Skeptical on the tax cut by Trump

[davew]

Originally Posted by lefty359

Nobody mentioned the growth this plan will provide. Plus overseas money coming back to the U.S. More jobs and more taxpayers. And right now, it looks like a go.

and it is a tax reform - far less people will need a CPA or tax lawyer to fill out all their forms.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by davew

and it is a tax reform - far less people will need a CPA or tax lawyer to fill out all their forms.

The bill will mean more taxpayers will be using the standard deduction but I can't see too many people opting to go it alone.

[Tom]

The dems are the one who really want to simplify that taxes.
Their proposed 1040 Form:

1. How much did you earn last year?
2. Send it in.

[porchy44]

With this tax bill. borrowing money for tax breaks is STEALING from future generations. Republicans and Democrats alike are culpable for the inevitable some day (when debt becomes unsustainable.). The Republican party was the last hope. I remember a day when the party was responsible and cared about the deficit. Only a dope or someone disingenuous would think that growth will make up for the deficit.

I would be for some tax breaks for corporations if they would only be in relationship for the number of employees that are employed in the USA. Then cut some unnecessary spending to make up for it.

It has been said by someone on this board that "you cannot trust the government'. I definitely am beginning to believe it.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Tom

The dems are the one who really want to simplify that taxes.
Their proposed 1040 Form:

1. How much did you earn last year?
2. Send it in.

what about the tax credit for donations to progressive causes?

[Track Collector]

Originally Posted by davew

what about the tax credit for donations to progressive causes?

It is hardly worth it. I hear you only automatically qualify for food stamps and disability benefits for the year in question.

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by chadk66

That will never happen. Those deductions will remain.

Apparently they survived, but only up to 10k. Avg deduction by a California resident was 18k according to D. Feinstein. So that’s a considerable haircut for California and NY residents

[davew]

This is just a smokescreen - just wait until 2026 when the taxes take a big jump.

All the dimocrat leaders predict this is the beginning of the downfall of the Republican domination - I hope they can still be in office to see it happen.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Apparently they survived, but only up to 10k. Avg deduction by a California resident was 18k according to D. Feinstein. So that’s a considerable haircut for California and NY residents

A bogus stat. The majority of people in CA don't itemize so their deduction was zero. In order to have a SALT deduction of $18K you need to be making a pretty high salary and/or own an expensive house. And what is never talked about is that people who have high SALT deductions are usually paying the Alternative Minimum Tax meaning they don't get to deduct their SALT expenditures!

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by porchy44

With this tax bill. borrowing money for tax breaks is STEALING from future generations. Republicans and Democrats alike are culpable for the inevitable some day (when debt becomes unsustainable.). The Republican party was the last hope. I remember a day when the party was responsible and cared about the deficit. Only a dope or someone disingenuous would think that growth will make up for the deficit.

I would be for some tax breaks for corporations if they would only be in relationship for the number of employees that are employed in the USA. Then cut some unnecessary spending to make up for it.

It has been said by someone on this board that "you cannot trust the government'. I definitely am beginning to believe it.

I can't understand how people can't "care for the deficit" and also "care for real economic growth" all at once and simultaneously. Why are these mutually exclusive concepts? Maybe some liberal out there would care to explain this to us. Why must it be one or the other?

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I can't understand how people can't "care for the deficit" and also "care for real economic growth" all at once and simultaneously. Why are these mutually exclusive concepts? Maybe some liberal out there would care to explain this to us. Why must it be one or the other?

I care for both. Cut regulation. Lower corporate tax rate a bit. Growth problem solved. Sweeping tax cuts aren't needed or necessary.

There is a significant number of think tanks both conservative and liberal leaning that are skeptical about the type of growth being used to pitch this as deficit neutral.

[xtb]

Originally Posted by porchy44

I would be for some tax breaks for corporations if they would only be in relationship for the number of employees that are employed in the USA.

I would like to see an inverse relationship between the percentage of the total number of employees of a company working in the US and the company's tax rate.

20% of employees work in the US = 80% tax rate
40% of employees work in the US = 60% tax rate
60% of employees work in the US = 40% tax rate
80% of employees work in the US = 20% tax rate
100% of employees work in the US = 0% tax rate

What most people don't realize is that "corporations" don't pay income tax, it is built into their products/services.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by elysiantraveller

I care for both. Cut regulation. Lower corporate tax rate a bit. Growth problem solved. Sweeping tax cuts aren't needed or necessary.

There is a significant number of think tanks both conservative and liberal leaning that are skeptical about the type of growth being used to pitch this as deficit neutral.

Sweeping tax cuts are absolutely necessary and foundational to an economy you want to grow it.

[davew]

Originally Posted by xtb

What most people don't realize is that "corporations" don't pay income tax, it is built into their products/services.

I am not sure what you implying - corporations pay taxes on their profits and shareholders pay taxes on dividends

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Originally Posted by xtb

I would like to see an inverse relationship between the percentage of the total number of employees of a company working in the US and the company's tax rate.

20% of employees work in the US = 80% tax rate
40% of employees work in the US = 60% tax rate
60% of employees work in the US = 40% tax rate
80% of employees work in the US = 20% tax rate
100% of employees work in the US = 0% tax rate

What most people don't realize is that "corporations" don't pay income tax, it is built into their products/services.

Right.

So a 14% tax cut will mean absolutely nothing to them.

What part of Disneyland did you wake up in today?