This figure makes the taxes look really big compared to the income, but to see it clearly you'd have to observe all of the country's income against all of the country's tax revenue. The amount of taxes they actually pay compared to their own income is not terribly impressive. It is sometimes, but not even always more than is paid by the middle-class. Even when it is, it's not very high. That is to say, it's not as high as the rates paid in most of the rest of the developed world, not as high as the rates paid in the USA through most of the 20th century, and not high enough to put much of any constriction on their wealth (i.e. they don't have much to complain about).
Taxes are just a simple collection of a defined amount of money each year. These taxes are never bringing people down to zero dollars. In the case of the rich it's not even close to zero dollars. They're still left with far more income than people in the brackets below them. With their income after taxes they obtain wealth, and wealth accumulates. The article mentions that the 20% highest earners have 50% of the country's income. Well they also have 85% of the country's wealth. Accumulation, you see. Those supposedly onerous tax burdens seemingly haven't slowed that gravy train down.
You see, the value of money doesn't really scale up. I don't have to pay more for goods and services the richer I get. As a result, each subsequent dollar I earn is effectively less valuable than the previous one, which is also to say that I can more affordably give it up. Here's the consequence of that. If a man earns $2 million each year and I start taxing his income for 50% (which is more than that guy would be giving), he'll be down to $1 million a year, which means he will continue to live like a king. If a man earns $20,000 a year and I start taxing him at 10%, he will then be making $18,000 year. At that size of income, a difference of $2000 a year could be the difference between subsistence and homelessness. The guy with the low tax rate got the raw deal. This, as an aside, is why a flat tax would actually be extremely unfair.
So the information you cite is clearly supposed to make it sound like the wealthy are being put upon, but the practical result is that they really aren't.