Tax Bill

[HOF44]

Not that I was going to vote R, but I'm damn motivated now to go vote D on anything I can find to vote on.  

[Hersh]

This tax plan won't pass. 

[No Excuses]

So far we have the biggest small business advocacy group, and the largest real estate groups, both opposed to this scam of a tax plan. 

 

It's really kind of amazing how they are targeting the middle class on the coasts with some of the changes to SALT, mortgage deductions etc.

[Burgold]

12 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Any indication how they will pay for it, or is increased deficit okay with them until they want to cut more out of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food programs, Vet health care because they don't want to increase the debt ceiling?

 

Assholes.

I'm sure they plan to pay for it with "growth"  You know the promised growth rate that is always based in pure fantasy and never happens.

[Larry]

33 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

So far we have the biggest small business advocacy group, and the largest real estate groups, both opposed to this scam of a tax plan. 

 

It's really kind of amazing how they are targeting the middle class on the coasts with some of the changes to SALT, mortgage deductions etc.

 

What's that compared to the groups that opposed their "health care reform"?  You saw the list of all of those big special interests, and the GOP still almost passed that pig.  (And is still trying.)  

 

 

[Larry]

43 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

Any indication how they will pay for it, or is increased deficit okay with them until they want to cut more out of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food programs, Vet health care because they don't want to increase the debt ceiling?

 

Assholes.

 

Now, I'd look at what happened to their "health care reform" bill, for precedent.  

 

The bottleneck is the Senate.  The GOP apparently would really prefer to pass the thing without changing the rules any more.  Apparently, they aren't quite ready to pull that switch.  (Maybe they'd be willing to do that, if they could find an issue that the public supported enough.  But this dog isn't it.  Now, if the Dems are stupid enough to shut down the government, then maybe they figure going nuclear won't hurt them.  But that's not where we are.)  

 

So, that precedent says that they'll try to pass it using the reconciliation rules.  

 

And that puts limits on what the bill can do.  I think one of them is that the CBO score can't raise the deficit by more than a certain amount.  

 

So, while the House has gleefully amended the House's "pay as you go" rule, which says any deficit increases have to be "paid for", to say that "but deficit increases due to tax cuts, or repealing Obamacare, don;t count", (it was the very first thing that the "fiscally conservative" Tea Party did, when they got to Washington), I suspect that the Senate will try to pass it without allowing a filibuster.  Which limits what they can do.  

 

[Fergasun]

Larry,

Tax reform was in the reconciliation rules for the budget... they already went nuclear. I think it can only cost $1.5T.

 

GOP cant complain.about deficits after this.

[Larry]

10 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

 

GOP cant complain.about deficits after this.

 

Sure they can. 

 

Theyve been doing it for 40 years. 

[zoony]

Im all for it.  Lets decommision and mothball 3 aircraft carriers to pay for it.  Done

[bearrock]

41 minutes ago, zoony said:

Im all for it.  Lets decommision and mothball 3 aircraft carriers to pay for it.  Done

 

Can we decommission 6 carriers so the middle class can get some cuts too?

[HOF44]

We should decommission cruisers all they do is run into **** anyway!!

[tshile]

i'm confused...

the 401k tax exemption is staying.

the standard deduction is doubling

the child credit is increasing

the mortgage interest deduction is only capped and the cap starts at $500k

 

how is this targeting middle class people?

[tshile]

they more than doubled the limit at which the child tax credit starts to phase out.

but they're dumping the $5k child care tax exclusion.... i've been using that

the SALT repeal but keep personal property kind of sucks...

 

there's lots of wins in this for me. two losses.

[bearrock]

17 minutes ago, tshile said:

i'm confused...

the 401k tax exemption is staying.

the standard deduction is doubling

the child credit is increasing

the mortgage interest deduction is only capped and the cap starts at $500k

 

how is this targeting middle class people?

Rise in standard deduction merely shifts people from itemized to standard.  Some may itemize more than 24k, some less, I would say for lot of middle class homeowners, 24k pretty much is a wash.  But we lose personal exemption along the way, so my family of 4's agi rose by 16k.  Pretty sure 1200 in additional child credit won't be enough to offset.  Lost student loan interest deduction, nice punch there.  We had a lot of medical expenses last year, particularly dental, so we would've itemized a lot more than a normal year, sucker punch there.  Best case scenario is a marginal rise in tax burden I would think.  I certainly don't see any cuts coming my way.

[The Evil Genius]

37 minutes ago, tshile said:

they more than doubled the limit at which the child tax credit starts to phase out.

but they're dumping the $5k child care tax exclusion.... i've been using that

the SALT repeal but keep personal property kind of sucks...

 

there's lots of wins in this for me. two losses.

 

Loss of state tax deduction. Couple that with property tax deduction being capped at 10k, it effects anyone living in a high income tax/property tax state. Largely blue states like NY & California. Couple those deductions with other charity deductions and some middle class families itemized a lot more than $24k in a year. Now they won't because the deductions aren't there.

 

 

Edit..we pay almost 10k in property taxes on our house right now. It's taxed at a value of a little over 600k. The majority of houses across the bay (think SF and areas south all the way to San Jose) have values over a million. Of course not everyone is taxed at the full value of their house (Prop 13) but if say.. half of them were...that's a lot of people in the Bay Area that just got shafted. 

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by The Evil Genius

[LadySkinsFan]

We have to look at the overall picture, not just what is good for us individually. 

 

What is good for the country, tax wise, debt wise, and not what is good for the very wealthy and corporations. 

 

I could get on board with a lower corporate rate if all their deductions and allowances are dropped. They must be made to pay their fair share. 

 

Their trickle down theory doesn't work, they don't create jobs, they don't invest in the country's future. 

[visionary]

 

[tshile]

I find it interesting that in the past I would **** about a Democrat's proposal that would be for the "middle class" because it would cut me out of it due to a cap on income (like the child credit that this bill would raise the cap on by more than twice), I would be told that we make enough that we "can afford" it.

 

Now theres a tax bill that affects people making quite a bit more, or paying taxes on values quite a bit higher, and here's the Democrats telling me it's an attack on the middle class.

 

I'm not supporting this bill yet because I haven't quite figured out how good/bad it is for me, and I haven't decided how good/bad it is for the country just yet. Just commenting on how what is and isn't middle class and who can and can't afford things has seemingly shifted quite a bit since late last summer when we were discussing some taxes last summer, just prior to the election.

 

1 hour ago, LadySkinsFan said:

We have to look at the overall picture, not just what is good for us individually. 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah that's a nice idea and I used to foolishly believe such a thing, but one thing that has become quite clear over the last year is that the vast majority of people in this country only vote for what is best for them. Most of the time it's money/tax related, but some people pick other topics.

 

In fact, I believe you're one of the people who's said you won't support anyone republican because of your feminism ideals.

 

Thinking you should vote for something bad for you individually, because it's good for the country, is a loser's game. No one else is willing to look out for you.

 

I'm not against factoring in how things impact the economy and what that means for you - that should absolutely be considered. I realize there can be a thin line between those things at time.

Edited November 2, 2017 by tshile

[bearrock]

14 minutes ago, tshile said:

I find it interesting that in the past I would **** about a Democrat's proposal that would be for the "middle class" because it would cut me out of it due to a cap on income (like the child credit that this bill would raise the cap on by more than twice), I would be told that we make enough that we "can afford" it.

 

Now theres a tax bill that affects people making quite a bit more, or paying taxes on values quite a bit higher, and here's the Democrats telling me it's an attack on the middle class.

 

I'm not supporting this bill yet because I haven't quite figured out how good/bad it is for me, and I haven't decided how good/bad it is for the country just yet. Just commenting on how what is and isn't middle class and who can and can't afford things has seemingly shifted quite a bit since late last summer when we were discussing some taxes last summer, just prior to the election.

 

 

The SALT part is not an attack on middle class.  That's an attack on upper middle and rich in high state tax and expensive property states (which coincidentally happens to be blue states).

 

I'm not sure attack is the right word, but the short stick for the middle class is the elimination of the personal exemption, student loan interest, dependent care deduction, alimony deduction, medical expense deduction, etc.

 

Corporations are the biggest winners here.  Middle class is just getting no tax cuts or marginal increase.  Corporations need a break but middle class is doing just fine, said no politician ever.

 

If you aren't getting child tax credit at all, that places your income at 120k plus at least.  It depends on the region, but I'm not sure how many would consider your situation to be middle class.

Edited November 2, 2017 by bearrock

[Fergasun]

Corporations and the rich are the big winners here.  Estate tax, and corporate tax reduction are being paid for by the middle class. 

 

I am probably a wash in the big scheme of things. And maybe the middle lower will win on taxes -- no doubt the ultra rich win... Trump. 

 

I see this as, even if you go 3-5 years with $1k a year benefit.. GOP will scream about the deficit and cut medicare/caid/Social security more than that $5k benefit ultimately.

 

The rich wont care, poor and middle claas will feel those cuts.

[steve09ru]

Have they actually defined the classes?  I feel like tshile and that it keeps shifting.  What is thresholds for low income, middle, upper middle, rich?

[Springfield]

I overheard Rush today.  

 

His line of thinking is that the taxes will go up SO much for blue states that they will have no choice but to vote for republicans in local elections, who will promise low taxes.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Springfield

[LadySkinsFan]

The crazy is strong in this one and others like him.

[Springfield]

I do also question why we need to lower corporate taxes to spur economic growth on an already booming economy, which has been booming for th last 7ish years.

[TheGreatBuzz]

4 hours ago, HOF44 said:

We should decommission cruisers all they do is run into **** anyway!!

Not really in good taste considering all the Sailors that died in those accidents.