I think how it works in the US is that you subtract the amount you donated (up to 50% of your income) from your income, and then the tax you pay is some percentage of that lowered income.
Yeah, as Gina points out, tax deductions are different, they let you reclaim a fraction of what you donate. e.g. if you’re getting taxed at a plausible marginal rate of like 40%, then, assuming you don’t drop into a lower tax bracket, you effectively get 40% of the amount you donated back.
In the link, the proposal is that if everyone’s getting taxed 40%, you instead tax everyone at 41%, and they choose where to send that extra 1%.
From what I understand, donations usually result in tax deductions equal to a portion of the donation (I think 15-30% in Canada) but the article suggests basically making them 100% tax deductible.
This sounds pretty similar to what we already have for tax deductions in the United States. Or did I misunderstand you?
I think how it works in the US is that you subtract the amount you donated (up to 50% of your income) from your income, and then the tax you pay is some percentage of that lowered income.
Example (over-simplified):
Income: $80,000 --> Taxes (15%): $12,000
Income: $80,000, Donations: $15,000 --> Taxable income: $65,000
So in this example, even though you donated $15k, your taxes only went down by $2,250.
Yeah, as Gina points out, tax deductions are different, they let you reclaim a fraction of what you donate. e.g. if you’re getting taxed at a plausible marginal rate of like 40%, then, assuming you don’t drop into a lower tax bracket, you effectively get 40% of the amount you donated back.
In the link, the proposal is that if everyone’s getting taxed 40%, you instead tax everyone at 41%, and they choose where to send that extra 1%.
From what I understand, donations usually result in tax deductions equal to a portion of the donation (I think 15-30% in Canada) but the article suggests basically making them 100% tax deductible.