The American Spectator : The Tax Hike Election of 2012

Text Size

The Tax Hike Election of 2012

By Grover G. Norquist from the April 2012 issue

Obama and the Democrats think the promise of higher taxes will be a winner for them this year.

(Page 2 of 3)

Obama and the Democrats would have no more luck selling tax hikes to reduce the deficit or pay our creditors. Rasmussen found 71 percent of Americans were unwilling to pay higher taxes to help reduce the national debt. This might be because 62 percent of Americans believed Congress and the president would spend the additional revenue on new government programs rather than reducing the debt. Similarly, the Tax Foundation asked in 2006, when the debt was somewhat smaller, if Americans would be willing to pay the $2,470 required of each individual tax return to eliminate the then $340 billion deficit. Nine percent of tax filers said yes. Seventy-nine percent said no. Only 17 percent said they believed the government would use the money to close the deficit; 63 percent said the government would just increase its spending.

What about other reasons to raise taxes? A mileage tax to pay for highways pushed by Obama’s transportation secretary? Seventy-three percent said no. Faring worse was a Federal Trade Commission recommendation to save (subsidize) our nation’s newspapers by taxing cell phone bills (84 percent no), computers (76 percent no), or websites (74 percent no). Taxes on icky things? The Tax Foundation asked about plans to tax foods with salt (71 percent no), sugary drinks (59 percent no), and junk food (55 percent no).

Asked about Obama’s “Simpson-Bowles” deficit commission, only 30 percent believed any of the promised spending cuts would be realized, while fully 78 percent thought it likely Congress would impose the proposed tax hikes.

And with an upcoming election likely to focus on the economy and job creation, a June 2011 Rasmussen poll showed that most Americans continue to believe tax reductions help the economy. Only one in four thinks otherwise.

How about the mega-question of the size and scope of government? According to a March 2011 Rasmussen poll, 68 percent of Americans prefer a government with fewer services and lower taxes. Only 22 percent want more services and higher taxes. That this is one of the more consistent polling results strongly suggests Reagan Republicans should dominate the political landscape if the GOP ever finds a candidate who can articulate the vision as Reagan did.

So Americans believe lower taxes help the economy, higher taxes hurt the economy, and revenue from tax hikes will be spent on new programs rather debt reduction. They think they are too highly taxed, and they want to reduce the size of government rather than pay more taxes.

Obamacare Tax Hikes

Individual and Employer Mandates to Purchase Health Insurance
Medicare Payroll Tax Hike from 2.9 to 3.8 Percent
Investment “Surtax” of 3.8 Percent
“Cadillac Plan” Excise Tax on High-Cost Health Insurance
Limitations on Use of Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and Flex Spending Accounts (FSAs)
“Medicine Cabinet Tax” on Purchase of Over-the-Counter Medicines
“Haircut” of Medical Itemized Deductions Allowed
New Tanning Tax of 10 Percent
Excise Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers
Employer Reporting of Health Insurance on Employee W-2

WHAT ABOUT Obama’s bet that Americans will vote for envy and vote to raise taxes on the rich? The quintessential tax on rich people is the death tax, or estate tax. In 2008, the Tax Foundation asked, “Do you personally favor or oppose completely eliminating the estate tax—that is, the tax on property left by people who die?” Sixty-eight percent favored abolition, and only 19 percent opposed it. This level of support for ending a tax paid by perhaps 2 percent of citizens, and rich ones at that, has remained consistently high and suggests Americans are not driven by envy as Obama hopes.

And the fairness of the progressive income tax? Sixty-nine percent of likely voters believe that if someone earns twice as much, they should pay twice as much in taxes—the definition of a flat rate income tax. Only 13 percent believe they should pay more than twice as much, the hallmark of a progressive tax structure.

How much should the rich actually pay? Today’s top rate for personal income taxes is 35 percent. Obama plans to watch that jump to about 44 percent in January 2013 (including the Obamacare surtax). And Obama’s stated goal is a new 30 percent Alternative Minimum Tax that will (for the short term anyway) only hit those earning a million dollars a year.

Asking, “What is the maximum percentage of a person’s income that should go to taxes—that is all taxes, state, federal and local?” Rasmussen found in April 2011 that 74 percent of Americans believed no one should have to pay more than 20 percent of his income in taxes. This is consistent with historical polls by the Tax Foundation, which found in 2009 that 24 percent of Americans believed that figure should be less than 10 percent, while 42 percent wanted the burden between 10 and 20 percent, and 22 percent were OK with a burden between 20 and 29 percent. (For the record, 1 percent thought the max tax should be zero.)

Remember that this question was for all taxes combined. Today, Americans pay 28 percent of their personal incomes in federal, state, and local taxes.

There is a danger for Republicans in the polling data. Fully 64 percent of Americans believe the middle class pays a larger share of its income in taxes than wealthy Americans do. Pew Foundation polling found that 57 percent of Americans “are bothered by what they believe are unfairly low amounts paid by the wealthy.”

There are two answers to this concern.

The most obvious one is to highlight the facts. In 2007, the most recent year with full data available, the top 1 percent of American earners paid 39.5 percent of all federal individual income taxes. The top 5 percent paid 61 percent, the top 10 percent paid 72.7 percent, and the top 20 percent paid 86 percent. The top 40 percent of income earners paid 98.7 percent of all federal personal income taxes. The bottom 40 percent received IRS checks from the government greater than any income tax paid. The tax system paid them.

Page: < 12 3 >

About the Author

Grover G. Norquist is the president of Americans for Tax Reform.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (66) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

oldfart| 4.5.12 @ 7:57AM

It makes no difference how much taxes are raised it will never been enough to satiate the desire to spend, spend, spend. There is enough evidence out there to prove this statement. Here are just three examples.
1. California
2. New York (state and city)
3. Maryland

Some states, New Jersey and Wisconsin, have figured out that you cannot spend yourself into wealth and are trying to do something about it.

As has been pointed out by others, the Progressives could confiscate all the assets of everyone with a net worth over $500K (homes and retirement plans included) and it still will not be enough to cover their spending plans.

One can only conclude that the modern education system does not teach people HOW to think, but WHAT to think. How many 20 somethings can actually reason on their own? Not many that I have seen – they are too busy chasing the latest smart phone or wondering what some no talent Hollywood 'star' is wearing.

The Executive and Legislative branches of the Government will NOT stop until economic collapse cuts off the flow of funny money. These bozos have dug themselves into a hole and are too STUPID to figure out that when you find yourself in a hole – STOP DIGGING.

benny havens| 4.5.12 @ 8:47AM

Ineptocracy (in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the
least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and
where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed,
are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

This was just sent to me this morning. If this doesn’t describe Obama, his Administration and the Democratic Party, I don’t what does.

benny havens| 4.5.12 @ 8:49AM

I don't "know" what does.

ENOUGH ROPE| 4.5.12 @ 10:52AM

Obama is the most anti-Christ, most anti-American, most racist, and most lying American president ever. That should become a superpac campaign slogan.

Months ago, Mark Levin interviewed John Lott (More Guns, Less Crime) who was employed by the U Chicago Law School while Obama taught there. According to Lott, Obama did NOT teach constitutional law.

SUBVET| 4.5.12 @ 1:13PM

Just one more lie..................

Nick| 4.6.12 @ 1:53AM

SUBVET,

I'm waiting for your response to my reply, in the Cardinal Wuerl thread.

markenoff| 4.6.12 @ 10:43PM

They're a cross between an ineptocracy and a kleptocracy.

Independent Thinker| 4.5.12 @ 3:40PM

Wake up, folks: It's Romney or Obama...Take your pick.

gearjammer| 4.5.12 @ 8:54AM

The democrats want all the money.

JmsA| 4.5.12 @ 5:24PM

If it only were the money they were after. No, they want much more than that. They want to transform it to something the very opposite of that intended/created by the Founders. They want tyranny. When they speak of equality they mean equality of misery for all except for the political class and the crony capitalist and other elites who help them retain and increase their power. The Chicoms and the socialist island prison just 90 miles off our southeastern coast are two of the models they're interested in following. And guess what? Unless we do something about it, and soon, that's just what we'll get.

Mimi| 4.5.12 @ 8:58AM

Who would run for President vowing to raise taxes...Did they Win?

gearjammer| 4.5.12 @ 9:21AM

Obama-said he'd raise them on the rich. Remember ?

Mike Hawk| 4.5.12 @ 10:30AM

Walter Mondull. Reagan wiped him out in an epic ;landslide.

russell.j.coller.jr| 4.5.12 @ 3:14PM

.....Dennis Miller: " Reagan stomped Mondale so bad in 1984 he made McGovern '72 look like William the Conqueror. "

Indy| 4.5.12 @ 9:29AM

I do believe in reducing some credits, we cannot survive as a Republic if ~50% pay no Federal Income Taxes - please spare me the speech "but they pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes" those of us who pay Federal Income Taxes pay all of those other taxes on top of what we pay to the Feds. Everyone must have skin in the game.

The GOP is terrible on messaging, they know this is the election plan, are they ready? Of course not, why do companies like GE, Google pay little to no taxes? They reap the benefits of a complex tax code designed to drive behaviors and political payoffs. We only hear about the "evil" oil companies and bankers but silence on Obama's favorites, come on GOP, get rid of some of these credits.

I support a flat tax but it will not happen in this election cycle.

jan| 4.8.12 @ 4:05PM

Indy, corporations DO NOT pay taxes, they are merely tax collectors for the WA DC scum!

John| 4.5.12 @ 9:54AM

As far as taxing companies...
In reality they don't pay tax, they just pass it on to the consumer. The consumer actually pays all taxes one way or another. If the employees didn't pay taxes that would be different.

Roy N.| 4.5.12 @ 8:04PM

Exactly. I doubt that most people in this country realize that goods and services purchased from corporations would cost less without a corporate income tax. The incomes of most wage earners would go a lot further than now.

Clint| 4.5.12 @ 10:18AM

" DR. RON PAUL “PLAN TO RESTORE AMERICA”

TAXES:

Lowers the corporate tax rate to 15%, making America competitive in the global market. Allows American companies to repatriate capital without additional taxation, spurring trillions in new investment. Extends all Bush tax cuts. Abolishes the Death Tax. Ends taxes on personal savings, allowing families to build a nest egg. "

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the.....e-america/

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To An Open Convention.

Mike Hawk| 4.5.12 @ 10:28AM

Hey Goofus, Rube Paul isn't the only one proposing this, it is basically the Conservative platrform. Paul is not a conservative even though some of his proposals may be.

Clint| 4.5.12 @ 12:03PM

Hey Goof Ass, Little Micky Hawklette,

" Ron Paul’s constitutional conservative credentials are unmatched.

He is:

*** 100% Pro-Second Amendment. Paul has received a lifetime “A” rating from the NRA, and I was given the “Defender of the Second Amendment Award” by Gun Owners of America in 2011. I’ve voted against gun control – EVERY time.

*** 100% Pro-Right to Work. Paul has never caved to the union bosses’ pressure. I voted to defeat Big Labor’s “Card Check” scheme, and I will continue the fight I’ve led as a congressman to the White House by fighting for passage of a National Right to Work Act.

*** 100% Pro-Health Freedom. Paul has introduced legislation in Congress to repeal ObamaCare’s hated individual mandate. As President, I will order all federal agencies to stop enforcing any rules and regulations related to ObamaCare, and I will veto any bills that fund this unconstitutional powergrab.

While Mitt Romney receives his most contributions from Wall Street, the top three donors to Ron Paul’s campaign by occupation are U.S. Army, U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy.

Paul has received more support from active duty military than all my opponents combined, and my other donors are everyday grassroots Patriots like you who just want to enjoy the full blessings of freedom and pass them on to the next generation. "

DR. RON PAUL “PLAN TO RESTORE AMERICA”

SPENDING:

Cuts $1 trillion in spending during the first year of Ron Paul’s presidency, eliminating five cabinet departments (Energy, HUD, Commerce, Interior, and Education), abolishing the Transportation Security Administration and returning responsibility for security to private property owners, abolishing corporate subsidies, stopping foreign aid, ending foreign wars, and returning most other spending to 2006 levels."

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the.....e-america/

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To An Open Convention.

Oldefarte| 4.5.12 @ 1:23PM

SHOVE THIS WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE. Ain't gonna be no open or brokered convention, except maybe in LJ with you and TOO SHORTS in attendance:
'..... Poll: Romney Takes 5 Point Lead Over Santorum in PA Thursday, April 5, 2012 10:52 AMBy: Newsmax ...Republican presidential front-runner Mitt Romney leads rival Rick Santorum 42 percent to 37 percent among likely GOP primary voters in Santorum’s home state of Pennsylvania, according to a new survey from Public Policy Polling (PPP). Ron Paul places third with 9 percent support and Newt Gingrich fourth with 6 percent. The numbers represent a significant reversal from the last PPP survey a month ago, which showed Santorum ahead 43 percent to 25 percent.Former Pennsylvania Sen. Santorum is hoping that the April 24 Keystone State primary serves as his firewall, calling it a must-win state. “The momentum in Pennsylvania is moving completely against Rick Santorum,” said PPP President Dean Debnam. “Mitt Romney has a great chance to deliver a final crushing blow to his campaign on April 24. A home state loss would be incredibly embarrassing for Santorum.”
Only 36 percent of Republicans in Pennsylvania think Santorum has a realistic chance for the nomination, while 54 percent believe he doesn’t.....'

Mike Hawk| 4.5.12 @ 3:51PM

Paul is no Constitutional scholar. You want a Constitutional scholar, it's Mark Levin, but you Paulistinains hate him and won't accept it. Stop the cut and paste bullcrap.

Crassus| 4.5.12 @ 6:05PM

Clint, why don't you go to You Tube and watch some clips from RuPaul's appearances on the Morton Downey Jr. show back in 1988. If you think he's crazy now you should have seen him when he was a kid.

Bill| 4.5.12 @ 11:26AM

It'll good. then why he failed to win any primary or caucauses? Rejected. It's Romney time.

Clint| 4.5.12 @ 12:07PM

Why Are You The Race Boy Clown,Who Has Jumped In Front Of A Number Of GOP Candidates' Parades And Pretends You're Leading Their Parades.

The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To An Open Convention.

Oldefarte| 4.5.12 @ 1:23PM

See my above, CLOWN!!!!!

Bill| 4.5.12 @ 3:30PM

I'm a Catholic and Conservatism is in my DNA.

Nick| 4.5.12 @ 8:47PM

"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill the Bigot, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:

http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403

You're a moron and a racist, Bigot Bill.
GO AWAY!

Bill| 4.5.12 @ 10:19AM

Pass the Balanced Budget amendment, and that will take care of the liberal hypocracy on taxation and regulations.

Bill| 4.5.12 @ 11:00AM

Obama's budget got 0-414 votes, none, in the House of Representative, and that tells us that how incompetent he is.

gearjammer| 4.5.12 @ 1:03PM

Obama does not consider the above margin a strong democratic majority.

Indy| 4.5.12 @ 11:41AM

"It Turns Out Warren Buffett Is A Master Of Avoiding Taxes"

kwan| 4.5.12 @ 11:48AM

Any economist no matter how far to the left he is politically knows that in the real world lower taxes produce greater remittances to the U.S. Treasury due to increased economic activity. This was proven during the Reagan Presidency. But Obama continues with his Marxist rhetoric that millionaires and billionaires are the enemy of the people and must be punished with increased taxation. Of course the "moochers" in the underclass buy into this fabrication as they believe there will be more gub-a-mint cheeeese for them once Obama strips the rich of their wealth. Right now the business community is in a holding pattern, waiting for the electorate to snap out of the dumb, dumber, and more dumber mentality that elected Obama in 2008, and vote this November to ship the community organizer back to the People's Republik of Chicago on January 20th.

Louis Jenkins| 4.5.12 @ 11:52AM

Line the entire American taxpayers up, ask the question, and see where the chips fall. Forty nine percent will say increase taxes, and 51% will say no. We need a budget, but then again the results will be the same. I wish it were that simple. We're taxed enough already, now Obama just has to admit that, yes, he will increase taxes next year. Big time. But he will only say so using political-speak. Lots of new programs awaiting their funding. The Democrats, and some Republicans, who control the Senate have no interest in forming a budget. They'd be seen for the crooks they are. The American people are seen as a fully mature chicken, ready to be plucked, and served up on a platter. Hopefully you guys have your act together. We're gonna need it.

Von Mises Jr.| 4.5.12 @ 12:16PM

If the middle class has not figured out that they are the target by now, they probably never will. The first rule for accontants is follow the money. The vast majority of wealth is with the middle class.
Subprime mortage crisis and Agenda21 "smart growth" are intended to redistribute your property to Fannie, Freddie, HUD and GMAC; and put you in government apartments. While most lost a large portion of their retirements during the busts of 1999, 2001 and 2008; the last demonstrated how the insiders such as Pelosi, Kerry and Boehner were able to make staggering gains on inside information. Silver collapsed last year from $49 to about $30 as margin rates were quietly increased by 85%. Do you think Soros and the Wall Street insiders didn't plan this and sell at the high?
Laffer wrote in 2010 how the sunset of the Bush tax breaks would cause a financial collapse in 2011. The Bush rates were extended through the end of 2012. Guess what happens in 2013 if Obama is our "Dear Leader?"

Jack London| 4.5.12 @ 2:57PM

'The vast majority of wealth is with the middle class.'

Depends what you mean by middle class. In 2007 the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of wealth.

DRed| 4.5.12 @ 4:12PM

http://www.offthechartsblog.or.....ink-again/

Damn communists are taxing us into oblivion.

Reprobate Charlatan DRedful| 4.5.12 @ 6:16PM

My name is DRedful. I provide sources. I just can't comprehend them.

* * * * * *

DRedful (2/23 @ 8:36pm):

"If you look at the data here it looks like our effective corporate tax rate is basically middle of the pack

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=REV"

Reply to DRedful:

"Your link has nothing to do with the U.S. corporate tax rate.
Your link does not show the corporate tax rates of OECD nations.
The U.S. corporate tax rate is second highest among OECD nations.
Effective April 1 the U.S. corporate tax rate will be highest among OECD nations."

DRedful (2/23 @ 11:22pm):

"Well no, it doesn't show the rates, it shows how much corporations actually pay in taxes as a percentage of gdp."

Reply to DRedful:

"Your link does not show the corporate taxes paid of the U.S.
Your link does not show the corporate taxes paid of OECD nations."

DRedful (2/24 @ 4:51pm):

"Well, if you look at what American corporations pay, compared to similar countries..."

* * * * * *

DRedful (8/10 @ 10:46am):

"Here's the inaccurate part. Mr. Ferrara states that the top 1% of income earners paid 40 % of federal income taxes in 2007. He uses that to show how unfairly taxed the top 1% of earners are."

Reply to DRedful:

"You owe Ferrara an apology. He stated in 2007 the top 1% paid 40.4% of income taxes because, try to follow me here, the top 1% paid 40.4% of income taxes in 2007.
In 2007 the top 1% paid 40.42% of the nation's income taxes, while the bottom 95% paid 39.37%"

DRedful (2/4 @ 1:15pm):

"Wake me back up when you can figure out the difference between federal income taxes and total tax taxes."

Reply to DRedful:

"It is notable in the quotation provided that you stated 'federal income taxes' and not 'total tax taxes."

DRedful (2/4 @ 4:34pm):

"Wow. The article claimed that the rich paid a disproportionate share of taxes in America. Taxes. Not federal income taxes. I wasn't saying that the claim that the rich paid 40% federal income taxes was inaccurate. I'm saying that using that to prove that the rich pay a disproportionate share of taxes in America is inaccurate. Why? Because it's not true. If you earn 22% of the income and pay 23% of the taxes, by definition, you're paying a proportionate tax burden."

Reply to DRedful:

"The notable liar himself:
"Wow. The article claimed that the rich paid a disproportionate share of income taxes in America. Taxes. Not federal income taxes. I wasn't saying that the claim that the rich paid 40% of federal income taxes was inaccurate."

"Here's the inaccurate part. Mr. Ferrara states that the top 1% of income earners paid 40% of federal income taxes in 2007."

"I'm saying that using that to prove the rich pay a disproportionate share of taxes in America is inaccurate. Why? Because it's not true."

It is notable the notable liar time and again ignores:
in 2007 the top 1% paid 40.42% of federal income taxes;
in 2007 the bottom 95 % - combined - paid 39.37% of federal income taxes;
in 2007 the top 1% paid more in federal income taxes than the bottom 95% combined."

DRedful (2/4 @ 6:29pm):

"derp derp derp"

* * * * * *

DRedful (4/5 @ 3:12pm):

"www.offthechartsblog.org"

Damn communists are taxing us into oblivion."

'Off the Charts', in 'About', is an organization:

"working at the federal and state levels on fiscal policy and public programs that affect low- and moderate- income families and individuals";

and is:

"dedicated to improving government policies toward low- and middle- income Americans and ensuring that government has the resources to meet its responsibilities and address critical needs".

Too bad this organization is not working on government and fiscal policy that affects the high-income families and individuals that pay the vast majority of taxes, and are the same high-income families and individuals who create the jobs for the low- and moderate- income families and individuals.

Too bad also this organization isn't dedicated to ensuring that government meets its constitutional responsibilities, and addresses the critical needs constitutionally, of the high-income families and individuals who create the jobs for low- and moderate- income families and individuals, in addition to paying for the vast majority of the government that is dedicated to ensuring unconstitutional control, to the detriment of low- and middle- and high- income families and individuals alike, in our equality under the law nation.

Idiot.

DRed| 4.5.12 @ 7:21PM

Well said, Skip. It's hilarious to me that you still haven't figured out how to use the variables in the oecd table. Derp derp derp!

Reprobate Charlatan DRedful| 4.5.12 @ 7:31PM

You mean the variables you didn't link to, that I hadn't figured out, while noting your reply to the intellectual beating you sustained above that you're avoiding, that I haven't figured out either?

DRed| 4.5.12 @ 7:52PM

Uh, they're right on the chart I linked to. They always have been. Do you need me to hold your hand? I thought conservatives were big on personal responsibility. The real beauty is that you started your comment by mocking my inability to understand the sources I link to. Don't ever change, Skip. Well-maybe you could stop writing the same boring cut and paste crap every time. But then you'd have nothing to say.

Reprobate Charlatan DRedful| 4.5.12 @ 8:56PM

Uh, you mean the real beauty of mocking what a consistently proven liar has to say, such as:

DRedful:

"If you look at the data here it looks like our effective corporate tax rate is basically middle of the pack

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=REV"

[Uh, you mean, liar consistently proven to be a liar, look at the data you provided that does not show our corporate tax rate, or the corporate tax rate of any other OECD country, while pretending for a moment it is not well known our corporate tax rate is second highest, until April 1 that is, when it is well known our corporate tax rate will not be basically middle of the pack, or even second highest, but will be the highest in the world among OECD countries, all this while ignoring for the moment you aren't a consistently proven liar, that is?]

DRedful:

"Well no, it doesn't show the rates, it shows how much corporations actually pay in taxes as a percentage of gdp"

[Uh, you mean, liar consistently proven to be a liar, the data that does not show how much our corporations actually pay in taxes, or how much any other OECD country's corporations actually pay in taxes, while pretending for a moment it is possible to compare these corporate taxes paid that are not shown to gdp to see ours is basically middle of the pack when it is well known ours is second highest until April 1 when it will be highest, while ignoring for the moment you aren't a consistently proven liar, that is?]

"Well, if you look at what American corporations pay, compared to similar countries..."

Oh, you mean the real beauty of mocking a consistently proven liar, who was proven a liar on 2/23, as is consistently the case with all the consistently proven liar's consistently proven lies, who as is consistently the case just been proven to lie on 4/5 on the very same words of the consistently proven liar that was proven to be lies on 2/23, as only a consistently proven liar could lie in proven consistent cases, proven lying consistently on 4/5 on the very same words proven to be lied on 2/23, lying, the real beauty of which is to be mocked, and mocked mercilously, in mocking of real beauty, without change, ever.

DRed| 4.5.12 @ 9:21PM

"while pretending for a moment it is possible to compare these corporate taxes paid that are not shown to gdp to see ours is basically middle of the pack"

Okay, set tax to 'corporate' and set variable to 'tax revenue as percentage of gdp'. Tell me what you see.

Figure 3 in this article has the data in picture form.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/16/41069272.pdf

Reprobate Charlatan DRedful| 4.6.12 @ 3:59AM

Okay, liar consistently proven to be a liar,

tell the reason no one could see this link,
with tax set to 'corporate' and variable set to 'tax revenue as percentage of gdp',
on 2/23 when you posted the link,
which did not have tax set to 'corporate' and variable set to 'tax revenue as percentage of gdp',
that this real beauty mocking your inability to comprehend the sources you link to saw on 2/23,
by setting tax to 'corporate' and variable to 'tax revenue as percentage of gdp' on 2/23.