Display:
I used the IRS withholding calculator.  http://www.irs.gov/individuals/page/0,,id=14806,00.html

you can run through it also, just putting 0's in for withholdings to date in 1995, and it ends up giving you your estimated taxes.

you are correct that the marginal tax rate is 15%.  But that is the number you use to calculate how much more tax you would pay on earning an additinion, say, $1000 over your base earnings--a very useful number, but not for estimating your total tax bill--only your marginal taxes.

there are some deductions that Mimi (and most of us) would get before the tax calculations would apply, according to the way she describes herself--kind of a personal deduction and what's called a standard deduction.  It more or less means that roughly the first $10,000 is taxed at 0%.  (these calculations are buried in that withholding calculator I directed you to above, but if you dig a little on the IRS site, doubt you'll want to as it's unbelievable boring, you'll see the detail of this).  then, I'm going a little from memory, the next $7500ish is taxed at 10%.  So in her case the only money taxed at the higher marginal 15% rate is the amount above the $17,500ish.  So her tax bill comes out to be pretty small.  And of course i don't know anything else about her life, but she may have some other deductions that would lower this--she sounds like someone that would donate to good charitable causes for example, or maybe pay interest on some student loans, maybe some work expenses.

oh and the way I read mimi, she supports herself more than 50%, and she would therefore get some benefit from being a household filer rather than a single filer.  Her parents I believe, would have to be giving her another $20,000+ before they could claim her as a deduction.

hope that helps  :)

by wchurchill on Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 at 04:11:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually, she cannot file head of household unless she has dependants.  A single filer making $20k a year and using the standard deduction per form 1040EZ owes $1,454 in Federal income taxes for the 2004 tax year.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes
by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 at 04:51:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
you're right, thanks for this correction.  (oddly enough I get a slightly different number on the site I referred you too--$1409--government efficiency I guess).  But accepting your revised number, we get 14.6% for social security, fed tax, and medicare.  Which still is quite a ways from Mimi's numbers, which infer 28%.  A truce?  :)
by wchurchill on Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 at 05:22:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A truce you say!?!  I WILL NEVER... oh, nevermind.  A truce sounds excellent.

Since mimi's not weighing in here, we'll just have to give her the benefit of the doubt that the rest is in state taxes of some sort.  I'm not very good at percentages which is why I just looked for the hard numbers per year.  How much is social security and medicare, do you know?  Don't go to any more work to answer, though.  It's starting to feel like H & R block in here! :-)

Seriously, though, I think this whole discussion has illustrated one of the political problems that the Republicans have been capitalizing on.  A lot of the lower income folks here aren't making it financially.  If you can afford an IRA and medical savings and a mortgage, you can end up paying much lower taxes.

But if you're someone living and working in an expensive inner-city, someone who's struggling to pay their bills, that $200 a month or so in taxes really hurts.  All of your living expenses are sky high, you pay sales tax and taxes on your car, gas, and some utilities, you add those taxes up and wonder why the hell you're paying so much when Enron didn't pay any federal taxes some years.  

This is hard evidence to these folks that the system stinks.  It's why they vote "against their interests" for the "low-tax" Republicans.  We keep wondering about this working class "insanity" without addressing the underlying issues the Republicans are speaking to with their rhetoric.

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 at 06:03:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
lol.  it was feeling like H&R Block.  thanks for the discussion.
by wchurchill on Sun Oct 2nd, 2005 at 08:06:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I apologize to come back so late. Most of the time I only have a bit of time to make a comment and have to leave and sometimes it takes me a couple of days to come back. I wasn't aware I caused so much unrest here with my comment. I have now given some numbers and explanations in response to the accusations up-thread.

Sorry for all the confusion.

by mimi on Wed Oct 5th, 2005 at 01:24:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No need to be sorry on my account -- I've been thoroughly enjoying the discussion and have found the facts everyone has brought out to be enlightening.  Thanks so much for your numbers above as well.  I'd been wondering because of some of your estimates whether you were on the east coast and see I guessed correctly.  

Thanks for taking the time and I'm glad to see you again.  Between wchurchill's Wild Ass Guesses, my sweeping generalizations, and your experiences, we make a pretty good team, I think!  We even all dragged some facts in -- I'm quite pleased with us.  Now if Colman can just sort it all out...  ;-)

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Wed Oct 5th, 2005 at 01:41:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series