• 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

Looks like to get it so that it doesn't add to the budget 10 years out, they are proposing to have all individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They've also further lowered the bracket amounts a half a percentage point, and are increasing the child tax credit to $2,000 (Which is a big deal, as this probably changes the game from the plan hurting people with lots of kids to helping those with lots of kids).

Pretty hard to find anyone who would be worse off now, for 8 or 9 years or so. I guess folks with million dollar homes are still hurt a bit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/14/...enate-obamacare-individual-mandate-trump.html

But the corporate tax cuts are permanent? Weird, that.

Also, let's not forget that they don't plan to pay for the cuts, so the plan adds $1.5 trillion to the deficit, which Republicans pretend to care about when Dems are in office. (And the plan will increase insurance premiums 10%. Which is an odd thing to say about a tax bill.)
 
I'll just drop this article about the House bill here:

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/kimberly-burham-penn-budget-model/?utm_source=kw_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2017-11-14

"Our dynamic analysis shows that over 10 years, it increases federal debt somewhere between $2 trillion and $2.1 trillion. By 2040, debt will increase from somewhere between $6.3 trillion and $6.8 trillion more than it would under current policy. Overall, both tax bills are a tax cut — taking revenue out of the system."

"The tricky thing about debt is that as you increase debt in the long run, it actually dampens economic growth, and that’s because some of the savings that people have don’t go into private investment – they go into paying for the debt. As a result, after 10 years, the tax cut and jobs act will increase GDP somewhere between 0.33% and 0.83% relative to where it would have been in 2027. However, this boost fades over time, mostly due to the rising debt. And by 2040, GDP could even fall below, in some scenarios, the current policy GDP."

"In fact, they (the tax cuts) don’t fully pay for themselves. We do see over the 10-year period that we can make up for about $500 billion with the dynamic model. But overall, they’re still adding to the debt and increasing deficits over that period.

[Regarding winners and losers,] there are two ways to look at it. One way is that you could think about who is getting most of these benefits. And in that case, most of the tax cuts are accruing to upper-income households. But the other question is: What’s happening to progressivity [of the tax code] over the whole system? That is, [which income groups] pay what share of the entire federal tax bill? We find that it is surprisingly stable. For instance, in 2018, with no tax bill, people in the top 10% of the income distribution will pay 28% of total taxes.

"Meanwhile, under the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, they would pay 27%. So those numbers are pretty close. In addition, even if you go far out all the way to 2040, the difference they would pay is 30% if we did not change the tax system, and the top 1% would pay 28% if we did change the tax system. It is surprising that there is not a larger effect on progressivity, but it’s pretty stable."
 
 
How a New Inflation Measure Would Raise Taxes on the Middle Class

When your income rises, some of that merely protects your purchasing power against inflation. It’s the part above inflation that represents your “real” raise. Indexing raises the income thresholds at which your tax rate rises. Without it, many taxpayers with no real gain in income would still be pushed into higher brackets merely because of inflation.

Taxpayers get a break from the current system because it shelters not just the raise that compensates for inflation, but some of their real raise, too. Both the House and Senate bills would in effect eliminate that second layer of protection by switching to the chained CPI. This raises about $130 billion more revenue over 10 years in the latest versions of both the House and Senate bills, according to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

And that part, unlike the individual tax cuts, is permanent. (I was wondering how they could cover permanent corporate tax cuts without increasing the deficit more than a decade out. Sneaky.)

Second, the permanent tax increase on individuals from the change in the way taxes adjust for inflation raises a surprising amount of money — about $500 billion in the decade starting in 2027.

The Senate Republican tax plan raises taxes on families and cuts healthcare spending to fund corporate tax cuts
 
Ron Johnson is a no. Probably already dead in the Senate.
 
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson Opposes GOP Senate Tax Package

He doesn't like that it favors corporations over other kinds of businesses. (Wiki tells me Johnson has a business / accounting background building a family business over a few decades before running for office.)

Also:

In addition to his concern about the details of the Republican proposal, he also complained about a process that he said has been closed to his input and also misleads the public about the nature of the tax overhaul.

“I don’t like that process,” Mr. Johnson said. “I find it pretty offensive, personally.”
 
Trump economic adviser appears surprised by CEO tax proposal response

During an event for the Wall Street Journal's CEO Council, an editor at The Wall Street Journal asked the room: "If the tax reform bill goes through, do you plan to increase investment — your company's investment, capital investment?"

People were asked to raise their hand.

When few hands were raised, Cohn, the White House Economic Council director, asked: "Why aren't the other hands up?"


http://thehill.com/policy/finance/3...ter-few-ceos-say-they-will-invest-more-if-tax
 
I really don’t get why that’s surprising. Give poor people more money and they will spend it because they need to or because they have no concept of savings, more spending and buying means more demand for goods and services. Give rich to upper middle class people as well as corporations they are just going to say thanks and keep the money or invest in things that don’t actually move the economy.
 
Trump economic adviser appears surprised by CEO tax proposal response

During an event for the Wall Street Journal's CEO Council, an editor at The Wall Street Journal asked the room: "If the tax reform bill goes through, do you plan to increase investment — your company's investment, capital investment?"

People were asked to raise their hand.

When few hands were raised, Cohn, the White House Economic Council director, asked: "Why aren't the other hands up?"


http://thehill.com/policy/finance/3...ter-few-ceos-say-they-will-invest-more-if-tax

That "article," such as it is, is completely unintelligible. It's like reading a risc stream-of-consciousness post, but on a purported news website.
 
You post alotta WSJ articles a lot of people can't read, fwiw.

The WSJ writes a lot about taxes.

(I assume most don't even go through to the links. That's why I generally include quotes or a summary.)
 
Trump economic adviser appears surprised by CEO tax proposal response

During an event for the Wall Street Journal's CEO Council, an editor at The Wall Street Journal asked the room: "If the tax reform bill goes through, do you plan to increase investment — your company's investment, capital investment?"

People were asked to raise their hand.

When few hands were raised, Cohn, the White House Economic Council director, asked: "Why aren't the other hands up?"


http://thehill.com/policy/finance/3...ter-few-ceos-say-they-will-invest-more-if-tax

Please clap
 
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson Opposes GOP Senate Tax Package

He doesn't like that it favors corporations over other kinds of businesses. (Wiki tells me Johnson has a business / accounting background building a family business over a few decades before running for office.)

Also:

We had our accountants in here to explain to us why both of us are exempt earlier today from this and they didn't have a good answer. I can see why someone remotely related to the excluded industries would push back on this. But at that point you mine as well make the top limit 25% as everyone will incorporate into some sort of business to take advantage of it.
 
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN

Wine and beer will be cheaper

The bill makes extensive modifications to the taxation of alcohol. It lowers a tax on barrels of beer brewed or imported. It also changes how aging periods for beer, wine and spirits are deducted. A tax credit on wine production limited to small domestic producers is extended to all wineries, and sparkling wine producers and importers become eligible for the credit as well. Taxes are also lowered on certain kinds of beverages, like mead.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/polit...-special-interests-industry-groups/index.html
 
 
I cant think the house bill matters much. The house has a good comfortable majority and the senate has a slim majority and all sorts of rules on what they can and can't do. Ultimately isn't the house going to have to pass whatever the senate can pull off?
 
 
Back
Top