Trump tax cuts have not paid for themselves

[UglyCasanova]

Lol means good luck. Republican voters are just as much beneficiaries of those programs as Democratic voters.

Agreed nobody wants to give up anything but it’s necessary. We need a truly fiscally responsible party/movement. That’s the biggest issue facing the country and unfortunately nobody in power will touch it. You don’t win elections by taking things away even if it’s the right thing to do. Promise shit, pretend to pay for it with voodoo economics or simply saying the kids will pick up the bill, never bring up the downside of living beyond your means, and voila you get elected.

 

[Jhhnn]

Agreed nobody wants to give up anything but it’s necessary. We need a truly fiscally responsible party/movement. That’s the biggest issue facing the country and unfortunately nobody in power will touch it. You don’t win elections by taking things away even if it’s the right thing to do. Promise shit, pretend to pay for it with voodoo economics or simply saying the kids will pick up the bill, never bring up the downside of living beyond your means, and voila you get elected.

Why should honest working people & our govt give up tax cuts to the Rich? What has that ever done for us?

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Yeah, but think about the hardships forced upon other families.

Can't you see how sad they are? Poor bastards barely scrapped by under Obama.

Am I missing something? Am I slow-witted? What's the point of putting up examples with those incomes?

Last time I checked, and only a few years ago, the MEDIAN family income in the US was approximately $60,000. That is, 50% of families have incomes above the median, and 50% have incomes below it.

I pretty much had my 2018 taxes done with good, ballpark estimates as early as September. The new tax software (Turbo) came in around November, and obviously reflects changes in the tax laws from the "Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017."

Now there is supposedly a limit on the amount of mortgage interest deductible under Schedule A, and I would think a lot of folks with many years yet to pay in their 30-year mortgages lose. But because I have a rental property that still carries a mortgage, I don't file on Schedule A, but on Schedule E.

Then, I look at my enormous dental bill for 2018. And I find they got rid of the "standard exemption" and raised the "standard deduction" for seniors such as myself from ~$7,500 to ~$13,000. That doesn't seem to be much of a win nor much of a lose either way.

Returning to Schedule E, there is a new 20% reduction in tax liability for businesses -- based on "pass-through" income as it is defined in the tax law. And I find that any landlord with just a single property reported on Schedule E is eligible. Given the repairs I made on the property in 2018, my "net gain" or profit was barely $1,000, and I obtain a mere $200 reduction in the taxable rental income.

But this is all chump-change. I would rather Bush had raised my taxes during the Iraq War, but he lowered them twice. Yet, since taxes are about "obligation" and not altruism, I can't allow myself to pay more than the law requires.

Of course Trump has said "I pay as little as possible." Now that we know his family history over three generations of deliberate tax fraud, it confirms my analysis of his language. An honest person would say "I pay what I owe -- no more, no less."

So let me spit in the faces of the Base. I urge my legislators and the State of New York as necessary to EXPROPRIATE the entire Trump Family fortune for tax fraud, and lock them all up in the electric chair for 99 years. F*** him, F*** his family, and f*** you. And while we're at it, why don't y'all use your criminal president's Space Force and self-deport yourselves back to your home galaxy? Get the hell outta MY country!

 

[Bitek]

Prepare to be shocked, cost estimates of the Trump tax cuts were underestimated by $600B. Oops

https://twitter.com/x/status/1085030967444688896

 

[fskimospy]

Agreed nobody wants to give up anything but it’s necessary. We need a truly fiscally responsible party/movement. That’s the biggest issue facing the country and unfortunately nobody in power will touch it. You don’t win elections by taking things away even if it’s the right thing to do. Promise shit, pretend to pay for it with voodoo economics or simply saying the kids will pick up the bill, never bring up the downside of living beyond your means, and voila you get elected.

The Democrats seem pretty fiscally responsible to me, Obama showed that.

Imagine how much worse our debt/GDP ratio would be if he had irresponsibly cut spending during the recession like other countries did. His signature achievement made the deficit smaller, not larger. Contrast that with every Republican President for the last 40 years. If you want fiscal responsibility, vote Democratic.

Also, why is cutting spending the fiscally responsible thing to do instead of raising taxes? US tax rates are very low by developed country standards so it seems like we have a lot of room to increase them.

 

[thilanliyan]

Also, why is cutting spending the fiscally responsible thing to do instead of raising taxes? US tax rates are very low by developed country standards so it seems like we have a lot of room to increase them.

Cause that would be socialism!!!!!!!! 😛

 

[vi edit]

This was unknowable. Absolutely unknowable. I had full faith in confidence in an administration full of grifters and reality tv personalities to able to force through something as simple as tax reform.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

From a tax rate and bracket point of view, people will be paying lower rates now than under Obama (your charts seem to be missing some brackets). The brackets that you post show that you'll be paying less (before the loss of exemptions, etc. are factored in). Where they get you is the elimination of personal exemptions and the new standard deduction. Depending on your situation, many will end up paying more than under previous laws and most probably won't realize it. I've read that 70% of the people who itemized in the past will no longer be able to under the new tax plan and when factoring in the loss of personal exemptions, those people will be lucky to break even. That's why the rush to throw in the expanded child (under 17) tax credits because without them, it would have been a shit show for people in the middle / lower middle classes with a couple or more children.

Because my kids are older than 16, I'll be lucky to break even on this mess.


As far as the OP goes, all I've got to say is DUH! Everyone with an ounce of truth in their soul knew this would happen but it was masterfully sold to the base as a big win. The only winners are those at the top (same with Kentucky's new 5% flat tax rate - fucked the bottom 95% with tax hikes while lowering the top 5%).

Thanks for being someone that actually checks Indus and his numbers - because yes - they are completely false and he is full of shit. Which is typical.

Itemizing in of itself isn't "All that".

If you previously itemized with a an amount of 20,500 in exemptions, you now get to take a standard deduction of 24,000. Just because it's the standard deduction that everyone gets doesn't automatically mean it's worse.

And yes - while the exemptions of 4,000 per dependent is eliminated, they brought on a $2,000 TAX CREDIT (which is way better than an exemption) PER dependent.


Suffice it to say, this certainly didn't hurt the poor or middle-class. As someone that works in tax I can tell you that this hurt one group of people and one group only: Those with very high itemized deductions with incomes in the top 15% or so (Upper class) - and that is based on putting caps on the deduction amounts for expensive homes (Property tax, mortgage interest, etc). This mostly hurts people in HCOL areas (NY/CA, etc)

 

[fskimospy]

Thanks for being someone that actually checks Indus and his numbers - because yes - they are completely false and he is full of shit. Which is typical.

Itemizing in of itself isn't "All that".

If you previously itemized with a an amount of 20,500 in exemptions, you now get to take a standard deduction of 24,000. Just because it's the standard deduction that everyone gets doesn't automatically mean it's worse.

And yes - while the exemptions of 4,000 per dependent is eliminated, they brought on a $2,000 TAX CREDIT (which is way better than an exemption) PER dependent.


Suffice it to say, this certainly didn't hurt the poor or middle-class. As someone that works in tax I can tell you that this hurt one group of people and one group only: Those with very high itemized deductions with incomes in the top 15% or so (Upper class) - and that is based on putting caps on the deduction amounts for expensive homes (Property tax, mortgage interest, etc). This mostly hurts people in HCOL areas (NY/CA, etc)

One other VERY important factor for all taxpayers is that this tax bill instituted a change that lowered the inflation percentage that's used to calculate tax brackets for this year. That means that anyone who relies on wage income (ie: everyone but the ultra rich) will pay ever increasing income taxes as compared to previous law. Most people got a tax break in the short term but in the long term people other than the rich actually had their taxes INCREASED by this 'tax cut'.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

One other VERY important factor for all taxpayers is that this tax bill instituted a change that lowered the inflation percentage that's used to calculate tax brackets for this year. That means that anyone who relies on wage income (ie: everyone but the ultra rich) will pay ever increasing income taxes as compared to previous law. Most people got a tax break in the short term but in the long term people other than the rich actually had their taxes INCREASED by this 'tax cut'.

Not sure that's correct:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jrose/2018/12/05/tax-brackets-and-rates-2019/#d85b0a53ec50

Why Tax Brackets and Other Tax Numbers Are Changing
It all has to do with a provision in the tax code known as indexing.Each year, the IRS adjusts tax brackets to account for inflation. For example, if the inflation rate for the past year is 2%, the IRS will adjust all income brackets up by roughly 2%.

For example, if a particular tax bracket begins at a taxable income of $40,000 one year, that number will be increased to $40,800 for the following year. The IRS also likes round numbers. Percentages will be no better than approximate, since numbers will be rounded up in increments of $25, $50, or even $100.

Similarly, the standard deduction will be increasing as well

The Standard Deduction for 2019
As you probably know – or you'll find out when you file your 2018 tax return – personal exemptions have been eliminated under the new tax law. The $4,050 you could claim up until 2017 for yourself, your spouse and any eligible dependents is now history.

In its place, the standard deduction has been roughly doubled. That will work out well for singles and couples, but it will be a definite negative for anyone with dependents.

And like other numbers in the tax code, the standard deduction will be increasing slightly for 2019. Here's how that will look:

Filing Status Single
2018: $12,000
2019: $12,200

Married
2018: $24,000
2019: $24,400

 

[fskimospy]

Not sure that's correct:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jrose/2018/12/05/tax-brackets-and-rates-2019/#d85b0a53ec50

Similarly, the standard deduction will be increasing as well

It is correct, we will all be paying higher taxes long term so that the rich can pay lower taxes.

From your link, the legislation changed the inflation calculation to chained CPI, which basically lowers the inflation index for every year going forward:

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44088

The chained CPI-U results in lower estimates of inflation than the traditional CPI does. CBO expects that annual inflation as measured by the chained CPI-U will be about 0.25 percentage points lower, on average, than annual inflation as measured by the traditional CPI. That estimate is based in part on the observed past differences between the chained CPI-U and the traditional CPI-U and CPI-W.

This means every year going forward your taxes will be slightly higher than they would have been when using regular CPI and this will compound for the rest of your life. In the long term the costs to the average person will significantly outweigh whatever tax cuts they are seeing now. That's one of the most offensive things about this 'tax cut', it's a long term tax hike for most people but those who own a lot of stock or get a lot of their income from investments. (ie: the super rich)

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

It is correct, we will all be paying higher taxes long term so that the rich can pay lower taxes.

From your link, the legislation changed the inflation calculation to chained CPI, which basically lowers the inflation index for every year going forward:

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44088



This means every year going forward your taxes will be slightly higher than they would have been when using regular CPI and this will compound for the rest of your life. In the long term the costs to the average person will significantly outweigh whatever tax cuts they are seeing now. That's one of the most offensive things about this 'tax cut', it's a long term tax hike for most people but those who own a lot of stock or get a lot of their income from investments. (ie: the super rich)

Okay you can have debate as to the potential inflation calculation differences, but you can't act like there is NO adjustment for inflation.

Overall - any difference will be meager year to year. By the time it actually makes a significant difference Democrats will long have passed their own tax reform.

Something tells me when they do inevitably get in power their checklist will simply be a list of everything that was passed under republicans 😛

 

[fskimospy]

Eh, the difference is overall meager. By the time it actually makes a significant difference Democrats will be passing their own tax reform.

Something tells me when they do inevitably get in power their checklist will simply be a list of everything that was passed under republicans 😛

The fact remains that this and a few other aspects of this bill are why after ten years people are seeing net tax increases. Legislation should be judged on its own merits, not in the hopes that someone else will undo the deliberate choices they made.

 

[Jhhnn]

Tax cuts for the right wing financial elite *are* the payoff for financing the GOP. It's a terrific investment generating returns that will last for years.

 

[nakedfrog]

Am I missing something? Am I slow-witted? What's the point of putting up examples with those incomes?

Last time I checked, and only a few years ago, the MEDIAN family income in the US was approximately $60,000. That is, 50% of families have incomes above the median, and 50% have incomes below it.

IIRC that image came out to show the savage barbarism of the Obama tax plans and how it impacted "regular people".

Ah, it was from the WSJ originally.

 

[zinfamous]

Prepare to be shocked, cost estimates of the Trump tax cuts were underestimated by $600B. Oops

https://twitter.com/x/status/1085030967444688896

Imagine if they could have saved those 600 billion dollars, on top of the ridiculous costs they are already paying to enrich a handful of people....think about how many YUUUGE GORGEOUS BRILLIANT WALLS! Trump could have built?

lol--it's plainly obvious that this twat has no intent of building a wall. All of the money is and was there to pay for it. He either pisses it away or uses the idea simply as a "bargaining chip" that no one else actually values...which is something that a moron would do.

 

[nakedfrog]

Imagine if they could have saved those 600 billion dollars, on top of the ridiculous costs they are already paying to enrich a handful of people....think about how many YUUUGE GORGEOUS BRILLIANT WALLS! Trump could have built?

lol--it's plainly obvious that this twat has no intent of building a wall. All of the money is and was there to pay for it. He either pisses it away or uses the idea simply as a "bargaining chip" that no one else actually values...which is something that a moron would do.

Hey, he explained that, they did spend the money, except they didn't actually, but they did really. You don't pay the contractors until they've built the thing, and then you also don't pay them.

 

[zinfamous]

Hey, he explained that, they did spend the money, except they didn't actually, but they did really. You don't pay the contractors until they've built the thing, and then you also don't pay them.

Oh yeah. that last part is the most important part.