Forum Thread

Your Location Should Determine Your Tax Bracket

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 5 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I've always thought it was odd that tax brackets are set in stone without taking into account where the individual or family lives. Not taking cost of living into account when determining a tax bracket places a much greater burden on an individual who lives in a metropolitan as opposed to a lesser populated area. For example--someone earning $185,000 as a businessman in rural Iowa has a much lower total tax burden than someone who lives in Chigago and makes $185,000. The cost of living in Chicago is astronomically higher than rural Iowa, but these two individuals are expected to pay the exact same amount in taxes.

    What do you think? Do you agree the IRS should reevaluate the way they determine tax brackets and make it based more off of location instead of a set number? Or do you think the current structure is fine as it is?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I definitely agree. I've always found it frustrating that my tax burden is higher just because I live in a city and not in a rural area. There has to be a better way than having a one size fits all tax bracket structure.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    It certainly would be nice if they used some kind of multiplier, depending upon your address' cost of living. I'm certain they already have most every city indexed, right? So the math is likely already done. Just need to apply it to the tax brackets. And I agree, that would produce a much more accurate number.

    But... it wouldn't be 100% accurate. Thinking about it, there would still be issues. What about commuters from suburbs? Or those that travel all over the place for work? Their cost of living wouldn't necessarily be reflexive on their psychical address, and it wouldn't be fair to tax them lower than their city dweller counterpart, would it, just because they are more happy with a longer commute and a more rural home?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I've never thought about that. But it makes sense, right? That's how they determine minimum wage in many places, based off of cost of living. Only fair to use that same logic to how much taxes someone pays.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    bryce28 Wrote: I've never thought about that. But it makes sense, right? That's how they determine minimum wage in many places, based off of cost of living. Only fair to use that same logic to how much taxes someone pays.
    I agree. Having numbers set in stone without taking any other factors into account just doesn't seem fair. I understand there are a lot of variables that should be taken into account when determining the value of properties and other things and that's how federal tax brackets should work, as well.