tax on income or tax on community which of two affect the rich more and which affect the poor more explain with reasons
Answers
I think that, to some degree, identify which forms of taxation impact the wealthy or the poor the most. Of course, this is all contingent upon how they are actually implemented (e.g., the effect of an income tax is dependent upon what the actual tax rates are.).
Here are a selection of various kinds of taxation, although it is by no means exhaustive:
Progressive taxation systems: Progressive taxation systems are those which take into consideration the ability to pay of those paying them. As a result, they impose the greatest burden upon the wealthy.
A progressive income tax -- The progressive income tax imposes the greatest burden upon the wealthy, as they are the most able to pay.
Regressive taxation systems: As a general rule, any tax which requires the poor to pay the same percentage or amount as a tax is regressive, because it fails to take into consideration the disparate abilities to pay based on income. Thus, regressive taxes may be relatively "equal" in that they impose the same percent or amount, but are not equal in that the poor are burdened more than the wealthy are.
A flat (income) tax -- While a flat tax still results in a wealthy person paying a greater sum of money to the government in taxes than a poor person pays, it still imposes a significant burden upon the poor. To illustrate this, let us suppose there are two individuals, A and B. A has an income of $20,000/year; B has an income of $200,000. A is only able to save a couple hundred dollars per year -- the rest of her money she has to spend on subsistence items, such as food, rent, healthcare, car maintenance and insurance, etc. By contrast, B is able to save $50,000, spend $50,000 on luxury items, and spend $100,000 on very high-quality subsistence items (e.g., a large home, organic food, etc.). If both have to pay a 10% income tax, A would have to pay $2,000 in tax; B would have to pay $20,000 in tax. Both pay 10% -- yet while B pays much less, that $2000 means significantly more to A than the $20,000 to B. In light of this tax, B can save "only" $30,000 of her income without impacting her spending at all; by contrast, A would have to make difficult choices about whether to purchase food, pay rent, etc.
Sales/consumption taxes -- As you mentioned, consumption taxes tend to be very regressive. I won't go into this here, since I addressed this idea at length here: How can a consumption tax be made progressive in a sensible way?
Social security, Medicare, Medicaid taxes -- These are withheld from the paychecks of all workers regardless of what their rate of pay or income is. All individuals are taxed at the same rate, as with a flat tax. The result is that, in the same way, these flat taxes impact the poor much more than the wealthy.
Roadway tolls and bus/subway/metro fare -- These fares/tolls require a flat amount from each person who uses the service. Someone who makes $1m/year and someone who makes $20,000/year pay the same amount. This is significant because (1) these costs of commuting become very substantial over the course of a year (e.g., NYC subway fare is $2.25 each way -- that's over $1,000 each year), and (2) the poor disproportionately have to commute into urban centers, and therefore disproportionately use these services.
Systems with both progressive and regressive elements:
Luxury taxes -- Taxes on luxury goods on the whole tend to apply primarily to the wealthy, as the wealthy are the most able to pay for such items. In this respect, they are "progressive." However, it is regressive in that when a poor person attempts to buy a luxury item, they would pay in taxes a greater proportion of their income in tax than a wealthy person would.
The Capital Gains tax -- The capital gains tax actually incorporates within it a progressive rate system which is tied to non-capital gains income. However, this does not make its operation in reality "progressive." The capital gains tax is in fact not really a separate tax, but an exception to the "regular" income tax. Capital gains are taxed at a preferential rate compared to regular labor. The vast majority of capital gains taxes are paid by the wealthy -- but this should not be mistaken for a burden being imposed upon the wealthy. Rather, the capital gains tax allows those whose income is derived from investment (i.e., almost exclusively the wealthy) to pay a much lower income tax rate. This is why, for example, Mitt Romney had such a low tax rate. (See: Romney admits he pays lower tax rate than most Americans). In other words, capital gains functions as a particularly low tax bracket for the wealthiest Americans, meaning that others have to pay more to make up the difference.
Explanation:
I think it is helpful to you
