what exactly is your point, are you suggesting the data is wrong? if the link had a 0.1% bracket it would show that the even smaller group pays an even higher percentage of the total income tax revenue relative to their size.
I'm suggesting that the dichotomy is "earns wages from labor" vs "earns income from assets". The difference of someone on the 2nd decile vs someone on the 1st decile is that the former looks at the price on the supermarket while the later doesn't need to. But the difference between someone on the top 1 percentile and the top 0.1 percentile is much starker.
> if the link had a 0.1% bracket it would show that the even smaller group pays an even higher percentage of the total income tax revenue relative to their size.
That's exactly the point: in absolute values, if you have a lot of concentration of wealth, those will come out to be most of the tax base. That doesn't mean that proportionally they are paying the same. As a matter of fact, someone that makes 100k being taxed 20% is actually more onerous than someone that makes 1M being taxed 20%. This is why most countries try to have a progressive tax system.
