中英對照 | 巴菲特建言政府：停止嬌慣富豪多收稅

科學百姓 雨台 scitizen-editor@outlook.com 1/1/2021

導讀：美國長期以來數一數二的巨富、最成功的投資家巴菲特無數次表示，美國政府對富人的稅收稅率太低了，無益於美國的經濟。以下是他2011年8月15日在紐約時報發表的專欄文章，要點是：

• 美國富豪的所得稅稅率總的來說比工薪階層顯著低於工薪階層。

• 富豪稅率低無益於創造工作機會。

• 建議為100萬和1000萬美元以上的收入分兩檔提升稅率，同時繼續給99.7%的人們減稅。

科學百姓轉載的目的，是讓讀者知悉影響美國社會的人們的思路。

停止嬌慣富豪吧

國家領導人號召大家 "共同承擔犧牲"。但當他們提出這樣的要求時，他們卻放過了我。我有向我的超級富豪朋友們打聽會讓他們承擔什麼痛苦。他們說他們也沒有受影響。

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

當窮人和中產階級在阿富汗為我們作戰時，當大多數美國人在為生計而用力時，我們這些超級富豪卻繼續得到給我們安排的超好稅收優惠。我們中的一些人是投資基金經理，從每天做工中就賺取了數以十億計的收入，但卻可以把收入算作 "結利收入"，從而只需付15%的優惠稅率（譯者註：結率收入英文是 Carried Interest，指的是基金投資經理從操作的其他人的投資收入中分得一定的百分比）。還有些人買了股指期貨只做工10分鐘，好像他們是長期投資者一樣，可以把60%的收益按15%的稅率交稅。

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

這些等等稅率惠顧是華盛頓的立法者的給我們富豪的康康賜予，他們覺得必須保護我們，就像我們是被發現的貓頭鷹或其他瀕危動物一樣。有高官朋友真是好啊。

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

去年我的聯邦稅單，即我支付的所得稅，以及由我支付的工資稅，是6,938,744美元。這聽起來是一筆很大的錢。但我支付的只是我應該納稅的收入的17.4%。這個稅率實際上比我們辦公室其他20人支付的比例都要低。他們的稅負從33%到41%不等，平均為36%。

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

如果你像我的一些超級富豪朋友一樣，用錢賺錢，你的納稅稅率可能會比我還低一些。但如果你是靠工作賺錢，你的納稅稅率肯定會超過我，很可能會超出我很多。

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

要了解其中原因，你需要考察一下政府收入的來源。去年，政府稅收中約有80%來自個人所得稅和工資稅。超級富豪們的大部分收入是按15%的稅率繳納所得稅，但他們幾乎不繳納工資稅（譯者註：這裡說到是富豪們的收入基本不是工資收入）。對於中產階級來說，情況就不一樣了：通常他們屬於15%或25%的所得稅檔次，此外還有沉重的工資稅。

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

早在20世紀80年代和90年代，富人的稅率要高得多，我的稅率處於他們享有的稅率當中。根據我有時聽到的一種理論，我應該為稅率高大發雷霆，拒絕投資，因為資本收益和股息的稅率提高了。

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

然而我沒有拒絕投資，其他人也沒有。我與投資者交往了60年，我還沒有看到任何投資者，即使在1976-77年資本收益稅率為39.9%的時候，會因為潛在收益的稅率而對一項明智的投資望而卻步。人們投資是為了賺錢，潛在的稅收從未嚇跑他們。而對於那些認為較高的稅率會影響創造就業的人，我想指出，1980年至2000年的高稅率期間，淨增加了約4000萬個工作崗位。你知道從那時起發生了什麼：稅率降低了，創造的就業崗位大大減少了。（譯者註：最近20年的工作職位淨增只有不到1000萬。）

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

自1992年以來，國稅局匯編了400名報稅收入最高的美國人的數據。1992年，收入最高的400人的總的應納稅收入為169億美元，支付29.2%的聯邦稅率。2008年，收入最高的400人的總收入已飆升至909億美元，平均沒人達到驚人的2.274億美元，但繳納的稅率已降至21.5%。

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

我這裡所說的稅種只包括聯邦所得稅，但你可以肯定，與收入總額相比，這400人的任何工資稅都是無足輕重的。事實上，2008年400人中有88人根本就沒有報工資，不過他們每個人都報了資本收益。雖然我們這些弟兄們可能不願工作，但他們都喜歡投資。(我自己可以體會到)。

The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)

我很了解許多富豪，大體上，他們都是正派人人士。他們熱愛美國，感謝這個國家給了他們機會。許多人都加入了 "捐贈誓言"，承諾將他們的大部分財富捐給慈善事業（譯者註：這是蓋茨和巴菲特發起的運動）。大多數人也不介意被要求多交稅，特別是當他們的許多同胞真正在受苦的時候。

I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.

12名國會議員很快將承擔起重新安排國家財政的重要工作。他們被要求着手制定一個計劃，將10年的赤字至少減少1.5萬億美元。然而，至關重要的是，他們應該做得比這個目標多得多。美國人正在迅速失去對國會處理我國財政問題能力的信心。只有立刻的、真實的、和非常實質性的行動，才能防止人們的疑慮蛻變為無望。而無望的感覺可以導致無望的現實。

Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.

這12位議員的首要工作是削減一些即使是富裕的美國也無法兌現的未來承諾，從這兒必須省下大錢。然後，12號應該專注於增加政府收入的問題。如果是我的話，我會保持99.7%的納稅人的稅率不變，並繼續目前降低雇員繳納的工資稅2個百分點的安排。這一減稅措施幫助了窮人和中產階級，他們需要每一個增加收入的機會。

Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

但對於那些收入超過100萬美元的人 —— 2009年有236883個這樣的家庭 —— 我會立即提高應納稅收入的100萬美元之上的部分的稅率，當然包括股息和資本收益。而對於那些收入1千萬美元或以上的人 —— 2009年有8,274個 —— 我建議再增加一檔稅率。

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

我和我的富豪朋友們，被一個對億萬富翁友好的國會寵愛得夠久了。現在是我們的政府把共同犧牲當真的時候了。

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.

參考資料鏈接

1. Stop Coddling the Super-Rich. 紐約時報, 2011.08