How many dem senators would there need to be to raise top bracket to 70%?

[Matty]

In other words,

besides Manchin and sinema, which other dem senators would likely balk at voting in favor of 70% tax rates on highest earners?

Are Manchin and sinema the only ones who would oppose?

[GeneralMacArthur]

70% top tax bracket is a really dumb idea and I would vote against a Dem who wanted to do it if I thought it had an actual chance of happening.

And spare me the exhausted "under Eisenhower the top tax bracket was 90%" talking point.  Exactly zero people paid that 90%.  Men like Andrew Carnegie and J.D. Rockefeller weren't paying 90% of their income to the federal government and you know it.

[Sir Mohamed]

None, I assume? I don't even think Sanders endorsed this, didn't he?

[Mr. Ukucasha]

Most Dem senators would probably oppose it if the top bracket remained at the current amount.

Even if the top bracket were raised substantially, many would still oppose it. No European country has a top bracket even close to being that high. It is true that America's used to be higher, but that rate was only on paper. In reality, there were so many loopholes, deductions, and exemptions that have since been removed that no one actually paid that marginal tax rate. Effective tax rates on the wealthiest taxpayers were only slightly higher back then than they are now.

Dems should tax capital gains, carried interest, and dividends as ordinary income for high earners instead.

[Mr. Ukucasha]

70% top tax bracket is a really dumb idea and I would vote against a Dem who wanted to do it if I thought it had an actual chance of happening.

And spare me the exhausted "under Eisenhower the top tax bracket was 90%" talking point.  Exactly zero people paid that 90%.  Men like Andrew Carnegie and J.D. Rockefeller weren't paying 90% of their income to the federal government and you know it.

And before someone says "hurr durr that was the marginal tax rate," no one actually paid 90% of every dollar they made over that amount either back then. In reality, there were so many loopholes, deductions, and exemptions in the tax code that have since been removed. The effective tax rates on the wealthiest taxpayers were only slightly higher back then than they are now.

[Mr. Ukucasha]

None, I assume? I don't even think Sanders endorsed this, didn't he?

AOC has endorsed a 70% top tax bracket and Sanders endorsed a wealth tax as high as 8%/year. Of course, those are just two Congresspeople and the vast majority of Congresspeople from both parties would oppose these proposals.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Corporate taxes are gonna be raised to 28 and Warren wealth tax is gonna take care of solvency of SSA, then the Top rates will be raised again if there is reparations they aren't gonna touch top rates until the determine reparations and that's probably gonna happen when we get DC Statehood I count MO and FL as Pickup and losing WV that's 52/48 and 54/48 there will be reparations

Kunce said he's not touching anything except corporate taxes and wealth tax

[Attorney General & PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I think all of these vote against it:

Kelly
Feinstein
Bennet
Hickenlooper
Carper
Coons
Ossoff
Warnock
Durbin
Cardin
Peters
Tester
Masto
Rosen
Shaheen
Hassan
Heinrich
Brown
Wyden
Casey
Reed
Warner
Kaine
Murray
Manchin
Baldwin
Klobuchar
Sinema
King

So it fails 22-78

[Ferguson97]

And spare me the exhausted "under Eisenhower the top tax bracket was 90%" talking point.  Exactly zero people paid that 90%.  Men like Andrew Carnegie and J.D. Rockefeller weren't paying 90% of their income to the federal government and you know it.

I mean, of course they're weren't. Because that's not how marginal tax rates work.