Here is a Wikipedia link on Excise taxes.
Quote:
Excise duty is a tax levied on the producer of certain goods, commodities and activities. It is a separate tax from VAT, and is different from it in that VAT solely affects the consumer (although, naturally, the consumer also indirectly pays the excise, as it is included in the eventual sale price of the product). The excise duty can account for as much as half the price of the goods subject to it, and sometimes more.
The Oxford Dictionary gives the origin of the word to be the Dutch accijns, itself presumed to originate from the Latin accensare - "to tax".
What is interesting about excise tax is how vague it actually is - it would be difficult, if at all possible, to find a precise definition explaining what it is that categorizes goods subject to excise tax. Lists of such goods are readily provided by governments, and it is possible to guess at what might be the motive for grouping such goods together; however, no explicit, formal definition is provided:
|
Excise - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I agree with flstf, corporate taxes are generally passed on to consumers. If you look at the historical profit margins in the oil industry during periods of relative competitive markets the profit margins don't deviate much. This means that incremental increases in costs (including taxes) are passed on to the consumer.
I also found this bit of trivial. In 2004 Exxon paid as much in in income taxes as the bottom 50% of taxpayers.
Quote:
According to IRS data for 2004, the most recent year available:
Total number of tax returns: 130 million
Number of Tax Returns for the Bottom 50%: 65 million
Adjusted Gross Income for the Bottom 50%: $922 billion
Total Income Tax Paid by the Bottom 50%: $27.4 billion
Conclusion: In other words, just one corporation (Exxon Mobil) pays as much in taxes ($27 billion) annually as the entire bottom 50% of individual taxpayers, which is 65,000,000 people! Further, the tax rate for the bottom 50% is only 3% of adjusted gross income ($27.4 billion / $922 billion), and the tax rate for Exxon was 41% in 2006 ($67.4 billion in taxable income, $27.9 billion in taxes).
|
Exxon's 2007 Tax Bill: $30 Billion - Seeking Alpha
Again, these taxes are actually paid by those who consume oil and gas, but it further shows how the liberal desire to punish the "rich" and corporations is actually regressive and has a bigger impact on the middle class and the poor.
-----Added 6/8/2008 at 02 : 18 : 41-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by robot_parade
I don't see how this is true. Obviously there is some turnover. Obviously people grow older, become more (and sometimes less) successful. But I don't see that the group of 'rich' people turns over every 10 or 15 years.
|
This is regarding the turnover in the top income earners in this country. I guess, I should first ask if you except the general demographics trends of income by age?
Generally, people are born making no taxable income. Then in their 20's and 30's they enter career paths with little experience at the low end of pay grades. Those who start businesses usually put their savings into the business and it takes time before the businesses get established and start making profits.
In a person's 40's and 50' they normally reach their peak income earning years. This is also the time when they accumulate assets and savings. this is also the time when they pay the most in taxes. Most of the people in the top 1%/5%/10% of income earners are going to be in this category.
When a person reaches 60+ they start to slow down on income production and start to live off of their savings and assets. The taxable income for this group drops dramatically.
So, outside of exceptions, like entertainers, sports figures, Bill Gates, Micheal Dell or trust fund babies (i.e. people like Ted Kennedy) normal people fit this general pattern.
However, even if you look at sports figures for example, the top wage earners is not static. With the exception of a few, like tiger Woods, an athlete will get one or two big contracts and is done in terms of peak earnings. In fact in football, veterans find the contracts of unproven high drafted rookies to be offensive.