Poll: Most Tea Party Supporters Say Their Taxes Are Fair

CBS News Poll analysis by the CBS News Polling Unit: Sarah Dutton, Jennifer De Pinto, Fred Backus and Anthony Salvanto.

As Tea Partiers gather for today's rally in Boston, home of the original Tea Party protest in 1773, 42 percent of Tea Party supporters think the amount of income taxes they'll pay this year is unfair, according to a new CBS News/ New York Times poll.

Yet while some say the Tea Party stands for "Taxed Enough Already," most Tea Party supporters - 52 percent - say their taxes are fair, the poll shows. Just under one in five Americans say they support the Tea Party movement.

However, those most active in the Tea Party are less satisfied with the amount of income taxes they will pay. Fifty-five percent of Tea Party activists - those who have attended a rally or donated money - (about 4 percent of Americans overall) say their income taxes are unfair.

Americans overall are more likely than Tea Partiers to describe the income taxes they'll pay this year as fair - 62 percent do, according to the poll, conducted April 5 - 12.

Majorities across all income levels say their income taxes are fair, as do most Republicans and Democrats.

More from the Poll:

Tea Party Supporters: Who They Are and What They Believe
Tea Partiers View Palin, Beck and Bush Favorably
Tea Party Activists Small but Passionate Group
"Birther" Myth Persists Among Tea Partiers, All Americans
Most Tea Partiers Believe Too Much Made of Problems Facing Blacks

Read the Complete Poll on Tea Party Members (PDF)
Read the Complete Poll on What Tea Partiers Believe (PDF)

---

This poll was conducted among a random sample of 1,580 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone April 5-12, 2010. Phone numbers were dialed from RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher.

An oversample of people who describe themselves as supporters of the Tea Party movement were interviewed, for a total of 881 interviews. The results were then weighted in proportion to the adult population. The margin of error for the sample of Tea Party supporters is three points. This poll release conforms to the Standards of Disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

This poll release conforms to the Standards of Disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

[funonthewater]

I was visiting Washington DC the day of the demonstration about the "Fair Tax". I stopped one of the protesters to ask him what he was advocating. He and his wife spoke with me. He told me about the "fair" 23% sales tax that they are proposing. I then asked him how much he made last year. He said $65K. I then asked him how much he pays in federal income taxes. He said 28%. He claimed that he couldn't itemize his deductions and that he had no children at home. I didn't believe that he paid 28%, so I went home and calculated his tax return with Turbo Tax.

According to Turbo Tax 2009, if he was married filing jointly and made $65K in 2009, he would have paid 8.175% in federal income taxes. I read on the fairtax.org website that they are advocating the elimination of the FICA tax also. This man pays 6.375% in FICA taxes, so his total tax rate is 14.550%.

Under the "Fair tax" plan, he would have paid 15.333% due to the "prebate" that they propose where people under the poverty level would pay no tax. That means that this man is asking to pay MORE in taxes than he does today! Sounds crazy to me.

So, I went on and calculated the taxes for a person making $105K. This person would pay a total of federal income + payroll taxes of 18.904%. The same person's "Fair" tax rate would be 18.400%. Hmmm... that means that the more wealthy a person, the lower their tax rate would be under the "Fair" tax.

Now, of course this all assumes that these people spend ALL of their income on purchases. We all know that the wealthier people do not spend all of their income on purchases. They have the money to save and invest. This means that the wealthy would pay the lowest tax rate of all.

Is this fair? I think not. Our entire country has been based on the progressive tax system where the wealthy pay a larger portion of the taxes. This, in turn helps the lower wage earners in many, many ways.

Also, the "Fair" tax forgets that many, many low income people have a negative net tax burden. They get more in refunds than they pay in taxes. This comes in the form of tax credits like the earned income credit. The "Fair" tax would not provide any help to these families, so it would result in a huge burden for them.

I think this "Fair" tax is just another ploy by the rich to dupe the average American into helping the rich get richer.

[tmittelstaed]

"...In my case I am trying to put three kids through colleges that my tax money helps support, but I make "too much" money to get any tuition relief and I also can't deduct any significant amount from my taxes for the same reason. I don't mind paying for my kids' education, but why should I have to pay for the education for other kids who might someday be going after the same jobs?..."

I assume your wife is not working then? Or she is working but her contribution to your kids college isn't important so you just don't mention it?

You and your wife might have considered college expenses 20 years ago when you were boffing each other to produce those 3 kids, and perhaps stopped at 2. Espically considering the world is overpopulated, and it is a big stretch for any couple today to claim any moral right to produce more than a replacement number of children. You might also consider that the increased population is the primary thing that is causing prices to rise, as more and more people compete for the same resources on Earth. Population is growing but land and oil and minerals and such are not. Hopefully the college your kids go to will teach them about this and they will not be ignorantly spouting off 20 years from now like you are.

As for why should your tax money be used to pay for someone else's kid to go to college, that's an easy one. It is because that other kid's parents don't have the money and if that other kid does NOT go to college then he is going to be an economic drain on YOUR kids for the rest of their lives. A moment's rational thought would have given you that answer. If there is ONE thing that our government spends money on that has an actual POSITIVE investment return it is education, every dollar spent on it returns multiple dollars in the future, and every dollar withheld from it costs multiple dollars in the future. As the tea partiers claim, someone has to pay those dollars and it's gonna be the college-educated kids who work at jobs that actually generate money for the economy, instead of some service sector job like hamburger-flipping which produces nothing of any lasting value for the economy, let alone significant tax money.

The ONLY people who ever "compete" with each other for a job are the people who only know how to do jobs that anyone can do. If you are worried about your kids competing for jobs then insist that your kids take the college courses in fields that there's a demand for people. Sure, everyone would love to be a "modern artist" and be paid a million dollars for standing there and throwing random paint splotches at a canvas, but if your kids have conned you into paying for that kind of a degree, I don't blame you for being worried. My view is we all have things we like to do that are "personally fulfilling" but if they aren't valued by the rest of the world, you do them on your own time, and you definitely don't waste your parents money on a degree in them.

One of the biggest secrets of the economy is that it costs the society the same money to put people on welfare as it does to reduce unemployment by 5% if the jobs that create that drop are all minimum-wage service sector jobs. That is why the last 3-4 recessions have had longer and longer periods of "jobless recoveries" after the recessions are over, because it's just not worth creating the minimum-wage jobs, when it costs the same to put the minimum-wage workers on extended unemployment benefits AKA welfare. People mostly don't realize this and so they get all lit up about high unemployment, when in reality the only unemployment numbers that are important are the numbers of in-demand job seekers that are out looking for work. When you see the "help wanted" adverts disappear for dentists, doctors, and other normally high-demand job positions, then you know we are in a recession, because at that time we have a surplus of high-demand workers out there unemployed. When those adverts start appearing again then the economy is in recovery.

[cahusker]

Is it not possible that a Tea Party member could believe that their own tax payment is fair AND also believe the fact that 47% do not pay ANY tax is NOT fair. In my case I am trying to put three kids through colleges that my tax money helps support, but I make "too much" money to get any tuition relief and I also can't deduct any significant amount from my taxes for the same reason. I don't mind paying for my kids' education, but why should I have to pay for the education for other kids who might someday be going after the same jobs?

[stychokiller]

A Tax rate of over 20% is nowhere near fair in my estimation. Even God only ASKS for a tithe of 20%. How then does the Govt. justify a rate of 38%?

[WestHoustonGeo]

Quoting:
(I have to ask, if Obama was a republican and White, would the same objections be made?)
Commenting:
John McCain is white and was questioned about his citizenship because he was born in Panama. But, he is proven (by birth certificate and military records) in no uncertain terms, to be the son of two U.S. military personnel, stationed in a U.S. military base in U.S. Territory - the Panama Canal Zone.
If you did not realize that the Canal Zone had been U.S. Territory, that is probably because Jimmy (Mr. Potato Head) Carter gave it away, for no good reason.
You can throw that ?birther? cussword around all you want. It does not change the fact that BHO has not released his real birth certificate, nor his Selective Service registration, nor any of his school records or publications.
That screams of a man with something to hide. But the press has not the intestinal fortitude to report same. And you, by throwing out the race card are making yourself a cartoon.

[mm334]

you cand find all the facts on www.factcheck.org - his Birth certificate is there... google it and you will find that the local newspapers carried it...please this birther stuff is so OLD!! His college information is also available if you look. DID you look up GWB's college when he was president, bet you didn't. Let's work on solving problems, not this other stuff. Don't you think that McCain and the rest of the GOP in their presidential bid would have used the birther stuff if it were true? So,let's move on.

[WestHoustonGeo]

You are missing the point. Some may find taxes now may to be acceptable. But, the grotesque entitlements now envisioned will inevitably mean National bankruptcy or immense tax increase....or both. And the Bush tax reductions will end this year.

[toldyouso21]

I was born in England. I am considered a natural born US citizen because both my mom and dad were US citizens. by law--if at least one of my parents are US citizens and that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt then not only am I a natural born citizen--I could run for President if I wanted to.

I am "natural born" because no bureaucratic process was needed to legally make me eligible for citizenship. Because my mom was a US citizen, I automatically had US citizenship also.

birthers--catch a clue--even if Obama was born in Kenya--if his mom was really born in Kansas--he IS a natural US citizen. He did not have to take a test, go through ICE or Immigration or go through a ceremony--any US citizen by dint of birth is a "natural" as opposed to a "created and sanctioned" US citizen. One involves a lot of interviews, paperwork and investigations--the other is bestowed because of who are parents are and/or where we are at the time of our birth.

Idiots.

[mm334]

THANKS toldyouso21!!!

[Confidential416]

I can't believe people are still discussing this... it's rediculous!

[toldyouso21]

The teabaggers don't like having a black for a President. it is not the taxes--they don't like having a black or a Democrat as a President, but to be honest enough to admit that is there main reason for being in this position, would destroy what little credibility they are trying to create.

[Hardball1911]

Oddly, I have only heard comments about race from those who have no idea what takes place at any of the rallies.

Go ahead and cite that several "politicians" stated they were called racial and homophobic names. As soon as you do, I will ask you this, with as many cameras and microphones that were on site that day, why has nobody been able to find ONE instance of any of it recorded? Hell, Andrew Breitbart even offered a cool $100 grand to the first person who can provide it, yet he is still holding on to that $100 grand. Odd, isn't it? So much racial tension coming from those who claim to be so oppressed.

You might want to consider opening YOUR mind when you demand that others open theirs. That would be a good start. And before you try to call me racist, you have no idea what my ethnicity is. If you guess caucasian you would be sorely incorrect.

[Studyin2Show]

What about black tea party supporters like me. Do we just have a problem with a black president? Ironically, a lot of the tea partiers supported Alan Keyes and he's waaaaay blacker than President Obama. So, no, I have no problem with a black president..... I just think we elected the wrong one. ;)

[noloyalisti]

What I pay is fair. What the rich 1-2% and the greedy, rich big corporations is completely unfair.

They take no risk and get handouts when they need it. Talk about a welfare state!

[choogendyk]

I'm not going to try to read through 200 comments to see if anyone has pointed this out yet. The pie charts in the article do not correctly represent the numbers. The pie charts give a visual impression that the groups are closer than they are. The chart segments that are supposed to represent 62% and 52% are more like 49% and 47%. The "Don't Know" segments are twice as large as the numbers they are supposed to represent. I wonder what happened between the reporter, the editor, the art department and the fact checker? I wonder how many other media outlets picked up the same misrepresentation of the data? I wonder if the story would have been written the same way if the visual impression had been accurate?

[XavierXavierXavier]

That is laughably bad, thanks for pointing that out!

The other IMPORTANT fact is that 47% of Americans don't pay ANY taxes. I think we can assume they all feel their income tax payment (ZERO DOLLARS) will be "fair" this year. The survey does not exclude these people.

If you subtract 47% from each of the "YES" categories and then renormalize what's left, here are the results:

ALL AMERICANS: 58% No, 27% Yes, 15% Don't Know
TEA PARTY: 79% No, 12% Don't Know, 9% Yes

The TEA PARTY category is probably off, because we can assume the vast majority of Tea Party members do pay taxes (that is the whole point of the movement). The ALL AMERICANS category is completely misleading as presented. A huge majority of all Americans, Dems/Repubs/Whatever, realize our taxes are ludicrous.