Author Topic: Republican Tax Plan 2017  (Read 381041 times)

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1498
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1100 on: December 06, 2017, 09:50:39 AM »
http://thehill.com/news-by-subject/energy-environment/363496-coal-ceo-gop-tax-bill-wipes-us-out-destroys-thousands-of

Quote
The CEO of one of the nation’s largest coal companies ripped the Senate tax-reform bill, saying late changes to the bill would “wipe out” coal mining jobs.

Robert Murray, founder and CEO of Murray Energy, said Tuesday that the tax hike on coal mining firms that would result from the changes would cancel out progress that President Trump has made on reviving the coal industry, according to CNN.

“We won’t have enough cash flow to exist,” Murray told CNNMoney. “This wipes out everything that President Trump has done for coal.”

You sound surprised, Mr. Coal Man.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/06/tax-plan-glitches-mistakes-republicans-208049

Quote
Republicans’ tax-rewrite plans are riddled with bugs, loopholes and other potential problems that could plague lawmakers long after their legislation is signed into law.

Some of the provisions could be easily gamed, tax lawyers say. Their plans to cut taxes on “pass-through” businesses in particular could open broad avenues for tax avoidance.

Others would have unintended results, like a last-minute decision by the Senate to keep the alternative minimum tax, which was designed to make sure wealthy people and corporations don't escape taxes altogether. For many businesses, that would nullify the value of a hugely popular break for research and development expenses.

https://www.vanityfair.com/newsletter/2017/12/trump-crony-admits-tax-plan-is-an-elaborate-middle-finger-to-liberals

Quote
TRUMP CRONY ADMITS REPUBLICAN TAX PLAN IS AN ELABORATE MIDDLE FINGER TO LIBERALS

Quote
“They go after state and local taxes, which weakens public employee unions. They go after university endowments, and universities have become play pens of the left. And getting rid of the mandate is to eventually dismantle Obamacare,” Moore said, explaining excitedly that scrapping the requirement that most people obtain coverage will hasten a “death spiral” in the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces.

https://slate.com/business/2017/12/senate-republicans-may-have-made-a-usd260-billion-mistake-in-their-tax-bill.html

Senate Republicans Made a $289 Billion Mistake in the Handwritten Tax Bill They Passed at 2 a.m. Go Figure.

djadziadax

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1101 on: December 06, 2017, 10:10:28 AM »
One example of benefit (sparked by a conversation with a colleague) - this plan would be of some benefit to a lot of singles who rent - think of our of college grads. They don't itemize usually and don't make tons. So doubling standard deduction is a boon.
 
But overall is a marginal benefit for most - 1-2K better off...its not all that great, but not terrible.
In my case with a family of four, I gain $12k for the standard deduction, but I lose 4 x $4,050 (2017)
or $16,200 for the personal exemptions.
 In just a few years, I won't have the two kid deductions, Then I'd gain $12k and lose $8,080, coming out ahead, at least on those two changes.
A married couple over 65yrs old get a slightly larger Standard deduction of $14,600.
 That couple gains $9,400 and loses $8,200, for a $1,200 reduction of AGI. Unless there is a senior exemption to the standard deduction change. I see where simplification is happening.

Don't forget the flex family tax credit (worth $300 per adult), the expanded child credit ($1600) and the lower tax brackets.

Again, that great, but not terrible either.

As many have said, the point of this bill is mainly to lower the corporate tax rate and attempt to repatriate cash from overseas. But most will gain on the personal side also, about 2 iPhone X worth a year.

frugalecon

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 730
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1102 on: December 06, 2017, 10:26:51 AM »
You may very well be right PathtoFIRE. I was going off an average full time salary of ~$35,000/worker, but I think your approach of looking at GDP per worker instead of compensation per worker is probably closer to the truth. That'd put the economic impact of all those missing workers (and missing jobs for the missing workers to take) at north of $700B/year.

I doubt that the people who have exited the labor force are as productive as the average worker, so this might be an overestimate.

sokoloff

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1103 on: December 06, 2017, 01:19:29 PM »
You may very well be right PathtoFIRE. I was going off an average full time salary of ~$35,000/worker, but I think your approach of looking at GDP per worker instead of compensation per worker is probably closer to the truth. That'd put the economic impact of all those missing workers (and missing jobs for the missing workers to take) at north of $700B/year.
I doubt that the people who have exited the labor force are as productive as the average worker, so this might be an overestimate.
Exactly. No more than slicing a pizza into 6 extra slices would be as filling as the original 8 slices.

OurTown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1372
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1104 on: December 06, 2017, 01:32:27 PM »
I always cut my pizza into 6 slices.  There is no way I could eat 8.

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7400
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1105 on: December 06, 2017, 01:38:43 PM »
You may very well be right PathtoFIRE. I was going off an average full time salary of ~$35,000/worker, but I think your approach of looking at GDP per worker instead of compensation per worker is probably closer to the truth. That'd put the economic impact of all those missing workers (and missing jobs for the missing workers to take) at north of $700B/year.
I doubt that the people who have exited the labor force are as productive as the average worker, so this might be an overestimate.
Exactly. No more than slicing a pizza into 6 extra slices would be as filling as the original 8 slices.

The people who have left the workforce may well be less productive than the average worker, but I don't think it is plausible to argue that total GDP is completely insensitive to the number of people working (which is what the analogy of slicing the same pizza into different numbers of slices implies). Taken to its logical extreme, that would imply that if someone (say a major orange political figure) managed to revoke the citizenship of every other american, deport us all, US GDP would remain exactly the same, and US per capita GDP would be more than $17 trillion.

We may well reach a point in our lifetimes where automation and machine learning make that hypothetical scenario more plausible, but today it's pretty clear that more people working equals more total economic activity (although reasonable people can certainly disagree about how much additional economic activity).

Paul der Krake

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5854
  • Age: 16
  • Location: UTC-10:00

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7512

djadziadax

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1108 on: December 06, 2017, 07:13:44 PM »


The most important element of all is the one most seem oblivious to: the animal spirits. People are really sick of sitting around obsessing about what the Federal Reserve is going to do. They want to spend.



Tell me more about these animal spirits...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes)

Priceless burn.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1109 on: December 06, 2017, 08:41:28 PM »


The most important element of all is the one most seem oblivious to: the animal spirits. People are really sick of sitting around obsessing about what the Federal Reserve is going to do. They want to spend.



Tell me more about these animal spirits...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes)

Priceless burn.

Yes, posting a broken Wikipedia link as a response to a question is a truly powerful argument.

MDM

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11477
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1110 on: December 06, 2017, 09:40:56 PM »
Tell me more about these animal spirits...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes)
Priceless burn.
Yes, posting a broken Wikipedia link as a response to a question is a truly powerful argument.
Gonna hafta plead Poe's law to the last two comments.

Presumably y'all were astute enough to determine the Simple Machines software ignored the closing ")" in the URL and followed the "Did you mean:" wikipedia link to Animal spirits (Keynes) - Wikipedia.  Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes) directly.

Mr Mark

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1229
  • Location: Planet Earth
  • Achieved Financial Independence summer 2014. RE'18
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1111 on: December 07, 2017, 12:30:24 AM »
I think Keynes Animal Spirits would have been more interested in a real and sustained plan to boost to lower and middle class disposable income. Giving it to share buybacks and the 1% will just feed the investor class. U.S. corporations are already flush with cash and easy credit. What they really need are more customers.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1112 on: December 07, 2017, 07:48:18 AM »
Tell me more about these animal spirits...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes)
Priceless burn.
Yes, posting a broken Wikipedia link as a response to a question is a truly powerful argument.
Gonna hafta plead Poe's law to the last two comments.

Presumably y'all were astute enough to determine the Simple Machines software ignored the closing ")" in the URL and followed the "Did you mean:" wikipedia link to Animal spirits (Keynes) - Wikipedia.  Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes) directly.

And Wise Virgin meant it the same way as P.G. Wodehouse.

djadziadax

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1113 on: December 07, 2017, 08:27:03 AM »
Tell me more about these animal spirits...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes)
Priceless burn.
Yes, posting a broken Wikipedia link as a response to a question is a truly powerful argument.
Gonna hafta plead Poe's law to the last two comments.

Presumably y'all were astute enough to determine the Simple Machines software ignored the closing ")" in the URL and followed the "Did you mean:" wikipedia link to Animal spirits (Keynes) - Wikipedia.  Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes) directly.

And Wise Virgin meant it the same way as P.G. Wodehouse.

This is pretty great - learned about P.G. Wodehouse and Poe's Law...never heard of either and I am glad someone pointed them out. Interesting stuff.

djadziadax

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 184
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1114 on: December 07, 2017, 08:29:26 AM »
Tell me more about these animal spirits...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes)
Priceless burn.
Yes, posting a broken Wikipedia link as a response to a question is a truly powerful argument.
Gonna hafta plead Poe's law to the last two comments.

Presumably y'all were astute enough to determine the Simple Machines software ignored the closing ")" in the URL and followed the "Did you mean:" wikipedia link to Animal spirits (Keynes) - Wikipedia.  Or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_spirits_(Keynes) directly.
Burn - as used in That 70's Show Just so funny!

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1498
  • Age: 34
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1115 on: December 07, 2017, 09:24:43 AM »
https://thinkprogress.org/paul-ryan-tax-cuts-medicare-medicaid-f87d810ad5b9/

Quote
Republicans in Congress are openly admitting they plan to use their tax reform bill to justify slashing funding for essential social programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and food stamps.

Quote
“We’re going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit,” Ryan said, adding that health care entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid are “the big drivers of our debt.”

Quote
Rep. Rod Blum (R-IA) claimed that to achieve the growth the tax plan forecasts, “we have to have welfare reform.” Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) said, “If we pass tax reform, we have to have welfare reform.” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) directly admitted that the plan all along has been “to do two things,” because “the driver of our debt is the structure of Social Security and Medicare for future beneficiaries.”

Quote
Ryan suggested that the programs are “paying people not to work.” Higgins referred to Americans who “suffer on welfare.” Blum went so far as to say, “Sometimes we need to force people to go to work.”

Quote
. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) claimed during debate on the tax bill last week that entitlements “help people who won’t help themselves, won’t lift a finger, and expect the federal government to do everything.” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) defended repealing the estate tax — a move that almost exclusively benefits the wealthy — by bemoaning “those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”

Quote
Nearly 90 percent of working-age parents who receive food stamps are back to work within a year. But two thirds of the people who receive those benefits are children, people who have disabilities, or people too old to return to work.

The tax cut, which overwhelmingly benefits the top 1% over the next 10 years, is needed in order to cut social programs that the poorest Americans need.

Your modern day GOP.

BigHaus89

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 212
  • Age: 35
  • Location: NW
  • Ride the Spiral to the End
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1116 on: December 07, 2017, 10:07:43 AM »
https://thinkprogress.org/paul-ryan-tax-cuts-medicare-medicaid-f87d810ad5b9/

Quote
Republicans in Congress are openly admitting they plan to use their tax reform bill to justify slashing funding for essential social programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and food stamps.

Quote
“We’re going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit,” Ryan said, adding that health care entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid are “the big drivers of our debt.”

Quote
Rep. Rod Blum (R-IA) claimed that to achieve the growth the tax plan forecasts, “we have to have welfare reform.” Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) said, “If we pass tax reform, we have to have welfare reform.” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) directly admitted that the plan all along has been “to do two things,” because “the driver of our debt is the structure of Social Security and Medicare for future beneficiaries.”

Quote
Ryan suggested that the programs are “paying people not to work.” Higgins referred to Americans who “suffer on welfare.” Blum went so far as to say, “Sometimes we need to force people to go to work.”

Quote
. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) claimed during debate on the tax bill last week that entitlements “help people who won’t help themselves, won’t lift a finger, and expect the federal government to do everything.” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) defended repealing the estate tax — a move that almost exclusively benefits the wealthy — by bemoaning “those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”

Quote
Nearly 90 percent of working-age parents who receive food stamps are back to work within a year. But two thirds of the people who receive those benefits are children, people who have disabilities, or people too old to return to work.

The tax cut, which overwhelmingly benefits the top 1% over the next 10 years, is needed in order to cut social programs that the poorest Americans need.

Your modern day GOP.

What the fuck?

The GOP's wet dream is becoming a wet reality. Fuck over the voting base in order to benefit GOP donors - blame the hardships on them liberals!

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1117 on: December 07, 2017, 10:11:32 AM »

Quote
Rep. Rod Blum (R-IA) claimed that to achieve the growth the tax plan forecasts, “we have to have welfare reform.” Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA) said, “If we pass tax reform, we have to have welfare reform.” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) directly admitted that the plan all along has been “to do two things,” because “the driver of our debt is the structure of Social Security and Medicare for future beneficiaries.”

I'm never quite sure what anyone means by "welfare," but given that the two programs to which Sen. Rubio referred are also the subject of stand-alone taxes and premiums, I don't understand his comment at all. While I understand that future expenditures under those programs may be legitimate concerns, the programs have all been at a surplus for years (and Social Security and Medicare Part A are at those surpluses entirely from the stand-alone tax collections), and they're expected to continue to run at surplus for the next few years, at least. So how are they the driver of our existing debt?

Paul der Krake

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5854
  • Age: 16
  • Location: UTC-10:00
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1118 on: December 07, 2017, 10:16:40 AM »
Welfare and entitlements mean "government programs I don't like".

Food stamps, TANF, and Section 8, are welfare.
Mortgage deductions, subsidized gasoline, and the Pentagon, are necessary spending.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1119 on: December 07, 2017, 10:31:01 AM »
The GOP's wet dream is becoming a wet reality. Fuck over the voting base in order to benefit GOP donors - blame the hardships on them liberals!

Stolen jokes:

The Republican tax plan includes tax breaks for people who own private jets, and for golf course owners, and repeals the estate tax.  It also raises health insurance premiums by an extra 10% per year and will cause approximately 13 million fewer Americans to have health insurance.  So chin up, America!  If you die from not being able to afford health care, at least you can leave up to eleven million dollars to your kids!

It also includes tax breaks for wineries and private school tuition.  So if you happen to be using your private jet to fly from your golf course to your country estate winery while your kids are away at private school, this tax plan is going to be great for you!

"Imagine if a poor child only inherited eleven million dollars and had to pay taxes on it, why they could absolutely starve!"

As if this big middle finger to average Americans wasn't enough, they've also used their tax plan to strike a blow against reproductive rights.  The republican tax plan would give a tax ID number to unborn fetuses so they can hold 529 accounts, moving them one step closer to personhood than their lack of a central nervous system would indicate.

62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.  Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.  Chuck Grassley specifically disparaged Americans who don't own stock as morally inferior.  (that last one isn't a joke, it's just really fucking infuriating)

BigHaus89

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 212
  • Age: 35
  • Location: NW
  • Ride the Spiral to the End
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1120 on: December 07, 2017, 10:40:30 AM »

62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.  Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.  Chuck Grassley specifically disparaged Americans who don't own stock as morally inferior.  (that last one isn't a joke, it's just really fucking infuriating)

They really are gunning(pun intended) for a violent revolution of the masses(the poor). U.S. drone strikes on U.S. soil? Sign an executive order to protect "True Americans."

The future of America sure is Great!

Saving4Fire

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 56
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1121 on: December 07, 2017, 11:33:15 AM »
A post from Robert Reich yesterday:

Quote
Make no mistake. The oligarchs (Koch brothers, Mercers, Wilks, Waltons, Deasons, Schwabs, Neugebauers, Murdochs, Griffins, Ricketts, etc.) are now in charge of the U.S. government. The views of most Americans (75 percent of whom are against the tax cut, for example) no longer matter.

This was the oligarch’s deal with the devil (Trump) from the start: Get us a huge tax cut, use the resulting deficit to justify cutting Medicare and Social Security, and get rid of environmental and financial regulations. In return, we’ll finance you, we’ll back your allies in the GOP, and we’ll mount PR campaigns on your behalf that magnify your lies. Hell, we’ll even make you look like a populist.

Over half the money contributed in the 2016 came from just 158 families, along with the companies they own or control. More than 50 of these people are on the Forbes list of America’s richest billionaires. 64 of them made their fortunes in finance (hedge fund and private equity). 17 in energy, mostly oil and gas. 15 in real estate and construction (the Trumps, for example). 10 in technology.

These American oligarchs don’t have to worry about whether Social Security or Medicare will be there for them in their retirement because they’ve put away huge fortunes. They don’t worry about climate change because they don’t live in homes that might succumb to hurricanes or wildfires. They don't care about public schools because their families don't attend them. They don't care about public transportation because they don't use it. Truth to tell, they don't even care that much about America, because their personal and financial interests are global.

They are living in their own separate society, and they want people who will represent them, not the rest of us.

The Republican Party is their vehicle. Fox News is their voice. Trump is their champion.

Fomerly known as something

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1627
  • Location: CA
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1122 on: December 07, 2017, 03:31:55 PM »

gerardc

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
  • Age: 40
  • Location: SF bay area
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1123 on: December 07, 2017, 09:55:48 PM »
62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
You keep repeating the same tired arguments. In a tax bill, you can't look at the delta in isolation to determine if it's fair or not, you need to look at the final state.
E.g.: someone earning $20k/year pays $1k in taxes; someone earning $10M pays $3.5M. After the bill, they might pay $3.4M instead. Quit crying that the "delta" of the bill is unfair. You need to look at the big picture. Many people think that $3.4M is more than fair enough in this case. Taxing the rich more is not always the solution. What's the evidence we have that we're currently undertaxing the rich? Those questions are not that simple.

Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1124 on: December 07, 2017, 10:01:14 PM »
62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
You keep repeating the same tired arguments. In a tax bill, you can't look at the delta in isolation to determine if it's fair or not, you need to look at the final state.
E.g.: someone earning $20k/year pays $1k in taxes; someone earning $10M pays $3.5M. After the bill, they might pay $3.4M instead. Quit crying that the "delta" of the bill is unfair. You need to look at the big picture. Many people think that $3.4M is more than fair enough in this case. Taxing the rich more is not always the solution. What's the evidence we have that we're currently undertaxing the rich? Those questions are not that simple.

Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

Agree with your first point, though I think the main counter-argument is that the rich disproportionately get long-term capital gain income that is taxed at a lower rate for unclear reasons. I don't understand why my marginal wage tax rate should be in the mid to upper 30% range while my long-term gain rate is half. Hence Warren Buffett's famous statement that his cumulative tax rate is less than his secretary's.

Second point - I can't ascribe motives to the Republicans other than I'm sure it's self-serving to some extent, given human nature. They may believe the economy works better that way, but most economists on the entire spectrum of thought agree that it won't (at least not enough to balance out the major debt increase). Good faith without being informed by experts isn't what we pay Congress for, they are supposed to make decisions based on all available information and expert opinion.

« Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 10:03:01 PM by Abe »

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3493
  • Age: 94
  • Location: Upper left corner
  • FI(lean) working on the "RE"
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1125 on: December 07, 2017, 10:20:50 PM »
62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
You keep repeating the same tired arguments. In a tax bill, you can't look at the delta in isolation to determine if it's fair or not, you need to look at the final state.
E.g.: someone earning $20k/year pays $1k in taxes; someone earning $10M pays $3.5M. After the bill, they might pay $3.4M instead. Quit crying that the "delta" of the bill is unfair. You need to look at the big picture. Many people think that $3.4M is more than fair enough in this case. Taxing the rich more is not always the solution. What's the evidence we have that we're currently undertaxing the rich? Those questions are not that simple.

Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

Agree with your first point, though I think the main counter-argument is that the rich disproportionately get long-term capital gain income that is taxed at a lower rate for unclear reasons. I don't understand why my marginal wage tax rate should be in the mid to upper 30% range while my long-term gain rate is half. Hence Warren Buffett's famous statement that his cumulative tax rate is less than his secretary's.

Second point - I can't ascribe motives to the Republicans other than I'm sure it's self-serving to some extent, given human nature. They may believe the economy works better that way, but most economists on the entire spectrum of thought agree that it won't (at least not enough to balance out the major debt increase). Good faith without being informed by experts isn't what we pay Congress for, they are supposed to make decisions based on all available information and expert opinion.
I think the closed door process that purposefully avoided time for discussion of analysis by independent or even GOP sources us anathema to working in good faith. The bills were crammed through before people woukd really kniw what was in there.

Undecided

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1237
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1126 on: December 07, 2017, 10:28:46 PM »
Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

DarkandStormy provided a few quotes earlier, including these:

Quote
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) claimed during debate on the tax bill last week that entitlements “help people who won’t help themselves, won’t lift a finger, and expect the federal government to do everything.”

Quote
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) defended repealing the estate tax — a move that almost exclusively benefits the wealthy — by bemoaning “those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies.”

While I think your first point was reasonable, if this is how two top Republican Senators are willing to go on record, I think Sol’s on to something, too.

accolay

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 990
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1127 on: December 07, 2017, 10:40:56 PM »
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

Assume good faith? Fool me once...

I guess the reason could be that they believe the economy works better like this....but I'm not sure how many more Republican economic experiments the US can survive.

Bateaux

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
  • Location: Port Vincent
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1128 on: December 08, 2017, 01:22:35 AM »
It took one hell of a lot of poor and working class voters to create this political nightmare.   The rich simply don't have the numbers themselves to get elected.   With the pending election of Roy Moore to the Senate, I'm pretty much done.  Fuck the poor and working middle class.   They brought it on themselves.

accolay

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 990
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1129 on: December 08, 2017, 02:04:54 AM »
Fuck the poor and working middle class.   They brought it on themselves.

I get it, but I'm not there yet.

sokoloff

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1191
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1130 on: December 08, 2017, 03:22:24 AM »
I think the main counter-argument is that the rich disproportionately get long-term capital gain income that is taxed at a lower rate for unclear reasons. I don't understand why my marginal wage tax rate should be in the mid to upper 30% range while my long-term gain rate is half.
I see two main reasons for long-term capital gains to be taxed at a lower marginal rate than short-term capital gains. (Then, I leave open the question of whether short-term capital gains should be taxed the same as labor or differently, but with total marginal rates on short term capital gains already over 50% for many investors, it's hard to argue that short-term capital gains should be taxed even more heavily.)

First, capital gains are a tax on nominal gains, not real gains. Over a short time frame, the effects of inflation (at least in the US) are low and so can reasonably be ignored. Over a long time frame, the effects of inflation are significant and the reduction in rate for long-term capital gains can be viewed as an imperfect nod to taxing that part that represents the real economic gain. (The housing total exclusion on some amount of gain on qualifying sales can be viewed as an economically sound exclusion for the same reason, IMO.)

The second relates to incenting behavior directly. Many businesses need long-term, committed capital to get off the ground, for inventory or other working capital needs, and/or for expansion. Businesses have uncertain returns for investors as well. Combining these factors, lowering the rates on LTCG serves as a financial incentive to invest for a longer horizon (and in these riskier ventures) than an investor might otherwise be inclined to do. Ceteris paribus, this has a positive effect on business formation, business expansion, and job creation.

AdrianC

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1211
  • Location: Cincinnati
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1131 on: December 08, 2017, 07:15:54 AM »
Fuck the poor and working middle class.   They brought it on themselves.

I get it, but I'm not there yet.

I get it too. People I know, even people dependent on Obamacare, either voted for this shit or didn't bother to vote at all. I'm starting to lose a little sympathy.

Peter Parker

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 249
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1132 on: December 08, 2017, 07:42:42 AM »
Fuck the poor and working middle class.   They brought it on themselves.

I get it, but I'm not there yet.

I get it too. People I know, even people dependent on Obamacare, either voted for this shit or didn't bother to vote at all. I'm starting to lose a little sympathy.

I would like to get there, but can't.

Wife and I earn enough that we will likely benefit from this plan. But for me that is not enough reason to say "hey it's great!"  It is definitely not great for my kids and those I care about that are less fortunate than me.

It is so frustrating to see many neighbors, friends, family support these idiots who constantly want to take money them and reduce many of the benefits they rely on....Then I hear about how "congress" wants to take away their Social Security.  Who do they think "congress" is???  It's the dolts they voted for.  I want to shake them and scream "pay attention people!" 


farmecologist

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 601
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1133 on: December 08, 2017, 07:56:08 AM »
Fuck the poor and working middle class.   They brought it on themselves.

I get it, but I'm not there yet.

I get it too. People I know, even people dependent on Obamacare, either voted for this shit or didn't bother to vote at all. I'm starting to lose a little sympathy.

I would like to get there, but can't.

Wife and I earn enough that we will likely benefit from this plan. But for me that is not enough reason to say "hey it's great!"  It is definitely not great for my kids and those I care about that are less fortunate than me.

It is so frustrating to see many neighbors, friends, family support these idiots who constantly want to take money them and reduce many of the benefits they rely on....Then I hear about how "congress" wants to take away their Social Security.  Who do they think "congress" is???  It's the dolts they voted for.  I want to shake them and scream "pay attention people!"


I have no sympathy for people who don't vote.  Especially the Bernie supporters who were 'perfectly comfortable' with their non-vote.  I saw many pre-election interviews with these people and I couldn't believe it.   I really hope they learned their lesson...but I fear not.

Frankly, you have to be a realist in this day and age...NOT an idealist.





Carnivore_Plant_Mom

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 24
  • Location: Michigan
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1134 on: December 08, 2017, 10:04:11 AM »

AdrianC

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1211
  • Location: Cincinnati
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1135 on: December 08, 2017, 01:25:48 PM »
we could all save a ton on taxes if we own LLCs:


It's very easy to set up an LLC. I've got one.

OurTown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1372
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1136 on: December 08, 2017, 02:06:15 PM »
Law firm associates, LLC. Under the Senate bill, there is potentially a major problem as drafted: Employees may be able to benefit from the pass-through provision by forming a pass-through of which they are an owner. To achieve the tax savings, no longer be an employee (who cannot benefit from the provision); instead be an owner (who can benefit from the provision). For example, law firm associates (and other employees of the firm) should no longer be mere associates. They should instead be partners in Associates, LLC—a separate partnership paid to provide services to the original firm. Their “profit share”—in lieu of salary—from Associates, LLC would then be given the special low pass-through rate. There are restrictions on lawyers—since they provide a personal service, which is disfavored in the bill—from benefiting from the special pass-through rate, but those restrictions would not apply to these associates. So long as the associate (or really partner in Associates, LLC) makes less than $500,000 in taxable income (for a married couple) or $250,000 (for a single individual), they would be fully eligible. And that covers a lot of law firm associates, not to mention many other people who are now employees—but who may not be for long.

OurTown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1372
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1137 on: December 08, 2017, 02:06:54 PM »
From the link above, fyi.

FIREchiefsr

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 90
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1138 on: December 08, 2017, 02:53:06 PM »
Does anyone know how the new AMT is supposed to work?  It would seem to me that someone taking just the standard deduction could still pay AMT under the Senate bill - so effectively, the AMT simply takes away the benefit of the new lower tax brackets for people above the threshold?

I also went through an example last night that shows that I would pay the AMT under the Senate bill, even if I take the standard deduction. If your effective tax rate is less than 28%, and income is basically from W-2 income, there’s a zone where you seem to be subject to AMT without any itemized deductions. I don’t know whether that’s the “intent.” It seems like an oddity to apply an “alternative” system in that case. An obvious “fix” would be to exclude taxpayers who elect the standard deduction. I didn’t look closely, because it doesn’t apply to me, but it seems that income that qualifies for the pass-through treatment is not proposed to be added back for AMT purposes.

You folks may have missed my earlier post regarding AMT.

The AMT numbers don't make sense.  They would still result in a joint filer at the top of the 24% bracket paying AMT, even if they're not claiming anything other than the standard deduction.  The whole AMT concept is designed to limit deductions and force some level of tax payments.  If somebody isn't deducting anything, I don't understand how they could still have to pay the AMT.

I tried to decipher the inflation adjustments, and it may be that the thresholds published in the bill (exemption and phaseout threshold), are in 2011 dollars, which will then be escalated to 2018 equivalents.  That would "almost" eliminate the AMT for the situation I described above.  I will be interested in hearing others' understanding of the revised AMT for individuals.

Edit:  I just ran the comparison of the published AMT thresholds against the original Senate brackets.  In this case, the AMT stays just below the 25% bracket top.  Do you suppose that when they wedged the AMT revival in at the eleventh hour they forgot to take into account their earlier amendment to reduce the brackets.  Nah, that would never happen in Washington.........would it?

fyi - I've started a dedicated thread on the revised individual AMT.  The topic seems to be getting lost here in the "big thread."

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/taxes/individual-amt-in-the-final-senate-tax-bill/new/#new

Bateaux

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
  • Location: Port Vincent
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1139 on: December 08, 2017, 06:57:14 PM »
I've got to apologize for some of my comments.  I'm pretty pissed about what going on in Alabama, poor and working people are on the verge of electing an accused pedophile to the Senate.   Why the hell should we not just write them off? 

Exflyboy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8402
  • Age: 62
  • Location: Corvallis, Oregon
  • Expat Brit living in the New World..:)
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1140 on: December 08, 2017, 07:07:58 PM »
Oh don't worry the GOP will soon be going after their medicare, Social Security, food stamps and Medicaid.

That will surely alienate the Trump base right?.. right?

RangerOne

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 714
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1141 on: December 09, 2017, 09:48:32 AM »
Oh don't worry the GOP will soon be going after their medicare, Social Security, food stamps and Medicaid.

That will surely alienate the Trump base right?.. right?

Usually it takes damn near a full 8 years for disillusion to set in... Most people only have time to absorb how the media and politicians chose feed them. I admit none of us have time to deeply scrutinize every decision they make.

But I find that having a president like Trump has taught me that the perception filter have of public officials truly has no limit. You can have the most accomplished president ever on one hand and the worst on the other and in the public eye it wont really make a difference.

I find the idea of cutting medicare or social security, without making any changes to our payroll taxes which are supposed to pay for them completely absurd. I think independents will feel the same. Trumps base probably will turn a blind eye. Because they will continue to get other things they want. Like a president willing to shit on unpopular immigrant communities and occasionally adopt white nationalist talking points...

At the end of his term when they realize more manufacturing jobs aren't coming the indepents will swing to something else.

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7400
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1142 on: December 09, 2017, 10:21:04 AM »
I find the idea of cutting medicare or social security, without making any changes to our payroll taxes which are supposed to pay for them completely absurd. I think independents will feel the same. Trumps base probably will turn a blind eye. Because they will continue to get other things they want.

While I'm certainly not arguing for medicaid/care or social security cuts, it is worth noting that under currently law we're going to be spending more on those programs each year than the payroll taxes which are supposed to pay for them bring in each year.

Last year the social security payroll tax (plus income taxes charged on benefits) brought in $869 billion, but $910 billion was paid out. Which is a small gap, but one that keeps getting bigger every year.*

Last year medicare payroll tax (plus beneficiary premiums and medicare taxes on social security) brought in $280 $366 billion and $679 billion was paid out in medicare benefits.**

Which is a long winded way of saying that it seems reasonable to me that either payroll taxes could be raised without raising benefits, or that if benefits were reduced, it wouldn't necessarily be reasonable (or responsible) to also cut payroll taxes.

*Right now that gap is covered by interest on treasury bonds purchased by social security years ago when the program is running a surplus, but the gap is projected to exceed this interest income in 2021, and the bonds themselves are projected to all have been sold to cover annual payments by 2034.
**Now to be fair, medicare payroll taxes were only designed to cover medicare part A (hospitals but not doctor's visits), and they do a good job of covering the spending on that alone. Medicare parts B and D (doctor's visits and prescription drugs approximately) don't have any dedicated revenue stream and end up being paid out of the general fund (essentially income tax revenue) every year.

Source for all numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/
« Last Edit: December 09, 2017, 11:38:34 AM by maizeman »

Paul der Krake

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5854
  • Age: 16
  • Location: UTC-10:00
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1143 on: December 09, 2017, 10:36:26 AM »
But will they dare touch the Mustachian sweet spot of benefits eligibility after only 40 credits?

We'll find out!

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7400
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1144 on: December 09, 2017, 10:55:59 AM »
But will they dare touch the Mustachian sweet spot of benefits eligibility after only 40 credits?

We'll find out!

We're also helped a lot by the fact that SS payouts are set up to be progressive (social security is a much better deal for low income earners than high income earners) but SS figures out who was low income based on average earnings over 35 years instead of earnings each year. So a mustachian who retires after making $100,000 for five years* gets the same very favorable treatment from social security as someone who worked for 35 years making only made $14,300/year.

Honestly I would be against of these being on the chopping block if congress does try to make significant reductions just because there aren't enough people like us to make the savings from changing those rules big. It seems much more likely any change would be a straight benefit cut for future retirees, increased taxability of social security payments, or a reduction in cost of living adjustments (for example switching to the chained CPI like Obama proposed years ago).

*Assuming they find a way to get up to 40 total credits at some point.

BTDretire

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3074
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1145 on: December 09, 2017, 11:18:17 AM »
62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
You keep repeating the same tired arguments. In a tax bill, you can't look at the delta in isolation to determine if it's fair or not, you need to look at the final state.
E.g.: someone earning $20k/year pays $1k in taxes; someone earning $10M pays $3.5M. After the bill, they might pay $3.4M instead. Quit crying that the "delta" of the bill is unfair. You need to look at the big picture. Many people think that $3.4M is more than fair enough in this case. Taxing the rich more is not always the solution. What's the evidence we have that we're currently undertaxing the rich? Those questions are not that simple.

Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

Agree with your first point, though I think the main counter-argument is that the rich disproportionately get long-term capital gain income that is taxed at a lower rate for unclear reasons. I don't understand why my marginal wage tax rate should be in the mid to upper 30% range while my long-term gain rate is half. Hence Warren Buffett's famous statement that his cumulative tax rate is less than his secretary's.

Second point - I can't ascribe motives to the Republicans other than I'm sure it's self-serving to some extent, given human nature. They may believe the economy works better that way, but most economists on the entire spectrum of thought agree that it won't (at least not enough to balance out the major debt increase). Good faith without being informed by experts isn't what we pay Congress for, they are supposed to make decisions based on all available information and expert opinion.

 I'm with gerardc, the top 10% pay as much as the other 90% of taxpayers. Of course, when taxes are cut there dollar amount will be larger!
EDIT: I'm sorry, I got that wrong, the top 10% pay 2.4 times as much in tax as the other 90%.
The top 25% pay 6.5 times more than the other 75%.

 I want a lower rate on capital gains that's how many people aquire wealth, I don't want that taken away. Especially away from me!

 I hope it passes, then we will have a data point about the effect of cutting taxes. Then we can argue again! :-)

Source, https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2016-update/
« Last Edit: December 09, 2017, 11:35:26 AM by BTDretire »

pecunia

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1146 on: December 10, 2017, 07:41:46 AM »
Wow!  Lots to read here, man!

Quote
I preface everything I say about this tax plan by saying cutting taxes on corps to stimulate and economy that has been over stimulated for a decade is stupid.

But the Republicans feel they have no choice because they know 2018 will likely see them lose their full control.

Yeh - I couldn't quite figure out how our "honorable" politicians could quite take the actions they took.  I guess they are setting a time bomb for the politicians that will follow them.  And,....since they don't seem to be doing much to help the average working Joe, many of them will be voted out in 2018 and the bomb will go off when they have skeedaddled to the lobbying firm.

Grandma will really be mad if they cut her Social Security and Medicare,......  If they only cut for those 55 and younger, they should be able to get away with it.  The rich folks will have their tax cuts and "reforms" will have taken place.  What a wonderful world.

Ocinfo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 313
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1147 on: December 10, 2017, 08:12:49 AM »
I find the idea of cutting medicare or social security, without making any changes to our payroll taxes which are supposed to pay for them completely absurd. I think independents will feel the same. Trumps base probably will turn a blind eye. Because they will continue to get other things they want.

While I'm certainly not arguing for medicaid/care or social security cuts, it is worth noting that under currently law we're going to be spending more on those programs each year than the payroll taxes which are supposed to pay for them bring in each year.

Last year the social security payroll tax (plus income taxes charged on benefits) brought in $869 billion, but $910 billion was paid out. Which is a small gap, but one that keeps getting bigger every year.*

Last year medicare payroll tax (plus beneficiary premiums and medicare taxes on social security) brought in $280 $366 billion and $679 billion was paid out in medicare benefits.**

Which is a long winded way of saying that it seems reasonable to me that either payroll taxes could be raised without raising benefits, or that if benefits were reduced, it wouldn't necessarily be reasonable (or responsible) to also cut payroll taxes.

*Right now that gap is covered by interest on treasury bonds purchased by social security years ago when the program is running a surplus, but the gap is projected to exceed this interest income in 2021, and the bonds themselves are projected to all have been sold to cover annual payments by 2034.
**Now to be fair, medicare payroll taxes were only designed to cover medicare part A (hospitals but not doctor's visits), and they do a good job of covering the spending on that alone. Medicare parts B and D (doctor's visits and prescription drugs approximately) don't have any dedicated revenue stream and end up being paid out of the general fund (essentially income tax revenue) every year.

Source for all numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/

Just wanted to add that the SSWB had a big increase last year: $118,500 to $127,200 (~7%), which is one way to raise revenue without actually changing the rate. I thought they were going to continue making large leaps but they recently announced that 2018 SSWB would only increase to $128,400.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3493
  • Age: 94
  • Location: Upper left corner
  • FI(lean) working on the "RE"
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1148 on: December 10, 2017, 10:05:19 AM »
62% of the benefits in this bill go to the top 1%, an unimaginable transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
You keep repeating the same tired arguments. In a tax bill, you can't look at the delta in isolation to determine if it's fair or not, you need to look at the final state.
E.g.: someone earning $20k/year pays $1k in taxes; someone earning $10M pays $3.5M. After the bill, they might pay $3.4M instead. Quit crying that the "delta" of the bill is unfair. You need to look at the big picture. Many people think that $3.4M is more than fair enough in this case. Taxing the rich more is not always the solution. What's the evidence we have that we're currently undertaxing the rich? Those questions are not that simple.

Republicans think this is appropriate because poor people are morally inferior and don't deserve tax breaks.
That's just your (angry) opinion. Why don't you assume good faith? Why couldn't the reason be that they really believe the whole economy works better that way?

Agree with your first point, though I think the main counter-argument is that the rich disproportionately get long-term capital gain income that is taxed at a lower rate for unclear reasons. I don't understand why my marginal wage tax rate should be in the mid to upper 30% range while my long-term gain rate is half. Hence Warren Buffett's famous statement that his cumulative tax rate is less than his secretary's.

Second point - I can't ascribe motives to the Republicans other than I'm sure it's self-serving to some extent, given human nature. They may believe the economy works better that way, but most economists on the entire spectrum of thought agree that it won't (at least not enough to balance out the major debt increase). Good faith without being informed by experts isn't what we pay Congress for, they are supposed to make decisions based on all available information and expert opinion.

 I'm with gerardc, the top 10% pay as much as the other 90% of taxpayers. Of course, when taxes are cut there dollar amount will be larger!
EDIT: I'm sorry, I got that wrong, the top 10% pay 2.4 times as much in tax as the other 90%.
The top 25% pay 6.5 times more than the other 75%.

 I want a lower rate on capital gains that's how many people aquire wealth, I don't want that taken away. Especially away from me!

 I hope it passes, then we will have a data point about the effect of cutting taxes. Then we can argue again! :-)

Source, https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2016-update/
Those who do nit know history are biund to reoeat it:
https://slate.com/business/2017/11/republicans-are-about-to-repeat-kansas-tax-cut-disaster.html

Anyine else want to chime in with examples of this experiment?

accolay

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 990
Re: Republican Tax Plan 2017
« Reply #1149 on: December 10, 2017, 03:59:05 PM »
Those who do nit know history are biund to reoeat it:
https://slate.com/business/2017/11/republicans-are-about-to-repeat-kansas-tax-cut-disaster.html

Anyine else want to chime in with examples of this experiment?

See: Oklahoma; Missouri

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!