Sweden Has a 70 Percent Tax Rate and It Is Fine

[Deleted]

I wish I lived in Sweden still, they are better at arranging their tax-money than we are in Denmark.
F.ex. the cars are almost 50% cheaper in Sweden, than in Denmark.

We basically pay the same amount of tax, I just like their way a little bit more, when I worked there for 4 years.

[sopeonaroap]

That doesn't even make any sense. Do you know how graduated tax systems actually work?

Are you the person who thinks that a person will make less money when moving up a tax bracket?

if your employer takes out proper taxes via wage brackets (they don't have to, but it's more accurate for all involved if they do) in the USA (any state), the jump in federal taxes from one bracket to another will actually cost you money vs working 2 less hours

it's not extreme and not enough to worry about really, but if i'm in a situation where i work 88 hours instead of 86, i take home more money to not work those 2 extra hours because federal taxes jump 550%

[Machismo]

if your employer takes out proper taxes via wage brackets (they don't have to, but it's more accurate for all involved if they do) in the USA (any state), the jump in federal taxes from one bracket to another will actually cost you money vs working 2 less hours

it's not extreme and not enough to worry about really, but if i'm in a situation where i work 88 hours instead of 86, i take home more money to not work those 2 extra hours because federal taxes jump 550%

No, only that extra income is taxed at a higher rate. I have employees, and I do federal withholding. It's simply not true. Only the money within that specific bracket is charged a higher rate. Everything below that is a lower rate.

[xGLxAnubis]

Swedes in high-earning brackets in particular are worse off than American counterparts.

Who cares? The massively wealthy are BAD for an economy and therefore bad for the majority of the citizens. As income goes up, MPS goes up, and moving money is the best money. (Higher MPS means less moving money). A strong middle class is extremely important for an economy. Worrying about people's well being at the very top is asinine; even being worse off than their American counterpart, they're still miles ahead of the Average American.

Boohoo for them. Sweden has a stronger middle class. Having a smaller economy is fine when literally EVERY other income bracket, except the top, is better off (As per your own link.)

[Fugus]

Many people have pointed out that while the United States is much richer than Sweden, it's more unequal. That's true, but I think many people have a picture of this in their head where the difference is massive. Here's what the actual distributions look like. Using those in concert with the data I posted regarding personal wealth and disposable income, the picture that emerges is a higher standard of living for the top three quintiles of Americans, with a large advantage in the top two quintiles (keeping in mind that the pie linked above is a larger pie per capita in the United States).

I realize people will just continue to insist that Swedish people totally have more money after you adjust for [insert thing that the OECD already adjusts for in the linked data], but this simply betrays their lack of engagement with reality.

Sweden, of course, is fine. But it's significantly less wealthy than the United States and Swedes in high-earning brackets in particular are worse off than American counterparts.

Just looking at that graph.

From it, the bottom 20% have nearly double what they have in the US (5.1% US vs 9% Swedish) and the second 20% have about 30% more compared to us (10.3% US vs 14.1% Swedish). When you combine that with their social safety net giving them access to far more than we have in the US without having to go bankrupt accessing it.

That accounts for a LOT and does end up giving them massively more for their bottom 40% compared to the US.

Edit:


Even the bottom 3rd 20% is doing about 10% better before you look at the safety net (15.4% US vs 17.7% Swedish).

The bottom 60% are all doing size-ably better while the 4th 20% are doing about equal to ours with the top 20% being the only ones doing worse but not even majorly so and given the level of incomes up there, many of them it won't even have any change in lifestyle.

[Thelin]

I have a lot of co workers who refuse to over time and I'm like why.. especially during holidays. Their answer is always higher bracket, more taxes. It makes no sense you're still making a fuckton more it's not like you're suddenly going to break even.

hate to break it to you but your co-workers are morons then.

[xGLxAnubis]

if your employer takes out proper taxes via wage brackets (they don't have to, but it's more accurate for all involved if they do) in the USA (any state), the jump in federal taxes from one bracket to another will actually cost you money vs working 2 less hours

it's not extreme and not enough to worry about really, but if i'm in a situation where i work 88 hours instead of 86, i take home more money to not work those 2 extra hours because federal taxes jump 550%

This is strictly false. This is not at all how marginal tax brackets work. An extra dollar is ALWAYS going to be more money, even after taxes, no matter how much money you make.

You are only taxed on the NEW brackets income, not your total. If you're exactly at a bracket, and make 1 Dollar to push you into the next bracket, the ONLY thing being taxed at the new bracket, is that 1 Dollar.

[pinelakias]

Seriously, how many of you actually work? Is everyone on the "no taxes" bracket? Because you don't seem to understand how taxes work in most countries...

[xGLxAnubis]

hate to break it to you but your co-workers are morons then.

Similar to the people who file 0 exemptions because that way they get a huge tax return every year! You could have already had that money in your pocket if you had filed higher, instead you gave the government an interest free loan.

[Deleted]

OECD disposable income accounts for this already. They also show household net financial positions, where the average American household has accumulated nearly double the average wealth of the average Swedish household.

If you're using the personal "you" rather than the general "you", this is even more true - I would be substantially worse off with a chunk of my income being taxed at top Swedish marginal rates and my personal return wouldn't be even close from a few freebies.

The tax system in Sweden wasn't made for the rich, but for the poor.

As you gladly sit and eat yourself fat daily there are plenty of people in your country struggling with debt because of education or an unfortounate desease.

Ask me how much my current education is costing me per year, and how much my friends cancer treatment cost him.

[xGLxAnubis]

Overtime is taxed differently, at a certain point instead of taking home 80c of a dollar you take home 60c of a dollar.

At some places, overtime is taxed differently by your employer; you get the difference back at the end of year.

Bonuses and overtime where I work, are automatically taxed at the highest tax bracket. However, when you file your taxes at the end of the year, that income gets taxed at your actual bracket instead, and your tax return reflects the difference between what you were actually taxed during the year, and what you should have been.

[pinelakias]

PS. I've worked in New York for 2~ years and currently in Stockholm (since Feb '18). Honestly, you can't compare the US with Sverige. Sverige is far better in most categories (like finances, healthcare, quality of life, environment, social, etc.)

[Queen of Hamsters]

Meanwhile, low income Swedes have a higher quality of life than many middle class Americans, nevermind the ones lower than that on the social ladder.
Doesn't matter how poor, you'll have an equal chance to anyone else. Sure the rich can buy their way to good grades, but that shit is being heavily scrutinized now.


Pretty sure you've gotten it wrong though. My taxes are 30%, and I don't run the risk of becoming bankrupt next week when I'm seeing a doctor about my enlarged lymph nodes. Well worth it.

[I Push Buttons]

The point is what the taxes are being spent on.

In USA taxes are stolen/wasted on ridiculous military expenditures and other private corporation scams while the citizens have to pay for education, health and whatever else.

Taxes would not be a problem if they were spent on things that actually help the people instead of feeding private corporations.

You realize that total US government (federal, state, local) spending is $7.6 trillion and the military budget is about $700 billion, which is only slightly more than 9% of that.

You mention education and healthcare in particular as two things we should be spending money on instead... The government spends $1.4 trillion per year on medicare and medicaid, insuring around 1/3 of the population... And $1.13 trillion on education (we are actually right at the top in terms of education spending per student).

[Usernameforforums]

You also ignore the Healthcare, Dental care, Eyecare, Infrastructure quality, Public services and savings that Sweden and most Scandinavian countries have. The US is virtually a third world when you look at the 'poor' or lower income families in each country.

- - - Updated - - -



Do you know how Marginal taxes work?

Actually, no. That’s why there’s a question mark. Please help me understand using my example

[Spectral]

Who cares? The massively wealthy are BAD for an economy and therefore bad for the majority of the citizens. As income goes up, MPS goes up, and moving money is the best money. (Higher MPS means less moving money). A strong middle class is extremely important for an economy. Worrying about people's well being at the very top is asinine; even being worse off than their American counterpart, they're still miles ahead of the Average American.

Boohoo for them. Sweden has a stronger middle class. Having a smaller economy is fine when literally EVERY other income bracket, except the top, is better off (As per your own link.)

As I wrote earlier, the living standard is higher for at least the upper 50% of Americans and the gap becomes large at roughly the top quartile. If you think people that are at roughly the 80th percentile of earnings are somehow bad for an economy, I really don't know what to tell you.

I'm inclined to agree regarding the very top - the United States could stand to reduce the levels of power and wealth that are attainable at the very high end. That would further increase the gap in living standards between the two countries, which would be great for the average American. Nonetheless, the United States already provides a remarkable opportunity for earnings among people that are at the median or better.

- - - Updated - - -

Just looking at that graph.

From it, the bottom 20% have nearly double what they have in the US (5.1% US vs 9% Swedish) and the second 20% have about 30% more compared to us (10.3% US vs 14.1% Swedish). When you combine that with their social safety net giving them access to far more than we have in the US without having to go bankrupt accessing it.

That accounts for a LOT and does end up giving them massively more for their bottom 40% compared to the US.

Edit:


Even the bottom 3rd 20% is doing about 10% better before you look at the safety net (15.4% US vs 17.7% Swedish).

The bottom 60% are all doing size-ably better while the 4th 20% are doing about equal to ours with the top 20% being the only ones doing worse but not even majorly so and given the level of incomes up there, many of them it won't even have any change in lifestyle.

Agreed regarding the bottom quartile - it's much better to be a poor Swede than a poor American. Worth a mention is that many of those poor American residents aren't Americans, but whatever, that's beside the point and teasing it out of the data is hard anyway.

With regard to the middle 20%, 15.4% of the American income is more than 17.7% of Swedish income. For evidence of that claim, see earlier posts regarding OECD data on disposable income and household wealth. This is close enough that it's probably not a big deal one way or the other.

In all, the impression you should be getting is that for a median individual, the countries aren't too different from a productivity, income, and wealth perspective. For a low-income person, Sweden is better. For a high income person (which is primarily skilled labor rather than a proverbial "1%"), income and wealth in the United States are substantially higher.

Of course, this isn't all directly related to tax policy, there are numerous other factors worth considering. As previously mentioned upthread, I'm not claiming that one country is "better" than the other or that there's an obviously correct policy approach. My core point is primarily that "and they're fine" is a flatly stupid way of looking at the world that doesn't actually consider meaningful differences and tradeoffs in policy.

- - - Updated - - -

It's weird that Genn got perma-banned, but others post lie after lie... and get to stick around.

Did Genn ever do anything other than post topics without commentary though? Hubcap doesn't the same thing to a great extent and it's not great, but I can't say I miss Genn's hit and run nothings. I don't really even get what the motivation is for posting an article with a copy-pasted block of text without any additional thoughts on the matter.

[Nihilist74]

I would say this is fine but I would ask how much does a Swede have to pay for health care, how much help do they get with housing, food, transportation, clothing and other things for survival. I would imagine they have a good safty net if they lose their job or have some other kind of economic crisis.

[Machismo]

As I wrote earlier, the living standard is higher for at least the upper 50% of Americans and the gap becomes large at roughly the top quartile. If you think people that are at roughly the 80th percentile of earnings are somehow bad for an economy, I really don't know what to tell you.

I'm inclined to agree regarding the very top - the United States could stand to reduce the levels of power and wealth that are attainable at the very high end. That would further increase the gap in living standards between the two countries, which would be great for the average American. Nonetheless, the United States already provides a remarkable opportunity for earnings among people that are at the median or better.

- - - Updated - - -


Agreed regarding the bottom quartile - it's much better to be a poor Swede than a poor American. Worth a mention is that many of those poor American residents aren't Americans, but whatever, that's beside the point and teasing it out of the data is hard anyway.

With regard to the middle 20%, 15.4% of the American income is more than 17.7% of Swedish income. For evidence of that claim, see earlier posts regarding OECD data on disposable income and household wealth. This is close enough that it's probably not a big deal one way or the other.

In all, the impression you should be getting is that for a median individual, the countries aren't too different from a productivity, income, and wealth perspective. For a low-income person, Sweden is better. For a high income person (which is primarily skilled labor rather than a proverbial "1%"), income and wealth in the United States are substantially higher.

Of course, this isn't all directly related to tax policy, there are numerous other factors worth considering. As previously mentioned upthread, I'm not claiming that one country is "better" than the other or that there's an obviously correct policy approach. My core point is primarily that "and they're fine" is a flatly stupid way of looking at the world that doesn't actually consider meaningful differences and tradeoffs in policy.

- - - Updated - - -


Did Genn ever do anything other than post topics without commentary though? Hubcap doesn't the same thing to a great extent and it's not great, but I can't say I miss Genn's hit and run nothings. I don't really even get what the motivation is for posting an article with a copy-pasted block of text without any additional thoughts on the matter.

Genn had commentary. I'd say he posted a lot less blatant lies than the likes of Hubcap. Hell, Hubcap often leaves the copy/pasted extra parts of the websites in there, like advertisements and completely unrelated bullshit.

[Draco-Onis]

You realize that total US government (federal, state, local) spending is $7.6 trillion and the military budget is about $700 billion, which is only slightly more than 9% of that.

You mention education and healthcare in particular as two things we should be spending money on instead... The government spends $1.4 trillion per year on medicare and medicaid, insuring around 1/3 of the population... And $1.13 trillion on education (we are actually right at the top in terms of education spending per student).

Yes but our spending on all these services is broken especially health care because we lack regulations and price controls like other countries. All you have to do is look at the results.

[Endus]

I bet the tax system encourages people to aim for a lower salary were the high taxes don't kick in. Instead of $98K they might shoot for $50K.

Someone doesn't understand how tax brackets work, and that person is Hubcap.