• iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    So sick and tired of this myth, how are Americans so goddamn ignorant of their own tax system that this continues to persist.

    • i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I know people who still repeat the line that earning more money will push them into a higher tax bracket and they’d end up with less money than if they stayed at their current income.

      • NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        So, there are some misconceptions about this on both sides. While some may misunderstand how tax brackets work, there absolutely are certain income thresholds where barely going over a certain amount will net you less money overall.


        Edit: To clarify, you should accept the raise. In most cases all you need to do to avoid “losing money” at any of these points is to lower your AGI by contributing to an IRA, 401K, etc.


        For example (using 2025 numbers here for a single filer):



        • Medicare Premium Increase (for those on medicare)
          @ $106k your medicare tax increases by $888, so you don’t want a raise that puts you between $106k and $~107k
          @ $133k medicare tax increases by $1.3k, so you don’t want a raise between $133k and $134k
          @ $167k medicare tax increases by $1.3k again
          @ $200k medicare tax increases by $1.3k again
          @ $500k medicare tax increases by $444… https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/insurance/medicare/what-is-the-medicare-irmaa

        • Roth IRA @ $150k you start to lose out on benefits from having a Roth IRA @ $165k you can no longer contribute to a Roth IRA, so if you’re close to this limit, you’re going to do what you can to stay under this income bracket as much as possible (contribute to an HSA, 401k, IRA, etc). https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/roth-ira-contribution-limits


        There are probably a few other taxes/credits I didn’t include, but this is just a quick example with what I could look up at the moment.

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Oh man don’t even get me started on that one too. I knew some people that genuinely thought a bonus would make them earn less overall.

        • 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          If i was a manager and someone turned down a raise/bonus because “tax” reasons, i would seriously evaluate my own managerial skills…

          Like, how did i not notice this person is a complete moron and why did i offer them a raise?

      • phar@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Isn’t this possible? Tax brackets for 2024 I thought for single filer is 24% below 191k and 32% over 191k, isn’t it?

        • pez@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          The higher rate gets charged only on the portion above the threshold. So with those rates someone earning 192k pays ($191k * .24) + ($1k * .32) = $46,100 not ($192k * .32) = $61,400.

          Where you can be worse off earning more is if it puts you over a threshold for some social services (food stamps for example) with a hard cutoff rather than progressively lower benefits.

        • i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          In places with marginal tax brackets, no. The numbers are different where I live, but the principle (hah) is the same:

          If you earn 291k a year, the first 191k is taxed at 24%. The money left over (100k) gets taxed at 32%. So if you get a raise or bonus, the “tax problem” is only that your extra money is immediately taxed at 32%.

    • very_well_lost@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      This myth is probably prevalent because corporations have spent the last 40 years squeezing every cheat and every advantage they can out of the system — to the point where anything that even smells like a “good gesture” is rightfully met with suspicion and contempt from the people they’ve been so blissfully exploring.

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Because when someone has been lying for a long time, any truth they might tell would be assumed to be lies, any good deed would be assumed to have an ulterier motive.

      “Boy who cried wolf” basically.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Oh shoot…I missed it. I DVR’d the election results, and never got around to watching it. Don’t tell me! No spoilers! I want to see if it we finally elect our first black president. It’s Obama vs McCain.

        …also, I’ve been in a coma for a while. 2024, huh? Do we have flying cars yet?

    • grepe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      maaaan! you must come from a country where the laws actually protect customers from the corporations rather than the other way around… otherwise you could never come up with such a naive statement.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Because we’re Americans. Ignorant is kind of our power play! We’ll angrily defend a position we know nothing about, and then call YOU wrong for being well versed on the matter.

      • limelight79@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ha! I’m going to retort one example of an extremely rare edge case, and that invalidates your entire argument!

    • Lightsong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t know much about this. How is this not “one of them”? It seems to be like one of them.

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        The company doesn’t get any benefit at all on its taxes by collecting donations from customers. Those donations belong to the customers, who themselves can claim them on taxes. The company is doing a good thing by encouraging and soliciting charity.