Define 'fair share' of taxes for the rich

It is what Kent Kirkwood fails to say in his "Tax cuts for rich have cost so much" that is really newsworthy. The obvious question that Mr. Kirkwood and his ilk fail to address is this: How much of the income tax load should the "rich" be paying?

It's the one question liberals hope won't be asked. They'd rather talk about how the rich man's secretary is in a higher tax bracket than is the rich man, etc. When all's said and done however, what matters is this: How much of our income tax burden are the "rich" paying, and how much are all the rest of us paying?

Here are the facts for tax year 2013, the latest year for which final figures are in as far as I have been able to determine.

Those in the top 1 percent income bracket paid 38 percent of all income taxes. When one adds in their share of corporate income taxes, this figure rises to about 40 percent.

This means that the top 1 percent paid $40 of every $100 dollars our government spent on such things as national defense, anti-poverty safety nets, education, transportation, science and medical research, federal retiree benefits and interest on the national debt. By way of contrast, back in 1980 these folks paid $20 of every $100 spent.

If 40 percent isn't enough, how much of all these programs does Mr. Kirkpatrick think the 1 percent should be paying for? Half? Three quarters? All?

In 2013 those in the top 5 percent bracket paid $60 of every $100 spent, those in the top 10 percent paid $70, those in the top 25 percent almost $90 and those in the top 50 percent income bracket paid $98 of every $100 our government spent on all these programs. The lower 50 percent paid $2 of every $100 spent.

Welcome to the real tax world.

Hans Schultz

Arlington Heights