Back in November Blue Hampshire posted a chart from an ITEP Report, asking why there was no “Tea Party Protest” based on the content of the slide posted. The slide shows the difference in estimated taxes paid as a percentage of income. The presumption is that a gross inequality exists between the top 1% and the bottom 20%.
ITEP is of course well funded by dubious left wing groups and still pretends to be non-partisan, but we won’t let that color our perception of the report because we don’t have to.
The chart is no cause for alarm. It states an obvious mathematical truth. It says that people who make an average of $14,100.00 per year (that’s the bottom 20% for New Hampshire according to ITEP) will spend about $1,170.30 in “total taxes” per year or 8.3% of income; where people who make $1,646,900.00 per year (that’s the average in the top 1%) will only pay $32,937.00 per year (2.0%) for the exact same amount of government—one which ITEP and Blue Hampshire both agree is too small because they both endorse broad uncontrolled revenue streams in the name of ‘fairness.’
So we get $1,170.00 versus $32,937.00.
If you do an apples to apples quintile comparison the top 20% pay an average of $52,024/per compared to the bottom 20% at 1,170.30.
State government costs the upper 20% $50,854 dollars more per year. That is insanely unfair.
So yes we do need a protest. The state is wasting buckets of money. We should cut State spending immediately. In fact, let’s make it poor people friendly. If we eliminate all the sales and fees and excise taxes (based on the ITEP report), those “poor people” would see their tax burden reduced 31%.
Something else the chart and report ignore (and the presumption of needed protest) is that despite the supposedly “repressive tax structure” New Hampshire consistently has the lowest number of people living below the poverty line. (Currently at about 7.8%. but generally lower.) That’s 50th out of 50 states in lowness, which seems important when talking about a study about tax percentage disparities and how it actually affects being poor, or not as it were.
We are also, inconveniently, one of the lowest for overall tax burden (44th I believe) – which is also important when looking at the report. ITEP actually listed the top ten “supposedly” low tax states that had “supposedly” disproportionate tax burdens on the poor and New Hampshire was not on that list.
Here they are in order.
Washington
Florida
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Illinois
Arizona
Nevada
Pennsylvania
Alabama
One more point? Why not. BH suggested Vermont as a comparison because the reported percentage difference between the bottom 20% and top1% is minor but they misreported the numbers for the comparison. BH initially reported it as 8.2% poor vs. 8.4% rich for Vermont which looks so progressive but those do not reflect federal offsets. Why would that matter? Because BH reported the federal offset adjusted numbers from the New Hampshire data in the post, and the non-offset numbers for Vermont.
Oops.
Vermont’s is still a lot closer but it does the poor no good (see below), which also seems relevant given the reports premise unless all you really want to do is justify taxing the crap out of people for no good reason.
After you account for the federal offsets in Vermont the poor pay 8.2% (NH was 8.3%) and the top 1% in Vermont pay 7.5% (NH was 2.0%). I can see that 5.5% as a burr up some liberal’s ass. If Vermont can rapes high wage earners for no benefit to the poor why not New Hampshire?
Because it hurts the poor, that’s why.
The poorest 20% in the People’s Republic of Vermont have an average income of $11,200.00 (That’s 26% less than NH’s bottom 20%) and at 8.2% they pay $918.00 based on the report. The rich 1% of Vermonters only earn an average of $1,250,000.00 (which is 31% less than NH) but pay $93,750 dollars in taxes.
For what?
More government! And despite more government and all that extra “rich folk money” the poverty rate is still historically higher next door by about 2 to 2.5%. Per capita income is lower, average wages are lower, so the standard of living is lower. So where is the big payoff from screwing rich people? You get to say you screwed rich people. But that’s it. Oh, and you grow more government, which requires more taxes you don’t actually need because….more government spending does not lift more people out of poverty. Not even in Vermont. In fact it may very well be the cause of it by reducing top end wealth and investment potential that creates jobs and opportunities.
So yes, we need a protest. Lower state spending and reduce taxes on everyone and you’ll have even fewer poor people.
###
Steve MacDonald is a local blogger and activist, a member of CNHT, and the New Hampshire Republican Volunteer Coalition. He can also be heard on New Hampshire Taxpayer Radio every Thursday from 6-8:00 pm on WLMW 90.7FM and streaming on the web.