I'll take a stab at this:Can someone point me at a nice concise description of the difference between a "progressive" and "regressive" tax? . . . - Jason Goray, Sheridan, NE
"Progressive" means basically your taxes go up in proportion as your share of the item being taxed (income, property, sales, etc.) goes up. Note the "in proportion" -- this means, for example, that those with a higher income pay a higher PERCENTAGE of their income than those with a lower income.
"Regressive" means that regardless of their possessions (income, property, sales, etc.), everyone pays the same percentage in taxes.
"Retrogressive" (the 3rd term in this series) is a tax that is the opposite of progressive -- those with the least pay a larger share of the tax.
An example of a progressive tax is the federal income tax, where the tax rate goes up as income goes up. But all the exemptions & deductions in it make the tax much less progressive in practice.
An example a regressive tax is the MN sales tax -- that is 6.5% for everybody. The exemption for basic necessities (food & clothing) is an attempt to make this tax somewhat more progressive.
The adding of extra local sales taxes in areas where many poor people live/work/buy (to fund a domed stadium, for example) is an example of a retrogressive tax. Other examples would be taxes on cigarettes, which are mostly smoked by poor people. Some localities are even more blatantly retrogressive: they have liquor taxes where beer (mostly purchased by poor people) is taxed at a higher rate than fine wine (mostly purchased by richer people).
Many of the new taxes (disguised as 'user fees') end up being retrogressive in practice, especially because of high minimums or 'base charges'. For example, Minneapolis Utility charges are quite retrogressive: an elderly widow living alone in her house will likely pay for more utilities than she actually uses, due to the minimum charges the city has set on these.
In general, my opinion is that taxes in the USA end up being retrogressive in practice, despite an apparent bias toward progressiveness. Poor & middle-class people pay far more than their fair share, the rich pay far less than their fair share. But that is not a discussion for this list.
For Christians, the requirement for "progressive" taxation comes from the words of Jesus, in the parable of the widow's mite.
Tim Bonham, Ward 12, Standish-Ericsson
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
