Skip to main content

Debt and taxes: some original infoviz creations

I was surprised to read this week that putatively educated Americans (a Louisiana lawyer, a Colorado dentist, an ABC News reporter) don't understand the concept of marginal tax rates. Because of this lack of comprehension, per ABC, the lawyer and dentist are vowing to keep their taxable income below $250,000 to avoid President Obama's proposed tax increase:
"I've put thought into how to get under $250,000," said [the ill-informed dentist]. "It would mean working fewer days which means having fewer employees, seeing fewer patients and taking time off."
Apparently some clarification is called for. Below is a US federal income tax table for 2009 (source).

This does not mean that if you bring in more than $372,951, every single dollar in your entire pile of money is taxed at 35%. Only Dollar #372,952 (plus whatever additional money you may earn) is taxed at that rate. Dollar #372,950 is taxed at 33%. Meanwhile, Dollar #1 is taxed at 10%. Hence the term "marginal": In a progressive tax system, there are margins (i.e., boundary lines) at which the government increases the tax rate on any additional incoming dollar.

So I concluded a little infoviz might help clear up the misunderstanding. (Click on images to enlarge.)

This illustrates the overall tax structure. As your money piles up (green), you have to pay a greater share to the IRS (red).

At this year's income tax rates, here are the raw numbers for people in each of the four filing statuses:

Note the colored cells in the Single table. Those numbers tell us how many dollars are subject to each tax rate. Clear as mud? Here's a graphic depiction:

And here's how that single person's tax prospects compare to those of married people filing jointly, married people filing separately and heads of household:

Questions? Comments? Critiques? Please let me know what you think.


  1. Actually, upon reflection, I have one: To be more accurate, the legend on the Y axis should really read "adjusted gross income in 000's." But does that complicate matters by raising the question of what "adjusting" is?

  2. Beautifully done! I will share this post with my readers on Monday.

    One thing I would like to see is a line graph with the x-axis being pre-tax income and the y-axis being after-tax income.

  3. Hmm, interesting. Thanks, Justin. I'll noodle around with that and see what I come up with.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Quality dataviz about quality-of-life issues

To accompany its Better Life Initiative, OECD (the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) has put up a handsome, carefully constructed set of interactive data graphics called the Better Life Index:
There is more to life than the cold numbers of GDP and economic statistics – this Index allows you to compare well-being across countries, based on 11 topics the OECD has identified as essential, in the areas of material living conditions and quality of life. Each country is represented by a multicolored flower with 11 petals (OK, yes, potentially cheesy). The length of each petal represents the country's score in a given area; the width of the petal indicates the importance the user has assigned to that particular aspect. Drilling down into the details is easy to do; in fact, if you've a mind to do your own visualizations of this info, the underlying index data can be downloaded in spreadsheet format.

Kudos to Moritz Stefaner, Jonas Leist and Timm Kekeritz (for Raure…

Cool Map: Emissions worldwide

From the Center for Public Integrity comes this interactive map showing greenhouse gas emissions from many of the world's largest economies.

Lots of data is packed into this simple interface, and the map itself is blessedly clear.

Note, though, that when it comes to infoviz issues, even these pros needed a do-over. Check out the message in the lower left corner. In an earlier version they made the common mistake of comparing circles based on radius, instead of by area. It's to their credit that not only did they fix the mistake, but they also owned up to it and made the change. The larger problem, though, is that distinguishing the relative size of circles is not easy for the average viewer; rectangles are clearer, and would probably have made this cool map even stronger.

Note also that stats are from 2005. Since then there's been substantial economic growth in China (for example), so the current numbers are likely to be even higher than what's shown here.

Differing Vie…

What Not to Do with Infographics, now in handy infographic form

From, a cautionary illustration that expresses exactly what I hate about so very many infographics. It dumbs down information under the guise of making you smarter.

Browse more infographics.