker Mar 25 #15

For 2026 Social Security wages are capped at $184,500 and it rises just about every year ... aggiesal Mar 25 #16

I don't understand the reasoning behind creating a donut hole MichMan Mar 25 #38

I was slow to realize tax code favors wealth hibbing Mar 25 #22

And if you have your own business or are a 1099 contractor, double that rate! SheltieLover Mar 25 #27

No. The rate cited IS the rate for self-employed individuals (after reducing their income to 92.35%) Ms. Toad Mar 25 #35

Yes, 12 percent taken out dlilafae Mar 25 #31

No. 6.2% is taken out for social security. n/t Ms. Toad Mar 25 #34

WTF it is going broke time to tax the rich accordingly..... Historic NY Mar 25 #36