I’ll assume that you clicked on the link that describes the policy, For those who did not here is a small excerpt
So what I see is a policy that purports to increase jobs and, perhaps, taxable receipts for the U.S. I’ll gladly admit I could be wrong about the second part. What it will effectively do is just the opposite. Given this, either the crafters of the policy did not understand what would happen, incompetence, or they knew exactly what it would do and described in a way to hide the true intent, ill will.
I’ll plead guilty to trying to make it pithy. But I stand by my assertion that this was either implemented incompetently or disguised maliciously.
I will also admit that I am often wrong. Maybe someone could convince me this is an effective policy that does what the public is being told it does.
Doesn’t the minimum corporate tax create incentives for US multinational companies to become non US multinational companies with separate US subsidiaries (such that only the US subs are subject to US tax)?
I think that if your only intention is to juice the economy, you put the money into the hands of the people who will spend it. That would be, the lower people’s income, the more chance that they will spend every single cent. People who are very wealthy will probably not spend much of their additional funds, if any. However, I think there is more to this than just getting the economy pumped up.
Well, the public servants have been harping job creation and economy stimulus as the main reason for the Fake Cut. One definitely does not create any of that by letting folks accumulate property and money in the hands of the few. Not talking about you or me, bus.
I’m not saying that this is an effective policy. I don’t know. We will see. If the economy starts to boom and more people prosper, perhaps this all will be forgotten. But I am saying that assuming that the other side is evil or complete idiots is a complete lack of understanding of difference of philosophy and the problems and worries that people face. That assumption is why we have the government we are burdened with, today. It wasn’t just the thought that those in charge were evil or idiots, but those who voted were the same. If you judge huge numbers of people in such terms, your contempt is easily recognized, and you will lose the masses.
I am kind of glad we did all major renovations this year. Yay, will deduct my almost $10k in sales tax we paid on those services to get my few crumbs. We are now done with the big stuff, so perfect timing. B-)
I think there’s more to it that that. Yep, job creation and economy stimulus. There is also rewarding your donors. There is the philosophy of fairness (ie you don’t penalize people for being successful). You don’t limit people’s accumulation or income. That you don’t participate in class warfare. I’m not too interested in demonizing people for being wealthy or being poor,myself. I think a lot of the talk is just trying to manipulate public opinion…ie calling this a middle class tax cut, when it’s really a business tax cut.
But we’ll see if this philosophy pays off. I actually don’t think it will, even if the economy takes off. Too much material for the next time, and I think they made some bad calls. However, I don’t put it past the opposition to overreach, misunderstand people’s feelings, take it for granted, and mess it up once again.
I am taking about what is being advertised to the masses. Of course it is all about rewarding the donors… it is very transparent… pillage while you can… with a few crumbs thrown in to appease the masses so the complainters will be fewer and less vocal. Were the donors really hurting with the stays quo… it definitely did not sound that they were dying. The deficit worries me. Big time. I hate debts. Getting a mortgage was a big deal for me. I never trade on margin and I hate car loans. This fake cut is like getting a really bad car loan on a clunker we all will be paying off for a looong time.
I am not sure I completely understand the point in this context, but I believe that some of the points in this thread are completely valid philosophical positions. Reasonable people can disagree about them and reach a compromise.
One person might believe that progressive tax rates are fair and another might not. We can debate this and probably reach a compromise. One person might believe that tax cuts boost economic growth and another does not. We can gather all the best evidence, struggle to try to understand it, and make a judgment. We could probably reach a compromise here, too. We might not agree on the interpretation of the evidence but we could rationally debate and try to persuade the other side.
What I believe is happening in this clause of the bill, allowing a global averaging of tax rates, is doing exactly the opposite of what it purports to do. And I have stated that this is either because the authors didn’t know what the clause was doing or the people behind the bill aren’t being truthful.
Why is this happening? Well, if the cause is incompetence, it is probably because this bill was rushed through. These issues would have clearly shown up in a normal tax bill process where there are months of hearings and floor debates. The problems could have been fixed.
If the problem is ill will, well, I guess the only solution is the ballot box. But in breaking the norms of tax policy legislation, I think we might be entering a period of reactionary tax policy every few years.
I actually have a lot more respect for the representative who said “If we don’t pass this bill, we can’t ever call the donors back” than for some of the more public figures asserting this will help the middle class and pay for itself. If you say I have contempt for some our elected officials who say “I didn’t know that; I didn’t read the bill”, well, that is one more charge to which I’ll plead guilty.
That’s definitely what I think, and I agree with most of your post.
However, assuming that people are “evil or stupid” is definitely a trigger phrase for me, and I’m not just talking about this tax bill, but what has happened to divide people over the last several years. That division has been manipulated to get us into the situation we now face.
If you make regular annual donations, and it looks like you will not be itemizing next year, you may want to make next year’s gift before the end of this year so you will be able to deduct it under current law.
Does anyone know if annual gift limit increases to $28,000 next year from $14,000 in the final version? That’s what Congress version proposed. Not sure if it survived the conference.
