The Giving Pledge: Reducing Income Inequality

I feel as if many people misunderstand how the top 1% are important to philanthropy. To be honest some of the largest donors are in the top .001% category. People claim how greedy we are. However, the data shows that the United States is in fact the most generous nation in the world. Let’s look at the data to reveal just how generous we are. According to “Giving US: The Numbers”, in 2010 total contributions to charity were $290 billion. $211 billion of this total amount was made by individuals. Family foundations contributed $19.5 billion while corporate donations were over $15 billion. Clearly, these are some large amounts.

This brings me to my next point of income inequality. True, there is income inequality however inequality exists in so many different aspects of our live. Brad Pitt and George Clooney have an inequality of women they can get or date compared to the average guy. Obese people have inequality in the terms of the calories they consume. Bill Gates has a net worth has a net worth that is over 104,000 times that of the average American. This is something that professor Don Boudreaux at George Mason has pointed out. Sure Bill Gates has a net worth that is 104,000 times the average American however does Gates enjoy 104,000 times more calories or 104,000 times more homes as the average American or 104,000 times happier than the average person . I think the average person tends to believe that Bill Gates life is 104,000 times better than their own given how much money he has. However, I would argue Bill Gates has a rougher life than most. If you look at his work schedule, how often he travels, and people always asking him for money and the stress that creates I think people would still want their old life back. Everyone wants more money, however if you got to the point of having Bill Gates kind of money it would become more of a burden. Also people like to imagine having as much wealth as someone else but never can imagine the work that has to be put in to earn that money. This is what I call invisible inputs yet visible outputs. People see the outputs of wealth or income yet easily forget how much hard work was put in to get to that point.

Bill Gates has amassed so much wealth he is giving most of it away to charity. In fact the second richest person Warren Buffett is giving all of his money to another rich person Bill Gates! Really what is happening is Warren Buffett pledged nearly all his net worth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. If anything this will reduce income and net worth inequality. Buffett and Gates are signed the “Giving Pledge” which is a pledge to donate at least 50% of one’s net worth to charity. As of 2010, 69 billionaires were signed up to give away and at least $125 billion has been promised by the first 40 donors. Of course this figure should grow since the billionaires will no doubt get richer which will increase the amount that goes to charity. I have a feeling more billionaires will join which will also increase the amount. It would be interesting to see if anyone backs out if the economy were to collapse.

What is interesting however is that Buffett and Gates want other people to not only pledge to give their money away but also pay higher taxes. My own theory on this is that they want anyone else to never become as rich as them. If you favor the estate tax, higher taxes, and for people giving all their money to charity it makes it harder to amassed large sums of wealth which make Buffett and Gates look even better in historical terms. Buffet and Gates are extremely competitive people and it seems as if they want to enhance their legacy from beyond the grave.

Buffett Tax

This week President Obama announced the Buffet Tax. The Buffet Tax would tax people making people who earn more than $1 million. In Buffett’s article in the New York Times entitled “Stop Coddling the Super Rich” Buffett makes the case that he pays lower taxes than his secretary. This of course is true since Warren Buffett’s income is taxed at a much lower since Buffett earns all his income on capital gains which is much lower than ordinary income (income from working). However, what I find interesting is that Buffett leaves out the taxes that his company pays in order for him to receive that income. Buffett runs Berkshire Hathaway which is a large conglomerate of companies. When Berkshire Hathaway earns income that income is taxed at a corporate rate. In 2010, Berkshire Hathaway paid 29.4% in corporate income taxes. Generally companies pay 35% in taxes but companies can lower this rate through their tax department. Berkshire Hathaway then passes their income to shareholders which Warren Buffett is. The income is first taxed at the corporate rate then Warren Buffett pays individual taxes. So in essence this income is taxed twice. Warren Buffett claims his income tax rate is 17.4%. However, the true tax rate Warren Buffett pays is 46.8%. People don’t really look at the tax rate corporations pay because people assume corporations are paying the taxes not people. People pay taxes not corporations. If corporations pay taxes its less money they have to operate which lowers their return which lowers the return of millions of shareholders. If Warren Buffett really is claiming his tax rate is 17.4% then he is essentially saying that Berkshire Hathaway pays no income taxes. Clearly, this is nonsense. Buffett would have more money if his company didn’t pay taxes. It is frequently brought up that although corporations are in a 35% bracket they don’t really pay it. This point is valid although I would point out lowering the tax a company pays comes at a cost. Hiring accountants and creating tax departments are not cheap. This cost is never talked about though. A company can’t magically lower their taxes without a cost. It would be interesting to see someone study the cost of taxes if you included how much time, energy, and money it took for corporations to lower their tax rate.

I myself am a fan of a progressive flat tax. This would free up corporate accountants and individuals from calculating their tax rate. Tax revenue would no doubt increase because it would be very hard if not impossible to shelter income if people paid one flat rate. Right now there are many legal ways to reduce taxes although billions of revenue is never collected because the tax system is so complex that very few people even understand it. The only problem I worry about is that if we raised more revenue it would lead politicians to want to spend more. It would be as if politicians went to a buffet and realized there was even more food than they thought.

I myself am a fan of Warren Buffett when it comes to his investing advice. However, his political views leave much to be desired. If Buffett really felt he was paying to little in taxes he could always voluntarily pay more. No one is stopping him from giving more money to the government. His actions show he is okay with paying the existing tax or else he would voluntary give more. You can’t say you are for raising taxes if you comply to pay lower rates than you otherwise would.

Warren Buffett: Higher Taxes Please

Warren Buffet in a New York Times op-ed yesterday said that rich people should pay more in taxes. Buffett points out that he paid 17.4% (or $6.9 million) in taxes last year. The reason Buffett is in a low tax bracket is because nearly all of his income comes from capital gains (buying and selling stock) which is taxed at a much lower rate than ordinary income (wages from a job). Warren Buffet claims he doesn’t mind paying higher taxes. Interesting that Buffett doesn’t voluntarily paying his highest marginal tax rate of 35%. In fact if Buffett felt really patriotic he could make a gift to the U.S. Treasury Department to pay down the United States national debt. I have a feeling Buffett isn’t going to be making a gift any time soon.

Our tax system is extremely progressive. The top 1% (people making $380,000 and up) pay an average tax rate of 23.3% this is higher than any other bracket. Meanwhile the average tax rate for the bottom 50% is a mere 2.6%. In addition to this, the top 1% of taxpayers are paying 40% of all income taxes. This percentage has only been increasing since 1980 not decreasing. The top marginal rates since 1980 have also decreased. If politicians wanted the top 1% to pay “more of their share” of income taxes all they would have to do is lower the marginal rates.

No doubt Buffett is probably one of the best investors of all time. However, I find it surprising that someone with an economics degree from Columbia doesn’t understand demand for anything slopes downward the higher it is priced including taxes. If Buffett was really serious about paying his fair share he would voluntarily pay more in taxes. Buffett can say how he wants to pay more in higher taxes, but until he voluntarily does so it’s all talk. Talk, rhetoric, and blame are all great tools for politicians. Blame in fact is an unlimited resource.