I thought we are lowering the tax to be competitive against other countries and stem the out flow of companies. Will lowering to 28% do that when others are at 22%? I would think they need to lower it close to 22%. 7% advantage is still a big deal.
How many teachers would itemize instead of using standard deduction? Most teachers I know would be better off taking $12K or $24K standard deduction. I am also against the elimination of estate tax. The silver lining with the estate tax elimination is a) it won’t be until 2025 b) the effect is felt only on the year you die. We have time. They didn’t increase life time gift limit which could be immediate.
[quote]
Even most corporate CEO’s have said they are not going to expand/invest more in their businesses[/quot]
Do they also say it’s ok companies leave the US in droves as they did in the last few years seeking a lower tax? Why do we then have an exit tax?
“How many teachers would itemize instead of using standard deduction? Most teachers I know would be better off taking $12K or $24K standard deduction.”
A lot of teachers are married and file jointly so their earnings are taxed at a higher level then a teacher who is single. And many of those married, filing jointly, certainly do itemize.
The estate tax is immediately doubled to $11.2 million for individuals in the Senate version (so far). The House version also immediately doubles the estate tax to $11.2 million and phases in a full repeal by 2024.
Doing that completely jettisons the the rationale for ALL the other individual losses in either tax plan. The loss of the deductions for medical expenses, out of pocket school expenses, taxing tuition waivers, SALT, etc., etc.
What I meant not immediate is it affects you when you die not now, not yet. A few will squeak by before the law changes again, of course. I imagine DeVos is still healthy and expects a long life?
According to NYT chart posted earlier. at present it’s mostly very well to do people who itemize. There were some in the $100K income who also itemize. I expect that will change greatly when standard deduction doubles shifting threshold income for itemizers to a higher end to $300-400K or higher. It is a bit manipulative to say poor teachers don’t get to deduct $250 they spend in classroom if in truth their household income is in the top 1- 0.5%.
Yes, family with pecial needs kids will suffer so do people with high medical expenses.
It’s a bit manipulative to go on and on about the corporate tax being 35% without mentioning that virtually no corporations pay it, and the effective tax rate is somewhere around 24%.
According to NYT, to make it revenue neutral eliminating deductions will bring the rate down to 28.5% vs 22% at other countries which is clearly still too high if the number of corporation relocating to other countries is any indication. One can gripe over 35% or 28.5% as much as you like. Either way, companies are moving oversea. So much so that we instituted an exit tax. To me that means we need to lower it to a competitive level whichever that may be.
I heard an economist on the radio the other day who said that if US lowers its corporate tax rate, other countries will, too. So the race to the bottom will continue.
If so, 20% sounds like a good place to be. It has 2% advantage to tidy over when the other countries lower their rates. Did the economist have a suggestion to stop the exodus of companies from US at 35% or 28.5% effective tax rate?
It sounds like a great place if what you want to do is screw poor people and the middle class, and take away services, in order to give more and more and more money to the super-rich. If that’s not your goal, then it doesn’t sound like a good place at all.
“According to NYT chart posted earlier. at present it’s mostly very well to do people who itemize. There were some in the $100K income who also itemize. I expect that will change greatly when standard deduction doubles shifting threshold income for itemizers to a higher end to $300-400K or higher. It is a bit manipulative to say poor teachers don’t get to deduct $250 they spend in classroom if in truth their household income is in the top 1- 0.5%.”
My H doesn’t make anywhere near $300k and we itemize. I live in NYS and $24k won’t come close to what we pay in SALT.
I have no problem with paying higher taxes but not so the very wealthy and corporations get tax breaks at the expense of screwing most everyone else.
Yes. I’ve spent way more $250 in classroom related stuff. We itemize and we have a huge deduction. That $250 or whatever is added on to our deduction. Whether I get to deduct it or not, I would have spent it. My livelihood doesn’t depend on deductibility of that $250. That’s what I was trying to say earlier, don’t make it “poor teachers don’t get to deduct”. If you are itemizing under the new law, you are not likely to be poor. Except special needs and medical expenses. That is real issue that we could focus on if we don’t get distracted by non issues.
Well @Iglooo my business deductions do not come close to the threshold for qualifying…so I very much appreciate the very little edge that $250 gives me annually…and I’m not the only one.
Don’t make it sound like this isn’t worthwhile for many… because it IS worthwhile.
And I personally think this very small deduction is more worthy than a deduction for owning a private plane, or maintaining a golf course.
I also don’t think that the grad school tuition waiver tax is something that should be considered. I also don’t mind paying more taxes…but come on. Believe it or not…some grad school students ONLY get the waiver…and get no additional monetary stipend. So…where is the money for them to actually pay these taxes.
This bill will give an enormous benefit to investors in US companies. About 1/3 of that investment is held by foreigners.
So the bill gives an $8 billion net benefit to US taxpayers, and a $22 billion benefit to foreign investors. WHY? Why are we helping foreign investors at the expense of low-income and middle-class American taxpayers?
Despite all of these negatives - only 1 Senator has come out against it. I think we should be prepared that this is going to happen. Maybe some improvements when they reconcile Hiuse and Senate versions, but I am not optimistic.
We should not roll over and play dead if we don’t want this. We can call, we can phonebank to districts of vulnerable representatives (to tell constituents to exert pressure), we can textbank.
I don’t like that the allowable deductions are what give lobbyists in Washington so much power. If no deductions at all were permitted, just a flat tax rate, there would be less bribing and conniving going on.
Same for the estate tax. As it is now those like the Kennedys shelter a billion dollars in a large complicated scheme of trusts. Others use the charitable deduction like Buffet and Gates. Get rid of all shelters and tax estates above a certain amount the same way. No shelters, no deductions.
This is really, really starting to pick up steam on r/politics. Is it representative of the whole country? Absolutely not. However, it tends to track the conversations of what many people who even remotely politically involved are having.
Reps & Senators are on break but that doesn’t mean you can’t stop reaching out and making your voice heard. Though the Rep who flat-out lied to me has a “full” voicemail at his local office.