Apparently, in Canada, we all work until July before we get any money for ourselves.
We work for seven months to pay taxes.
(We have many taxes that people do not even see.)
However, we have excellent universal healthcare and a good social safety net.
Per capita is meaningless here. Maybe we spend more on vitamins and plastic surgery, or heart transplants.
What we are talking about is tax burden.
A American paid $15000 a year in taxes, and a Frenchman $35000 on the same income. Now that American might spend $9000 on insurance & medical and the Frenchman only $1000 out of pocket, but he actually pays more.
You didn’t think that one all the way through.
Yes, since the Frenchman spends $10000 more, net.
The point is that the Frenchman’s additional tax burden is not going towards healthcare. France actually spends less on healthcare even if you only count public sources (i.e. government).
This is an incredibly important point with a very telling link.
Forget taxes: That’s political smoke and mirrors. Look at total expenditures per capita.
If a lot of countries are spending far less per person on health care, it’s ridiculous to suggest that their taxes are phenomenally higher. I mean, for Australia in 2015 it was US$4420 per person. That’s a tenth of their average household income. How do you get a really big tax boost from that? And, as noted, they get better healthcare. Paying a bit more in taxes for cheaper, better healthcare shouldn’t be this hard to understand.
The Guardian analysis puts it rather less, at least for a gross of around £40k, which is well above the UK median. It all depends, I suppose, on how you calculate averages.
And the big difference in France’s case is probably down to pension contributions as much as or more than to medical care.
If there is a top marginal rate of 70%, it’s hard to blame it on healthcare, unless you believe the U.S.A. had a national healthcare system in the 1950s.
(ignoring the political commentary, this is a source for the top US income tax bracket in 1950:
1950s Tax Fantasy Is a Republican Nightmare - Bloomberg)
Since US healthcare is about twice as costly as European healthcare, and even worse if we count it by percentage covered, the OP should be quite obviously wrong. In fact, just the government covered part of US healthcare costs ore than most European nations spend on full UHC. So yeah, obviously not true.
I live in Norway. I make just short of 100k $ on an average exchange rate. I pay 25 % tax. According to the statistics bureau, that is about average.
Nearly no-one pays more than 36 %. It is theoretically possible and you can find the few and proud if you scrutinize the tax lists. But most people who have incomes high enough to pass the mid-30s tax bracket make enough to set themselves up to pay less tax if they want to.
Yes, that counts a lot of Canadian taxes not part of income tax.
For example, well over half the price of gasoline is taxes.
My property tax is over $7,000 a year - which includes school board taxes.
(But my parents apparently used to pay more for a home valued less in New Jersey).
Both employer and employee pay CPP and EI premiums - works out to about $3000 a year. But… that was included in the numbers I cited earlier, I think.
But the logic is 27% income, 13% sales tax, 9% property taxes, and add miscellaneous taxes… It adds up.
“statutory health care plan at 5.25% on earned income”
Thus they pay 5.25 tax for their healthcare.
So indeed, it is partially going to healthcare.
Spending per capita means little, since quite a bit of “healthcare” is optional. Also America is known for higher costs and also expensive procedures.
I don’t live in Norway, but from googling it:
100K income in Norway
-7.2K Social Security Tax
-26.5K Income tax (28% of total minus personal deduction)
-2K extra income tax on income above 75K (9%)
-7K VAT (conservative estimate, depends on your spending)
That’s about 43% taxation. Of course, if you own your home outright, based on average price of homes, and have 200K in other assets, add another 7K or so in taxes - so it becomes 50%.
Quite a bit more than 25%. But, I understand, less than the neighbors like Sweden. I guess it helps to have huge oil/gas resources.
Actually, it means that when I get a paycheck, it has an entry for the full wage, a taxes deducted, and a money put into my bank account. The money going into my bak account is roughly 75 % of the full amount and the taxes deducted are 25 %. With some leeway because taxes are not the same every month.
Thats what 25 % tax means.
If you want to be totally accurate, I also pay about $ 300/month in local taxes, but I only have 12.5 5 tax in December, so it works out.
VAT is generally considered a cost of living thing.
You are not figuring deductions into your calculation. Everyone has some. Mortgage interest, student loans, union dues, children, spouse, etc.
Oh yes, the oil. We don’t spend the oil money. It all goes into a sovereign wealth fund. We spend dividends of the fund. Thats why the budget sometimes show a 30 % surplus.
The reason we have lower taxes is, I am told, that we manage to keep a large percentage of the workforce employed, through generous maternity policies.
Yeah, the United States got really short-changed there.
I think you’re being a bit underhanded here. Norway chose to place their taxes on consumption rather than income. Cars have a what? 300% tax on them?
I know every long weekend half of Norway storms the border to Sweden for shopping.
Indeed; the French are notoriously timid and fearful, and decided to forgo all their armed forces to spend all the money they sucker from the foolish Americains for defense on wine and baguettes and cheap cigarettes; since their economy is based on bicycling around selling onions to each other, they are content with a simple rustic existence a la Clochmerle with no pretensions to Yankee standards of civilisation.
That happened about the time they got out of Africa.
Right. In France, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier just emerges from the fog off Brest and is immediately commissioned into the French navy at no cost to the taxpayer. :rolleyes:
Spending per capita means everything. Your claim was that the French have a higher tax burden because of healthcare costs. If the French government is spending less than US federal/state governments on healthcare per person, that claim is obviously wrong. It doesn’t matter whether US spending is elevated because of optional/expensive procedures; the fact that US spending is greater means your claim was clearly incorrect.
I don’t know how to explain this to you any more clearly.
They do:
“statutory health care plan at 5.25% on earned income”
Thus they pay 5.25 tax for their healthcare. Thus that claim is obviously true.