Well, in technical terms, one could say the average tax rate of the richest 1% of the country has fallen and not kept up with their share of income. The WSJ reported a few days ago that according to the latest IRS data “the richest 1% of Americans in 2006 garnered the highest share of the nation’s adjusted gross income for two decades, and possibly the highest since 1929″.

“According to the figures, the richest 1% reported 22% of the nation’s total adjusted gross income in 2006. That is up from 21.2% a year earlier, and is the highest in the 19 years that the IRS has kept strictly comparable figures.”

“The average tax rate in 2006 for the top 1%, based on adjusted gross income, was 22.8%, down slightly from 2005 and the fifth straight year of declines. The average tax rate of this group was 28.9% in 1996, and was 24% in 1988.”

I guess it is like almost everywhere else in the world. If you work as an employee and cannot invest and offset your gains you will most likely pay too much taxes compared to others, in relative terms. But then again, not everybody is willing to take the risks associated with it. But there comes a point where you wonder how much money people do need or should have, and whether this is a healthy trend for the rich in the long run. But that is a more philosophical discussion.