A thousand fucking dollars. For people making significantly more than the median family income. Christ. And in exchange we all get to build our own roads!
And that tax cut is a lie and will actually be a straight up tax hike for most Americans making between 50 and 150k
Tax Policy Center suggests that most in that range will see a modest tax break around 1%. About 1 in 7 in that range would owe $1000 more a year.
The plain old rich in the $155k-$305k bracket get a minor break that becomes a hike in the next decade.
I do not believe this analysis, horrible for the plan as it is, successfully accounts for the laser focus of the gop targeting it's tax rises onto those who live in cities. There seems to be no way that a massive fraction of americans living in say, los angeles, wouldn't see a huge increase in their tax bill. Loss of state level exemptions alone will be disastrous.
A thousand fucking dollars. For people making significantly more than the median family income. Christ. And in exchange we all get to build our own roads!
And that tax cut is a lie and will actually be a straight up tax hike for most Americans making between 50 and 150k
Tax Policy Center suggests that most in that range will see a modest tax break around 1%. About 1 in 7 in that range would owe $1000 more a year.
The plain old rich in the $155k-$305k bracket get a minor break that becomes a hike in the next decade.
I do not believe this analysis, horrible for the plan as it is, successfully accounts for the laser focus of the gop targeting it's tax rises onto those who live in cities. There seems to be no way that a massive fraction of americans living in say, los angeles, wouldn't see a huge increase in their tax bill. Loss of state level exemptions alone will be disastrous.
62% of the United States population lives in cities and 70% of the population does not benefit from deducting their state and local taxes. Most of the people in cities who will see a tax bump are going to be upper middle class to rich.
Does anyone here think that the repatriation tax forgiveness will actually bring a stimulus to the economy? Because I see it as trickle-down with different lipstick.
It is blatantly obvious that's all it will be because the foreign dollars held by companies are profits legally belonging to the shareholders. When brought back they can be used for dividends, stock buybacks, acquisitions, paying down American debt, or reinvestment in the business in whichever proportion is most beneficial for the shareholders as determined by the board. The thing is that corporate profits are already at an all time high and are, by and large, not being used for reinvestment, so why would any extra dollars be used for that?
Does anyone here think that the repatriation tax forgiveness will actually bring a stimulus to the economy? Because I see it as trickle-down with different lipstick.
It is blatantly obvious that's all it will be because the foreign dollars held by companies are profits legally belonging to the shareholders. When brought back they can be used for dividends, stock buybacks, acquisitions, paying down American debt, or reinvestment in the business as determined by the board. The thing is that corporate profits are already at an all time high and are, by and large, not being used for reinvestment, so why would any extra dollars be used for that?
That is not true. They legally belong to the company, not the company's shareholders.
Does anyone here think that the repatriation tax forgiveness will actually bring a stimulus to the economy? Because I see it as trickle-down with different lipstick.
It is blatantly obvious that's all it will be because the foreign dollars held by companies are profits legally belonging to the shareholders. When brought back they can be used for dividends, stock buybacks, acquisitions, paying down American debt, or reinvestment in the business as determined by the board. The thing is that corporate profits are already at an all time high and are, by and large, not being used for reinvestment, so why would any extra dollars be used for that?
That is not true. They legally belong to the company, not the company's shareholders.
Ok fine. But legally the shareholders own everything the company owns (after the obligations to the holders of the company's debt and preferred shares are satisfied).
Does anyone here think that the repatriation tax forgiveness will actually bring a stimulus to the economy? Because I see it as trickle-down with different lipstick.
It is blatantly obvious that's all it will be because the foreign dollars held by companies are profits legally belonging to the shareholders. When brought back they can be used for dividends, stock buybacks, acquisitions, paying down American debt, or reinvestment in the business as determined by the board. The thing is that corporate profits are already at an all time high and are, by and large, not being used for reinvestment, so why would any extra dollars be used for that?
That is not true. They legally belong to the company, not the company's shareholders.
Ok fine. But legally the shareholders own everything the company owns (after the obligations to the holders of the company's debt and preferred shares are satisfied).
A residual claim on the firm’s profits isn't owning everything the company owns.
Edit: A residual claim when the company is liquidated is not the same as owning everything the company owns.
If 100k is typical than I guess my family is poor as dirt.
100K is national mean for a family filing jointly. It's a pretty useless number for anyone other than the people actually calculating how much money is coming in as taxes. 100k is everything between pretty rich (you live in Rural Idaho) and just getting by (you live in New York).
Typical means common. Being the mean in a HUGELY bifurcated system means that families earning $100k total are actually pretty rare. The most common family probably earns a little less than the median family, at around $60k I think.
Median is a far more useful personal metric than mean.
By the way, I remember back last year when the election went south, there were a number of people here saying that should any Trump tax cut actually go through, and actually benefit us, that some of us would then take that money and donate it all to various anti-Trump causes.
I'd just like to say that personally, this is still my intention.
You all are too nice to corporate boardmembers who pull this tax holiday shit. Incentivize things differently, sure. That's a start. But the individuals who pull this shit?
They belong in prison. For theft.
If we can have bullshit mandatory minimum sentences for poor teenagers, I don't see why we can't have the same for fucking white-collar assholes.
You all are too nice to corporate boardmembers who pull this tax holiday shit. Incentivize things differently, sure. That's a start. But the individuals who pull this shit?
They belong in prison. For theft.
If we can have bullshit mandatory minimum sentences for poor teenagers, I don't see why we can't have the same for fucking white-collar assholes.
Unless a one world government or financial institution is put into place, stuff like tax havens will always exist. I think we're rapidly heading towards a major populist uprising, ala early 20th century. Acquisitions, mergers, and spin-offs have lead to huge monopolies and oligopolies that are very detrimental to the consumer.
I'm... Not sure that it actually results in an across the board cut (no matter how small it is) to every single bracket, like that graph says. I think they might be taking some of the numbers over credulously
I'm... Not sure that it actually results in an across the board cut (no matter how small it is) to every single bracket, like that graph says. I think they might be taking some of the numbers over credulously
There aren't enough numbers to break it down without a lot of assumptions. For instance, where do the brackets actually land? So that it the most likely result if you take the promises of everyone getting something at face value. Which isn't too ridiculous, since it gives political cover and it isn't like they're trying to get revenue neutrality out of it. This is 100% deficit financed, so who cares? Until the market crashes again.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
That's only if you think about the facts. Just listen to the talking heads and then you'll believe that the Republicans have the best plan.
I'm... Not sure that it actually results in an across the board cut (no matter how small it is) to every single bracket, like that graph says. I think they might be taking some of the numbers over credulously
There aren't enough numbers to break it down without a lot of assumptions. For instance, where do the brackets actually land? So that it the most likely result if you take the promises of everyone getting something at face value. Which isn't too ridiculous, since it gives political cover and it isn't like they're trying to get revenue neutrality out of it. This is 100% deficit financed, so who cares? Until the market crashes again.
That article is also saying that the personal taxes will (somehow) actually result in a half trillion dollar windfall for the government, with the actual losses in revenue coming from the business changes. Which...well, I hear that the infrastructure plan will have plenty of bridges to sell you
Even a 25% increase of the taxes you pay is a potentially crippling change for a lot of people. This removal of the state tax deduction should be highlighted at every possible occasion by the Democrats. I was wondering how they were going to screw over the normal people with their plan, and this is certainly going to screw a lot of people over.
The problem is that it hits states like NY and Cali the most....which is probably the actual reason why they're doing it in the first place. Fucking over those libby libs is a positive to some parts of the country
I just moved to NYC and have a terrible understanding of taxes in general, what in these changes and living in NYC would change?
0
Options
HakkekageSpace Whore Academysumma cum laudeRegistered Userregular
Even a 25% increase of the taxes you pay is a potentially crippling change for a lot of people. This removal of the state tax deduction should be highlighted at every possible occasion by the Democrats. I was wondering how they were going to screw over the normal people with their plan, and this is certainly going to screw a lot of people over.
The problem is that it hits states like NY and Cali the most....which is probably the actual reason why they're doing it in the first place. Fucking over those libby libs is a positive to some parts of the country
I just moved to NYC and have a terrible understanding of taxes in general, what in these changes and living in NYC would change?
Property tax deductions and state and local income tax deductions would be killed
NJ and NY are high state income and local property tax states and it would fuck anyone making a salary or owning a home here
Even a 25% increase of the taxes you pay is a potentially crippling change for a lot of people. This removal of the state tax deduction should be highlighted at every possible occasion by the Democrats. I was wondering how they were going to screw over the normal people with their plan, and this is certainly going to screw a lot of people over.
The problem is that it hits states like NY and Cali the most....which is probably the actual reason why they're doing it in the first place. Fucking over those libby libs is a positive to some parts of the country
I just moved to NYC and have a terrible understanding of taxes in general, what in these changes and living in NYC would change?
The number of people living in us cities makes me think that most of these analyses which say lower taxes between 50 and 150k are just garbage. I've run the numbers myself and old people in the last few years of their mortgage. Young people who recently bought a home are no question taking a massive hit unless they earn like 350k
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
That's only if you think about the facts. Just listen to the talking heads and then you'll believe that the Republicans have the best plan.
It's going to be hard to hide that when people actually have to pay their taxes though...
0
Options
Shortytouching the meatIntergalactic Cool CourtRegistered Userregular
edited September 2017
golly I can't wait to get my extra 350 over the course of an entire year
Even a 25% increase of the taxes you pay is a potentially crippling change for a lot of people. This removal of the state tax deduction should be highlighted at every possible occasion by the Democrats. I was wondering how they were going to screw over the normal people with their plan, and this is certainly going to screw a lot of people over.
The problem is that it hits states like NY and Cali the most....which is probably the actual reason why they're doing it in the first place. Fucking over those libby libs is a positive to some parts of the country
I just moved to NYC and have a terrible understanding of taxes in general, what in these changes and living in NYC would change?
Property tax deductions and state and local income tax deductions would be killed
NJ and NY are high state income and local property tax states and it would fuck anyone making a salary or owning a home here
Don't forget NYC has a city income tax as well. I wasn't itemizing, but was considering buying a house. I'll have to see the details of the taxes to see how this affects my thinking, but my guess is that houses are now a lot less affordable... In theory that should make house prices go down, but I doubt that will happen in NYC.
0
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
When I was living in NYC the state and local tax deduction was huuuuge. Just losing that'll would probably cost me a couple grand.
Losing the mortgage interest deduction probably won't do much to lower real estate prices in the city because the city's real estate market is just stupid messed up, though I wonder what it would do to coops since there ownership structure allows a portion of the maintenance to be deducted from taxes.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
That's only if you think about the facts. Just listen to the talking heads and then you'll believe that the Republicans have the best plan.
It's going to be hard to hide that when people actually have to pay their taxes though...
That's why I will fully expect that any changes that the bill that'll be worked on, even if it's finished, won't be implemented until the following year.
Ie, 5 months after the midterms. Because they will not want people who get shafted, voting in primaries a couple months later.
They may mostly be stupid craven assholes, but there are a few that are savants in political consequence. Make people eat the shit sandwich early 2019, hope they get used to the taste in 2020, and add some pork in mid 2020 if they don't.
Because if there's one thing Republican voters can do, it's forget about what their Congress did, beyond the last thing they did.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
That's only if you think about the facts. Just listen to the talking heads and then you'll believe that the Republicans have the best plan.
It's going to be hard to hide that when people actually have to pay their taxes though...
The same "tax cutting" Republican Party has been pushing the idea of "broadening the tax base" to make sure more Americans have "skin in the game".
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
That's only if you think about the facts. Just listen to the talking heads and then you'll believe that the Republicans have the best plan.
It's going to be hard to hide that when people actually have to pay their taxes though...
That's why I will fully expect that any changes that the bill that'll be worked on, even if it's finished, won't be implemented until the following year.
Ie, 5 months after the midterms. Because they will not want people who get shafted, voting in primaries a couple months later.
They may mostly be stupid craven assholes, but there are a few that are savants in political consequence. Make people eat the shit sandwich early 2019, hope they get used to the taste in 2020, and add some pork in mid 2020 if they don't.
Because if there's one thing Republican voters can do, it's forget about what their Congress did, beyond the last thing they did.
I'm not sure how well that would work. 2 years is not an awful long time to get used to it
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
They have the same issue with Net Neutrality, and like it, they also have the same thing working in their favor. Most people don't understand the actual consequences to these changes, and won't try to. They'll just hear their favorite talking head saying how great they are, and all the magical unicorns that will have jobs as a result and go with it.
It will be really important for any opposition to get the same type of messaging push as they did with the attempts to repeal the ACA, which resulted in it becoming wildly more popular. Unfortunately I think that's going to be a lot harder with taxes due to the complexity of it.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
They have the same issue with Net Neutrality, and like it, they also have the same thing working in their favor. Most people don't understand the actual consequences to these changes, and won't try to. They'll just hear their favorite talking head saying how great they are, and all the magical unicorns that will have jobs as a result and go with it.
It will be really important for any opposition to get the same type of messaging push as they did with the attempts to repeal the ACA, which resulted in it becoming wildly more popular. Unfortunately I think that's going to be a lot harder with taxes due to the complexity of it.
Taxes are WAY easier to understand and sell to voters then net neutrality.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
They have the same issue with Net Neutrality, and like it, they also have the same thing working in their favor. Most people don't understand the actual consequences to these changes, and won't try to. They'll just hear their favorite talking head saying how great they are, and all the magical unicorns that will have jobs as a result and go with it.
It will be really important for any opposition to get the same type of messaging push as they did with the attempts to repeal the ACA, which resulted in it becoming wildly more popular. Unfortunately I think that's going to be a lot harder with taxes due to the complexity of it.
Taxes are WAY easier to understand and sell to voters then net neutrality.
I don't think it will be too hard to push the message of 'your taxes remain largely the same and the deficit goes up trillions". It's easily checkable when tax time comes around.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
They have the same issue with Net Neutrality, and like it, they also have the same thing working in their favor. Most people don't understand the actual consequences to these changes, and won't try to. They'll just hear their favorite talking head saying how great they are, and all the magical unicorns that will have jobs as a result and go with it.
It will be really important for any opposition to get the same type of messaging push as they did with the attempts to repeal the ACA, which resulted in it becoming wildly more popular. Unfortunately I think that's going to be a lot harder with taxes due to the complexity of it.
Taxes are WAY easier to understand and sell to voters then net neutrality.
Keep your netflix prices from going up or the streaming speeds from getting slower is a pretty easy sell.
I'd apparently potentially end up paying more in taxes under the Trump plan which has is basically the only negative personal outcome I didn't expect under a Trump/Republican government.
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
They have the same issue with Net Neutrality, and like it, they also have the same thing working in their favor. Most people don't understand the actual consequences to these changes, and won't try to. They'll just hear their favorite talking head saying how great they are, and all the magical unicorns that will have jobs as a result and go with it.
It will be really important for any opposition to get the same type of messaging push as they did with the attempts to repeal the ACA, which resulted in it becoming wildly more popular. Unfortunately I think that's going to be a lot harder with taxes due to the complexity of it.
Taxes are WAY easier to understand and sell to voters then net neutrality.
Keep your netflix prices from going up or the streaming speeds from getting slower is a pretty easy sell.
Not that easy. It's too abstract and too far off.
Compared to taxes that people pay right now and visibly see and think about a lot.
When I was living in NYC the state and local tax deduction was huuuuge. Just losing that'll would probably cost me a couple grand.
Losing the mortgage interest deduction probably won't do much to lower real estate prices in the city because the city's real estate market is just stupid messed up, though I wonder what it would do to coops since there ownership structure allows a portion of the maintenance to be deducted from taxes.
I mean, they're huge if you itemize. It is a high tax place to live.
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
By the way, I remember back last year when the election went south, there were a number of people here saying that should any Trump tax cut actually go through, and actually benefit us, that some of us would then take that money and donate it all to various anti-Trump causes.
I'd just like to say that personally, this is still my intention.
Last time I looked I would get like 800-900 bucks and every penny is going to Planned Parenthood.
Posts
I do not believe this analysis, horrible for the plan as it is, successfully accounts for the laser focus of the gop targeting it's tax rises onto those who live in cities. There seems to be no way that a massive fraction of americans living in say, los angeles, wouldn't see a huge increase in their tax bill. Loss of state level exemptions alone will be disastrous.
62% of the United States population lives in cities and 70% of the population does not benefit from deducting their state and local taxes. Most of the people in cities who will see a tax bump are going to be upper middle class to rich.
It is blatantly obvious that's all it will be because the foreign dollars held by companies are profits legally belonging to the shareholders. When brought back they can be used for dividends, stock buybacks, acquisitions, paying down American debt, or reinvestment in the business in whichever proportion is most beneficial for the shareholders as determined by the board. The thing is that corporate profits are already at an all time high and are, by and large, not being used for reinvestment, so why would any extra dollars be used for that?
That is not true. They legally belong to the company, not the company's shareholders.
Ok fine. But legally the shareholders own everything the company owns (after the obligations to the holders of the company's debt and preferred shares are satisfied).
A residual claim on the firm’s profits isn't owning everything the company owns.
Edit: A residual claim when the company is liquidated is not the same as owning everything the company owns.
Median family income in the US is $72k https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEFAINUSA646N
I'd just like to say that personally, this is still my intention.
They belong in prison. For theft.
If we can have bullshit mandatory minimum sentences for poor teenagers, I don't see why we can't have the same for fucking white-collar assholes.
Unless a one world government or financial institution is put into place, stuff like tax havens will always exist. I think we're rapidly heading towards a major populist uprising, ala early 20th century. Acquisitions, mergers, and spin-offs have lead to huge monopolies and oligopolies that are very detrimental to the consumer.
There aren't enough numbers to break it down without a lot of assumptions. For instance, where do the brackets actually land? So that it the most likely result if you take the promises of everyone getting something at face value. Which isn't too ridiculous, since it gives political cover and it isn't like they're trying to get revenue neutrality out of it. This is 100% deficit financed, so who cares? Until the market crashes again.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Yes, shouldn't the Devil be tempting us middle-class people by reducing our taxes? If Republicans are going to increase our taxes to give them to the rich, and Democrats are going to increase our taxes and give them to the poor, there really is no temptation to go to the Dark Side for self-interest.
That's only if you think about the facts. Just listen to the talking heads and then you'll believe that the Republicans have the best plan.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
That article is also saying that the personal taxes will (somehow) actually result in a half trillion dollar windfall for the government, with the actual losses in revenue coming from the business changes. Which...well, I hear that the infrastructure plan will have plenty of bridges to sell you
I just moved to NYC and have a terrible understanding of taxes in general, what in these changes and living in NYC would change?
Property tax deductions and state and local income tax deductions would be killed
NJ and NY are high state income and local property tax states and it would fuck anyone making a salary or owning a home here
http://www.app.com/story/money/business/consumer/2017/09/29/trump-tax-plan-property-tax-deduction-new-jersey/712485001/
NNID: Hakkekage
The number of people living in us cities makes me think that most of these analyses which say lower taxes between 50 and 150k are just garbage. I've run the numbers myself and old people in the last few years of their mortgage. Young people who recently bought a home are no question taking a massive hit unless they earn like 350k
It's going to be hard to hide that when people actually have to pay their taxes though...
that's like, 1.25 student loan payments!
Don't forget NYC has a city income tax as well. I wasn't itemizing, but was considering buying a house. I'll have to see the details of the taxes to see how this affects my thinking, but my guess is that houses are now a lot less affordable... In theory that should make house prices go down, but I doubt that will happen in NYC.
Losing the mortgage interest deduction probably won't do much to lower real estate prices in the city because the city's real estate market is just stupid messed up, though I wonder what it would do to coops since there ownership structure allows a portion of the maintenance to be deducted from taxes.
This is gonna be the issue for them trying to sell it. It's a pure establishment/donor-focused handout to rich people. The Democrats don't like it. And Trump's voters don't like it either. So if you can get the anti-establishment messaging on the issue to breakthrough with them, it will be an issue for the GOP.
Ie, 5 months after the midterms. Because they will not want people who get shafted, voting in primaries a couple months later.
They may mostly be stupid craven assholes, but there are a few that are savants in political consequence. Make people eat the shit sandwich early 2019, hope they get used to the taste in 2020, and add some pork in mid 2020 if they don't.
Because if there's one thing Republican voters can do, it's forget about what their Congress did, beyond the last thing they did.
The same "tax cutting" Republican Party has been pushing the idea of "broadening the tax base" to make sure more Americans have "skin in the game".
This is code for raising taxes on poor people.
I'm not sure how well that would work. 2 years is not an awful long time to get used to it
They have the same issue with Net Neutrality, and like it, they also have the same thing working in their favor. Most people don't understand the actual consequences to these changes, and won't try to. They'll just hear their favorite talking head saying how great they are, and all the magical unicorns that will have jobs as a result and go with it.
It will be really important for any opposition to get the same type of messaging push as they did with the attempts to repeal the ACA, which resulted in it becoming wildly more popular. Unfortunately I think that's going to be a lot harder with taxes due to the complexity of it.
Taxes are WAY easier to understand and sell to voters then net neutrality.
I don't think it will be too hard to push the message of 'your taxes remain largely the same and the deficit goes up trillions". It's easily checkable when tax time comes around.
Keep your netflix prices from going up or the streaming speeds from getting slower is a pretty easy sell.
Not that easy. It's too abstract and too far off.
Compared to taxes that people pay right now and visibly see and think about a lot.
1.2%*
I mean, they're huge if you itemize. It is a high tax place to live.
Last time I looked I would get like 800-900 bucks and every penny is going to Planned Parenthood.