The 23 percent was calculated in 1995, and since we have had significant tax cuts since then, it may be less than 23 percent. We have to go back to the committees that the gentleman deals with on the Committee on Ways and Means to have new studies done on that. But in 1995 it was revenue neutral, which means it brings in exactly the same amount of money as the current system does. But let us point out that the average income-earner today spends 28 percent of their income to the withholding of the IRS, of the Tax Code, and another 8 percent roughly for their Social Security and Medicare. So as an individual spending, I would rather give up 23 percent of what I spend than 34 percent of what I earn. It will encourage great earnings and great savings.
JOHN LINDER: “The 23 percent was calculated in 1995, and since we have had significant tax cuts since then, it may be less than 23…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing tax rates and their impact on income earners.
Share
More from JOHN LINDER
I do share the Ranking Member's frustration that we are talking about it again, rather than doing something about it.
I feel rude trying to inject some fact into this kabuki theater, but I am going to try: 85 percent of America is insured; 95 percent of those people are happy with their insurance. The other 15 percent uninsured, they consume 70 percent on…
Wealthy people pay taxes on personal consumption, and wealth has no meaning unless it is spent on personal consumption. If I had $100 million and lived in a $20,000 home and drove a used car, that $100 million would mean nothing to me. So…
My daughter at 35, she is now 37, called me and she said what in the world is AMT. She has got four little boys and the deductions and a fairly decent income gets them into the AMT. When it was set in 1969, it captured 90,000 taxpayers. In…





