Trump, GOP tax plan cuts rates, nearly doubles deduction

[Jazzhead]

The corporate tax rate needs to be cut in half IMO...ours is the highest in the world and we're considered one of the least friendly country's to do business in IIRC.  I've seen nothing about slashing capital gains taxes or eliminating the death tax either.

Both of those need to be on the chopping block as well.

All in all, a good bill.  Not perfect, but certainly something I can support. 

I agree completely regarding the corporate income tax rate.  Ideally, corporate income shouldn't be taxed at all.   Philosophically,  I see no reason why capital gains shouldn't be taxed at the same rate as wage income.   And to finance the increases in the child tax credit and the elimination of the AMT,  I'd be in favor of having a higher fourth bracket on the wealthy.   And as for the death tax,  I realize why so many oppose it,  but have no problem retaining it as a means of offsetting the revenue lost from the proposal's tax rate cuts and credit increases. 

[austingirl]

Depends on what you call rich. Hubby and i make the top bracket (barely)   we pay 6 figures a year in federal income tax. Add that to state and local tax and our marginal tax rate is around 50%.    I am paying for kids in grad school and have one small enough I still need a nanny.  Tax shelters?  There are none for 1099 income. If you are truly rich and don't work for a living, there are plenty for capital gains and inherited money.  But if you work (days, nights, weekends, holidays, sometimes 14-16 hour days) there are no tax shelters.  My kids that I am supporting get no federal help (we make too much) with all the $ we pay into the system.  In fact, I can't even write them off, because the AMT rolls off all our deductions.  Rich? hardly.  Yes we do OK, but I drive a Honda not a mercedes ans we are hoping to save enough to retire some day so we don't have to keep working like this.  How much more of my income is the government entitled to?  I am the "rich" you want to pay more taxes.  The truly rich don't pay income tax because THEY DONT WORK!

Very well stated! Unfortunately the left has successfully insinuated their definition of "rich" into our language. We should not use their terminology. High income earners are NOT rich. It is immoral to tax income and that is why I am for the Fair Tax. It taxes consumption, rewards savings, and the government cuts every household a check each month to indemnify everyone up to the cost of living. It also has the advantage of taxing the cash economy including drug dealers and other criminals who skate now but sure do buy stuff.

[Cyber Liberty]

All in all, a good bill.  Not perfect, but certainly something I can support. 

I agree completely regarding the corporate income tax rate.  Ideally, corporate income shouldn't be taxed at all.   Philosophically,  I see no reason why capital gains shouldn't be taxed at the same rate as wage income.   And to finance the increases in the child tax credit and the elimination of the AMT,  I'd be in favor of having a higher fourth bracket on the wealthy.   And as for the death tax,  I realize why so many oppose it,  but have no problem retaining it as a means of offsetting the revenue lost from the proposal's tax rate cuts and credit increases.

I have a quick quiz for you:  How do you feel about the term "Tax Expenditure?"  I'll wait.

@KingsX I invite you to play as well, although it appears you ignore Members who ask you things, which is considered rude.  What do you think of that term?

[Jazzhead]

I have a quick quiz for you:  How do you feel about the term "Tax Expenditure?"  I'll wait.

Philosophically, I'm against the tax code being used for social engineering.  As I noted above,  I see no reason why capital gains shouldn't be taxed at the same rate as wage income.  That being said, I understand that certain deductions against are effectively sacrosanct, such as the mortgage interest deduction, the charitable deduction and the deduction for certain retirement savings.  Within the context of what's politically possible,  I'd love to see lower, flatter tax rates applied equally to realized gains and wage income.   

I also admit to favoring one traditional form of taxation - tariffs - that doesn't jive with my general philosophy as enunciated above.   

[Mom MD]

All in all, a good bill.  Not perfect, but certainly something I can support. 

I agree completely regarding the corporate income tax rate.  Ideally, corporate income shouldn't be taxed at all.   Philosophically,  I see no reason why capital gains shouldn't be taxed at the same rate as wage income.   And to finance the increases in the child tax credit and the elimination of the AMT,  I'd be in favor of having a higher fourth bracket on the wealthy.   And as for the death tax,  I realize why so many oppose it,  but have no problem retaining it as a means of offsetting the revenue lost from the proposal's tax rate cuts and credit increases.

Maybe capital gains should not be taxed at the sans rate as income because I have already paid tax on that money before I invested it?   I know you think the government has a right to everything I earn or do but I don't share your viee

[Cyber Liberty]

Philosophically, I'm against the tax code being used for social engineering.  As I noted above,  I see no reason why capital gains shouldn't be taxed at the same rate as wage income.  That being said, I understand that certain deductions against are effectively sacrosanct, such as the mortgage interest deduction, the charitable deduction and the deduction for certain retirement savings.  Within the context of what's politically possible,  I'd love to see lower, flatter tax rates applied equally to realized gains and wage income.   

I also admit to favoring one traditional form of taxation - tariffs - that doesn't jive with my general philosophy as enunciated above.   

Interesting, but you didn't answer my question.  What do you think of the term "Tax Expenditure?"  Does it piss you off, or does it seen to be a relevant part of the discussion?  For clarification, the term is used to describe the "cost of a cut in taxes."

[KingsX]

Those promoting Trump's tax cut for the rich keep comparing it to Reagan's "tax cuts." Ironically, Reagan also increased taxes by taxing Social Security. The income threshold to tax Social Security was  NOT tied to inflation so now it affects low-income seniors.  Reagan's tax abomination has not been corrected or even addressed by Trump or his GOP cohorts.


" The Social Security Act Amendments of 1983 (Public Law 98-21) established that beneficiaries whose total annual income exceeds certain thresholds are required to pay income tax on up to 50 percent of their Social Security benefit income. Ten years later, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA 93, Public Law 103-66) established an additional higher threshold, above which up to 85 percent of Social Security benefits are taxable. The 1983 amendments require beneficiaries to pay income tax on their benefits if their modified adjusted gross income (AGI) -  which includes one-half of Social Security benefit income - is greater than $25,000 for single beneficiaries and $32,000 for married couples. "
 
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/issuepapers/ip2015-02.html

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Frankly the standard deduction should be like $30000, and everyone should be taxed.

You can't really live on less than $30000 in this area.

[KingsX]

Frankly the standard deduction should be like $30000, and everyone should be taxed.

You can't really live on less than $30000 in this area.

Trump originally promoted  a standard deduction of $25,000 single / $50,000 couple...
but that was just a bait and switch to get voters on his campaign bandwagon.

The GOP's 2016 "Blueprint-A Better Way" plan for tax cuts for the rich is almost the
same plan Trump is promoting today.

[truth_seeker]

Maybe capital gains should not be taxed at the sans rate as income because I have already paid tax on that money before I invested it?   I know you think the government has a right to everything I earn or do but I don't share your viee

There is a basic philosophical difference:

--Liberal, collectivists=government owns everything, "allows" people to keep only some of it

--Conservative, wealth belongs to the producers, and should only hand over a minimal amount, for defense, public safety, etc.

The idea that retirement, healthcare, is a function of government is quite recent, in keeping with soviet "cradle to grave," thinking

[truth_seeker]

Refreshing to hear so called conservatives, calling Reagan's tax plan an "abomination." NOT

Are there any membership pre-requisites here?

[txradioguy]

Refreshing to hear so called conservatives, calling Reagan's tax plan an "abomination." NOT

Are there any membership pre-requisites here?

Reagan's tax plan and economic policies had an effect that lasted almost to W's administration.

Not sure how anyone outside of the DNC could refer to them as an "abomination". 

[DB]

Reagan's tax plan and economic policies had an effect that lasted almost to W's administration.

Not sure how anyone outside of the DNC could refer to them as an "abomination". 

Trump hated Reagan's tax policies. He went before congress trying to get taxes increased on the "rich" to force investment into real estate tax shelters. He wanted 50%. Either put you money in a real estate tax shelter or lose it to the federal government was his demand.

[DB]

You are correct on the political reality.  However, the underlying problem remains unsolved.  Every election (except perhaps 2016) the low earners go to the voting booth and choose the one who will spend the most.  Their attitudes might change if they were required to pay for part of it.  We have a government that borrows 10% of the budget in good times and 50% in bad times.  Exempting people from responsibility has put us in this position.  At some point, the bill will come due, and the lower and middle classes will suffer like they never have.

Yep. Making the tax rates even more progressive is only increases the problem.

[txradioguy]

Trump hated Reagan's tax policies. He went before congress trying to get taxes increased on the "rich" to force investment into real estate tax shelters. He wanted 50%. Either put you money in a real estate tax shelter or lose it to the federal government was his demand.

He compared them to something the Soviets would do.  Called them a "disaster"

But the fact is, that 25 percent for high-income people — for high-income people — it should be raised substantially with the understanding that if you invest, you can get it down and down substantially below that number...I was asked to come by the Chairman, and I make this plea that, if something isn’t done to put the incentive back — I mean, we’re no different right now than the Soviet Union. They have no incentive, and we have no incentive. And if something isn’t done to quickly put the incentive back, this country is going to be in very deep problems.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/04/19/video-trump-trashes-reagan-tax-cuts-as-democratcalled-expert-witness-in-1991-n2151131

[KingsX]

Refreshing to hear so called conservatives, calling Reagan's tax plan an "abomination." NOT

Are there any membership pre-requisites here?

 I called the tax on Social Security benefits passed under Reagan an abomination.

Reagan was also the first president to give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.

I am well-informed...  if only that were a requirement.

[DB]

 I called the tax on Medicare passed under Reagan an abomination.

I am well-informed...  if only that were a requirement.

Reagan was also the first president to give amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.

Reagan did that making a "deal" with the Democrats in exchange for stronger border enforcement. And we all know what happened as a result...

Guess who's doing the same thing now?

[txradioguy]

Reagan did that making a "deal" with the Democrats in exchange for stronger border enforcement. And we all know what happened as a result...

Guess who's doing the same thing now?

They also lied to him on the 3-1 deal on spending.

[DB]

He compared them to something the Soviets would do.  Called them a "disaster"

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/04/19/video-trump-trashes-reagan-tax-cuts-as-democratcalled-expert-witness-in-1991-n2151131

That made him an in your face crony capitalist. Using government to coerce taxpayers to put money into his tax shelters. I still can't believe so many think he's a principled conservative...

[txradioguy]

That made him an in your face crony capitalist. Using government to coerce taxpayers to put money into his tax shelters.

No wonder the Democrat chairman of that committee called him as their "expert" witness.

[Mom MD]

There is a basic philosophical difference:

--Liberal, collectivists=government owns everything, "allows" people to keep only some of it

--Conservative, wealth belongs to the producers, and should only hand over a minimal amount, for defense, public safety, etc.

The idea that retirement, healthcare, is a function of government is quite recent, in keeping with soviet "cradle to grave," thinking

Exactly.   And the problem is we have way too many liberals who think they are conservatives.  They are not.  The libera definition of rich is anyone that makes more than I do.

As a conservative I think the sports figure or CEO has just as much right to keep what they earn as the janitor.   The government has no more right to a millionaires income than to mine

[KingsX]

The problem with the new neo-con definition of conservative...
it is all about money... and no longer about morality.

[txradioguy]

The problem with the new neo-con definition of conservative...
it is all about money... and no longer about morality.

Ummm ok.   

[Cyber Liberty]

@Jazzhead @KingsX It's telling neither you would not answer my question "What do you think of the term 'Tax Expenditure'?", meaning the cost to the government of a tax cut.  I know what @truth_seeker thinks of it, and he's right on the money.

I could spend a paragraph describing why I think that is, but I have one of you already declaring my opinion as having no worth, and the other simply doesn't answer questions, he merely opines.  A computer network admin would say he's in "Broadcast Mode."

[Cyber Liberty]

Ummm ok.   

He doesn't know us very well, does he?  This the hazard of just walking into a forum and being the loudmouth at the end of the bar.  It took me a couple years to get to be the loudmouth.