DFW Enterprises, Inc

Even Joe Biden would raise the top marginal rate on work to over 50%

The brawl in President Obama’s second term over raising the top income-tax rate to 39.6% from 35% was centuries ago in political time. One way to tell is that even moderate Democratic 2020 presidential candidates have quietly proposed to raise the tax rate on labor by double digits and it’s received almost no attention. Unlike single-payer health care and wealth taxes, this tax increase could command majority support in a Democratic Congress on day one.

The idea is to increase the Social Security payroll tax, the 12.4% levy that falls directly on labor and is not eligible for deductions. Currently the tax applies to income up to $137,700, split between employer and employee. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar want to impose it on all labor income above $250,000. Joe Biden wants it to fall on income above $400,000. Pete Buttigieg says he wants “additional Social Security taxes” on income above $250,000.

Meanwhile, Representative John Larson’s Social Security 2100 Act, cosponsored by 208 House Democrats, would apply the tax to income above $400,000 to finance an expansion of the entitlement. The bill would also gradually raise the payroll tax rate on all workers to 14.8% from 12.4%. As entitlement watcher Charles Blahous notes, that’s a 19% increase in the payroll tax burden. That’s significant for less-skilled workers who don’t earn enough or have too many dependents to pay income tax.

Raising rates on high earners may be less politically toxic but it’s terrible economics. Experts can debate how much the top rate affects the incentive to work for, say, a dentist or an engineer, and whether a two, three or five percentage-point tax-rate increase has an effect on the wider economy. But there’s little doubt a new 12.4% tax would depress incentives and reduce America’s competitive advantage for high-skilled workers and make the tax structure more typical of European countries.

The nearby table borrowed from our friends at Cornerstone Macro captures the magnitude of the tax increases on labor and investment income that Democratic presidential candidates are proposing. The top marginal federal tax rate on labor is currently about 40% including the Medicare tax.

To continue reading this story, please click (HERE):

George MacKay is a veteran of war on screen. The 27-year-old actor has played a soldier or veteran seven times in movies and television over the years, including World War II and Afghanistan fighters. Now he has his third role set in World War I, but the biggest of his career so far. As a stoic English infantryman saddled with an impossible mission, he helps carry the new movie “1917,” a Golden Globes nominee opening on Christmas.

“Maybe it’s that sort of juxtaposition,” says Mr. MacKay, a Brit with soft eyes and a sharp chin, reflecting on why so many filmmakers have seen a soldier in him. “Being the baby-faced fella in that awful landscape, or being a gentle man doing violent things.”

His “1917” co-star Dean-Charles Chapman, fresh from his role as an ineffectual prince in Netflix’s recent Shakespeare adaptation “The King,” is 22 years old and best known for playing a doomed boy-king in “Game of Thrones.” Together the actors are the sole focus of “1917,” which was filmed and edited to play as a single, uninterrupted camera shot. It follows a pair of foot soldiers sent to prevent 1,600 of their distant comrades—including the brother of Mr. Chapman’s character—from charging into a German ambush.

“1917” was directed by Sam Mendes, who drew inspiration from his grandfather, a messenger on the Western Front when he was a teen. With Krysty Wilson-Cairns, Mr. Mendes also wrote the film, which features cinematography by Roger Deakins. The movie, by attaching itself completely to the two lance corporals as they hurtle through crowded trenches, across a hellish no-man’s-land, and into enemy territory beyond, has a scale that shifts between intimate and epic.

To continue reading this story, please click (HERE) to go to the Wall Street Journal