So, I was doing my tax research, and I – obviously – made my way to this very important table. Now, my inquisitive mind couldn’t just go with looking at the information that was to benefit me and continue on with the research. No, of course not. Thus, I began making calculations.

I concluded that this table is far from fair. But I am certain no one was of the naive belief that it may not be thus. But here is my “questionable” proof:

Take last fully-defined bracket for singles (income in the range of $146,750 and $319,100), and use the top income as the example:

.33 * ($319,100 – $146,750) + $35,717 = $92,592.50

It is obvious to me that the resulting maximum tax for a previous bracket is the base tax for the following bracket. But, there does not lie my claim. To follow through (in a minimalist manner), one must take the bottom bracket and make the same calculations as above.

.10 * ($7,150 – $0) + $0 = $715

However, for the sole purpose of being “fair”, I will also present the same simple calculation with the second bracket ($7150-$29,050)

.15 * ($29,050 – $7,150) + $715 = $4,000

Here is where the relevance comes to bare. If you take the percentage taxation on all three, you find that:

$715 ÷ $7,150 = 10%

$4,000 ÷ $29,050 = ~13.8%

$92592.5 ÷ $319,100 = 29%

Now, there is an obvious increase in taxation. However, it must be noted that $7,150 is 2.24% of $319,100; and yet the taxation difference is only 19 points. This fact is due to the increase in the ranges on each bracket.

The first bracket under the Single category is from $0 to $7150, and I will use units of $7150 to measure the other brackets. Following said rule, the first bracket ($0-$7150) is __1 (one)__ unit; the next bracket up ($7150-$29050) is __3 (three)__ units; the third ($29050-$70350) is __5 (five)__ units; the next ($70350-$146750) is __7 (seven)__ units; the second to last bracket ($146750-$319100) is __24 (twenty-four)__ units; and the top, unbounded bracket can not be defined in units, except where an exemplar amount is used. For that reason, I am using the amount of $1,000,000. Therefore, for my purposes, the unit measure for the top bracket in under the Single category is __95 (ninety-five)__ units.

At first one might think that the brackets are measured in some prime number sequence, but they are not. If you make more than $146,750, you have the privilage of reduced taxation by the merit of the system. To be fair the system should increase percentage taxation in a manner that may be more standarized. For instance,

Make more than ($)

But no more than ($)

Then Tax is ($)

Plus (%)

Over ($)

0

7150

0

10

0

7150

29050

715

15

7150

29050

70350

4000

20

29050

70350

146750

14325

25

70350

146750

211100

35717

30

146750

211100

289750

55022

35

211100

289750

382700

82549.50

40

289750

382700

489950

119729.50

45

382700

489950

—-

167992

50

489950

If the system increased in graduated increments until a taxation percentage were reached, one could say that the system is fair. As it stands today, those in hire brakes pay the same percentages as those who make a lot less. To this point, an example comes in the case of those who make $319,100 and those who make $146,750. Both pay 29% of their incomes, but those who make the lesser of the two are at a disadvantage.

you nerd.

=D