• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Biggest Reform EVER passed thread

Other than lowering rates, what is actually "reformed" about the tax code? Aren't there still 7 brackets? Is it really simplified at all?
 
It is not simplified, from all I can read. It invites even more the smart and financially able to distort what they do to shelter and shift income into lower-taxed categories. Just some employees will not have to worry as much about trying to itemize.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Other than lowering rates, what is actually "reformed" about the tax code? Aren't there still 7 brackets? Is it really simplified at all?
Click to expand...

No, and accountants and tax lawyers are licking their chops.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Other than lowering rates, what is actually "reformed" about the tax code? Aren't there still 7 brackets? Is it really simplified at all?
Click to expand...

Well the amount of people who go from itemizing to the standard deduction is significantly more simple.
 
palmab03 said:
Well the amount of people who go from itemizing to the standard deduction is significantly more simple.
Click to expand...

This is the main simplification, although I wish it would have gone much further down this track. Home mortgage deduction and charitable giving are really the only two deductions I think would be necessary to cut. And if you cut the rates enough I wouldn't even mind getting rid of them.

But the standard deduction being doubled is going to be a big benefit for the vast majority of lower and middle income familes (particularly the lower middle class). There is a lot to dislike in this bill, but there are some good pieces to it. In the end it is probably more like OBamacare. In order to get it passed, it didn't go probably where it needed to be.
 
Wrangor said:
This is the main simplification, although I wish it would have gone much further down this track. Home mortgage deduction and charitable giving are really the only two deductions I think would be necessary to cut. And if you cut the rates enough I wouldn't even mind getting rid of them.

But the standard deduction being doubled is going to be a big benefit for the vast majority of lower and middle income familes (particularly the lower middle class). There is a lot to dislike in this bill, but there are some good pieces to it. In the end it is probably more like OBamacare. In order to get it passed, it didn't go probably where it needed to be.
Click to expand...

But the benefit of the (almost) doubling of the standard deduction is eaten up by the removal of the personal exemption. Somehow the GOP talking points forget to mention that.
 
DistrictDeacon said:
But the benefit of the (almost) doubling of the standard deduction is eaten up by the removal of the personal exemption. Somehow the GOP talking points forget to mention that.
Click to expand...

The main benefit is simply dropping the rates 3% down pretty much across the board. The Standard deduction change really amounts to about $500.
 
palmab03 said:
The main benefit is simply dropping the rates 3% down pretty much across the board. The Standard deduction change really amounts to about $500.
Click to expand...

Except that double digit drop in corporate tax rates that don't expire in ten years.
 
When 2021 rolls around and there is likely a Democratic president taking over a Democratic Congress, I hope they institute actual tax reform and double the corporate rate while giving incentives that reduce corporate tax burden if corporates meet certain worker benefit thresholds.
 
Wells Fargo says raises were not linked to tax bill passage — then backtracks

“As it relates to team members, minimum pay is a topic that we continue to review as part of our efforts to attract and retain talent, and we have been on a path to increasing the minimum hourly rate, having most recently increased it in January 2017,” Gilchrist said in an email in response to an inquiry from The Times .

Asked directly to confirm that the pay raises were not a result of the tax bill, Gilchrist said, “That is correct.”

On Thursday, Gilchrist backtracked.

“We believe tax reform is good for our U.S. economy and are pleased to raise our minimum hourly pay to $15 as a result,” he said after The Times article appeared online.

He would not comment on the reason for the earlier statement or whether Wells Fargo would have raised its pay if the tax bill had not passed.
Click to expand...

Companies coordinating blatant PR stunts to help politicians who gave them a massive tax cut should probably try to stay on message.
 
give me a fucking break. corporations have been making money hand over fist for the last few years. this tax bill has nothing to do with bonuses...are we to believe they jsut happened onto extra money?

pandering to idiots
 
If businesses would actually use this money to give back to the employees by raising their pay, or treating them like real fucking people, then I would be much more sympathetic to giving bigger tax breaks to corporations.

I think that there is a reasonable argument for lowering corporate tax rates to keep jobs from going overseas, but would need to see some data on that showing a correlation.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
If businesses would actually use this money to give back to the employees by raising their pay, or treating them like real fucking people, then I would be much more sympathetic to giving bigger tax breaks to corporations.

I think that there is a reasonable argument for lowering corporate tax rates to keep jobs from going overseas, but would need to see some data on that showing a correlation.
Click to expand...

If one business in a competitive industry uses the money to raise pay or poach talent from competitors which provides a competitive advantage, then wages will naturally rise. As long as there aren't monopolies or collusion, this should naturally happen over time.
 
Your unwavering commitment to capitalism as it benefits workers is remarkably steadfast in spite of the evidence against your case.

Why isn't one company already doing it with excess money that they already have?

Why if they aren't doing it now would they use the extra money that they are getting to give to workers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top