Tax Burden

Thomas M. Neale's letter to the editor ("The wealthy pay more than their fair share," May 14) uses the usual Republican tactic of irrelevant statistics to confuse the issue of tax fairness. It does not matter that the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay 38 percent of income taxes. What matters is what percentage of their income do they pay in taxes - and not just income taxes, but all taxes. In the tax year of 2010, Only 42 percent of federal revenue came from income taxes. The rest came from payroll taxes (Social Security and Medicare taxes, 40 percent)

YOUR EDITORIAL of June 3, ''One way to cut state's income tax,'' which called for the broadening of the sales tax, is flawed.While such might result in a revenue-neutral plan, as you suggest, it would place us at yet another competitive disadvantage with our neighboring states.Delaware, of course, has no sales tax and has a personal income tax burden of $759 per capita versus $873 for Maryland.Compared to our foremost competitor, Virginia, our sales tax burden on a per capita basis is $321 versus $324, so any sales tax increase or broadening would give Virginia something else to crow about.

Your article ("O'Malley faces political risks of tax increases," May 17) suggests that Gov.Martin O'Malley's future political ambitions will be damaged by his successful efforts to raise taxes on the wealthy. But I ask, would his prospects have been enhanced if he had allowed major cuts in funding for health care, education, environmental clean up, and programs that benefit the elderly, children, homeless, handicapped and developmentally disabled? I think not. As a business executive whose tax burden will undoubtedly go up as a result of these measures, I could not in good conscience oppose these tax increases.

The revenue package passed by the House of Delegates this week could hurt Maryland's tax-burden ranking among the states but wouldn't make it the "tax hell" some critics predict, according to a respected research group. The state now ranks roughly in the middle of the pack in terms of state and local tax burden, according to the Washington-based Tax Foundation. William Ahern, spokesman for the group, said the net $670 million increase proposed by House Speaker Michael E. Busch could push it up to about 15th if other states hold their rates stable.

The most consequential national tax policy change during the past three decades has been the steady shift of the nation's tax burden from wealth to work. This shift in tax priorities is connected to stagnant growth, unemployment, economic inequality, societal stress and, of course, our national deficit and debt problems. It wasn't always this way. The 25 years following World War II were a time of great American prosperity, growth and expansion of the middle class. I can't tell you how many Americans old enough to remember have told me America was a better country then, and economically speaking, they're right.

We had misgivings about the "100,000 cops on the beat" crime bill, but we supported it in part because of the very helpful and urban-oriented prevention programs and in part because Attorney General Janet Reno promised that "community circumstance" would determine where the federal funds to pay for more police officers would go. By "community circumstance" she meant the amount of violent crime and the local tax burden. Federal dollars would go where both were high. Sounded like Baltimore and other big cities to us.So where did the first grants go?

WHAT STARTED as a jobs-growth bill has now turned into a giveaway contest. Everyone in the Maryland State House suddenly wants to ease the income-tax burden, but no one can agree on how to pay for it, who should receive most of the relief and whether the state can even afford to cut taxes. You need a program to figure out all the players in this confusion.Gov. Parris N. Glendening wants a 10-percent cut in the rate to signal corporate America that Maryland is serious about easing its tax burden.

IN THE RAGING economic civil war among the states to attract and retain businesses, Maryland business leaders are looking like the gang that couldn't shoot straight. By making a large cut in the Maryland personal income tax the centerpiece of their campaign, they are misrepresenting facts, holding a gun to the head of elected officials and pointed to miss the target.They're right that the state needs to compete combatively against other states to capture and grow jobs. They're wrong, however, that slashing income taxes is the way to do it. What's more, they have grossly overstated the tax burden in Maryland, especially on businesses.

As Tuesday's deadline for filing income tax returns approaches, Americans can reflect on a study that shows they will have to work longer to pay their taxes this year. Despite federal income tax cuts during the Reagan years, the total tax bite has increased. According to the Tax Foundation, the average American will have to work 2 hours and 49 minutes of each eight-hour workday to make enough money to pay all federal, state and local taxes. The Washington group says this is a record -- and one minute more than last year.

In his column on tax fairness, commentator Bob Price makes a mistake common among conservatives - so common, in fact, that it must be intentional. Price asks "Is it fair that almost half of Americans pay no federal income tax?" ("Let's talk about the meaning of fairness," Jan. 27). There's nothing wrong with this statement because Mr. Price identifies the tax in question. However, later in the column Mr. Price drops the reference to income tax and implies that he is writing about all taxes; for example: "Should the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay more than one-third of the nation's taxes?