Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Trending
    • Monroe Area High School Football: Week 2 Roundup
    • Commentary: The old carmakers are running on empty
    • Tens of thousands march across Germany to protest far-right party AfD | Civil Rights News
    • Falcons dealing with yet another QB concern before Week 1
    • Millions dropped from SNAP food assistance as funding faces September uncertainty
    • The Monkees: When a Fake Band Became Real Pop Icons
    • Second crypto billionaire says donated record £36 million to Reform UK
    • Will Houthi advances in Yemen give Iran leverage in its war with the US? | Conflict News
    Prime US News
    • Home
    • World News
    • Latest News
    • US News
    • Sports
    • Politics
    • Opinions
    • More
      • Tech News
      • Trending News
      • World Economy
    Prime US News
    Home»Opinions»A regressive rate tax could fill the Social Security reserve gap
    Opinions

    A regressive rate tax could fill the Social Security reserve gap

    Team_Prime US NewsBy Team_Prime US NewsJune 13, 2026No Comments1 Min Read
    Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Reddit Telegram Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email


    To the editor: For wage earners, the Social Safety tax is currently 6.2% for each worker and employer for the primary $184,500 of annual wages, falling to zero on all wages past that (self-employed people pay 12.4% of the primary $184,500 of internet earnings).

    A generally prompt treatment for the projected reserve fund depletion is to easily lengthen or eradicate the taxable wage cap, which is at present yearly adjusted upward for inflation (“The Social Security crisis should be dominating the Senate campaign,” June 12). What by no means appears to be thought of is adjusting the tax fee. I might assume that going from a hard and fast fee to a regressive fee would procure extra income and will truly scale back the tax for many wage earners (necessary for political acceptance).

    It may look one thing like this: 6% tax on employer and worker on the primary $200,000 earned; 5% on the subsequent $100,000; adopted by 4% to three% to 2% on $100,000 increments to ultimately 1% for earnings over $600,000 yearly. Whereas this may not procure the identical income as merely eliminating the wage cap, it might be rather more palatable politically.

    Bob Fey, Orange



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Previous ArticleTrump’s name must be removed from Kennedy Center by noon Saturday, judge says
    Next Article The ‘NBA blocks champions’ quiz
    Team_Prime US News
    • Website

    Related Posts

    Opinions

    Two L.A. Times pieces ‘harmonized with one beautiful message’

    September 12, 2026
    Opinions

    Letters to the Editor: Trump’s Obamacare rebate stunt is pure ‘desperation’ ahead of midterms

    September 12, 2026
    Opinions

    Contributor: The administration’s growing arrogance is not patriotism

    September 12, 2026
    Add A Comment
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Most Popular

    Severe weather to impact parts of US over Labor Day weekend

    September 6, 2026

    Iran declares Strait of Hormuz closed as ‘unauthorised’ vessel hit

    July 12, 2026

    Major NFL insider finally addresses ‘really sad’ Mike Vrabel-Dianna Russini situation

    May 23, 2026
    Our Picks

    Monroe Area High School Football: Week 2 Roundup

    September 12, 2026

    Commentary: The old carmakers are running on empty

    September 12, 2026

    Tens of thousands march across Germany to protest far-right party AfD | Civil Rights News

    September 12, 2026
    Categories
    • Latest News
    • Opinions
    • Politics
    • Sports
    • Tech News
    • Trending News
    • US News
    • World Economy
    • World News
    • Privacy Policy
    • Disclaimer
    • Terms and Conditions
    • About us
    • Contact us
    Copyright © 2024 Primeusnews.com All Rights Reserved.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.