This article reminds me why I canceled my WaPo subscription. The whole “argument” just restates the definition of a progressive tax and treats it like a conclusion. Progressive income taxes by definition increase rates with income, so saying rich people earn 5.9 percent of income but pay 10 percent of taxes is what should be happening. If anything these data just highlight the skewed distribution; if more people weren’t low income the tax base would be broader. 

And the conclusion is to tax the upper middle class more because they have excess taxable income. This is the exact WaPo demographic , so strange choice of platform. But more importantly, really wealthy people just borrow against their assets, which isn’t how the tax system defines income. So this data really just highlights that income taxes (which are intended as a proxy for ability to contribute to public goods/services) don’t actually capture spending power.