Trump's tax plan

[John Connor]

In his book, “Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again,” published in 2011, Donald Trump laid out a plan to transform America’s tax code, and it is beautiful.
http://rev.lanistaads.com/revive/www/delivery/ck.php?n=d3ca389
Trump’s code, which he calls the “1-5-10-15 income tax plan,” is a simplistic way to fix our nation’s broken taxation system, without putting the strain on any particular group of people.
Under Trump’s tax plan, those making up to…
$30,000 per year will pay 1 percent in federal income taxes
$30,000 to $100,000 will pay 5 percent
$100,000 to $1 million will pay 10 percent
$1 million or above will pay 15 percent

http://gopthedailydose.com/2015/08/...exactly-what-he-needs-to-win-the-white-house/




What's not to like about that? Sounds good to me!

 

[sportage]

Never would work.
A lot of programs would need to be drastically cut, or eliminated.
Not enough tax would be coming in to fund the wars, military, and the tax breaks given to the wealthy.
And in the end, states would carry the burden by raising state sales taxes, gas taxes, property taxes, tag taxes, education taxes, all of which would do far more harm to the middle class, not to mention the social safety net.
And I would assume with states raising their property taxes, that property tax deduction would be eliminated in the Trump tax plan. As well as the deduction for mortgage interest.
Sounds simple if.... the programs being eliminated and drastically cut would not involve you.
Oh, add in there college assistance. The wealthy would continue to afford college, and all the rest? Enjoy that fast food career.

 

[compuwiz1]

All tax revenue does not come from income tax. Many people don't understand this. Get more people into the work force. There would be more revenue, taxing people fairly, according to their income. The programs that would need to be cut have been doled out to some people who could work, but wouldn't, because their lifestyle was better than they'd have had, by actually working. Time for a change of culture in this country. Also, get rid of programs that house, feed and provide freebies to the illegals. If we cut off the freeloaders, we'd need to pay less taxes. Trump has it right. Lefties can go whine about it.

 

[shira]

All tax revenue does not come from income tax. Many people don't understand this. Get more people into the work force. There would be more revenue, taxing people fairly, according to their income. The programs that would need to be cut have been doled out to some people who could work, but wouldn't, because their lifestyle was better than they'd have had, by actually working. Time for a change of culture in this country. Also, get rid of programs that house, feed and provide freebies to the illegals. If we cut off the freeloaders, we'd need to pay less taxes. Trump has it right. Lefties can go whine about it.

This point of yours is irrelevant. What YOU don't seem to understand is that the whatever fraction of government revenue that DOES come from income tax would be drastically cut under Trump's plan. And any government agency or program funded by the income tax would therefore need to be either eliminated or severely reduced in scope - just to maintain our yearly budget deficits at "only" their current levels.

Of course, Trump doesn't tell anyone that. Magically - just by changing tax brackets - everyone's take-home pay would increased by 40%, painlessly.

 

[Jimzz]

http://gopthedailydose.com/2015/08/...exactly-what-he-needs-to-win-the-white-house/




What's not to like about that? Sounds good to me!

If that sounds good to you then you need to stop thinking as its probably hurting your head.

Those numbers would not even come close to the current amount that comes in from income taxes and we are already ruining at a deficit.

 

[Hugo Drax]

We can print Greenbacks to pay off the deficit. Lincoln did it to fund the civil war. We can do it to get rid of our deficit and pay for wars with it. I would increase the 1 million and up to 25% and the 5+ million to 40%

 

[Jimzz]

We can print Greenbacks to pay off the deficit. Lincoln did it to fund the civil war. We can do it to get rid of our deficit and pay for wars with it. I would increase the 1 million and up to 25% and the 5+ million to 40%

Very few make millions in income, "capital gains" yes; but not income.

Capital gain tax's would have to be increased to keep people from moving from one to the other.

 

[John Connor]

If that sounds good to you then you need to stop thinking as its probably hurting your head.

Those numbers would not even come close to the current amount that comes in from income taxes and we are already ruining at a deficit.

Why are we running a deficit again?

Maybe Congress shouldn't be borrowing from the bank of China then handing it out to other countries? Maybe there should be no more earmarks? Maybe stop spending on BS? That's a start. Contrary to popular belief, you can balance the budget and cut a lot of crap. It's not a tax input problem, it's a tax output problem. And there lies the truth to government. They will spend and spend and spend.

 

[Jimzz]

Why are we running a deficit again?

Maybe Congress shouldn't be borrowing from the bank of China then handing it out to other countries? Maybe there should be no more earmarks? Maybe stop spending on BS? That's a start. Contrary to popular belief, you can balance the budget and cut a lot of crap. It's not a tax input problem, it's a tax output problem. And there lies the truth to government. They will spend and spend and spend.

There ya go again trying to think.

Our debt is less than 10% owed to China, more is owed to the SS fund than China.
And the numbers you think are so great do not mean cuts to programs but the ending of said programs. Again we already run at a deficit at our current rates. let alone we see what happens when rates get slashed, look at Kansas as the Republican test on taxes. How's that working out?

 

[sm625]

Those tax rates are a decent start. The problem is, and correct me if I'm wrong, that this applies only to income tax. Income tax is an increasingly small portion of the overall tax burden. You have your other payroll taxes, but then you also have new taxes, like the massive obamacare tax. Since the supreme court has somehow ruled it constitutional, we can expect to see more taxes of this type. Then there's also the various "bubble taxes". After the Federal Reserve bought over a trillion in mortgage backed securities, rents have shot up well past the rate of wage growth. This is a tax, and its a mighty big one and it doesnt even show up in most people's analysis of our tax burden. Same goes for the government induced healthcare and college cost bubbles.

 

[Newell Steamer]

Yes, lets listen to the man who went bankrupt and suckles the government teat on such topics.

It's like listening to Hillary on best practices for e-mail security.

 

[dank69]

So run a $2T/yr deficit? Good plan, Mr. Trump.

 

[Chiropteran]

So run a $2T/yr deficit? Good plan, Mr. Trump.

The national debt can not be paid off, it's mathematically impossible.

500 billion, 2 trillion, who cares? It won't ever be paid off either way.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

This point of yours is irrelevant. What YOU don't seem to understand is that the whatever fraction of government revenue that DOES come from income tax would be drastically cut under Trump's plan. And any government agency or program funded by the income tax would therefore need to be either eliminated or severely reduced in scope - just to maintain our yearly budget deficits at "only" their current levels.

Of course, Trump doesn't tell anyone that. Magically - just by changing tax brackets - everyone's take-home pay would increased by 40%, painlessly.

We are under the assumption that exemptions (IE: Baby makers that spend their life pumping out babies for tax exemptions and freebies for the rest of us working class to pay for) would be eliminated with it.

This goes the same for millionaires a'la Warren Buffet that pays less % than his secretary. If exemptions are eliminated, it is actually not a bad tax plan. I'm a little confused however if...
1. This is still in the progressive bracket ideology (IE: If you make $50k, do you pay 5% on 50k, or 1% on 30k and 5% on 20k? Needs clarification there).
2. Again, I am under the assumption this eliminates all the ridiculous exemptions we have outside of simple ones (such as pre-tax retirement plans such as a 401k)
You guys don't know much about our tax code, do you?

 

[Mxylplyx]

All tax revenue does not come from income tax. Many people don't understand this. Get more people into the work force. There would be more revenue, taxing people fairly, according to their income. The programs that would need to be cut have been doled out to some people who could work, but wouldn't, because their lifestyle was better than they'd have had, by actually working. Time for a change of culture in this country. Also, get rid of programs that house, feed and provide freebies to the illegals. If we cut off the freeloaders, we'd need to pay less taxes. Trump has it right. Lefties can go whine about it.

You conservatives seriously overestimate how much of the government budget is dedicates to supporting "free loaders". You haven't the slightest clue what the budget impact of this so called plan is, but since it fits your agenda of going after some dirty Mexicans and poor people, I would guess you really dont care.

 

[fskimospy]

We are under the assumption that exemptions (IE: Baby makers that spend their life pumping out babies for tax exemptions and freebies for the rest of us working class to pay for) would be eliminated with it.

This goes the same for millionaires a'la Warren Buffet that pays less % than his secretary. If exemptions are eliminated, it is actually not a bad tax plan. I'm a little confused however if...
1. This is still in the progressive bracket ideology (IE: If you make $50k, do you pay 5% on 50k, or 1% on 30k and 5% on 20k? Needs clarification there).
2. Again, I am under the assumption this eliminates all the ridiculous exemptions we have outside of simple ones (such as pre-tax retirement plans such as a 401k)
You guys don't know much about our tax code, do you?

I don't think you know much about our tax code if you think this would come anywhere close to equivalent revenues to what we get today.

His tax plan, regardless of assumptions, is a fantasy. I wouldn't be surprised if he had made it up on the spot because he thought it sounded good.

 

[soundforbjt]

Reminds me of the leader of the repubs last election at this time...9 - 9 - 9!

 

[Slew Foot]

Not bad but i think the percentages need adjusting. Also tax cap gains the same as income.

 

[DrPizza]

In his book, “Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again,” published in 2011, Donald Trump laid out a plan to transform America’s tax code, and it is beautiful.

Trump’s code, which he calls the “1-5-10-15 income tax plan,” is a simplistic way to fix our nation’s broken taxation system, without putting the strain on any particular group of people.
Under Trump’s tax plan, those making up to…
$30,000 per year will pay 1 percent in federal income taxes
$30,000 to $100,000 will pay 5 percent
$100,000 to $1 million will pay 10 percent
$1 million or above will pay 15 percent

"Oh crap. I'm making $99,100 per year. I pay almost $5k in federal taxes. If my boss gives me a 1% raise, I'll have to pay over $10k in federal taxes - my take home pay would go down."
In other words, Trump is pandering to the idiots. At least he didn't have a "1-2-3-4 income tax plan," because then the idiots would realize it's unrealistic. "1-5-10-15" sounds just high enough that the idiots will think there's a shot.

We are under the assumption that exemptions (IE: Baby makers that spend their life pumping out babies for tax exemptions and freebies for the rest of us working class to pay for) would be eliminated with it.

This goes the same for millionaires a'la Warren Buffet that pays less % than his secretary. If exemptions are eliminated, it is actually not a bad tax plan. I'm a little confused however if...
1. This is still in the progressive bracket ideology (IE: If you make $50k, do you pay 5% on 50k, or 1% on 30k and 5% on 20k? Needs clarification there).
2. Again, I am under the assumption this eliminates all the ridiculous exemptions we have outside of simple ones (such as pre-tax retirement plans such as a 401k)
You guys don't know much about our tax code, do you?

You're right with the #1 - it does need to be clarified; my example doesn't assume that it's the tax on the amount over.

However, while I agree that there are some ridiculous exemptions, others are not so ridiculous. E.g., exemptions for children - the creation of future tax payers. So, while the government gives parents a break for 18 years, 2 decades later, they start getting that money back in the form of income tax on new earners. And, once YOU retire, those future earners are absolutely needed. Our economy wouldn't do very well with a decreasing population.

Other exemptions are absolutely needed to guide social or economic growth in particular areas. E.g., without incentives, people may not switch to more energy efficient products. Sometimes market forces alone aren't enough to make the changes that are necessary.

 

[fskimospy]

"Oh crap. I'm making $99,100 per year. I pay almost $5k in federal taxes. If my boss gives me a 1% raise, I'll have to pay over $10k in federal taxes - my take home pay would go down."
In other words, Trump is pandering to the idiots. At least he didn't have a "1-2-3-4 income tax plan," because then the idiots would realize it's unrealistic. "1-5-10-15" sounds just high enough that the idiots will think there's a shot.


You're right with the #1 - it does need to be clarified; my example doesn't assume that it's the tax on the amount over.

However, while I agree that there are some ridiculous exemptions, others are not so ridiculous. E.g., exemptions for children - the creation of future tax payers. So, while the government gives parents a break for 18 years, 2 decades later, they start getting that money back in the form of income tax on new earners. And, once YOU retire, those future earners are absolutely needed. Our economy wouldn't do very well with a decreasing population.

Other exemptions are absolutely needed to guide social or economic growth in particular areas. E.g., without incentives, people may not switch to more energy efficient products. Sometimes market forces alone aren't enough to make the changes that are necessary.

To make any plan that emphasizes 'removing deductions' even remotely feasible there's one huge one you have to go after: the mortgage interest deduction. It's hugely costly and of dubious societal benefit.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/05/news/economy/biggest-tax-breaks/

Watch voters freak out when you try and end it, which is why everyone sticks to the nebulous 'herp derp eliminate deductions'.

 

[brycejones]

Like just about everything else the Trump campaign does, this is a laughably bad plan.

 

[theeedude]

Sounds like I will get a tax cut bigger tax cut with Trump than other GOP candidates. Go Trump!

 

[Chaotic0ne]

This debt problem is much easier to solve than a lot of people realize. And it doesn't involve your grandchildren working overtime to pay it off. All they'd have to do is establish a new currency with no debt tied to it. And shut down the Federal Reserve. There are some problems that would occur as a result of this, but troubleshooting those problems is far easier than paying off 20T+ in debt. The value of money is imaginary. Its paper, its 0000s and 1111s stored on a computer. Its legal tender because some group with a whole lot of guns says it is. Even better if you can bully the entire world into attaching your money to the price of oil, the petrodollar.

 

[fskimospy]

This debt problem is much easier to solve than a lot of people realize. And it doesn't involve your grandchildren working overtime to pay it off. All they'd have to do is establish a new currency with no debt tied to it. And shut down the Federal Reserve. There are some problems that would occur as a result of this, but troubleshooting those problems is far easier than paying off 20T+ in debt. The value of money is imaginary. Its paper, its 0000s and 1111s stored on a computer. Its legal tender because some group with a whole lot of guns says it is.

This is really, really wrong. First, the whole 'burden on our grandchildren' is based off of a misunderstanding of the nature of our debt. Second, to say 'some problems would occur' when the US government repudiates the dollar and moves everything to a new national currency to avoid servicing its debt is like saying 'I feel a bit under the weather' when you have Ebola.

Dangerous nonsense.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The national debt can not be paid off, it's mathematically impossible.

500 billion, 2 trillion, who cares? It won't ever be paid off either way.

People said this before Clinton took office. They were wrong it can be done we just need more people working and more growth or team work between the parties.