So the standard ded for join filers increase from 12.7k to 24k, and the personal exemptions ($4050 in 2016) is eliminated. I guess this is for the sake of simplifying the tax code. But does it make any sense? If you married with 4 kids or less making 150k, your tax is staying the SAME or reduced (reduced if less kids). So smaller families get more tax reduction. Why? If you have more than 4 kids, then your tax would actually go up. This simplification seems stupid. You are taking money away from those that need it more - larger families. There are definitely tax increases to middle class families and even poor families. So far, increases to larger family in certain income range and to many of those in state with income taxes (really the "D" state). The big winner is still businesses and the very wealthy. The super majority of the tax decreases will go toward those (with the failed theory that that somehow will trickle down).
There is no question this so-called tax reform is a monet grab for the rich by the rich, and I wish they called this for what it really is. Many middle to upper income households are going to get shafted in the rear without vaseline so that the Moron-in-chief can keep a whole lot of his money. Those ****ers will go on tv and lied through their teeth, especially limp dick Paul Ryan. Hopefully the Senate will stop this charade.
Standard ded increase from 12.7k to 24k for family. Eliminated is the personal exemption ($4050 each).
Some will get a tax increase, but most will get a tax cut. But again, it's heavily weighted toward the top. Think $K for most vs $M-$B for the top earners. If you think outside of just taxes (debt - est to cost 1.5T in 10 years, services), the story is much more bleak. I would think most will have an immediate short term gain, but at the expense of a higher debt that the younger folks, and today children will pay, plus the pressure to cut services, which have a bigger impact to middle class and lower income families. All in all, this is a huge shift to the very top, and of little surprise, the gain is especially great for Trump and families like his. Other elimination that were once bipartisan: 1- Child tax credit is expanded to the higher middle class (no problem with that), but shifted away from the poor. There are scenario where a single parent with 2 kids working full time on min wages would get less credit than a families with 2 kids making 250k. 2- Adoption tax credit of up to 13.6k (for household making < 244k) eliminated. Program isn't perfect but eliminating this instead of improving it? It only cost $300-$400M a year, but it's huge to those household. Adoption was one of the idea to drive down abortion. "families values" ?? 3- No tax on education gone. Now there is a new tax on education.. not sure what is the goal here? Educ loan interests ded also gone. 4- Repeal of the medical expense and property casualty loss deduction is a head scatcher. Think who needs those - you get hit by cancer (especially if lifetime limit is back) or your house got wiped out by a natural disaster (how many ppl have flood ins?). It's a short term tax break for those that need it the most. ... others smaller one.. And simplification... there isn't much of any simplification. It's fundamentally as complex as it is today. The big changes would drive a need for more CPA, lawyers, Tax SW, tax strategy... in the short term. Nice break down below. Overall, ~300B in tax saving to individuals over 10 years. ~1.2T in tax saving to busn and wealthy families over same period. We do need tax reform, but this is just more of the same shift to the top by GOP, hiding under "simplification" and trying to sell it with some cuts to the avg families.
The loss of personal exemptions is the thing that will hit families with multiple children and/or dependent college students very hard. Under the current system, students can be claimed as one additional exemption until the age of 23, whereas the child tax credit is only available for children younger than 17. Like I said, this is a heist on working families, and you guys are fools (not you) if you really believe this tax scam is meant to help out middle income Americans with their tax burden. Any republican voting for this abomination need to be targeted in their next reelection. Easy opposition political ads.
The individual deduction is also doubled. Individuals can claim that. Junior should get a job as it is - now there is even more motivation.
The simplification is found in doubling the standard deduction. More people will be better off with a 1040EZ using the standard deduction instead of itemization. I personally feel there are too many tax breaks. Having more than 2 kids should be considered a luxury IMO. What I prefer to see is a drastic reduction in tax breaks and any tax break should be granted through EIC. To me, this is much more fair as it drastically reduces the tax liability for low income but still forces middle to higher incomes to pay their share. Additionally, if anyone wants to go the route of "operating a business" and wish to be subjected to tax deductions, they should be forced to do it under an EIN and not through a pass through method. I know this would be largely unpopular because this is very often used as a tax loop hole to reduce ones tax liability.
Do you just copy and paste responses w/out thinking about what you're saying? I stated there should be less tax breaks and somehow you blindly spin it into less taxes for the rich. That is literally the most absurd thing anyone has ever said since the dawn of history. Wait. What does literally mean again?
Ok, i admit I am just looking at this as I have had a VERY busy week for work. Just a few early observations. Taxes are left alone on the rich. Businesses get a needed reduction. Looks like under this plan people who live in high income tax states will end up paying more. I am not seeing too much I dislike. Getting rid of the state income tax deduction looks like a great way to make income tax more equitable. Why should people who live in high income tax states pay at a lower federal rate just for living in that state? Unless someone lives in a high income tax blue state, I do not see many drawbacks even though it look like I may pay a little more under this plan due to recent success. I do not mind paying more income tax as long as it is equitable. That is my initial observations.
You two are nuts. Taxes are being cut substantially for the rich in multiple ways, and to pay for it they are eliminating breaks for the middle class. No more estate tax. Lower tax brackets for anyone making less than a millionaire but above middle class. What would be equitable is if every state received back a proportional amount of the tax they pay from the feds for programs. So NY should get 20 times more than a state that pays 20 times less in federal tax. Then get rid of state taxes.
This obsession with the estate tax fascinates me. Why should the children of successful people be required to pay extra income taxes? They already pay taxes on the income of the success, so why can't they pass their success on to their children? These taxes are often on real estate instead of just money which means the people inheriting the sweat of their parents brows have to sell part of the inheritance to pay the taxes. I do not expect a rational; response from you Lou so I will take your response with a grain of salt and wait for a good response from someone who has proven to be a better responder.
I also find it interesting you think a state who pays more in state taxes deserves more on a federal level. I mean you do choose to live in such a state don't you? You do choose to pay the extra taxes by receiving the things that afforded to you by paying those extra taxes from those states? Why do you expect a lower federal amount based on YOUR choices? Edit: Your plan seems awfully self serving and could very well give more tax advantage to the rich and less to the poor. Why not keep it on an individual basis that way the people who are able to pay it can instead of sharing the burden across all economic lines in each state as you purpose?
I don't understand the obsession over the estate tax either, especially on this topic. Hearing Lou and the others speak, this is a full money grab for the wealthy. It really doesn't matter. The estate tax could be taken off the table and they will find some reason to b**** about it. The reality is those who are exceedingly wealthy and are subjected to the current estate tax laws can find ways around them easy enough. Its people like the farmers in the midwest who get screwed by these laws.
Reality - looking at the real tax data - tells us this isn't true. It's just an easy thing for you to repeat without knowing any facts.
Not remotely true. Most businesses don't get a reduction - small businesses certainly don't, which is why small biz associations have come out strongly against the plan. Big businesses do benefit. Those businesses are having record profits, so whether that's "needed" is a matter of opinion. Previous data shows that money will not significantly go towards growth or additional jobs, so really it's just a matter of whether you think the richest Americans "need" more money at the expense of the national debt, which everyone pays for. So you believe property taxes - a massively regressive tax - as a method of financing local and state goverment should be given preference over income and sales taxes? Why do you believe the federal government should be picking winners and losers amongst state taxation decisions, and why do you think property taxes should be given preference?
