1. China 2. Canada 3. Brazil 4. US 5. Germany 6. Italy impose the greatest tax burdens. Canada’s taxes on income and profits are the highest of G7 nations — these taxes discourage working, saving, and investing. ------------------ Today, the combined U.S. corporate tax rate stands at 39.3 percent. That means America now has the highest statutory corporate income tax rate in the world—even higher than socialist Sweden and welfare-states Germany and France. Even our effective tax rates (that is, the rate companies actually pay after deductions and credits) are high. According to the C.D. Howe Institute, the U.S. effective tax rate on manufacturing and services is 37.7 percent, which is fourth highest in the world. Only China, Canada and Brazil rank more highly. http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1276.html

There are enormous differences in effective income tax rates between countries, because of differences between the rates of taxation, the width of the zero tax band (basic personal exemption), the effect of tax relief provisions (other exemptions), the impact of marginal tax rates, and whether or not the country uses taxation credits that are independent of marginal tax rates. These factors make direct comparisons quite difficult. The "highest" rate of income tax varies with both the income group that an individual finds themselves in and the country in which they reside. For example, a person who earns the median income in country 'A' may may be taxed at a lower rate than a person who earns the median income in country 'B', but the situation might well be reversed at higher and/or lower income levels. Because of these variations, lobby groups can easily manipulate income tax data to provide answers to support just about any point of view they want to take. It becomes easy to manipulate and mislead the 'average' taxpayer, when different groups present radically different interpretations of taxation data. In the near 35 years that I have been earning a wage and paying income taxes, as compared to the sales taxes that we pay from the day we make our first candy purchase, I have seen all kinds of numbers floated past my view. After a while, one can identify the political and socio-economic goals of an organization simply by observing what kind of spin they put on tax figures. The following information was obtained from the OECD, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php?aid=77). Please read through the text, following, after reading the rankings, because it will explain how the data were classified. There is more information in the article cited on the OECD website. (These figures include only member nations of the OECD, since I have been unable to find suitable rankings for all countries. I hestitate to republish data from the many neo-liberal and neo-conservative think-tanks who detest both taxes and governments. Data from these think-tanks are frequently cited by the media, who receive the data along with briefing documents and sample articles. This process makes for less work for the media outlets and provides a reflection of the position of their owners and the business sector in general.) ---------------------------------------- "Highest all-in-one income tax rates on wage income in OECD countries, 1998, in order from highest to lowest: Belgium, Japan, Denmark, Finland, France, Turkey, Sweden, Spain, Germany, Canada, Switzerland, Italy, Ireland, Norway, Iceland, Australia, Czech Republic, Luxembourg, Portugal, United States, Korea, and Hungary." ---------------------------------------- "When comparing different tax systems, most people tend to look at top rates of personal income taxes imposed by central government. However, concentrating on these ‘headline’ rates can be misleading." "In all OECD countries central government levies a tax on personal income. The rate structure of these income taxes shows wide variation. Our focus here is on top marginal rates, that is the highest percentage of tax ... earned above standard taxable income levels. Most studies compare only the top rates of personal income tax imposed by central government. However, 22 out of the 29 OECD countries also levy other taxes on personal income. Consequently, any cross-country study of tax systems that does not take into account the combined rate of all taxes on personal income will not grasp how top income taxes in the OECD area really look." "The fundamental structure of personal income tax systems imposed by central governments is very similar in every OECD country. A certain amount of income may be exempted from tax. That’s the ‘personal exemption’ - also known as personal allowance. In some countries, the first slice of income is not exempted, but is taxed at zero per cent instead. This zero band has the same effect as a personal exemption. An alternative system is to tax all income, and give all taxpayers a reduction in their tax bill in the form of a ‘basic tax credit’." "Even if the fundamental structure of income taxes from country to country is broadly the same, the tax bill for taxpayers in more or less the same position may be quite different. One major reason is that different countries provide different tax relief to their citizens. Expressed as a percentage of the gross wage of an average production worker, Greece exempts only 3% of the average worker’s wage, Korea 7%, the Netherlands 14%, France 20%, and the United Kingdom and the United States offer relief to the tune of 24% of the average wage. The average production worker in Sweden pays no income tax at all to the central government. This is because the tax allowance is a tenth higher than his or her wage." "With the exception of Germany, which applies several tax formulae, income in excess of the personal exemption or zero-rated band is divided up into brackets. The number of brackets varies significantly; Sweden has one tax bracket, Iceland and Ireland have two, while Luxembourg, Mexico, Spain and Switzerland each have eight or more. All of the taxable income within a bracket is taxed at the same rate. The rate applied to the income in successive brackets increases. The result is a progressive tax: as total taxable income rises, a growing share of it goes - at least in principle - to the taxman." "Under a progressive system, tax relief is determined by the marginal rate applicable to the highest unit of income. So, as earners move into higher tax brackets, their tax relief actually rises in value. In other words, personal allowances and the value of the zero band go up, rather than down. In contrast, the value of tax credits is independent of the taxpayer’s income level. In 1998, nine countries used basic tax credits: Austria, Canada, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Mexico, New Zealand, Poland and Portugal." "How progressive a given rate schedule depends not only on the amount of basic tax relief, but also on the width (or length) of the tax brackets, and the marginal rates applied to the income in each bracket. And income tax brackets certainly vary in size, while income taxes exhibit a remarkable variety of marginal rates, reflecting national views on what constitutes an equitable distribution of the tax burden." "Top marginal rates of personal income tax levied by central government range from 25% in Sweden and 33% in New Zealand to as much as 60% in the Netherlands. In Ireland and New Zealand, taxpayers at the income level of an average production worker are already exposed to the top marginal rate of 48% and 33% respectively. In Austria, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom workers must earn about twice the average before they start paying the top rate." "On the other hand, Swiss and US employees are not confronted by the top rate unless their salaries reach ten times the average production worker’s wage. In Turkey the top rate does not kick in until taxable income is 29 times the average wage and more." ---------------------------------------- Footnote... As a Canadian, with a tax system that usually puts us about the middle of the range, I am quite content paying my taxes. We receive a large number of services for our tax dollars, which many tend to ignore. For the lucky individuals who do not need to depend on these services, I can only hope their good luck continues. However, we all depend on taxpayer-funded services every day of our lives. I have met people who were very bitter about the system, until their luck and good fortune ran out. I don't consider them hypocrites for changing their tune after the fact. They learned that they do have support, perhaps not as much or not as quickly as they would like, but something is there to help most of us. In many countries, it is not. .

My Dad pays 40% income tax!!!!! We live in South-East england!

Generally it is Denmark. There was a case a few years ago where someone was forced to pay 120% tax, thats MORE than they earned!!!

The US effective income tax rate of about 15-20% per http://www.incometaxlist.com seems good