I don't see how they define what an average US taxpayer is. Is this the US taxpayer (all people who worked and paid any form of tax pre credit) paid an average of $5,000 each? Is it that those who actually paid taxes (post credit) paid an average of $5,000 each? Is it taxpayers who pay an average amount of tax paid $5,000 each?
It's really nonspecific and the same is more like something to stir up controversy rather than something that wants to produce a meaningful and thoughtful data for people to consume and consider. Considering that after Federal credits are taken into account 40% of all households do not pay taxes at the federal level, this becomes important.
> The annual analysis shows how individual income taxes—the portion withheld from workers' paychecks—were spent ... It does not include corporate or individual payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare. To determine what constitutes the average tax bill, NPP divided the total amount of federal income tax collected by the number of applicable returns filed.
Average here means total collected divided by returns filed ie number of taxpayers. So it is literal - the average paid by each taxpayer.
Okay so it is in effect completely meaningless. Because roughly 40% of households get money withheld from their paycheck and they file a tax return. In that tax return they will receive a refund equal to or greater than what they had withheld. So it is not the average paid by each taxpayer it is a number that they invented based upon total collections before refunds and credits divided by the total number of people who filed.
That further solidifies that the entire article is just something they made up to push their specific agenda rather than supplying data that can support their agenda. Cnsidering that the agenda they seem to be pushing is increased social programs for the 40% who are not paying any taxes or paying a negative tax rate there is a reason why they chose that methodology.
We used to be founded on the principles of no taxation without representation. Now it seems to be representation without taxation. The ability to have 40% of the population convince 11% to give them more money without providing any benefit. We talk about unsustainable models this is definitely an unsustainable societal model.
I'm not in favor of wars around the world but I'm also not in favor of ignoring problems in other countries or aggression against other countries until the point it gets to a world war. Much better to intervene with our dollars before we have to shift our entire economy because we didn't deal with military aggression when it was small and in someone else's land.
> I'm not in favor of wars around the world but I'm also not in favor of ignoring problems in other countries or aggression against other countries until the point it gets to a world war. Much better to intervene with our dollars before we have to shift our entire economy because we didn't deal with military aggression when it was small and in someone else's land.
the US funds war in Israel currently that stokes violence and regional conflict. there's no claim that it is to avert world war.
It's really nonspecific and the same is more like something to stir up controversy rather than something that wants to produce a meaningful and thoughtful data for people to consume and consider. Considering that after Federal credits are taken into account 40% of all households do not pay taxes at the federal level, this becomes important.