"Phil Mickelson, stop whining and give thanks for your good fortune"
Syracuse professor Len Burman pens an item for Forbes.com and it doesn't get off to the best start with the professor citing Phil's comments in "Saturday's New York Times," a major problem since they were uttered on Sunday and he's trying to make a factual case.
That said, his main point is one that Mickelson sponsor KPMG probably won't appreciate: if Phil's paying what he says he's paying his accountants aren't doing their job.
My first reaction is that Phil should talk to his accountant because his effective tax rate is surely lower than 60 percent. The fiscal cliff deal raised his marginal income tax rate to 39.6% (assuming he’s in the top bracket). The phase-out of itemized deductions will add about 1.2% and he will also have to pay a combined Medicare tax rate of 3.8% (the regular 2.9% for self-employed people plus the new 0.9% surtax enacted to help finance the Affordable Care Act). According to the New York Times article, Mickelson will also owe 13.3% in California state income taxes because he’s in the new millionaire bracket. That adds up to 57.9%, but state income taxes and 1.45% of the payroll tax are deductible from federal income tax, so that reduces their net cost by 5.8% (39.6% of 14.75%). In net, Mickelson will owe about 52% of his marginal earning in federal and state taxes.
In other news, an unbylined FoxNews.com story lumps Phil in with actor Gerard Depardieu. Let's hope Phil doesn't want to move to Russia.
Sam Weinman compiles some of Phil's previous bits of venting, some of which were successful in making his case.
Lorne Rubenstein points out that Mickelson's comments overshadowed the golf played last weekend.
This time, he got on a soapbox and said a mouthful. He’s wealthy and he’s entitled to move where he wants. But suddenly hardly anybody was talking about Brian Gay’s win in a playoff at the Humana. Nobody was talking about Jamie Donaldson beating Justin Rose at the Abu Dhabi HSBC Golf Championship. Did Tiger Woods and Rory McIlroy miss the cut at Abu Dhabi? Oh yes, they did. That seemed a long time ago.
Geoff
**Here's a different analysis from Ed Kilgore that again suggests the topic raised uncomfortable questions about the competance of Phil's accounts. Uncomfortable since KPMG, his sponsor, also presumably does some of his accounting work.
Aside from the rather important dual facts that (a) he seems to be conflating marginal and average taxes, likes so many people do, and (b) to pay anything like the rates he’s talking about he’d have to have the most incompetent financial advisers in the world; Mickelson does put a real question on the table. Should we worry that in a progressive tax system extraordinary people will no longer feel a continued financial incentive to do extraordinary things? And if there’s any risk of that, how do we discern the difference between sheer greed (and in the case of people who become insanely rich playing games, perhaps ingratitude) and some presumed rational breaking-point where toil and trouble are no longer worth the effort?
I guess the simple answer to that is: experience will tell.








Reader Comments (41)
add local, state and whatever taxes thrown at all of us in California.
The number in taxes is easily north of 50%.
What percentage of earnings, IS acceptable for the govt to take?
I personally believe it is absurd for anybody to work 1/2 the year for the govt.
I have been in the high tax brackets, and now lower.
And yes, at one time, I moved to Nevada. Better taxes, and more importantly, a better practice
situation at that time. My one year in Nevada, I saved enough in state income tax (versus CA)
equal to the down payment on my current home.
There isn't anything the California govt provides that is worth (among) the highest taxes in the nation
Got your nomex handy P.B.?!?
How did Palmer and Nicklaus make any money back in the days of 90 and 70% tax rates. My God how their lives have been impoverished and the two of them reduced to teaching lessons at the local muni to make ends meet.
This whole debate just highlights how far wingnut the baby boomers have gone in their constant quest of self satisfaction.
Memo to all of you under 50: from 1946 - 1982, the top marginal rate was between 90 - 51%, much higher than currently and those years were generally considered the Golden Age of America.
Anyways...it's good to have the old FIGJAM back again...Phil lost that moniker awhile back... apparently not.
If you are referring to Mickelson in paragraph three, he is a member of Generation X, not a Boomer.
Regarding tax rates, the "golden age" and your implicit argument, for over seventy years, tax revenue has remained remarkably consistent at approximately 18% of GDP irrespective of substantial fluctuations in rates.
Your mediocrity is inspiring, I'm sure, to the less gifted in our midst.
Let's assume the Syracuse tax professor is right, 52% for Phil, what would be his number in Florida? No way I try to do the math.
And we've got it better than nurses, cops, and quite a few others.
You really need a change in attitude, Pat. To avoid a Nomex purchase as DTF suggested, get on the "You didn't build that!" wagon and you'll start to feel better about yourself.
I would agree as to what his accountants are doing. There are people who specialize in doing such things....hell why doesn't Phil call Mitt as he seemed to have it figured out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures
Of course, a lot of that is borrowed from the Social Security Trust Fund. Gotta keep the world safe for ExxonMobil! Speaking of which, didn't we break up Standard Oil once, for good and sufficient reason. What the hell happened?
How can anybody judge the job KPMG is doing when they can't even get the types of taxes right? Maybe we should pass judgement on you for your inability to get the laundry list of taxes people pay correct? I mean a supposed "tax policy expert" shouldn't miss these things, should he?
http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2013/01/phil-mickelson-apologizes-for-comments-on-taxes.html
http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2013/01/paulina-gretzky-dustin-johnson-beach-photo.html?sct=obinsite
Much more interesting than taxes.....
KLG-- What happened? Well, while the GOP was running cover by the Monica madness, and the 75 million dollar (or whatever) porn report posted online before it was even given to Clinton's lawyers--- the REAL politicing was going on--- both mergers of big oil --ExxonMobil, GulfTexaco, Or whatever - I try to not think about the scamming as I just get angry all over.... and not to let a good smokescreen go to waste, the Banks did quite a bit of merging, with stamps of approval--- the phone regrouping has taken a little longer, but don't worry, the pool of suppiers is growing smaller, and the monopolizing of America's big industries is in full swing, courtesy of the no party system- we only have incumbents, and millions spent on ''elections'' to provide income to the TV empires, which, coincidentally, are becoming owned by fewer companies all the time. NBC/Golf Channel- simply an appetizer for the meals that go on with ull blessing of the ''regulators.''
Clinton, the Bushes and Cheney were all laughing about the dumbass Americans losing sleep over ''is is'' while the paperwork flowed over mergers, and the stage was set for the biggest pocket lining in history, courtesy of the privatizing of the militaries services.
Cornholed again.
T. Holman, lots of little tricks can help a guy like Arnie out. One way is to move to FLA to decrease the tax burden. Another is to endorse an illegal driver to increase revenues. Then you can run your PGA Tour event as for-profit without telling anyone, that adds 7 figures to the bottom line every year. Etc...
This help ya better understand it?
My tax form should be the length of West Virginia's: A half-page.
I spent 8 years in the public sector and the waste was staggering. We had 12 people in my department and we could have easliy functioned just as efficiently with 5 or 6. There were 2 or 3 people that did literally NOTHING (other than gossip) most of the day,and 5 or 6 more that considered 2 hours of actual work in the day a lot. And of course everything we bought was non-bid and usually from a friend or family member of one of the "higher ups" at 50% above cost.
And while it may seem like whining when someone has millions of dollars and can afford to pay more...we can all relate to not paying more than you have to for certain things. If a cup of coffee at Starbucks went up to $10, should we just accept it as those if you are already going there for a $5 cup of coffee, then you can probably afford a $10 cup as well?
Stop whining, Phil…
A co-worker's husband owns a small company. A few years ago he was deciding if he should bring on another employee to boost sales higher. After all the tax costs involved were added up he decided to not higher someone and just stay the same size. So the economy lost out on at least another job (not counting the up and downstream impacts of that job). So that (for him) rational point had already been met.
I bet the sponsor, Sony, isn't all that thrilled with the disclosure those pics provide. Maybe it was that ol' "back flu" flaring up on him again ;)