I have a meeting with my advisor in a few hours. She happens to be the head of the department. I’m going to ask if they have a contingency plan to deal with the fallout over the screw-the-students parts.
I don’t know what I’ll do. It might be cheaper to stay and remain on the school’s insurance even it means taking out loans for taxes. I can’t risk losing insurance and I won’t be able to afford cobra.
This just sucks.
@romanigypsyeyes — and sadly, COBRA would only allow you to extend your coverage for 18 months.
One follow-up question about the retroactive nature of the bill…I realize the tax changes will be implemented on Jan 1st, but wasn’t there some mention of the cap on deductibility of mortgage being effective the day the bill was proposed? I don’t know if that is still in play or if there are any other situations where a pre-Jan 1st date will apply.
In at least one version (the House’s?—but I think it’s in both) of the proposals, the cap on mortgage interest is from the date the bill was introduced, to prevent someone getting a $1M mortgage in December and still being able to deduct all of the interest, knowing that they wouldn’t have been able to if they closed in January.
ETA: I have to say, if this pile of steaming junk is going to pass, that’s a provision I kind of agree with (though I wish the effective date had been, say, two weeks after it was proposed, to allow people who were currently amidst closing and such to get in under the wire.)
@CT1417, as far as the mortgage, I think the Senate bill left the deductibility alone, and the House bill limited it to 500K (but only for new mortgages). I’m wondering if there would be a big rush for people with large mortgages to refinance before Jan 1st.
I’m curious what it took to buy off the Senators who were holding out.
Looks like @dfbdfb answered both your question and mine.
Was that the only provision that had a pre-Jan 1st date? Or the only one we know of perhaps!
Well, it seems to be out:
JCT on effects of Senate tax bill in 2027:
those earning $200K+: $12.9B tax cut
those earning $30-50K: $12.9B tax increase
Pretty darn simple.
And, I will wager a beverage of choice (limited to $50 dollars) that 80% of fortune 500 CEO’s will amend their contracts to be self-employed and get taxed at the lower pass-through rate.
It’s class warfare; they have clearly won this battle.
So the Senate and House will have to compromise on the mortgage deductibility now? I can’t say I disagree with limiting mortgage interest deductibility to those $500,000 or under. If your income will support a $500,000 mortage, you are not poor.
I do disagree with eliminating the medical expenses deduction. That really hits the old and sick.
And while I see the logic of eliminating SALT (why should federal taxpayers subsidize states that tax and spend too much), it will hit Calfornians hard. We personally will have to decide how much nice weather is worth. Maybe start looking at states with low taxes and nice weather.
The House can just pass the Senate-passed bill. They don’t have to go to reconciliation. I don’t think they will.
Mortgage deduction - as I understood it, you had to be in a legally binding contract for a RE purchase on the date the bill was introduced. That makes sense - a lot of folks could have walked out of their contracts, especially those with low or no earnest money. But don’t take my word for it… let me dig it up.
The mortgage deduction is not worth very much without also being able to deduct SALT.
The Senate bill takes the number of taxpayers who will itemize down to 7%, and the House version down to 12%.
I read through the actual House bill, and IIRC it grandfathers current loans. It’s only new ones that will be subject to the cap.
Here it is:
"In the case of any pre-November 2, 2017, indebtedness, this paragraph shall apply as in effect immediately before the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the report states.
However, there is an exception for those who are already entered into a contract. Home buyers purchasing their primary residence who were in a binding contract before November 2 and are scheduled to close before January 1, 2018, are exempt from the new rule, as long as the contract closes before April 1, 2018."
How symmetrical. 
It will make a good sound byte for ads for 2018 and 2020, though!
Yes, as long as you close by Jan 1 2018 and complete the purchase by April 1 2018. In addition you can refinance a loan that exceeds that cap that is grandfathered, as long as you don’t increase the amount of debt.
Section 1302.(a) (page 99): https://waysandmeansforms.house.gov/uploadedfiles/bill_text.pdf
Hate to get into the politics of the thing, but that’s really what it’s all about. The GOP mega donors, who stand to benefit the most, have said pass it or stop calling us for donations. And failure means they have to run next year with not a single success to campaign on. So the GOP is trying to ram it through without proper scrutiny or dissent, just to save their political lives. The president, meanwhile, stands to gain more than almost anyone in the country, and is desperate for a “win”, whatever that means. This is a far cry from draining the swamp.
It does make me wonder if some see the writing on the wall given the large number of reps who have announced they won’t be running again.
I thought this was good.
Granted. Here on the east coast, 100K is not considered rich. So from our lens this could be more of a middle class cut. Here 100K makes for an ok living but one is not partying up or vacationing that is for sure. Saving for college and retirement is also challenging.
Trump’s own income comes primarily from the Trump Organization, an LLC. A pass through entity. His personal tax rate will be cut to 25%. Same as a couple with 90k salary.
Because this is following a well established playbook. Just like the ACA. There was little outrage here about that bill - except by a few who were labeled selfish.
Sen. Corker has said details of the “trigger” will be released sometime this evening. Not clear if that will be before or after the vote. I’m sickened by politicians.