At Economix, Catherine Rampell writes:
I am constantly amazed by how little Americans know about where they stand in the income and taxing distribution. The latest example is evident in a recent Gallup study, which found that 6 percent of Americans in households earning over $250,000 a year think their taxes are “too low.” Of that same group, 26 percent said their taxes were “about right,” and a whopping 67 percent said their taxes were “too high.”
And yet when this same group of high earners was asked whether “upper-income people” paid their fair share in taxes, 30 percent said “upper-income people” paid too little, 30 percent said it was a “fair share,” and 38 percent said it was too much.
It’s hard to quibble with those who both believe that their taxes are too high and that “upper-income people” are paying too much, as this view is perfectly consistent. The same goes for the 6 percent who believe that they are not paying enough, and who feel the same way about those who earn more. But it stands to reason that there are many in the over-$250,000 camp who believe that they are overtaxed but that millionaires are undertaxed. It seems plausible that this sliver of the population is disproportionately likely to make campaign donations to progressive candidates who advocate new tax brackets for millionaires yet who also defend tax expenditures that benefit upper-middle-class households.
Last fall, I had an exchange with Annie Lowrey, now of Slate, on why I opposed a millionaire’s bracket. I started with an argument for why egalitarian liberals should oppose it, and then I briefly reviewed the case against high marginal tax rates from disincentive effects. I’ve also written on the dangers of crafting tax policy to match the policy preferences of HENRYs, Shawn Tully’s shorthand for High Earners, Not Rich Yet, who want to soak those further up the income ladder.