Trump Tax Cuts.

[Scout26]

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-trump-administration-tax-reform-principles-2017-04-26

Opinions ??


Of Course Bernie is appalled that Americans might keep more of their money....
http://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2017/04/28/shocker-guess-what-2-little-words-from-trump-have-bernie-sanders-all-worked-up/

[Fly320s]

It is a good start.

[AJ Dual]

Despite the fact I could be on the short end of the stick, Wisconsin still being a "Top Five" or "Top Ten" state for tax burden, the one thing that really has me excited and hopeful. (which, after it goes through the House, Senate, Reconciliation etc. is almost zero "hope") is the proposal to eliminate the state and local taxes deduction.

It essentially provides some back end subsidy for the states who go crazy on taxes, and lessens the pain, and the motivation on those taxpayers to rein in their local politicians and spending. Arguably where personal opinions and input has much more impact.

And I'm sad that cutting the corp. tax rate to 15% would even be controversial. Honestly, it should be slashed down to 10%. That and the current admin's attitudes about agency-level regulations would have the world running back to the U.S. for all sorts of manufacturing in an instant. Not even getting into the fact that any/all "corporate taxes" are all just pass-along costs onto end consumers anyway.

[Scout26]

Despite the fact I could be on the short end of the stick, Wisconsin still being a "Top Five" or "Top Ten" state for tax burden, the one thing that really has me excited and hopeful. (which, after it goes through the House, Senate, Reconciliation etc. is almost zero "hope") is the proposal to eliminate the state and local taxes deduction.

Same here in Illinois.  It's especially "helpful" for those getting only retirement income, as that's one type of income that Illinois doesn't tax.....yet.    They can claim their property taxes and then sales taxes which often help get them over the hump from the standard deduction to being able to itemize.

[Ben]

Not a bad start. I don't know how crazy I am about the top designation. While he lowered the rate (to a lesser extent than he originally said he would) he also lowered the bottom tier, which increases taxes for a lot of individual business owners, farmers, etc. who previously fell into the middle bracket.


Edited for clarity.

[MikeB]

...

And I'm sad that cutting the corp. tax rate to 15% would even be controversial. Honestly, it should be slashed down to 10%. That and the current admin's attitudes about agency-level regulations would have the world running back to the U.S. for all sorts of manufacturing in an instant. Not even getting into the fact that any/all "corporate taxes" are all just pass-along costs onto end consumers anyway.

It shouldn't be controversial at all, but stupid people. Really you could almost go 0%, except for the idjits that would complain incessantly. Realistically most(pretty much alll) corporations don't really pay taxes. They may pay some taxes in some way on profits, but in reality for the most part all that means is they charge enough for the products they produce or supply that the buyers or subscribers are actually paying those taxes. Or they have some ".Fed" way to offset  transfers of money such that the income is not taxed.

Just another reason that I'm for some kind of flat tax, the only fair way; everyone just pays the same percent no deductions or any other way to reduce the taxes, etc., what have you.

[Fly320s]

Just another reason that I'm for some kind of flat tax, the only fair way; everyone just pays the same percent no deductions or any other way to reduce the taxes, etc., what have you.

To make it fair, everyone should pay the exact same dollar amount.

[MechAg94]

Or do what I heard Ron Paul mention a while back.  Eliminate the income tax entirely and don't replace it with anything.  Just reduce spending to match the loss in tax revenue. 

[MechAg94]

On the business side, it looks like he wants to eliminate taxes on business income made overseas.  That is a pretty big departure from past practice.  Between that and the 15% tax rate, there is much much less incentive for businesses to relocate. 

One-time tax on trillions of dollars held overseas

Would this be a one-time tax to move the money back to the US? 

[DittoHead]

Just reduce spending to match the loss in tax revenue. 

This is the other (harder) half of the equation. The tax cuts are great, but I don't believe they are going to "pay for themselves" and spending needs to be reduced to match. I would rather have higher taxes to cover what we ARE spending than have lower taxes without the matching spending cuts to balance it.

http://www.redstate.com/jaycaruso/2017/04/28/republicans-need-stop-chasing-gdp-growth-fantasies-justify-tax-reductions/

[TommyGunn]

If the income tax rates are cut right (like Reagan did -- twice), you don't have to "pay for them."  More $$$$ in the private sector stimulates the economy, which then employs more people, which means there are now more taxpayers, which ultimatly increases government revenue.  Reagan's cuts essentially doubled the revenue.
Or would have .......
If the *&&%$%^ kongress hadn't then spent it and then some!

[MechAg94]

Congress never wants to cut spending.  So "paying for tax cuts" is not something I worry about on the front end.  If you wait around for Congress to cut spending, you will die of old age. 

[wmenorr67]

If the income tax rates are cut right (like Reagan did -- twice), you don't have to "pay for them."  More $$$$ in the private sector stimulates the economy, which then employs more people, which means there are now more taxpayers, which ultimatly increases government revenue.  Reagan's cuts essentially doubled the revenue.
Or would have .......
If the *&&%$%^ kongress hadn't then spent it and then some!

Problem is more and more people would rather put their hand out than work.