http://www.aft.org/pdfs/pubemps/pecompsurvey0910.pdf (page 76)
Good Health article : http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51204
economic research links
Mississippi Tax Rates: (corporate and personal)
$0 - 4999 3%
$5000 - 10000 4%
$10000 + 5%
Std Deduction 2,000 / 4,000
Pers Exemption 1,500 / 300 per dependent
Corporate Collections per capita - $131 (averaged per corporation or per taxpaying entity?)
Individual collections per capita - $482 (averaged per natural person or per taxpaying entity?)
Mississippi taxpayers receive more federal funding per dollar of federal taxes paid compared to the average state. Per dollar of federal tax collected in 2004, Mississippi citizens received approximately $2.02 in the way of federal spending. This ranks the state 2nd highest nationally, and represents a increase from 1995, when Mississippi received $1.54 per dollar of taxes in federal spending and was 3rd highest nationally. Neighboring states and the amount of federal spending they received per dollar of federal taxes paid were: Louisiana ($1.78), Arkansas ($1.41), Tennessee ($1.27), and Alabama ($1.66).
http://www.sig.msstate.edu/modules/cms/images/thumb/244.pdf intersting read
65,009 Corporate Taxpayers
$382.5 million in taxes paid after tax credits
$109.4 million (29%) of tax after tax credit paid by in-state Corporations;
$273.1 million (71%) of tax after tax credit paid by out-of-state
$64.3 million in tax credits
40,123 Corporate Taxpayers located within the state
24,886 Corporate Taxpayers located out-of-state
$48.1 million in tax credits claimed by out-of-state Corporate Taxpayers
$16.3 million in tax credits claimed by in-state Corporate Taxpayers
1,287,518 persons paying Personal Income Tax
$32.5 billion Net Taxable Income
$25,549.85 Per capita Net Taxable Income for In-State taxpayers
I would like to find Gross Corporate Income from Mississippi and Gross Personal Income to Mississippians.
Still no comparison of real income (All income before deductions, tax breaks, credits, exemptions, etc) to taxes paid. Also no comparison of Accumulated Wealth to taxes paid and share of taxes.
Effective tax rate links :
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-21/google-2-4-rate-shows-how-60-billion-u-s-revenue-lost-to-tax-loopholes.html - dang it!! Google is a tax dodger!! #*(*#$(*(*@#$#$)^
http://www.darwinsfinance.com/my-effective-tax-rate/ - makes my point... but probably not what his goal was??? The higher your income the more tax breaks you actually qualify for... or actually, the more tax breaks you can afford to take advantage of. I would have loved to have taken advantage of the tax credits for improving home insulation, new windows, etc, but I couldn't afford to. You could only afford to get the credit if you didn't need it.
http://www.quickanded.com/2010/02/effective-tax-rates-of-the-richest-400-americans.html - AHA! an analysis that points out the rich keep paying less and less percentage... ?? Hmm....
"One less-noticed finding in the report is that the super rich have been paying smaller and smaller portions of their incomes to taxes*."Also, the article has a good description of Marginal vs. Effective tax rates :
"we generally end up talking about marginal tax rates. The word “marginal” in this context means you don’t actually pay the full rate of the bracket you fall in. So, for example, a single person earning $50,000 in 2009 would technically be in the 25 percent bracket. But they would actually pay 10 percent on their first $8,350 in earnings (the lowest bracket), 15 percent on every dollar between $8,351 and $33,950 (the second bracket), and 25 percent on every dollar between $33,951 and $50,000 (their salary). This works out so that the hypothetical person would actually only pay 17.4 percent of their income in taxes."( I commented on the article )
I don't really agree with this one... something is fishy in the numbers, but I don't know what exactly.
So... think we're "Taxed Enough Already" - at historical lows???
Long article - but the "Key factors affecting Job Growth" is interesting. Brings up uncertainty of Demand, so companies will not hire if they are not going to have demand to necessitate hiring.
"But surges in productivity without corresponding increases in consumption yield surplus labor."http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/reuters/MTFH09905_2010-08-16_11-56-12_N16250437.htm
Again cites "uncertain demand" as a major factor in not hiring and missing profit goals.
Tax credit for job creation idea, BUT :
"For one, a tax credit is yet another approach that gooses the supply side of the economy when the problem is primarily one of demand. There's no point in widget makers hiring another employee, even if it's cheap for them to do so, if they can't sell the widgets they're already making."http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/08/uncertainty_legislation_and_th.html
"I keep hearing about how policy uncertainty is holding us back, I still haven't heard, or been able to generate, any compelling data to support that argument."and comments on that article are intersting too.
can the marginal revenue that results from the marginal worker's product exceed the worker's cost? that's the only relevant question any entrepreneur asks, and the answer today, due to demand insufficiency, is, by and large, "no."