First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply Watch out this new GOP tax bill is going to reduce write-offs to the rich. #endofthemiddleclass
22866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/18/17
Bill is here: http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171218/CRPT-115HRPT-466.pdf

The new bill is being criticized by Democrats for cutting some tax deductions that high earners make:




This is causing a huge amount of people in New York city to discuss moving because they will have to face the full brunt of their tax bills and not write it off elsewhere: http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/16/wealthy-nyc-elites-prepare-to-flee-the-city-under-de-blasios-tax-burden/



Oh Boy those Republicans sure are looking out for their wealthy donors! They are making sure to give them an even larger tax bill! Obviously Trump is only in it to help the rich make more money.

Here are the new tax brackets with the plan they say they have the votes to pass now:




How much are you going to save under this new plan? http://taxplancalculator.com/

I'm saving $637
1309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 12/19/17

Rujikin wrote:

The new bill is being criticized by Democrats for cutting some tax deductions that high earners make:



That's not exactly how that works.
Median cost of a home in an area doesn't really equate to those areas being "for the wealthy".
For example, median cost where I live is $533,800 (for a home).
Average income per household is $54,581.
There's less than 5% of the area that makes over $150k.

So I think this is a classic example as to where you need to think outside of your current living situation to fully understand the scenario.
Or rather, you could do more research on how average or median house costs doesn't necessarily equate to higher income per household in all areas.


Rujikin wrote:

How much are you going to save under this new plan? http://taxplancalculator.com/

I'm saving $637




It looks like I'll be losing a massive $109.
Actually, it's not as bad as I thought but I knew that I'd lose some with the new tax plan, since it takes a stab at the middle class.
15746 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/19/17
If you look at the actual breakdown of who makes money on this, it is heavily skewed in favor of the rich. This only gets worse over time. By 2027, on average, everyone making under $75000 will be paying more in taxes ( according to the JCT I believe).

It is a classic bait and switch.
1309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 12/19/17

sundin13 wrote:

If you look at the actual breakdown of who makes money on this, it is heavily skewed in favor of the rich. This only gets worse over time. By 2027, on average, everyone making under $75000 will be paying more in taxes ( according to the JCT I believe).

It is a classic bait and switch.


Yep.
The "calculator" that was linked ignores a fair amount from the tax bill and focuses singularly on the tax bracket shifts.
In the long term, citizens that were relying on personal exemptions are going to see their taxes raise or their income tax return significantly decreased.
I make enough and my significant other makes around $70k.
We're not married so we will be filing separately.
If we were married and filed jointly, we would lose about $12k between the two of us according to the calculator.

Either the calculator is skewed to only show short-term gains for those between 50-90k income for the household or it's just wrong in general.
When calculating my own, single-file, taxes - I lose $109 whenever this tax plan goes into effect (fiscal year).
So it doesn't really matter since people will always try to claim that it's for the 'middle class' when it's definitely not.
It's for the top 1-2% and the rest will only have short-term benefits for a few years.
Analysts are projecting that this tax bill may be the first of its kind to actually lead us into a recession.
runec 
38524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 12/19/17
Every single independent analysis of the plan shows its a disastrous hand off to the rich. The majority of Americans oppose the bill.

But hey, here's this Tweet from a dude that doesn't understand what he's replying to.

557 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M
Offline
Posted 12/19/17
Have to laugh at this calculator. Sent the screenshot to my accountants and they too laughed. I will supposedly save nearly $7k.

12117 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 12/19/17
Even ignoring the obvious flamebaiting, if you're gonna keep defending the new plan why not make a defense for the accusation that nobody has actually had the oppurtunity to read it fully? That seems to be the most common criticism I have seen and yeah it's pretty bad when your leaders will have to vote on something they are only partially aware of.
runec 
38524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 12/19/17

octorockandroll wrote:

Even ignoring the obvious flamebaiting, if you're gonna keep defending the new plan why not make a defense for the accusation that nobody has actually had the oppurtunity to read it fully? That seems to be the most common criticism I have seen and yeah it's pretty bad when your leaders will have to vote on something they are only partially aware of.


Well, hey, he did link us the 1097 page PDF of the bill. As if he's actually read it, anyone here is going to read it or anyone voting on it has actually read it.
84844 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M
Offline
Posted 12/19/17

runec wrote:

Well, hey, he did link us the 1097 page PDF of the bill. As if he's actually read it, anyone here is going to read it or anyone voting on it has actually read it.


The bill is only 503 pages, but it is followed by a table of contents that goes on for some pages, and then a simplified (not legalese) description of the current law and the differences in the house, then senate, then reconciled versions. The 503 pages is too long, but it wouldn't be terrible if it wasn't in legalese, which is a pain in the arse to read. Most people don't have the patience for reading legalese, their eyes start to cross, they start to become irritated, and they give up stating they can't understand it.

As far as the bill itself goes, I don't think it goes far enough in reducing the deductions and credits that can be taken. It would probably be best to just eliminate the itemized deductions (and greatly trim credits), not just for individuals, but entirely. That, in conjunction with removing the capital gains rate and having capital gains be included as income taxes, would greatly reduce the loopholes that have people complaining that the "rich don't pay their fair share". Although, the issue still arises that people only look at Federal Income tax and think that is all one needs to pay in taxes, when it could be less than 50 percent of their overall tax burden. Removing itemized deductions won't happen, though. Because you have plenty of people in government who love the tax deduction and credit system, it allows them to exert governmental control over behavior and it allows them to give specialized deductions and/or credits to their rich buddies.
runec 
38524 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 12/19/17

ishe5555 wrote:
As far as the bill itself goes, I don't think it goes far enough in reducing the deductions and credits that can be taken. It would probably be best to just eliminate the itemized deductions (and greatly trim credits), not just for individuals, but entirely. That, in conjunction with removing the capital gains rate and having capital gains be included as income taxes, would greatly reduce the loopholes that have people complaining that the "rich don't pay their fair share". Although, the issue still arises that people only look at Federal Income tax and think that is all one needs to pay in taxes, when it could be less than 50 percent of their overall tax burden. Removing itemized deductions won't happen, though. Because you have plenty of people in government who love the tax deduction and credit system, it allows them to exert governmental control over behavior and it allows them to give specialized deductions and/or credits to their rich buddies.


Capital gains tax is one of the big Rich Get Richer(tm) ones and they even had that cut during the Bush years. Combine that with cutting down the estate tax and its one more step towards cementing oligarchical dynasties. Oh, and here's a break for your private jet.

While the US tax code does desperately need to be simplified you can't draft a 500 page plan based exclusively on wishful thinking that it will sort itself out math wise. Nevermind taking yet one more swing at the dead horse of trickle down economics. There's a difference between an incentive and a benefit. If you're just going to hand money to corporations as a benefit the only thing you're encouraging is that they'll keep paying their lobbyists to push for the next round of benefits.

I mean, taken straight, the tax plan is objectively insane. Taking something that doesn't work, has never worked and will never work then attacking everyone whose job it is to tell you it won't work? That's either insanity or stupidity. And if it's not one of those two that only leaves one option: Corruption.

So if the GOP isn't stupid or insane, then it's corrupt. Because there's certainly no reason to believe this will work by any objective measure.

Save maybe Paul Ryan, but it's hard to reason with a man who yells John Galt's name during sex.








22866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/19/17 , edited 12/19/17



octorockandroll wrote:

Even ignoring the obvious flamebaiting, if you're gonna keep defending the new plan why not make a defense for the accusation that nobody has actually had the oppurtunity to read it fully? That seems to be the most common criticism I have seen and yeah it's pretty bad when your leaders will have to vote on something they are only partially aware of.





runec wrote:


octorockandroll wrote:

Even ignoring the obvious flamebaiting, if you're gonna keep defending the new plan why not make a defense for the accusation that nobody has actually had the oppurtunity to read it fully? That seems to be the most common criticism I have seen and yeah it's pretty bad when your leaders will have to vote on something they are only partially aware of.


Well, hey, he did link us the 1097 page PDF of the bill. As if he's actually read it, anyone here is going to read it or anyone voting on it has actually read it.


We have to pass the healthcare bill to see whats in it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvSkeJbQy74
2190 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Online
Posted 12/19/17

Rujikin wrote:

We have to pass the healthcare bill to see whats in it:


The ACA, which is what she was talking about, took two years, 25 days of consecutive debate, and about 200 amendments at the request of GOP politicians to pass. It's a rather stupid comparison.
-OlE- 
1121 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Nebraska
Offline
Posted 12/19/17

Mishio1 wrote:


The ACA, which is what she was talking about, took two years, 25 days of consecutive debate, and about 200 amendments at the request of GOP politicians to pass. It's a rather stupid comparison.


not to mention the actual quote ruji is referencing has been butchered and taken out of context so it doesn't even mean what he is implying it means
28494 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/20/17
Did they manage to keep the individual mandate repeal?
22866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/20/17
I haven't heard of it being removed. Can't look too in depth.

It just passed the House, already passed the senate, and is going to Trump's desk: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/20/house-has-enough-votes-to-send-tax-bill-to-trumps-desk.html

Rand Paul just shared this:

First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.