Larry Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 45 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: You know..sewer and water improvements, emergency and police services, sidewalks, etc. 🙄 . . . . schools. 7 minutes ago, Major Harris said: Does any of this have anything to do with individual tax returns? Yes, the policies of government taxation and spending does have something to do with individual tax returns. At least in some states. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Major Harris said: Does any of this have anything to do with individual tax returns? Yes and no. States with higher state income taxes likely have higher property costs (and thus higher chance of individuals exceeding the 10k SALT limit). Since these states (and the individuals within) are now being punished, and because they're often donor states (giving to the feds more than taking back), the argument is that they are punished with the new limit while also paying for other states lack of $'s in state revenues. Edited March 5, 2019 by The Evil Genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 15% of Federal spending (~$610B) goes to things like: veteran's benefits, transportation, education, health, etc Another 15% goes to things like: civilian and military retirement, MORE veteran's benefits, and EITC The rest is taken up by debt interest payments, medicare, medicaid, and military spending. The vast majority of the discretionary spending is spent in the taker states. https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 27 minutes ago, Major Harris said: Does any of this have anything to do with individual tax returns? 84% of federal revenue comes from income tax (all from an individual) and payroll tax (paid mostly by indiv and maybe some by employer) (mainly for social security and social insurance programs). The top 20% of income earners pay 87% of all income taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 46 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: Yes and no. States with higher state income taxes likely have higher property costs (and thus higher chance of individuals exceeding the 10k SALT limit). Since these states (and the individuals within) are now being punished, and because they're often donor states (giving to the feds more than taking back), the argument is that they are punished with the new limit while also paying for other states lack of $'s in state revenues. Sorry I read your answer as a “no” to my question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) TBH, I don't mind if my state is a donor state (which it might have moved off of as of this year). In my mind, helping states whose people don't (or can't) help themselves isn't a bad thing. My problem all along with this new tax cut is that it isn't the cut that it was portrayed as for the middle class taxpayer (especially one who owns a home and in a larger state). 4 minutes ago, Major Harris said: Sorry I read your answer as a “no” to my question. Maybe I don't understand your question then. The new 10k SALT limit instituted by the Trump tax cut absolutely effects individual taxpayers. At least an estimated 11 million of them. Edited March 5, 2019 by The Evil Genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said: TBH, I don't mind if my state is a donor state (which it might have moved off of as of this year). In my mind, helping states whose people don't (or can't) help themselves isn't a bad thing. My problem all along with this new tax cut is that it isn't the cut that it was portrayed as for the middle class taxpayer (especially one who owns a home and in a larger state). Maybe I don't understand your question then. The new 10k SALT limit instituted by the Trump tax cut absolutely effects individual taxpayers. At least an estimated 11 million of them. What I’m saying is that if you take my return and use the same numbers for Jim in NOVA it’s gonna be the same. I get what you’re saying I just think it’s a stretch to look at that and say “taker state.” The SALT limitations will affect people in taker states in areas with high property values. And in all all of this, to be clear, I am not defending Trump or his tax plan. Just relaying personal experience. I was actually hit the hardest on last years return. It was the first time we’ve ever had to pay. We almost broke even this year so hopefully we can keep it there. Edited March 5, 2019 by Major Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted March 5, 2019 Share Posted March 5, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Major Harris said: The SALT limitations will affect people in taker states in areas with high property values. No doubt. But statistically where are the most people impacted by this new limit? Blue Coastal states (NY, NJ, and California) from what I can tell and have read. Also not mentioned, the loss of personal exemptions is a giant **** you on top of the sundae for itemizers. An additional $8,100 + anything over 10k in SALT is the difference in taxable income from now on. Edited March 5, 2019 by The Evil Genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted March 5, 2019 Author Share Posted March 5, 2019 Let's not forget which taxpayers got the most benefit from the tax scam transfer of wealth at the expense of the rest of us. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 "Hey, look at our new simplified tax form!" (stuffs half of the old 1040 into 6 SEPARATE SCHEDULES) Agent Orange and the GOP actually managed to make tax filing paper waste 2x worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 1 minute ago, FanboyOf91 said: Agent Orange and the GOP actually managed to make tax filing paper waste 2x worse. Damn tree lobby 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 I’m shocked. https://www.marke****ch.com/story/trumps-tax-cuts-are-punishing-states-that-voted-for-clinton-data-suggests-2019-03-07?fbclid=IwAR3N-PkBaVuvOxuLaYkXEjwd4MZeJD9iMd16pJIDU3glmMZdjKTgejPxLIM&utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=&utm_term=&utm_content=&utm_campaign= Trump’s tax cuts are punishing states that voted for Clinton, data suggest Quote “Loyalty is very important to me,” President Donald Trump once said. And if people are disloyal, “I always find a way to get even.” Cue your 2018 tax return. A Marke****ch analysis shows that the states that voted for Trump in the 2016 election will get the majority of his tax cuts — even though they only pay a minority of all federal taxes. That’s according to data from the Internal Revenue Service, and an independent study of the tax reforms. The net benefit for the states that supported the president are likely to come to $35 billion in this tax year alone, analysis shows. It’s “an economic civil war,” said New York governor Andrew Cuomo at a press conference recently. The tax giveaway “literally restructured the economy to help red states at the cost of blue states.” He called it “a diabolical, political maneuver.” The tax cuts “financed the Republican state-tax cut from the Democratic states,” he said, adding, “I mean, if people actually understood what it was that they were doing there would have bene an uprising.” “It is not a New York-only phenomenon,” Cuomo told a news conference last month. The new tax structure “encourages high-income New Yorkers to move to other states.” Marke****ch looked at the calculations conducted by the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, an independent Washington, D.C. think-tank. Bottom line: States that voted for Trump will get 56% of the tax cuts, or an extra $35 billion. Yet according to the Internal Revenue Service’s most recent data, those states were only paying 48% of federal taxes. The difference per person is not trivial. Using data from the IRS and the U.S. Census Bureau, people in the “Trump” states pay an average of $7,800 in net federal taxes per person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaceman Spiff Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 Just got my taxes done from our companies CPA. I'm not going to get personal and let you guys know how much I owe but...wow. No lube, even. Thanks Trump. Go **** yourself. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 I love how profanity filter "cleaned up" market watch.com 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 1 hour ago, Elessar78 said: I love how profanity filter "cleaned up" market watch.com It also has problems with the creator of the GOP Southern Strategy, and the room in the front of the plane where the pilots sit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 Why does everybody suddenly hate billionaires? Because they’ve made it easy. https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/why-does-everybody-suddenly-hate-billionaires-because-theyve-made-it-easy/2019/03/13/00e39056-3f6a-11e9-a0d3-1210e58a94cf_story.html?utm_term=.7334e71aebe1 Quote When did “billionaire” become a dirty word? Maybe it was when former Starbucks chief executive Howard Schultz dismissed Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s proposal for higher taxes on fortunes of $50 million or higher as “ridiculous.” ... Schultz, who is worth an estimated $3.5 billion, told an interviewer that he doesn’t like being called a billionaire. These days, he prefers “a person of means” because billionaires have become shorthand for income inequality, tax cuts and special interests. Toying with a run for president, Schultz bills himself as a centrist alternative to liberal candidates such as Warren — and mocks her tax plan as unrealistic and unpatriotic. “It’s so un-American to think that way,” he said with all the nuance and self-awareness of a man unaccustomed to either. But Howard — can we call you Howard? — here’s the thing: Americans are starting to “think that way.” They’re starting to think that maybe it’s undemocratic for the richest 1 percent in this country to control 40 percent of the nation’s wealth. In the 1950s, the average chief executive made 20 times more than their employees; now, chief executives earn 361 times more — about $13 million per year at the country’s top corporations. Those 2017 tax cuts? The primary benefits went to those who were already rich. All this comes into sharper relief during tax season, when the average worker is crunching numbers and calculating how much of their annual income goes to the government. A January Fox News poll found that 70 percent of registered voters — including most Republicans — favored increasing taxes on families who earn more than $10 million a year. This isn’t about blaming any specific billionaire, but a growing resentment that the richest people and corporations have somehow managed to get richer while most working stiffs are just one or two missed paychecks away from a food bank. It’s not a debate about marginal tax rates or the unregulated free market: It’s a gut feeling that the game is rigged, and the middle class and the poor are losing. The average American family can barely afford to send kids to any college, much less bribe their way into an elite university. ... “For the last 40 years we have been living under a market fundamentalist ideology that you could trace to the Reagan-Thatcher revolution,” explains Anand Giridharadas, a progressive commentator and author of “Winners Take All.” He describes the basic tenets of that ideology: Government is bad, taxes are bad, regulation is bad — but rich people are not only good but will make the world a better place. “We now know that this kind of winners-take-all philosophy allows the very fortunate, through rigging political power to assist their economic power, to basically monopolize the future itself,” he says. “I think people are well aware that there are some people who’ve managed to get themselves on the right side of every [political] change. And most people haven’t.” More at link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted March 18, 2019 Author Share Posted March 18, 2019 I mean, how many billions does a person of means really need to live a comfortable life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 25 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said: I mean, how many billions does a person of means really need to live a comfortable life? Well it's expensive paying off abortions, mistresses, child support, and alimony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted March 18, 2019 Share Posted March 18, 2019 43 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said: I mean, how many billions does a person of means really need to live a comfortable life? Millions 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 5 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: I mean, how many billions does a person of means really need to live a comfortable life? I can't answer this question without some practical experience. I think the rest of you are going to need to help me do the lab. I promise to journal my findings. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Vet Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 Just got our numbers back. We usually get a refund from state (MD) and have to pay 4x that refund to Federal. Last year we made 6% more than 2017 but paid less in taxes. I guess the withholding tables indicated less should be taken out of our paychecks. We will still get a state refund but will owe 5.5X that to Uncle Sam about a month from now. SALT limitation was brutal. Overall federal taxes were up (percentage wise) vs 2017. My wife and I changed our W4s last night from 1 deduction to zero and then are having more money pulled out each pay period. That check to IRS is going to sting. Hopefully these changes will help tax time next year. We'll keep an eye on candidates for this upcoming election and then re-assess 2020. Thank goodness I don't have Redskin tix to purchase this year. GV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted March 19, 2019 Share Posted March 19, 2019 On 3/18/2019 at 8:58 AM, Spaceman Spiff said: Just got my taxes done from our companies CPA. I'm not going to get personal and let you guys know how much I owe but...wow. No lube, even. Thanks Trump. Go **** yourself. Well, look on the bright side... most of the tax credits you DID get were temporary (only the billionaire giveaways were permanent)... so it will get worse, before you even account for all the services that will have to be cut to fund the giant deficit that has been created by fiscal conservatives. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 (edited) I had a win. Almost 2% lower effective tax rate even though income increased, and we lost some deductions. I ended up owing both the Feds and State a little, because my paycheck withholdings were too low, but I'd rather they gave me an interest free loan than the other way around. Edited April 9, 2019 by Corcaigh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 12 hours ago, Corcaigh said: I had a win. Is behind the fridge a low tax state? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 9, 2019 Share Posted April 9, 2019 Anyone looking to still e-file, Taxact has a $5 option for deluxe (basically all the deduction options and bells and whistles). Go through Slickdeals to find the specific link. I think the caveat is that you can't have used them last year to file. We waited since the GOP chose us to owe rather than get a refund (hello to that lost 10k in SALT deductions). But I'm glad I found the cheap option to e-file since I was dreading doing the paperwork by hand. 😁 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now