Here's the deal. When Donald Trump (and President Obama, et al.) talk about the ''economy'', they're talking about Wall Street. When the minimum wage worker talks about the economy, he's talking about the groceery store. The stock market increases, say 3.7% in one year, and that's considered a growing economy. During the same period, the price of butter, for exampem ''grows'' from $2.50 per lb. to $3.50 per lb. That's a 40% net loss for the grocerty shopper. This is an over simplification, but I think you catch my drift.
5
Soon to be followed by an endorsement from the Teamsters Union. Trump knows his audience, and it isn't here at the Times. These comments will never be heard inside any Trump establishment. But they will laugh at the author and his screed.
Trump has flunked sociology with his plan to "run the illegal immigrants out of town;" has flunked math and statistics with his tax proposal; and has flunked history and economics with his assertion that reducing tax revenue will expand the economy. He must have been a student at one of his for-profit colleges !
3
Trump has proved himself a fake; he promised tax increases on the rich and is delivering tax cuts instead. He needs to be interviewed and questioned about his falsehoods.
3
But let's not forget that he employs lots of women, so women love him. Women won't mind paying higher taxes. Given the fact that we make less than men do. No big deal. He could just raise taxes on women and be done with it! Isn't Donald awesome!
5
The number of tax brackets is irrelevant. Very nearly everyone who does their own taxes uses the tax table. The brackets could change every $50, even contiuously, and no one would even notice. It isn't the number of brackets that makes the tax code complicated, it's the number of ways of dodging one's tax bill. The complexity is intentional.
5
The one song the liberal Left is never allowed to quit singling is hate-the-rich. Jealousy and envious hatred never sell to intact adult personalities, but are the sine qua non for liberalism's salesmen.
The logical extension of hate-the-rich is the tyranny led by one old guy or a clubhouse full of them. In those places, that entity actually gets to live a Western consumer's life while the 400 million underneath them are prisoners guarded 24/7 lest they try to escape.
And of course, when countries like that kill 110 million of their own citizens in the 20th century, all the employers and successful creators are dead, so it is a natural result that people in the food-growing areas starve - both in the Soviet Union and in Mao's China.
But the evil rich didn't get to gloat, which is what keeps the central planning types like Josh Barro and his employers up at night.
Lord knows we can't HAVE workers getting jobs, because when the black, Latino, or white worker makes their own way, they are not servile dependents waiting for a government check every month. Under liberal rules, why even have such people around?
Letting workers provide for their own families - instead of Uncle Sugar - is such a non-option that the war on employers can never EVER be called off.
The logical extension of hate-the-rich is the tyranny led by one old guy or a clubhouse full of them. In those places, that entity actually gets to live a Western consumer's life while the 400 million underneath them are prisoners guarded 24/7 lest they try to escape.
And of course, when countries like that kill 110 million of their own citizens in the 20th century, all the employers and successful creators are dead, so it is a natural result that people in the food-growing areas starve - both in the Soviet Union and in Mao's China.
But the evil rich didn't get to gloat, which is what keeps the central planning types like Josh Barro and his employers up at night.
Lord knows we can't HAVE workers getting jobs, because when the black, Latino, or white worker makes their own way, they are not servile dependents waiting for a government check every month. Under liberal rules, why even have such people around?
Letting workers provide for their own families - instead of Uncle Sugar - is such a non-option that the war on employers can never EVER be called off.
4
Honestly, my young children learn faster from their mistakes than the Republican economics "experts" have in the last few decades. The canard of "unprecedented" growth has lingered for many years, despite repeated, persistent evidence to the contrary. "Have mercy on those wealthy job creators! Eliminate those burdensome regulations and cut their taxes! Ét voilá! 6% growth, millions more paying into the system, and we rule the world!"
Yet somehow, those policies don't result in enormous employment increases. They don't result in nearly enough corporations taking their savings and reinvesting them into creating jobs - more likely, those "savings" get turned into a benefit for shareholders, board members, and executives. And the drastically reduced intake at the Treasury leads to painful cuts - which confound the trickle-down crowd, all of whom were so certain that *this* time, it would all work splendidly and we'd be booming.
Over and over, and still they don't learn. My five-year-old is far better at recognizing when something is wrong, and how her behavior or choices need to change as a result. How depressing that so many in the GOP cannot meet the same standard.
Yet somehow, those policies don't result in enormous employment increases. They don't result in nearly enough corporations taking their savings and reinvesting them into creating jobs - more likely, those "savings" get turned into a benefit for shareholders, board members, and executives. And the drastically reduced intake at the Treasury leads to painful cuts - which confound the trickle-down crowd, all of whom were so certain that *this* time, it would all work splendidly and we'd be booming.
Over and over, and still they don't learn. My five-year-old is far better at recognizing when something is wrong, and how her behavior or choices need to change as a result. How depressing that so many in the GOP cannot meet the same standard.
1
"Volkswagen could have saved fuel or improved performance by allowing more pollutants to pass through its cars’ exhaust systems, researchers said."
This still is no reason to deceive all the people ultimately killing them
This still is no reason to deceive all the people ultimately killing them
1
Not that there was any danger of my considering Trump a reasonable choice, but now his fiscal views/plans are every bit as objectionable as his social views/plans...and his comb-over.
3
This isn't voodoo economics. It's P.T. Barnum economics: "there's a sucker born every minute."
4
Many of the critiques I have seen are incomplete or nonsense. The only major flaw I see in trumps tax plan is his elimination of the estate tax. The major flaw in the analysis that Trump's plan solves is that it eliminates carried interest used by Private Equity, and Deferred Tax loopholes used by hedge funds to hide or convert income from ordinary income to capital gains. The article also assumes we actually know what the rich really earn and in truth the whole game being played with the IRS is to show the IRS some of what they earn or change the category of what they earn. Trump knows this and that's why his plan matters...its the only plan right now to eliminate both carried interest and Deferred taxes and in the process find all the income being earned by the rich and more importantly make that income part of the ordinary taxable income category most regular Americans use to file their taxes. Many of the analysis done in the article makes some common major mistakes....number one is a group think one: The really rich no longer make ordinary income from a job like myself and the guy who wrote his article. number two is that the rich now make most of their money from investments so if you look up the rate schedule for capital gains you will see that at most many will be paying 10% though many use special tax entities to get their taxes to 0. Therefore all those examples of tax categories going from 39% to 25% are wrong since they are not even making ordinary income.
5
There must be more to this plan.
For example, will Trump end the tax exclusion for muni bonds? This would be a great idea, the exclusion favors only the superwealthy.
How about we start taxing all those tax-free mega endowment funds? Yale's endowment alone grew $2.6 billion last year--why is that tax free?
If we get everyone into the tax tent, ending nonprofit status for all, then rates really can be as low as Trump proposes.
For example, will Trump end the tax exclusion for muni bonds? This would be a great idea, the exclusion favors only the superwealthy.
How about we start taxing all those tax-free mega endowment funds? Yale's endowment alone grew $2.6 billion last year--why is that tax free?
If we get everyone into the tax tent, ending nonprofit status for all, then rates really can be as low as Trump proposes.
5
Taxes should be as broad as possible, as low as possible, and as uniform as possible. Although I realize that view may not be popular with leftists like Joseph Barro who believe that everyone's earned income belongs to the US Government, and if that Government decides to let those who earned the income keep a little of it they should be thankful!
4
It's Josh Barro, and why do you say that he thinks everyone's earned income belongs to the government? Conservatives say a lot of exaggerated nonsense about people on the left. Conservatives have been emptying the Treasury for a long time now with numerous tax cuts and borrowing for wars rather than raising taxes to pay for them. Are we becoming Greece in that everyone want a workable society but doesn't want to pay for it. A reasonable percentage of taxes on income is necessary to live in a civil, sanitary society. What we have now is a deteriorating country with an antiquated infrastructure and those that have the most complain the most about having to pay for it. Well too bad!
6
Trump and his heirs will be the beneficiaries of his tax plan. It is such an outrageous give away and will result in huge HUGE deficits that it will make all of the US look just like Kansas.
The Trump tax plan will result in more inequality and bigger deficits
Newsflash. If you want to grow the economy then the government needs to spend big on local projects like infrastructure and education.
Raising the minimum wage and charging corporations for the ACA subsidies their part time work force receives will also create more full time jobs and more folks with more disposable income.
Tax breaks to billionaires just gives more money to a few hundred versus raising the minimum wage puts more money in the hands of millions who will spend that money locally.
Those millions with more money to spend will create demand and more economic growth.
The Trump tax plan will result in more inequality and bigger deficits
Newsflash. If you want to grow the economy then the government needs to spend big on local projects like infrastructure and education.
Raising the minimum wage and charging corporations for the ACA subsidies their part time work force receives will also create more full time jobs and more folks with more disposable income.
Tax breaks to billionaires just gives more money to a few hundred versus raising the minimum wage puts more money in the hands of millions who will spend that money locally.
Those millions with more money to spend will create demand and more economic growth.
7
This is sensible, shame people like you don't run for President
3
Minimum wage increases kill jobs. This have been proven time and time again, and is being proven yet again in cities across the nation. Yet the left is so wedded to its failed ideology that it can no longer separate fact from fantasy
1
It should be pointed out that this article completely ignores incentive effects of lower tax rates.
I don't know how large they would be, but after the so-called "Reagan tax cuts," individual income tax revenue as a percentage of GDP *increased*. Even at the 28% rate, individual income tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was higher than it was with much higher tax rates from 1951 thru 1981.
I don't know how large they would be, but after the so-called "Reagan tax cuts," individual income tax revenue as a percentage of GDP *increased*. Even at the 28% rate, individual income tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was higher than it was with much higher tax rates from 1951 thru 1981.
4
Mark, the short-term increase in revenue following the Reagan cuts was primarily caused by taxpayers shifting discretionary taxable income forward into the year with more favorable rates. It was roughly offset by abnormally lower revenues the prior year from lower reported income.
A similar opposite effect occurred as a result of the 1986 tax changes that closed many upper-income loopholes. Revenues from high-income individual taxpayers were lower afterward and higher before.
A similar opposite effect occurred as a result of the 1986 tax changes that closed many upper-income loopholes. Revenues from high-income individual taxpayers were lower afterward and higher before.
Actually, individual tax revenues as a percentage of GDP continued to be higher all the way through FY 2002, even though tax rates after the Clinton tax increase were still *much* lower than the tax rates through 1981, so it wasn't just a short-term increase.
1
Trump proposes to tax life insurance but not to tax estates.
This means Trump would tax middle-class widows and orphans, but not wealthy heirs and heiresses.
Sure, the rich play all kinds of games with life insurance as a way of getting around the estate tax. This behavior would stop under Trump, who would repeal Teddy Roosevelt's tax on only the largest estates.
Thus, the new tax on real estate proceeds will only fall on those people who need that money to live because someone close them died.
Trump makes sure the rich get to 'keep their wealth,' but the middle-class and poor --- who thought they were prudent in buying life insurance -- have to give up a portion of their wealth to the government because they were unlucky enough to have a parent or spouse who died.
Trump is a selfish salesman of the first order -- he always gets the better end of the bargain while claiming that you'll benefit too. Just ask the Bronx, Atlantic City and Scotland whether making 'a deal' with Trump was a smart move.
This means Trump would tax middle-class widows and orphans, but not wealthy heirs and heiresses.
Sure, the rich play all kinds of games with life insurance as a way of getting around the estate tax. This behavior would stop under Trump, who would repeal Teddy Roosevelt's tax on only the largest estates.
Thus, the new tax on real estate proceeds will only fall on those people who need that money to live because someone close them died.
Trump makes sure the rich get to 'keep their wealth,' but the middle-class and poor --- who thought they were prudent in buying life insurance -- have to give up a portion of their wealth to the government because they were unlucky enough to have a parent or spouse who died.
Trump is a selfish salesman of the first order -- he always gets the better end of the bargain while claiming that you'll benefit too. Just ask the Bronx, Atlantic City and Scotland whether making 'a deal' with Trump was a smart move.
4
This is the bait-and-switch that gave Trump whatever success he's had in real estate. He says things that "sound populist" but that are never coherent, let alone specific. But give him the power to implement his agenda and he'll favor those he always lived among and those he' s most comfortable with: the rich.
2
That's certainly what this tax plan seems to be saying.
1
Why should Trump's plan make any sense - after all he's a Republican. The whole party is dedicated to voodoo economics.
5
I am all for tax cuts! Yes! This is what I need. Especially the middle class, singles, who are just making $100,000. Can't even afford a home in California because taxes and property are too high. Lower taxes and we can save and purchase that home. Yes on tax cuts!
3
Anybody with even a lick of business sense would say that Trump's numbers don't add up and that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
Surely, Maria still wants the firefighters, police, water and sewer pipes, paved roads, air pollution control etc etc that protect that 'home in California.'
Who does Maria propose will pay for that -- no her, apparently -- to whom will she stick the bill?
But she's celebrating the miserly prospect of getting all these basic services without having to pay for them. That's Trumpism, not Americanism.
Surely, Maria still wants the firefighters, police, water and sewer pipes, paved roads, air pollution control etc etc that protect that 'home in California.'
Who does Maria propose will pay for that -- no her, apparently -- to whom will she stick the bill?
But she's celebrating the miserly prospect of getting all these basic services without having to pay for them. That's Trumpism, not Americanism.
1
Trump's plan will spend $180,000 giving a tax cut to someone making $1million a year. Luckily! There will still be $5000 left over for you! (A person making $100,000) If you really want to puke, add up how much the government will be spending so that people making $380 million (like Trump who currently pays 39%) can get their tax cut. Under his plan he will be paying a 15% business rate (as an independent contractor).
2
Woops, I wrote a comment earlier that said you would get a $5000 tax cut under Trump's plan, but actaully, singles making $100,000 will see their taxes increase by $1,800 a year. Unbelievable! His plan favors the super-rich vs. everyone else pretty aggressively.
1
It doesn't add up if you assume nothing changes in behavior or overall economic performance. A typical left wing Democrat perspective. Trump's plan means substantially higher economic growth and significantly more people working. Each person pays less, but we have higher aggregate revenue. Supply side economics work when you're trimming bloated failed economic policies like Obamacare and "stimulus programs" that left us with massively underutilized and underemployed resources. Including our people.
4
The failure of the economy after the Bush Tax Cuts prove that apetra and all members of the Laffer Curve Cult are delusional.
The facts bear it out -- tax cuts do not mean economic growth. That is particularly true when you have cut tax rates so much (during GW Bush) that the nation is now on the Lower Rates-Lower Revenue side of the curve.
[Don't forget it is a Curve! It bends back upon itself, and Laffer's fact-free magic can only happen on the Lowe Rates-Higher Revenue side of the curve. Cut rates too far (Reagan, 1981-82) and you cut yourself, and must be then forced to raise taxes (Reagan, 1984, and GHW Bush, 1989).
The facts bear it out -- tax cuts do not mean economic growth. That is particularly true when you have cut tax rates so much (during GW Bush) that the nation is now on the Lower Rates-Lower Revenue side of the curve.
[Don't forget it is a Curve! It bends back upon itself, and Laffer's fact-free magic can only happen on the Lowe Rates-Higher Revenue side of the curve. Cut rates too far (Reagan, 1981-82) and you cut yourself, and must be then forced to raise taxes (Reagan, 1984, and GHW Bush, 1989).
5
Please, in 25 words or less, tell me exactly, precisely WHY Obamacare is such a disaster.
1
The angry but clueless American middle class is not necessarily averse to the notion of more and more tax cuts and other goodies to be lavished on the 1% at public expense. The idea, however, appears to be temporarily out of fashion because it has been raised by a clown this time. More power to Donald Trump, Long live the Domald so the middle class may survive!
Trump disappointed me. I was expecting he will go against Republican thinking on taxes. I was expecting he will give big tax breaks for middle class and below, and increase taxes on the rich to 75%. Instead, he went the other direction. He started as an outsider and rapidly becoming an insider. Fiorina lied all her life and continuing the practice. Looks like Trump and Fiorina will soon become a foot note. Sorry to see the political entertainment season is coming to an end.
4
Took the words out of my mouth
Actually, we need a more progressive scheme starting at just above FPL. At least a nominal tax of 2% for the lowest rate climbing to higher rates as we progress.
I am a Republican. The Bush tax cut was a disaster. Not because it lowered rates but it eliminated the binding effect that everyone needs skin in the game.
I am a Republican. The Bush tax cut was a disaster. Not because it lowered rates but it eliminated the binding effect that everyone needs skin in the game.
Without doubt, Trump's tax plan would be great for Trump -- both financially and in attracting more voters. Would tax reductions result in economic growth that would offset loss of tax revenue? We've heard that argument espoused by Reagan and GW Bush to justify tax cuts, but somehow it never seems to work out that way.
4
So, finally we know why Mr. Trump is running for president. He wants to be able to pass on his fortune to his children and pay no taxes. This is the same guy who years ago suggested a wealth tax. The old Trump also was in favor of health insurance for everyone, now he wants to repeal Obamacare.
It was a good idea to attack the Hedge Fund Managers. Rather than going after all the rich he picked a pretty small group to malign. And then he gives them a tax cut hoping his misinformed and confused supporters don't notice.
But to be honest. All the GOP candidates are running on the same platform. Trump just says out loud what the others are planning. Tax cuts for the rich, deregulation of everything, take away health insurance from the middle class and poor, cut social security and medicare, etc. They're all the same.
It was a good idea to attack the Hedge Fund Managers. Rather than going after all the rich he picked a pretty small group to malign. And then he gives them a tax cut hoping his misinformed and confused supporters don't notice.
But to be honest. All the GOP candidates are running on the same platform. Trump just says out loud what the others are planning. Tax cuts for the rich, deregulation of everything, take away health insurance from the middle class and poor, cut social security and medicare, etc. They're all the same.
6
A GOP trojan horse? whodda thunk?
3
Trump is a shyster. He has the elixir that cures all. Trump is a filthy rich buffoon. Hopefully, those under his spell will wake up and find their way out of the rabbit hole.
2
With a nod to Krugman, it appears that much of Trump's appeal has resulted from matching up to the true preferences of his followers by offering sincere "cultural preservation" with populist economics, instead of the traditional Republican package of insincere "cultural preservation" with passionate economics for the wealthy. As such, Trump was considered an existential threat by the Republican donor class.
With this tax plan, Trump has fallen into line. This will make him more appealing to the establishment and less appealing to his current followers. It will be interesting to see which has the greater influence on his future success.
With this tax plan, Trump has fallen into line. This will make him more appealing to the establishment and less appealing to his current followers. It will be interesting to see which has the greater influence on his future success.
2
Trump's tax plan just shows that he understands how the wealthy hide their money,
So, what you are saying is that when we look past the bells and whistles [no pun intended], this is Republican business as usual, and a massive shifting of the wealth upwardly, right?
And who is surprised...?
And who is surprised...?
6
I was surprised. A lot of people out there win the "I told you so award" on this one. True colors of a greedy Trump showing through
And what did we expect from a self-serving, narcissistic promoter that spews nothing but bluff and bluster?
2
Sounds like most people think Trump prepared his tax plan without the help of accountants an lawyers. I think not. Might be a good idea for the media to ask Trump to show a chart on how income tax is collected in total from the last time the IRS published such information and compare his numbers to how it would be collected ,categorically, for a clear comparison, under his plan. We would also be able to see how the totals add up and compare to each other to determine if sufficient taxes would be collected. In any event a good honest chart using real data as a base and then saying what would Trump's tax plan do to the data if imposed on it would show.
You're asking Trump to show his tax plan's long form birth certificate! How dare you question the integrity of this paragon of virtue and altruistic public service! Why, I read that he once sent his chauffeur a car seat when his baby was born!
1
Whiteboard and Sharpies at the next debate!
It has been a tic at the rear of my conscious mind for a long time and it finally came to the front; Donald Trump's physical mannerism's and especially facial poses recall those projected to the world by Benito Mussolini in his heyday.
5
Of course the numbers don't add up. Republicans at this point have become little but looters and pillagers of the public treasury, grabbing what they can get for their own, while scattering distracting coins on the floor for everyone else, as they mount the national debt they scream and pretend to care about. Nothing fiscally responsible about them at all.
6
EPIC FAIL!
These are classic republican tax proposals - a tax system that bankrupts the government.
So, we know that perhaps only one part of it is serious - but don't know which part that is.
These are classic republican tax proposals - a tax system that bankrupts the government.
So, we know that perhaps only one part of it is serious - but don't know which part that is.
1
When I watched Trump talk about his tax plan I was kind of mystified by his claims of growth. It's almost as if he is just repeating the old lie that the less taxes you take in, the more money you get. This theory has been debunked by our rising debt for at least thepast two decades. We can see a micro example of how well this has worked in Kansas, yet people refuse to open their eyes.
3
No surprise, this is the holy grail of the Republicans.
This is the usual GOP tax cut heaven on steroids. Who wants to live in what's left of a nation with crapo schools, roads, infrastructure, sanitation etc., etc? Apparently, the super rich, who live off of everyone else's labor, perhaps in a city in the sky, just like in the sci fi stories. The Republican Party are traitors to the whole notion of "e pluribus unum."
6
Josh Barro you're a low energy loser what's the matter with you you're gonna do great under my tax plan it's terrific.
Since President Reagan's 1981 inauguration and the advent of voodoo Reaganomics (increase spending, cut taxes and borrow), the government's (and taxpayers') debt has ballooned from $930 billion to today's $18.15 trillion. And, during that same period, the debt's interest has cost $10.9 trillion. Also during that period, pseudo Republican fiscal conservatives have consistently evaded mentioning such numbers while promising and enacting numerous and obviously unaffordable tax cuts. If Trump was a true fiscally responsible conservative, his tax plan would also include a firm moratorium on any tax cuts until the debt and its interest has been significantly reduced and on a sure path to elimination. Our government should be the world's richest superpower and a creditor nation; instead, it is the world's greatest superborrower.
1
When are we going to claw back the trillions of dollars not declared by the rich at all but hidden in offshore accounts around the world?
3
Note to Mr. Bush: Doesn't all this come under "free stuff?
2
As the old saying goes, when the government money goes to the poor, it's socialism; when it goes to the rich, it's capitalism.
I would like to hear less about Trump and more about Bernie Sanders, the real phenomenon. There seems to be a news blackout on Sanders even though he is winning a greater part of the Democratic vote than Trump is the Republican.
8
And Sanders's ideas are worth reading about.
5
Well, here is the answer for what reason this presidential campaign is needed to Donald Trump. He simply lobbying his own interests, and he makes it quite shamelessly.
2
Simplifying the tax code, H&R Block is loving "Trumpie" tax plan.
I am just trying to put myself (I know dangerous) into the mind of the average Trump supporter who makes like $50,000 with none of these ultra-rich tax breaks. How do they square Mr. Trump's ACTUAL proposal with all his blather over the summer about how rich guys like him could afford to pay more taxes so that average Americans could get a tax cut?
From a federal budget standpoint, how can you afford to build massive walls along the border when you are not bringing in sufficient income? Oh yeah - Mexcico is going to pay for that after all of the illegal immigrants "self-deport."
And so it goes in the Republican fantasy land. It is remarkable that these people can get anyone to listen to them let alone take them seriously.
From a federal budget standpoint, how can you afford to build massive walls along the border when you are not bringing in sufficient income? Oh yeah - Mexcico is going to pay for that after all of the illegal immigrants "self-deport."
And so it goes in the Republican fantasy land. It is remarkable that these people can get anyone to listen to them let alone take them seriously.
3
The headline is ridiculously unfair. Why did you not mention, for example, that his proposal would have families making under 50k pay zero taxes? The idea is that tax loopholes account for many billions in avoided taxes and by removing them, richer people, who are the ones they primarily advantage, would end up paying more, or roughly the same, not less. Mr Barro has written a column to suit accountants and tax preparation companies who fear the effect of a simplified tax code.
4
Your comment, '"tax loopholes account for many billions in avoided taxes" prompts me to point out another - and many times larger - tax evasion benefiting all taxpayers. I refer to the government's (and taxpayers') $18.15 trillion debt of evaded/postponed taxes caused by our elected leaders annually refusing to levy sufficient taxes to fund the spending they approve as necessary. But, just since President Reagan's 1981 inauguration, the debt's interest has also cost $10.9 trillion so the total cost to date of the evaded/postponed taxes has already cost over $29 trillion. The US has become the world's greatest superborrower ever and its past time for the credit agencies to downgrade its credit rating.
Most families making under $ 50 K a year do not pay taxes now. Trump is not really doing anything new in this regard, while giving away billions to rich guys and corporations (more rich guys).
"But in truth the rich pay taxes on most of their income" That is the single most misleading statement I have seen in awhile. The tax code is long precisely because it contains more loopholes then Swiss cheese paid for by numerous special interests most of whom coincidentally happen to be wealthy. Your entire article is disingenuous and you know it.
5
I might be able to get behind their complaint that rates are too high, IF any of them actually paid those rates. Remember Warren Buffett, whose effective rate is 17%? His secretary pays more. Do you honestly think he's unusual?
3
Please cite ome facts? This article claims 88% is taxed on those with income from 500k to 10 mil 84% above, this is most. Actual fact, if you can refute this please please do so. Awaiting
They pay 68.3% of taxes, but earn 95% of all income. And,let's not forget that the bottom payers and earners pay a disproportionate share of sales tax and payroll tax.
http://circanews.com/news/us-wealth-concentrated-at-the-top
http://circanews.com/news/us-wealth-concentrated-at-the-top
Tax equally. It doesn't matter the source of income, it's all income - i.e., no special rates for "investment" income. Businesses taxed on gross profit, regardless of source. If the business is headquartered outside of the US, then taxed on gross profit of all sales within the US.
Individuals start paying taxes above (pick a number) say $30,000/yr. Rates adjust from 5% to 50%. You get deductions for spouse, kids (up to a maximum of 2.) No other deductions for anyone or anything (like mortgages and the like.) Inheritance tax kept above $1,000,000.00
Individuals start paying taxes above (pick a number) say $30,000/yr. Rates adjust from 5% to 50%. You get deductions for spouse, kids (up to a maximum of 2.) No other deductions for anyone or anything (like mortgages and the like.) Inheritance tax kept above $1,000,000.00
If you tax only business earnings stateside, the businesses will move overseas.
1
I think I should get extra-special deductions for having two spouses.
1
The countries in the world write the lowest tax rates for the rich have the lowest standards of living, highest inequality and most corruption.
The countries writhe highest rates have high standards of living, lower inequality, and and have better business environments.
Countries that tax the rich are nice places to live.
The countries writhe highest rates have high standards of living, lower inequality, and and have better business environments.
Countries that tax the rich are nice places to live.
10
A 25% corporate rate & 25% rich rate would work better considering that President Obama and Governor Romney proposed the 25% rate during the 2012 election and Obama pushed it again in 2014 or so.
25% is more attainable in the short run since doesn't not shock the system as Josh alludes to throughout the article. However it doesn't include the hypotheticals that become realization once money is freed up. When we have more to spend, we tend to spend some or all of it. This is human nature and it's not just the poor & middle class who spend most of their incomes.
The rich may have more income to save but when more income is freed up, they will spend more too! Look at credit ratings profiles based on upper incomes because the rich carry high balances and more than 45% of them pay the minimum amounts or slightly more. Very few pay the balance in full so they too participate in revolving balances and if the rich have more to spend, most shall do so.
I assume the rich starts at $150,000 or double the average income for a New Yorker. Senator Chuck Schumer argues that middle class ends at $500,000/year. Considering the cost of living this weighs in favor of my argument.
Presidents Kennedy and Reagan lowered tax rates and we saw economic booms plus those eras had growth industries and current projections suggest the glut shall end in 2017 to 2018 so Trump's model could be modified & would be because Congress has greater control than any blowhard candidate would ever admit.
25% is more attainable in the short run since doesn't not shock the system as Josh alludes to throughout the article. However it doesn't include the hypotheticals that become realization once money is freed up. When we have more to spend, we tend to spend some or all of it. This is human nature and it's not just the poor & middle class who spend most of their incomes.
The rich may have more income to save but when more income is freed up, they will spend more too! Look at credit ratings profiles based on upper incomes because the rich carry high balances and more than 45% of them pay the minimum amounts or slightly more. Very few pay the balance in full so they too participate in revolving balances and if the rich have more to spend, most shall do so.
I assume the rich starts at $150,000 or double the average income for a New Yorker. Senator Chuck Schumer argues that middle class ends at $500,000/year. Considering the cost of living this weighs in favor of my argument.
Presidents Kennedy and Reagan lowered tax rates and we saw economic booms plus those eras had growth industries and current projections suggest the glut shall end in 2017 to 2018 so Trump's model could be modified & would be because Congress has greater control than any blowhard candidate would ever admit.
1
So the rich have become the job creators again...except we they aren't. That they don't always "spend" their money is only part of that problem. If you really want to see people spend money. let lower income groups have more, or (I know you'll find this offensive) have the government spend it on infrastructure. And speaking of taxes, when Clinton raised tax rates what happened? There were other periods when tax rates were much higher and America prospered. And I mean America not just a small group at the top.
1
What evidence do we have that when the rich have more money they buy more US goods and services?
1
Actually studies prove the rich and middle class spend more when capital is freed up. The TIMES has published this more than once. You people think that the rich should be punished for success and you don't deserve the right to discriminate while damaging the economy which also creates more poor people. Cuba, Russia, China and every other failed commie country tried to fix the poor problem taxing people to death. Talent moved or became complacent producing less and what they produced was and still is inferior to US made goods.
Infrastcture is no problem, but people like you fail to comprehend how to contain waste. with liberals, waste is only a problem when we have a republican president but our side has more responsible types but we have a few wasters too but not like the failed liberal.
When Clinton raised taxes the economy slowed, charts of GDP, output and consumer spending prove this. You've been lied to by corrupt media dolts. Same happened when Reagan raised taxes, when he then lowered taxes, the economy took off. Clinton took Newts advice and reduced some regulations plus we had a major tech/internet boom. Plus the usual wall street corruption that liberals never want to prosecute........that is liberals in the DC area.
We prospered when Kennedy lowered taxes, Reagan too. I have to reiterate this because the proof documented in charts everywhere. Clinton benefitted from Reagan's success.
Infrastcture is no problem, but people like you fail to comprehend how to contain waste. with liberals, waste is only a problem when we have a republican president but our side has more responsible types but we have a few wasters too but not like the failed liberal.
When Clinton raised taxes the economy slowed, charts of GDP, output and consumer spending prove this. You've been lied to by corrupt media dolts. Same happened when Reagan raised taxes, when he then lowered taxes, the economy took off. Clinton took Newts advice and reduced some regulations plus we had a major tech/internet boom. Plus the usual wall street corruption that liberals never want to prosecute........that is liberals in the DC area.
We prospered when Kennedy lowered taxes, Reagan too. I have to reiterate this because the proof documented in charts everywhere. Clinton benefitted from Reagan's success.
Is it just me or does the Trump tax plan sound a bit self serving. I would be very curious to know exactly what kind of financial windfall his plan would be him personally, his businesses and his children. My guess would be substantial. So, is this in the best interest of the country (since Republican economics have a long history of simply not working) or is this plan only in the best interest of Trump?
4
Reagan's plan worked. People try to blame Bush bit the fact is Bush inherited Clinton's mess which includes stock scams, bailing out a hedge fund and the Asian Contagion. Actually, neither Clinton nor Bush should get most ot the blame, Congress and Wall Street should get the bulk of the blame but thus far we can't prosecute wall street thanks to congress and we rarely see politicians prosecuted either. The banks gamble and we pay for it.
Yes Trump will benefit as property values and incomes rise. Rent and lease rates will go up. But we should also question if he's the right candidate because he doesn't invest much in the stock market. Does he not see the value or fears the risk. It has also limited his growth yet he gambled 4 times with casino madness.
Yes Trump will benefit as property values and incomes rise. Rent and lease rates will go up. But we should also question if he's the right candidate because he doesn't invest much in the stock market. Does he not see the value or fears the risk. It has also limited his growth yet he gambled 4 times with casino madness.
1
"Reagan's plan worked."
Said who, the unicorn or the mermaid?
Said who, the unicorn or the mermaid?
1
You are simply deluded to believe that Reaganomics worked.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/opinion/paul-krugman-presidents-and-th...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/05/opinion/paul-krugman-presidents-and-th...
1
Trump, like so many choose, to ignore the existence of numerous foreign based corporations doing business in the US and offer no solutions to mitigate their tax avoidance - tax avoidance with a unique twist. When they shift pre-tax US profits overseas, those profits are not subject to repatriation - not with a foreign parent. Those untaxed US profits are gone, never to be returned to the US and taxed where they were earned. What about those profits Donald, Jeb, Marco, Ben and you too Bernie?
3
Agreed. No one has mentioned such tax expenditures yet. But in my own view, though tax expenditure reform will not solve the entire deficit, it is a big step in the right direction, as nearly a trillion dollars goes out of the treasury each year as tax expenditures. Reform there is desperately needed before we go belly up.
As for the corporate tax, I suspect not a single corporation pays the advertised 35%, but like so many huge corporations pay nothing at all, or even get credits back from the government. I would set the rate at 45% and then negotiate with each corporation for lower rates, awarding one percentage point with the removal of one major business deduction for every one percent deduction.
Tax deductions for business are nothing but taxpayer subsidies for private enterprise, which seems as if it cannot make business work at all unless they are subsidized by the taxpayers.
Enough is enough. Put an end to this house of cards.
As for the corporate tax, I suspect not a single corporation pays the advertised 35%, but like so many huge corporations pay nothing at all, or even get credits back from the government. I would set the rate at 45% and then negotiate with each corporation for lower rates, awarding one percentage point with the removal of one major business deduction for every one percent deduction.
Tax deductions for business are nothing but taxpayer subsidies for private enterprise, which seems as if it cannot make business work at all unless they are subsidized by the taxpayers.
Enough is enough. Put an end to this house of cards.
3
People who look only at their own benefit in this tax cut proposal of Trump's, are missing the forest for the trees. It will be impossible to repatriate corporate profits. Soveriegnties around the world suffer with the same issues of money leaving the country into some virtual bank in some remote island. The cat is already out of the bag. The system has created a huge problem for the world, that is now highly connected economically. Watch the stock market as it goes down. Oil is tumbling as renewables rise but banks, war profiteers and fossil fuel companies fight for its survival. Hedge funds are the new banks. They are like packs of wolves, scavanging the world for victims. The new trade treaties done in secret by corporate lawyers could seal the world's fate. No word from Trump on this topic. Europe is balking. We should too. I want a candidate that will face down this rising corporate hegemony. It looks like Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein to me.
10
Another Fantasy Island tax plan designed to attract support from those who think only of themselves and are unable to see past their own noses. Out of the mouths of those who complain that we ( please remember that our government and our collective needs are us) need to live within our means, comes a plan that significantly reduces our ability to do so, by reducing revenues, while urging greater military expenditures because we must project Strength, while promising that the reduced revenues will produce tremendous growth that will solve everything. What is it that we call those who keep doing the same thing expecting different results; yes I recall, we call them insane. That is an apt description of this plan.
16
While a President Trump might have a Congress willing to pass his tax cuts, he won't be able to convince enough of the 535 elected officials in Congress to reduce, let alone eliminate, the tax cuts granted to everyone (albeit targeted to a select few). There are so many vested interests linked to those tax specialties that would be impossible.
This is the old fashioned Bait-and-Switch just to get the deal done. I fear that Mr. Trump has not only an inflated perception of himself, but a very inflated perception of the power of the Presidency. He isn't used to getting actual agreement from others let alone getting the "herd of cats" that is Congress to agree to any of his legislative agenda. He can't fire them or make them do what he wants done.
If elected President, I estimate that Trump will last about 90 days before he resigns in total frustration.
This is the old fashioned Bait-and-Switch just to get the deal done. I fear that Mr. Trump has not only an inflated perception of himself, but a very inflated perception of the power of the Presidency. He isn't used to getting actual agreement from others let alone getting the "herd of cats" that is Congress to agree to any of his legislative agenda. He can't fire them or make them do what he wants done.
If elected President, I estimate that Trump will last about 90 days before he resigns in total frustration.
4
I could care less what Trump or any other wealthy person pays in tax. If my tax bill comes down as a result of his plan, then it's a good one.
If he can get corporations to repatriate even a small portion of their profits stashed overseas, then this will be a huge win, with incentives to invest that cash here at home, everyone will benefit.
If he can get corporations to repatriate even a small portion of their profits stashed overseas, then this will be a huge win, with incentives to invest that cash here at home, everyone will benefit.
@greylag44
Doha
The responsible Republican approach to public finance. LOL
Doha
The responsible Republican approach to public finance. LOL
7
If you want to repatriate money from abroad, tax it at 90% with assets in the US frozen until it's paid.
It's time to stop letting billionaires write the rules.
It's time to stop letting billionaires write the rules.
2
Yup, they really are the party of the people, eh?
1
One can quibble about the tax rates but the basic concept of simplification of our tax code, reducing taxes on wage earners, and making the corporate income tax competitive with the rest of the world makes total sense. And most important - the naysayers and belittlers have no alternative to our tax codes which strangle investment and economic growth.
A change is essential. A family earning $300k should not be paying half their income out to taxes, as they do now when including FICA, etc. Even with the lower tax bracket they would still have to pay those taxes. And keeping US corporations from becoming foreign should be a priority in any tax reform. Trump is right on the general fix and implementable with some modifying. Makes sense that'll promote economic growth too - something the anti-business Democrats keep stalling.
A change is essential. A family earning $300k should not be paying half their income out to taxes, as they do now when including FICA, etc. Even with the lower tax bracket they would still have to pay those taxes. And keeping US corporations from becoming foreign should be a priority in any tax reform. Trump is right on the general fix and implementable with some modifying. Makes sense that'll promote economic growth too - something the anti-business Democrats keep stalling.
1
Tom Paine
Charleston,
Get someone to explain to you the difference between a nominal and effective corporation tax. The anti business democrats? So why was GDP shrinking at the rate of 9% a quarter at the end of 2008 when a Republican administration was in office?
Charleston,
Get someone to explain to you the difference between a nominal and effective corporation tax. The anti business democrats? So why was GDP shrinking at the rate of 9% a quarter at the end of 2008 when a Republican administration was in office?
8
A family earning $300K a year would be in the top 1.5% of all income earners. Pretty sweet!
Even if they pay half their income in taxes -- highly debatable -- that would leave them with $150,000 a year to spend, or about $12,000 a month. Or $3000 a week.
Most American families do not EARN (net after taxes) $3000 a MONTH, so pardon us if we don't feel any pity for your "typical rich family".
Even if they pay half their income in taxes -- highly debatable -- that would leave them with $150,000 a year to spend, or about $12,000 a month. Or $3000 a week.
Most American families do not EARN (net after taxes) $3000 a MONTH, so pardon us if we don't feel any pity for your "typical rich family".
1
Paine, for you to assert that "A family earning $300k should not be paying half their income out to taxes..." is to state a bold faced Lie.
It is a Popular Lie in right wing circles, but it is a Lie none the less.
It is a Popular Lie in right wing circles, but it is a Lie none the less.
1
Extremely Disappointing plan by Trump.
I had my hopes up based on prior statements he had made. He had proposed a net wealth tax some years back. That particular proposal was crazy but it led me to believe he at least would support an estate tax. I was also hoping his simplification of the tax code would mean getting rid of adjustments to income. For example, employer paid health insurance that is excluded from income. Or any and all deferred compensation plans like IRAs and 401Ks. As I understand this article all of that remains under Trump's plan.
That is before you even get to the regressive payroll tax system (SS and Medicare) that the rich hardly pay but crushes middle and lower income earners. Apparently Trump doesn't want to touch that.
I had my hopes up based on prior statements he had made. He had proposed a net wealth tax some years back. That particular proposal was crazy but it led me to believe he at least would support an estate tax. I was also hoping his simplification of the tax code would mean getting rid of adjustments to income. For example, employer paid health insurance that is excluded from income. Or any and all deferred compensation plans like IRAs and 401Ks. As I understand this article all of that remains under Trump's plan.
That is before you even get to the regressive payroll tax system (SS and Medicare) that the rich hardly pay but crushes middle and lower income earners. Apparently Trump doesn't want to touch that.
5
Bush's tax cuts destroyed the United States.
21
Reagan's deregulation started the process.
1
Many assume that his "loyalty oath to the GOP" in meeting with Reince Priebus (2015.09.03) was exchanged for a guaranteed VP slot for Donald Trump no matter which other is selected as presidential candidate. This would ease Him into a presidential run himself in 2020 or 2024 at the latest.
1
Tax cuts or tax increases. It doesn't matter much what he says or proposes. We just have to remember that to be trusted, you have to be trustworthy.
6
It's all smoke and mirrors, contrived to distract us from the TPP debacle about to descend on us.
Pay no attention to that blustering man; campaign promises (and threats) are never binding.
Pay no attention to that blustering man; campaign promises (and threats) are never binding.
7
I wondered when Blow-your-own-Trumpet's populist PR was going to disappear like mist dissolving in the noonday sun. Now you see it now you don't. This 'plan' is just to secure himself. But will his followers realize they've been Trumped? Not all of them, but some might. I can only hope...
2
So if Trump becomes President and rams through this plan, his campaign expenditures will have been a good investment. He would get a good return by his lowered taxes.
34
How right. Simple to see too.
Trump's party believes that the purpose of self-government is redistribution of wealth and control-over-incomes -- UPWARD.
Cutting taxes for the already wealthy has always resulted in more borrowing of the cash from the same group of people (let me see, I cut your taxes $10 and then I need to borrow the cash from you by giving you a marketable asset (a Treasury bond) - the math of this is a positive $20 improvement in your Net Worth in the current period, while also giving the already wealthy claim/control-over future incomes too.
It is the party of redistribution - upward - simple to see.
Oh the other party - it balances budgets and even after the most horrendous recession has still has acted to lower annual deficits (which would basically go away now if the FED would redeem its bonds and remit to Treasury, offsetting the need to borrow).
Trump's party believes that the purpose of self-government is redistribution of wealth and control-over-incomes -- UPWARD.
Cutting taxes for the already wealthy has always resulted in more borrowing of the cash from the same group of people (let me see, I cut your taxes $10 and then I need to borrow the cash from you by giving you a marketable asset (a Treasury bond) - the math of this is a positive $20 improvement in your Net Worth in the current period, while also giving the already wealthy claim/control-over future incomes too.
It is the party of redistribution - upward - simple to see.
Oh the other party - it balances budgets and even after the most horrendous recession has still has acted to lower annual deficits (which would basically go away now if the FED would redeem its bonds and remit to Treasury, offsetting the need to borrow).
1
In 2008 all the Democrats promised their constituents Health Care.
In 2015 all the Republicans promise their constituents Wealth Care.
Why are Republicans always trying to fudge the numbers? Trump and Bush's tax cut plans only make sense to people who don't get math.
In 2015 all the Republicans promise their constituents Wealth Care.
Why are Republicans always trying to fudge the numbers? Trump and Bush's tax cut plans only make sense to people who don't get math.
34
Yet another piece of "advertising" from The Donald. If his numbers do not add up, how can anyone call this a real plan? Kansas tried slashing its tax structure with the same foolish promise of a resulting nirvana economy. That turned out to be a bunch of hokum. So is this "plan".
Dump the Trump. He is a huckster of the first magnitude, nothing more.
Dump the Trump. He is a huckster of the first magnitude, nothing more.
36
Trump reminds me of J. Edgar Hoover who famously sad, " The business of America is business". Shortly after saying those words, the country went into the Great Depression. Running a construction business is not the same is running a superpower. Can someone tell him he is "Fired"?!
18
It was Coolidge who said that actually
4
Just one problem here: you're thinking of Herbert Hoover, not J. Edgar. But it wasn't J. Edgar or Herbert who said "The business of America is business." It was, famously, Calvin Coolidge.
8
Calvin Coolidge said that, not J Edgar Hoover. I agree with Eli that government and business are two separate entities, and expertise in one doesn't translate to success in the other.
Donny Frump is up to his old tricks. Surprise, surprise. tax cuts for Frump.
6
Mr. Trump is not a populist. He is a self-promoting carnival barker.
29
The Times should create or gather a representative sampling of types of taxpayers, from poor to rich, and calculate the total tax paid by each (including income tax, property taxes, sales taxes, and excise taxes) with our current tax laws and with any proposed changes. Without this, we do not really know what is going on, and perhaps that is the idea behind how tax changes are covered.
6
I can see why Trump majored in real estate management at the Wharton School. Since he was a transfer student, I guess he missed those classes on basic accounting and taxation.
Once again, the Trumpster speaks out of both sides of his face. He even out-Jebs Jeb!, unless by predicating the plan on a growth rate of 6%, he just wants to show he is high-energy and can tell "taller" tales than sleepy Bush.
Once again, the Trumpster speaks out of both sides of his face. He even out-Jebs Jeb!, unless by predicating the plan on a growth rate of 6%, he just wants to show he is high-energy and can tell "taller" tales than sleepy Bush.
19
Taxes fund our society. If this thought bubble becomes US policy it will guarantee much faster increases in income and wealth inequality. It will see the budget deficit sharply rise while government debt will again take off.
Is there any empirical evidence that backs up tax cuts causing a permanent jump in economic growth?
The evidence from previous tax cuts is that it increases the wealth of those at the top end while lowering government revenue significantly. How many neutral tax experts and economists have backed up Trump's tax cuts thought bubble?
How much would Donald Trump gain from his proposed tax cuts?
Is there any empirical evidence that backs up tax cuts causing a permanent jump in economic growth?
The evidence from previous tax cuts is that it increases the wealth of those at the top end while lowering government revenue significantly. How many neutral tax experts and economists have backed up Trump's tax cuts thought bubble?
How much would Donald Trump gain from his proposed tax cuts?
17
No the evidence goes the other way. The only evidence was Laffer's curve drawn on a napkin back in the early 80s. Maybe late 70s.
3
Laffer Curve Logic and the Lack of Evidence for It
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/01/the-new-laffer....
Proof that this tax fantasy of 1978 was just that: Fantasy.
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/01/the-new-laffer....
Proof that this tax fantasy of 1978 was just that: Fantasy.
1
I sometimes think we are in a country full of 6 year olds, with all the people who gleefully imagine how wonderful it would be if we didn't pay taxes. Yes indeed! Just think how wonderful it would be if there were no taxes to pay for social security, medicare, emergency rooms in public hospitals, fire fighters, policemen, teachers, highway and bridge maintenance and no infrastructure spending, air traffic controllers, disaster relief, etc. The list goes on and on. Certainly some of our tax dollars go to the wrong things, such as our endless wars overseas, but to think that we would have a better country if all our taxes were cut to nothing is ludicrous. If people want to live in a country where people don't pay any taxes, they should move to a banana republic. I would prefer that people, particularly the rich, paid more taxes, so we could have a quality of life even approaching what it is in more "civilized" countries like Denmark and France. There people have universal healthcare, don't worry they'll be eating cat food when they are old, free education, high speed trains, bridges and roads that aren't falling apart. They may have problems there, but at least they're adult to know that you can't get something for nothing.
71
OK, all this shows us is that he is as useless about economics and the simple facts of how a strong working government is financed, as the rest of the GOTP. When are these people going to learn that a complex society works best when it works for everyone, not just the very few, who already are doing fine, or have too much already.
The Right pretty much sees the role of government as a means to empower the Rich, facilitate unchecked Capitalism by unfettering large Corporations to their heart's desire, subjugate and crush the many, all while channeling unlimited funding to the military.
There is decades of hard won experience and vast amounts of factual data demonstrating that a viable society simply cannot work this way. Insisting it works because, "I am rich and I feel fine," is just pathetic self delusion. It seems they know it perfectly well, and no simply longer care.
The hard Truth emerging here is that the Rich and Powerful really do want it this way. Their America The Beautiful is a land of gated communities, islands of staggering wealth, amidst a vast stormy sea of poverty, despair, inequality, and social unrest. At this point, they are not even trying to appeal to the nation as a whole anymore. In their America, a viable, aware, strong, and educated Democracy is not even remotely a requirement anymore.
Is Democracy dead to the GOTP? Just watch them and listen... it most certainly is.
Do they want a viable working government? Not even remotely!
The Right pretty much sees the role of government as a means to empower the Rich, facilitate unchecked Capitalism by unfettering large Corporations to their heart's desire, subjugate and crush the many, all while channeling unlimited funding to the military.
There is decades of hard won experience and vast amounts of factual data demonstrating that a viable society simply cannot work this way. Insisting it works because, "I am rich and I feel fine," is just pathetic self delusion. It seems they know it perfectly well, and no simply longer care.
The hard Truth emerging here is that the Rich and Powerful really do want it this way. Their America The Beautiful is a land of gated communities, islands of staggering wealth, amidst a vast stormy sea of poverty, despair, inequality, and social unrest. At this point, they are not even trying to appeal to the nation as a whole anymore. In their America, a viable, aware, strong, and educated Democracy is not even remotely a requirement anymore.
Is Democracy dead to the GOTP? Just watch them and listen... it most certainly is.
Do they want a viable working government? Not even remotely!
24
Not a single mention that every single person earning less than $50,000 would pay $0 in income taxes under Trump's plan (a significant decrease from today)? I know there are a lot of give-aways to the rich that are worth calling out, but fair reporting would have at least mentioned this fact.
5
It's $50K for married couples; presumably $25K for individuals. That's about the point where a person is paying minimal tax, anyway. In particular, a person who has substantial deductions from a Sched E, where there is rental unit income helping to pay the mortgage and utilities, the tax my be as low as $0.
The article does mention that married couples earning less than $50k would pay $0 in income tax.
3
For single people it's only $25,000. Married couples are taxed 0% $50k or below. It's in paragraph #11.
3
Supply side Economics does not work people.....stop pushing it and come up with something that does
15
There is nothing new under the GOP sun. Another "candidate" runs to cut his/her taxes.
9
Every Republican Tax Proposal ends up being a windfall tax cut for Millionaires and Billionaires, they just can't help themselves.
Serving the rich is built into Republican DNA, that's who they care about.
Serving the rich is built into Republican DNA, that's who they care about.
25
Feudalism at its finest.
19
This is a tax plan bought and paid for by the Committee to Anoint Grover Norquist as Patron Saint of the Tea Party, aka the end-of-the-American- Republic-as-we-know-it.
I'm beginning to think what Trump signed last week wasn't a pledge not to run a 3rd party candidacy, but one of Norquist's de rigeur 'loyalty oaths' to destroy governm...er, not raise taxes...by appealing the people's greed.
I'm beginning to think what Trump signed last week wasn't a pledge not to run a 3rd party candidacy, but one of Norquist's de rigeur 'loyalty oaths' to destroy governm...er, not raise taxes...by appealing the people's greed.
7
I like Trump and think he is the only real choice we have in the coming Presidential election seeing as the other two parties are completely bought and paid for by the elite. However, I find his tax plan to be really disappointing. Was this the best he could do?
Obviously.
7
Jack, Senator Sanders does not fall into your description of " bought and paid for
by the elite" Trump is the elite, just bought a paid for by himself?
by the elite" Trump is the elite, just bought a paid for by himself?
1) Since the guy can't do math, he probably put this out there to allow those who can to do it. He will probably issue a revision at some point. Given the field of GOP candidates, I can't see him getting knocked out of the race.
2) Using the foreign income elements of the tax code to get companies back is interesting.
3) Reducing taxation on more lower income people is humane.
4) The plutocratic elimination of the estate tax is not surprising, but the tax should stay.
4) We need more brackets, not fewer, and we need a more progressive system that covers the cost of good governance.
2) Using the foreign income elements of the tax code to get companies back is interesting.
3) Reducing taxation on more lower income people is humane.
4) The plutocratic elimination of the estate tax is not surprising, but the tax should stay.
4) We need more brackets, not fewer, and we need a more progressive system that covers the cost of good governance.
6
I remember a time when the Republican party stood for real fiscal responsibility and real national strides toward greatness. Dwight Eisenhower signed the Interstate Highway Act and supported the creation of NASA.
Richard Nixon supported the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Clean Air Act of 1970 as well as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Nixon also opened relations with China, a much more dangerous adversary than Iran could ever hope to be.
This was when governance meant government action not overseeing the decline of the US into a third world nation by coddling the wealthy from responsibility as citizens.
Richard Nixon supported the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Clean Air Act of 1970 as well as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Nixon also opened relations with China, a much more dangerous adversary than Iran could ever hope to be.
This was when governance meant government action not overseeing the decline of the US into a third world nation by coddling the wealthy from responsibility as citizens.
27
Who knows it better than Trump to milk the system. Did'nt take long to show his true colors. How could he have more taxes on the rich? It would hurt him too - a lot. And we all know he is a businessman above all else. Profits and greed first. The Hedge Fund Managers must heave a sigh of relief. Now that it is in the open, I am awaiting his poll numbers. He is now just a mean, racist, misogyst narcissist. No more the maverick. Just another one of the 1% with a nasty streak.
19
He always was just another 1% guy. But with a motor mouth rattle that swept up low information sorts who dream of things that will never be.
The guy 1) "made" his money by inheriting it; 2) runs casinos, i.e. businesses that makes money by duping people into thinking they will get something for free. What other kind of tax plan do you expect?
32
A billionaire who brags about being "really rich" released a tax plan that would greatly benefit really rich people. Shocking.
The real news here is that the same people who have been crying about the deficit for the past five years are now backing a guy who would increase it exponentially.
The real news here is that the same people who have been crying about the deficit for the past five years are now backing a guy who would increase it exponentially.
26
How in the world can Obama supporters look at what the Obama economy has done to the American middle class and critique anyone's economic policy?
- 91 million Americans gave up on finding work during the Obama presidency.
- 19 trillion dollar Obama deficit
- Poverty, long term unemployment soaring in Black community during Obama presidency
- 1 in 4 Black children in America are starving during the Obama presidency (USDA)
- Healthcare costs climbing, healthcare less affordable for more Americans after Obamacare than before.
- 91 million Americans gave up on finding work during the Obama presidency.
- 19 trillion dollar Obama deficit
- Poverty, long term unemployment soaring in Black community during Obama presidency
- 1 in 4 Black children in America are starving during the Obama presidency (USDA)
- Healthcare costs climbing, healthcare less affordable for more Americans after Obamacare than before.
8
And I suppose the Republican right wing had nothing to do with these "facts"?
11
There are 156 million people in the U.S. labor force, , but "91 million Americans gave up on finding work"? Wow!
6
It's not enough to just quote present numbers: you have to put them in context. Are things improving or getting worse? I just looked up some food security statistics and things have improved from 2011 to now (following a sharp uptick in 2008 for obvious reasons): http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-i...
3
So Trump is running to line his own multi-billionaire pockets. That figures. It's like the Kochs supporting candidates who will let them line their pockets with the Keystone oil pipeline tar sands fields and move up from the #3 polluters in the country to even higher rank. Trump's pure fascism positions on mass deportation of 11 million men, women and children and his other impossible positions - the largest wall in human history which he has zero idea how to pay for - fall into the insanity world view. Personal profit seems to be the other piece of the puzzle.
Citizens United and voter suppression by the Supreme Court and Republicans have almost destroyed democracy in this country. Lunacy on the far right and the Hastert Rule have resulted in the most dysfunctional Congress in history.
People should stop bashing Hillary and support sanity, better Supreme Court choices, women's rights, minority rights, etc. or this country will become unrecognizable.
Citizens United and voter suppression by the Supreme Court and Republicans have almost destroyed democracy in this country. Lunacy on the far right and the Hastert Rule have resulted in the most dysfunctional Congress in history.
People should stop bashing Hillary and support sanity, better Supreme Court choices, women's rights, minority rights, etc. or this country will become unrecognizable.
11
Trump is just being a good politician: tell people what he thinks they want to hear: "I'm going to put more money in your pockets by lowering your taxes".
In effect, trying to buy people's votes.
I have no trouble believing Mr. Barro's assertion that Trump's tax proposals are mathematically impossible and will add significantly to the national debt while lining the pockets of his rich cronies (like they really need more money as opposed to most struggling middle class families in this country).
Then he has the unmitigated gall to go back on his statement that (paraphrasing a little here) "the hedge fund guys are really gonna hate me when they see my plan raise their taxes". So instead, the hedge fund guys will actually get a tax break too in Trump's tax plan.
It galls me that so many people are supporting Trump when he repeatedly makes unrealistic and not well thought out campaign promises. In that regard Trumo is a very dangerous individual and certainly not anybody we would want a POTUS.
No, Trump is better off running his own company where he can do as he pleases and not be accountable to anyone but himself.
In effect, trying to buy people's votes.
I have no trouble believing Mr. Barro's assertion that Trump's tax proposals are mathematically impossible and will add significantly to the national debt while lining the pockets of his rich cronies (like they really need more money as opposed to most struggling middle class families in this country).
Then he has the unmitigated gall to go back on his statement that (paraphrasing a little here) "the hedge fund guys are really gonna hate me when they see my plan raise their taxes". So instead, the hedge fund guys will actually get a tax break too in Trump's tax plan.
It galls me that so many people are supporting Trump when he repeatedly makes unrealistic and not well thought out campaign promises. In that regard Trumo is a very dangerous individual and certainly not anybody we would want a POTUS.
No, Trump is better off running his own company where he can do as he pleases and not be accountable to anyone but himself.
10
Can't wait for Dr. Paul Krugman to carve up this gift to the .00001% in his next column. When you cut taxes, a corresponding decrease in revenue is the result. The government can't repair America's dangerously aging infrastructure without revenue from taxes. Trump seems to think we're all stupid. If we elect him, we are.
18
And yet ALL other media outlets, including WSJ and CBS are reporting:
"The Trump plan would eliminate income taxes for millions of households, lower the tax rate on all businesses to 15% and change tax treatment of companies’ overseas earnings.
Under the Trump plan, no federal income tax would be levied against individuals earning less than $25,000 and married couples earning less than $50,000. The Trump campaign estimates that would reduce taxes to zero for 31 million households that currently pay at least some income tax. The highest individual income-tax rate would be 25%, compared with the current 39.6% rate.
Many middle-income households would have a lower tax rate under Mr. Trump’s proposal, but because high-income households generally pay income tax at much higher rates, his proposed across-the-board rate cut could have a positive impact on them, too. For example, an analysis of Jeb Bush’s plan—taxing individuals’ incomes at no more than 28%—by the business-backed Tax Foundation found that the biggest percentage winners in after-tax income would be the top 1% of earners.
Mr. Trump’s plan appears designed to help him, as the GOP front-runner, cement his standing as a populist—though that message is complicated by the fact that the billionaire, like other Republican leaders, would eliminate the estate tax."
"The Trump plan would eliminate income taxes for millions of households, lower the tax rate on all businesses to 15% and change tax treatment of companies’ overseas earnings.
Under the Trump plan, no federal income tax would be levied against individuals earning less than $25,000 and married couples earning less than $50,000. The Trump campaign estimates that would reduce taxes to zero for 31 million households that currently pay at least some income tax. The highest individual income-tax rate would be 25%, compared with the current 39.6% rate.
Many middle-income households would have a lower tax rate under Mr. Trump’s proposal, but because high-income households generally pay income tax at much higher rates, his proposed across-the-board rate cut could have a positive impact on them, too. For example, an analysis of Jeb Bush’s plan—taxing individuals’ incomes at no more than 28%—by the business-backed Tax Foundation found that the biggest percentage winners in after-tax income would be the top 1% of earners.
Mr. Trump’s plan appears designed to help him, as the GOP front-runner, cement his standing as a populist—though that message is complicated by the fact that the billionaire, like other Republican leaders, would eliminate the estate tax."
5
Consider the source....as my mother used to say "what can you expect from a pig but a grunt". His plan truly benefits him and is based on erroneous assumptions.
2
The guy lies to people about his interest in helping the working class out, then puts out a tax plan that lets the wealthy off the hook even more than they already are. He is definitely in the right party. We need to return to the days of middle class prosperity when tax codes helped to balance the advantages of the rich. If you want to live like a Republican, vote Democrat.
13
The Trump Tax Plan may well be everything Mr. Trump said it would be or it may not. But the Upshot attack on his Plan is lacking in any factual evaluation and loses itself in generalities that appear to be nothing more than a series of empty broadsides.
b
b
3
Tax cuts have been so successful at destroying the economy and the government. Republicans are mental midgets in my opinion.
14
why do you waste time giving credibility to this plan? Everyone gets something. It's not revenue neutral. It will increase the deficit by billions of dollars. when are reporters going to stop giving him a pass his rediculous ideas and do some real homework on the costs.
No the Mexicans the Chinese Japanese nor anyone else will pick up the tab.
No the Mexicans the Chinese Japanese nor anyone else will pick up the tab.
3
Oh well. Looks like this rips a big hole in the Trump hot air balloon. Color me sad, our first dates went so well Don...
Time for me to go home to my Bernie.
Time for me to go home to my Bernie.
7
I already pay 0% income tax.... yes, I'm that poor, so I don't need Donald Trump.
Nor do I need him hiding behind my threadbare skirts because he wants to do himself a favor and cut his own taxes ( see John McDonald in the comment below. And, 'full disclosure', I have no idea who the gentleman is, but he appears to have done his homework, as do many in these comments).
This sounds like the "Doughnut Hole Plan". If he's saying, Ohh, I'll take care of the poor... but it turns out he's really taking care of the rich - then the middle-class had better high-tail it to Iceland. They'll be the new 'doughnut hole' where all the moola will come from.
I already pay ZERO PERCENT.
Tax the rich at the Eisenhower Rate of 94%!!!
Nor do I need him hiding behind my threadbare skirts because he wants to do himself a favor and cut his own taxes ( see John McDonald in the comment below. And, 'full disclosure', I have no idea who the gentleman is, but he appears to have done his homework, as do many in these comments).
This sounds like the "Doughnut Hole Plan". If he's saying, Ohh, I'll take care of the poor... but it turns out he's really taking care of the rich - then the middle-class had better high-tail it to Iceland. They'll be the new 'doughnut hole' where all the moola will come from.
I already pay ZERO PERCENT.
Tax the rich at the Eisenhower Rate of 94%!!!
12
We've been down this road before and it didn't work out too well. In fact we're still paying the price for trickle down economics.
15
To all of you Trump supporters: this just proves that your beloved candidate really thinks you are stooopid. Only time will tell, for sure.
13
Yes, well the 'Emperor' has no clothes. Duh.
4
I find it hard to believe there isn't at least one NYT Pick out of 247 comments below.
3
So then... it sounds like Trump is in fact owned by one special interest: THE GOP. Perhaps that was the deal he struck just before he signed the pledge. Put forth an absurd Tax plan that still cuts taxes for corporations and the wealthy... and add few details. How disappointing. I actually believed him for a moment when he spoke about raising taxes on the wall street boys and paying more himself. Serves me right, I suppose. (You know the one about the frog and the scorpion?)
5
if people actually pay attention to what ALL of the republicans propose, not just Trump, no one would ever vote for them. to me, this is the number one proof that most people have their eyes on their phones, and not on the game that these guys are playing. it's called "let's do and say crazy stuff, and plan laws and policy to benefit wealthy donors, because no one will notice, nobody cares, and no one is aware of our history, because we've been doing and saying the same stuff for a hundred years and keep getting elected". wild card....the Bernie Sanders phenom. we'll see
4
It IS "huge"!
1
He's the soul of the republican party, that is, his views on race and tax cuts are an exaggeration of everything the Rebubbacans have screamed at us for the past 35 years. You can see it all in high relief, so to speak.
In that sense I kinda like him.
In that sense I kinda like him.
Oh good--here we go again. Trickle down economics. 'Cuz THAT is always such a good deal for the 99%.
6
I fear for my country. The Clinton email server should not have existed (Politics 101: if something goes wrong it must not be your fault so use the governments server for government work). Now it is clear the server was run by someone without even basic knowledge of how hard drives work. We are left with the Republican field, not one of whom shows the slightest inclination towards caring beyond their narrow base, or any tendency to logic or facts. Romney was a real class act compared to this bunch. Even when he lied you could see he was a decent (rich and sheltered) guy trying to play the game. Romney it is time to run!
1
the only thing an elephant never forgets is himself.
1
I'm sure many of Trump's enthusiastic followers (many are probably Obamacare beneficiaries) don't mind these tax cuts one bit. They all imagine the American dream will happen to them, and they will be among the rich in no time.
2
About time for the donald to fade.
So, let me get this. If you're saying that **lowering** taxes on the rich would not pay for the totality of cuts in his plan, aren't you, by implication, saying that **increasing** taxes on the rich -- which, folks on these pages want, at least by a plurality -- is unlikely to be enough close our tax hole (i.e., deficits)?
1
As I have been saying all summer: Trump, he'll say anything.
1
See, Mr. Trump is a really smart guy who went to Wharton. He lowers taxes for everyone, says it is paid for by the rich, but they get richer! He gets votes from the middle and lower class and everyone is happy.
Anyone who can't see through the Trumpster deserves him. I see his face and nausea overcomes me. What he's revealed about his tax plan is ridiculous and proves he graduated in the lower echelon of his class at Wharton. In fact, Wharton School should be embarrassed he's a graduate.
3
Trump once again shows his lack of courage.
2
More tax black magic. I can think of no greater gift to the top .001% than getting rid of estate tax. Do we really want the mega-rich to develop their dynasties more easily than they already do?
7
Trump is about Trump. Anybody who thinks otherwise...you're fired.
9
As a person who deals in taxation - this piece touched on something which contradicts the Times and the far left's mantra that the rich get too many deductions. You said it plainly - the cuts can't be made up by closing loop-holes because there aren't that many. Make up your minds!
1
...guess the donald thinks we can't do math....
1
You mean he wants to get votes by giving people stuff?
6
Brilliantly perceptive!
Allowing people to keep the money they earn is not "giving them stuff".
So he really is a Republican.
3
We need a law requiring Presidential candidates to pass 4th grade arithmetic.
6
Let's turn America into Kansas. It's working so well there.
5
It really is too bad we don't have inter-party debates during the primaries. I would love to hear Bernie Sanders eviscerate this buffoon and his policies.
5
Think back to the last Republican presidency: 9/11, The Great Recession, Iraq War, plunging stock market, real estate collapse, one banking crisis after another, collapse of the middle class, auto industry collapse, crumbling infrastructure, nationwide gerrymandering....all brought to you by your friendly Republican party. How short our collective memory seems to be. That any Republican is polling above zero today is truly astounding, if not frightening.
9
Ah, how the "rich get richer" as everyone else gets snookered about "trickle down" and other "voodoo economics." We've had the New Deal and the Fair Deal, and now it looks like we're being asked by the deal-maker-in-chief to swallow a Raw Deal that may cost well over 3 trillion dollars (based on comparisons the Jeb! Bush's and Marco Rubio's giveaways to the rich) most likely in Obamacare, Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security cuts. You may not "Feel the Bern" yet, but don't let yourself get "Trump-ed either.
3
We've heard this one before. The tax cuts were made and there wasn't the growth that was needed to make up for the loss of revenue to the government. What happened was the growth of huge government deficits, which Republicans then refuse to fix by raising taxes again. Rather they insist on cutting spending, but not spending that Republicans like, i.e. military spending, just the spending that Democrats generally support, including things such as food stamps, support for education, support for scientific research, and, oh and did I mention Medicare and Social Security? It's the Laffer Curve all over again for a new generation.
3
Call it what you will, "The Laffer Curve", "Voodoo Economics", or its current incarnation as Trumponimcs, the idea massive tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations with token tax cuts to everyone else will pay for themselves through increased profits has proven a complete failure.
Reagan's laffer curve was a laugh and started the nation on the road to huge deficits. Ultimately he had to raise taxes. Bush One (read my lips) had to raise taxes even more; and Bush 2 gave us the worst recession since the depression. I might add that it was Reagan who gave us the exodus of jobs overseas and Trumps notion of what amounts to starting a global trade war is one of the same key drivers of the Great Depression.
How can people be so stupid as to keep buying into the same policies that have been proven disastrous for the last 90 years? Will the Republican Party ever learn anything?
Reagan's laffer curve was a laugh and started the nation on the road to huge deficits. Ultimately he had to raise taxes. Bush One (read my lips) had to raise taxes even more; and Bush 2 gave us the worst recession since the depression. I might add that it was Reagan who gave us the exodus of jobs overseas and Trumps notion of what amounts to starting a global trade war is one of the same key drivers of the Great Depression.
How can people be so stupid as to keep buying into the same policies that have been proven disastrous for the last 90 years? Will the Republican Party ever learn anything?
7
Cutting taxes to grow the economy - Evidence? (No Ronny reference please - the taxes were much higher then)
3
"Despite Populist Tone, Trump Offers the Rich Tax Cuts". Great headline. For an incredibly biased article that is. The Trump tax plan cuts taxes for nearly all people, which is indeed populist. But that message wouldn't be adequately bised against Trump for this paper.
1
Those of us who live in rural/semi-rural areas that are in desperate need of real economic development have learned to recognize the carnival barkers and the snake oil salesmen. They pass our way with tedious regularity.
If it seems to be too good to be true, it usually is.
If there is such a thing as a secular sin, to play upon people's hopes is one.
If it seems to be too good to be true, it usually is.
If there is such a thing as a secular sin, to play upon people's hopes is one.
8
6% annual growth ...
For all those who think that would be fantastic, I present a list of all countries that achieved at least 6% annual growth in 2014, according to the World Bank:
Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Chad, China, Dem Rep of Congo, Rep of Congo (yes, those are two different countries), Cote D'ivoire, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, India, Laos, Malaysia, the Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Panama, the Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, St Kitts, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Zambia.
Two clear trends come up in that list:
1. All of those places have next-to-no protections for workers. Indeed, workers (who are frequently teenagers) in most of these countries are little better than slaves. And forget OSHA/MSHA, if you die or are injured on the job, tough luck.
2. In every place listed, the standard of living is a *lot* lower than in the US. Wages are much lower, starvation is not uncommon, and home heating or cooling is not even a concept for many.
We had a period like that in the US, back in the 1890's. You can read all about it in Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". I for one don't want to return to that.
For all those who think that would be fantastic, I present a list of all countries that achieved at least 6% annual growth in 2014, according to the World Bank:
Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, Chad, China, Dem Rep of Congo, Rep of Congo (yes, those are two different countries), Cote D'ivoire, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, India, Laos, Malaysia, the Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Panama, the Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, St Kitts, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Timor, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Zambia.
Two clear trends come up in that list:
1. All of those places have next-to-no protections for workers. Indeed, workers (who are frequently teenagers) in most of these countries are little better than slaves. And forget OSHA/MSHA, if you die or are injured on the job, tough luck.
2. In every place listed, the standard of living is a *lot* lower than in the US. Wages are much lower, starvation is not uncommon, and home heating or cooling is not even a concept for many.
We had a period like that in the US, back in the 1890's. You can read all about it in Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle". I for one don't want to return to that.
23
Its easier to grow faster when you are a poorer country, and many if not most of these were commodity/export driven. And commodity prices have collapsed.
Maybe this is what Donald means by making America great "again."
Just to put this in some sort of perspective about how this might affect Trump personally, almost all of his more than 500 companies are organized as LLCs. Many make no money or almost no money. Others of his LLCs make a lot.
In case you ever thought Trump was selfless, consider this. Trump proposes lowering the tax rate on "pass through" income (specifically income from LLCs) from 39.5% to 15%, a 62% reduction in the tax rate. An LLC Member who derives $1M in net income, i.e. net income after deductions and credits, from his venture, now is taxed around $400,000. Under his plan proposed today, that same LLC Member ($1M net after deductions and credits) would pay $150,000, a tax reduction of 62.5%.
With good reason, this is called the Trump Tax Plan because if enacted, it would benefit Trump himself. Just on the face of it, he might as well call it the Trump Tax Incentive, since his tax plan provides him all the incentive he requires to get elected President so he can contribute less to running the government he would head.
In case you ever thought Trump was selfless, consider this. Trump proposes lowering the tax rate on "pass through" income (specifically income from LLCs) from 39.5% to 15%, a 62% reduction in the tax rate. An LLC Member who derives $1M in net income, i.e. net income after deductions and credits, from his venture, now is taxed around $400,000. Under his plan proposed today, that same LLC Member ($1M net after deductions and credits) would pay $150,000, a tax reduction of 62.5%.
With good reason, this is called the Trump Tax Plan because if enacted, it would benefit Trump himself. Just on the face of it, he might as well call it the Trump Tax Incentive, since his tax plan provides him all the incentive he requires to get elected President so he can contribute less to running the government he would head.
32
Ha-ha! One-time measures won't work. It's easier to take all the money from the rich (including himself) and restart economy at once, then spend the rest on the needs of the poor. Even if it won't work, the majority will love him.
1
This is an incredible Tax plan that America needs to restart our Economy and grow american jobs. Instead of having the rich Wall Streeters pay only 20% on capital gains while upper middle class wage earners pay 39% income tax, Trump has equaled the playing field so now wage earners will pay the same amount as the Wall Street Speculators, while increasing taxes on Wall Street such as the carried interest and closing the loopholes.
To offset revenue loss from income tax cuts, Trump will impose a mandatory one time tax of 10% on all foreign cash held overseas by corporations. Estimated between 2 and 5 trillion. This will bring investment and corporations back to America creating job and further economic growth.
This is also fair for the poor who will now pay 0%, that is, nothing in taxes. Author ignorantly believes that raising taxes further on wage earners is "populist." No, populist is paying no taxes or less taxes altogether.
To offset revenue loss from income tax cuts, Trump will impose a mandatory one time tax of 10% on all foreign cash held overseas by corporations. Estimated between 2 and 5 trillion. This will bring investment and corporations back to America creating job and further economic growth.
This is also fair for the poor who will now pay 0%, that is, nothing in taxes. Author ignorantly believes that raising taxes further on wage earners is "populist." No, populist is paying no taxes or less taxes altogether.
2
I watched Trump interviewed on 60 Minutes last night. I have been ignoring him all this time, but was curious what the national and media interest was. I was deeply suspect of his "tax plan", and just about every thing else he proposed. His plans for office and governing this nation are as if he'd be reigning king with out others to reconcile his notions with, nationally and globally. He's a bombastic megalomaniac, and it deeply concerns me that he has gotten so much positive attention. I honestly feel he has a personality disorder, and seemingly good swaths of america need their heads checked too, if they feel he'd be a positive force residing at the highest seat of our gov't.
42
Why waste your time analysing something which will never see the light of day? This man has no credibility with the wider population and will never win the primary far less the Presidential election. He is nothing less than a delusional bully which has been amply demonstrated here when he bludgeoned our pathetic public officials into consenting to his destroying a site of special scientific interest for his own selfish economic gain. He is the quintessential ugly American abroad rampaging around dismissing the little people. He seems to have very few redeeming features.
12
I see a comment about cutting the Federal Government. Just as a matter of course, what would Republicans shrink? Medicare? Social Security? FDA? CDC? Education? Defense? All hot button, non starter issues that will just not make it past the electorate. Republicans just don't want to pay for government as their record shows for the past 55 years. Run up spending and cut taxes for the wealthy. Under Republicans deficits have grown far greater than under Democratic administrations while GDP has been the lowest. There is a cost to living in our society where it seems many people want to emigrate to. Trickle down won't pay that bill. Revenues must increase to maintain our country's standards. Bring back PAYGO and have corporations and individuals pay their share.
People need to stop being influenced by fear, sound bites and outright distortion of the facts. Read, learn, think and vote responsibly.
People need to stop being influenced by fear, sound bites and outright distortion of the facts. Read, learn, think and vote responsibly.
29
Mr. Barrio presupposes that facts matter in the GOP. They don't. Facts never matter to fanatics. Magical thinking does and it's all the simple minded folks in the GOP want.
32
That is one thing the Repubs count on: the ignorance and naïveté of enough of the American voting populace.
A lot of people in this country are not very good at math and their eyes glaze over when confronted with it. So therefore, when a huckster like Trump makes a lot of mathematically impossible tax proposals, all they hear is hey, great, I'm going to pay less taxes! Never mind the effect on infrastructure spending and the increasing national debt.
Donald, it is time to end your pipe dream of becoming POTUS. Let some mature adults do the heavy lifting of governing the country and go back to running your own company and stroking your inflated ego.
A lot of people in this country are not very good at math and their eyes glaze over when confronted with it. So therefore, when a huckster like Trump makes a lot of mathematically impossible tax proposals, all they hear is hey, great, I'm going to pay less taxes! Never mind the effect on infrastructure spending and the increasing national debt.
Donald, it is time to end your pipe dream of becoming POTUS. Let some mature adults do the heavy lifting of governing the country and go back to running your own company and stroking your inflated ego.
1
3 problems with this article.
1st, the author seems to believe he's writing an article for a 3rd grade journalism class instead of the NY Times. He tactfully and subtly reminds us not once, but twice, that he would benefit from Trump's tax plan. As if anyone reading the NY Times believes this author would write a 1500-word article because he stands to either gain or lose a few bucks. Does he really believe we're that dim, and what does that say about him?
2nd, the author has an serious (and intentional) disconnect. In the first paragraph of this hit piece, he says the plan is not "populist". Then, buried in the middle of the article, he admits that Trump's plan has an unprecedented zero tax rate for the lowest income bracket. No further analysis or justification given as to why this is not a major populist initiative.
3rd, his analysis about Ford moving a plant to Mexico was disingenuous. He said the tax plan would not encourage Ford to keep the plant here. And that was all the author said on the subject of Ford-and-Mexico. That was dishonest journalism because Trump has flat-out stated that he intends to encourage Ford via trade tariffs. More specifically, that he's an enemy of NAFTA and that he intends to renegotiate it, or cancel the treaty altogether! And why? Another populist initiative: protecting American labor. Trump's trade tariffs agenda was summarily ignored by the author so as to concoct a phony, misleading narrative.
Verdict: Dishonest journalism.
1st, the author seems to believe he's writing an article for a 3rd grade journalism class instead of the NY Times. He tactfully and subtly reminds us not once, but twice, that he would benefit from Trump's tax plan. As if anyone reading the NY Times believes this author would write a 1500-word article because he stands to either gain or lose a few bucks. Does he really believe we're that dim, and what does that say about him?
2nd, the author has an serious (and intentional) disconnect. In the first paragraph of this hit piece, he says the plan is not "populist". Then, buried in the middle of the article, he admits that Trump's plan has an unprecedented zero tax rate for the lowest income bracket. No further analysis or justification given as to why this is not a major populist initiative.
3rd, his analysis about Ford moving a plant to Mexico was disingenuous. He said the tax plan would not encourage Ford to keep the plant here. And that was all the author said on the subject of Ford-and-Mexico. That was dishonest journalism because Trump has flat-out stated that he intends to encourage Ford via trade tariffs. More specifically, that he's an enemy of NAFTA and that he intends to renegotiate it, or cancel the treaty altogether! And why? Another populist initiative: protecting American labor. Trump's trade tariffs agenda was summarily ignored by the author so as to concoct a phony, misleading narrative.
Verdict: Dishonest journalism.
16
Speaking of being "disingenuous", yeah, why bother folks with facts like listing the specifics that Trump has (finally) revealed… when instead it's so much easier to just make vague complaints about "3rd grade writing" and "dishonest journalism"?!
Donald Trump continues to believe his own hype by telling potential voters what they want to hear instead of what they NEED to hear. It's time for honesty and hard truths instead of some kind of quasi-reincarnation of Ronald Reagan where the world will be a better place because I will receive a tax cut. Meanwhile, roads, bridges, infrastructures, etc. are crumbling and deteriorating at alarming rates. As another commenter wrote earlier, this is "Voodoo Redo Economics". That didn't work the first time and it certainly won't work a second time.
15
Wall Street Thieves, Oil Barons, Billionaire Serial Polluters, War Profiteers, and FOX News Blowhards have suddenly found Donald much more to their liking. Afterall, in the Republican Party, the wedge issues used to garner votes may vary from decade to decade, but the underlying motive always remains the same:
Profits, Power, and Tax Breaks for Corporate Billionaires.
Profits, Power, and Tax Breaks for Corporate Billionaires.
27
I'm looking forward to when The Donald starts throwing dollar bills from a suite in one of his casinos to the masses in the streets below.
8
Gee....a billionaire who wants tax cuts for the wealthy. Big surprise there. Trump's a disaster waiting to happen.
23
Ask the citizens of Kansas or Wisconsin if tax cuts worked for their states. Journalists need to put an end to Reagan Economics - a failure time and time again.
35
Another rich guy angling to change legislation to benefit rich guys. Now we see the real reason he's trying to run for President.
Also bear in mind he's aiming high. If he loses at any point along the line, he could always try to run for Mayor of New York.
Also bear in mind he's aiming high. If he loses at any point along the line, he could always try to run for Mayor of New York.
6
I decided to quit my job
To buy a Maserati
A beach house on Nantucket
and send my kids to private school.
I am assuming that someone will hire me for a million a year.
Is that really a plan?
To buy a Maserati
A beach house on Nantucket
and send my kids to private school.
I am assuming that someone will hire me for a million a year.
Is that really a plan?
10
Boy, is Krugman going to have some fun with this!
22
Nothing but one more try to attract people's attention. Thanks to Trump we now know that taxation can be used as an instrument to insult people too, though from the practical point of view the plan sounds as a disaster.
5
Trump's "idea" that cutting taxes on the rich would spur economic growth, perhaps as fast as 6% per year, hearkens back to the GOP of old when the "voodoo economics" of a certain candidate posited that tax cuts for the rich would benefit everyone through a "trickle down" effect. Doesn't anyone else recall this? Reaganomics was a dismal failure that brought the US economy to the brink of disaster. Our infrastructure may never recover. NO THANKS.
29
GOP of old? for them, it never gets old. otherwise, right.
We live in a time of miracles!
Tax cuts for the rich, for corporations, for the poor, and miraculously, for the middle class as well - all "fully paid for".
Another candidate who cannot add.
Tax cuts for the rich, for corporations, for the poor, and miraculously, for the middle class as well - all "fully paid for".
Another candidate who cannot add.
36
Mr. Trump's plan is almost perfect. It lacks only one key provision: a 100% tax on Donald Trump's entire assets. And while you are at it, seize his helicopter for drug-related crime. I mean, he must be on something, right?
13
Donald is becomming a real Henny Youngman - one liner responses.
3
I don't know what makes the author, Barro's, math correct given all the ins and outs with Trumps proposal. And I certainly know little about corporate tax structures. But cutting revenue in anticipation of 6% economic growth reminds me a lot of all of these underfunded pension plans who project returns that don't materialize. How about we stop spending money for once before we have it. Once we have the surplus we can then think about whether we want to refund part of it or pay down some of our debt and use some for the infrastructure we always talk about.
8
Your suggestion is too practical to work in the congress we have. Both sides still have to bicker and point fingers. Then the media backs them up. Fox on one side and the NY Times on the other.
As I seem to recall, the US had a surplus under Bill Clinton. It took a Republican, George W. Bush, to wipe out the surplus and spend beyond our means . . .
You have to be very skeptical of this kind of proposal. How can you balance a budget when you cut tax revenues? Smoke and mirrors!
10
Or by reducing wasteful government spending, taxing corporate cash holdings held abroad at 10% estimated at 2 or 5 trillion, and boosting economic growth and prosperity so more people earn middle class wages and pay taxes.
1
The viability of the plan depends on the nature of the loopholes and deductions that will be eliminated - none of which are yet specified in the plan. The author uses fuzzy mathematical comparisons to dismiss the possibility that closing loopholes and deductions could pay for this: percentage decreases are not the same as percentage point decreases.
In fact, we really do not know if this plan is viable until these details are revealed. Why does the Times jump to conclusions and mislead its innumerate readers?
In fact, we really do not know if this plan is viable until these details are revealed. Why does the Times jump to conclusions and mislead its innumerate readers?
3
This. The plan is viable depending on the details. Also, the author seems to ignore the revenue that would be generated from a mandatory tax of 10% on all corporate cash holdings held overseas estimated at 2 or 5 trillion.
1
Simple answer. Trump is a Republican and he made people mad by saying illegal immigrants should be deported. They can't even discern the difference between legal and illegal immigrants - so how could they be expected to look at a tax plan fairly??
2 things.
First, details should have been revealed if they weren't; the author seems to know enough of the details.
Second....innumerate? really?
First, details should have been revealed if they weren't; the author seems to know enough of the details.
Second....innumerate? really?
Trump would move car factories from their current locations to the Bible Belt to save money, and then move them back when wages drop in the industry midwest. It is time the media stopped giving him so much attention. The ratings are bad.
3
I just read an article where one of the Republican pollsters said that we were now "leaving the entertainment part" of the election and headed into the serious stuff. Wow. I guess all this was for show and dumping Perry and Walker, talking about shutting down the government over a fake video is just part of their little game. Trump tax blabbery is just the latest bull.
8
Tax blabbery." I love it!
How are we going to pay for additional defense spending if nobody pays any taxes?
Trump, Bush, and the others who favor both tax cuts and increased defense spending have yet to explain this--the math simply doesn't work out.
Trump, Bush, and the others who favor both tax cuts and increased defense spending have yet to explain this--the math simply doesn't work out.
12
We'll get more of what we have now from pursuit of the very same strategy: huge deficits.
Almost every politician gives the rich tax breaks. But I love his call for the end to NAFTA.
4
Well, waddaya know, he really is a Republican.
8
This is a factually incorrect headline. It should be Trump Tax Cut is for Everyone, Including Hedge Fund Managers.
Great idea. Impossible to implement.
Great idea. Impossible to implement.
1
Trump says he'll invest $100 million in his campaign. Looks like he's aiming for a very high return on investment.
5
You mean he lied? Really?
10
After revealing his Tax Plan, Mr. Trump finally gains the right to run as a Republican.
8
you are forgetting the part about cutting the size and scope of the federal government which makes up for a large portion there
1
As for the rest of the runner ups, we've got Fiorina, a somewhat feasible contender who got a bit of attention thanks to her gender, Carson the Surgeon, Jeb!, the brother of the late President Bush and other long list of no-name candidates. Let's go over their track records: one utterly destroyed the Hewlett-Packard, the company that once represented the American innovation, and obliterated any hopes of its revival, another wrecked the state of Louisiana, drowning her in millions of dollars in debt despite its previous surplus in its state budget, a coward with no charisma who couldn't even properly defend his wife's reputation in public debates, some unpopular fool who quit the race months after realizing that people never liked him, some backwater surgeon who has got little to do with politics, much less running a country and etc. And all of them are RINO, mind you; upon being elected, all of them will return to being a lapdog for the wall street like most others before them. Do you seriously want these dopes running our country? Do you want to repeat your previous mistakes, investing your hopes in powerless and corrupt who will repay with disappointment? I sure don't. I want America to be great again. Yes sir. Trump, let's make America great again.
4
The Art of the Political Deal = Bait and Switch.
How novel!
How novel!
6
Voodoo economics continues!
Cui Bono? Donaldo!!!!
Cui Bono? Donaldo!!!!
3
All I'm seeing here is typical excuse making telling us how this plan will never work.
I'm writing off Hillary b/c I believe she can not escape criminal charges for willfully violating the Espionage Act on occasions too numerous to count and making David Patreus' violation of national security look like an Alter boy who pilfered the mission box out of two dimes and a nickel.
That said lets assume Bernie Sanders is the Democrat nominee.
If President Bernie Sanders does nothing but stay the course how much will be added to the deficit?
What is Bernie's plan... Is it to tell us there is no fiscal cliff ahead, so full speed ahead?
How will Bernie bring back industry and jobs from oversees?
How will Bernie increase revenue?
How will Bernie finally END the Obama recession and reduce the number of un/under employed Americans and bring down the more accurate U-6 Unemployment rate?
I'm writing off Hillary b/c I believe she can not escape criminal charges for willfully violating the Espionage Act on occasions too numerous to count and making David Patreus' violation of national security look like an Alter boy who pilfered the mission box out of two dimes and a nickel.
That said lets assume Bernie Sanders is the Democrat nominee.
If President Bernie Sanders does nothing but stay the course how much will be added to the deficit?
What is Bernie's plan... Is it to tell us there is no fiscal cliff ahead, so full speed ahead?
How will Bernie bring back industry and jobs from oversees?
How will Bernie increase revenue?
How will Bernie finally END the Obama recession and reduce the number of un/under employed Americans and bring down the more accurate U-6 Unemployment rate?
1
Trump's arithmetic is as lousy as his Fantasyland ideas. He's a demagogue and we don't need anymore of them.
Until someone proposes a balanced budget and a 10%+ reduction in Federal debt during each year of his / her presidency AND will promise draconian measures to reduce debt and expenses and to increase revenues if the initial efforts don't produce results in 180 days, I'll vote for someone else.
Until someone proposes a balanced budget and a 10%+ reduction in Federal debt during each year of his / her presidency AND will promise draconian measures to reduce debt and expenses and to increase revenues if the initial efforts don't produce results in 180 days, I'll vote for someone else.
1
That's Entertainment!
2
Sorry NYTimes, We The People just don't see the value of giving trillions of our tax dollars to the corrupt oligarchy political system anymore. Quite frankly, I am glad that Trump's plan would reduce tax revenue to the government by trillions of dollars. Good Riddance!
3
Mr. Trump's wingnut supporters will look at the zero tax numbers and shout "Hallelujah" without considering any of the rest of the implications of this plan. And that's likely what he's hoping for...big numbers from the wingnuts. It's also clear that he's got his own best interests going here in both the structure of the plan (pay yourself first) and in eliminating the death tax to the great, very very huuuge benefit of his own kids when his day comes. Trump always puts Trump first. Let's be clear.
5
Republican "plans" always depend on an ignorant electorate, and always, ALWAYS benefit ONLY the wealthy.
This tax plan really isn't that bad... but the GoP will label it liberal and this will be the beginning of the end for the Donald.
Other than the obnoxious upper tax breaks the sliding scale and the removal of taxes on lower income are good ideas.
Trump even mentions a one time 15% tax on the super wealthy if it would go towards eliminating the deficit - not a terrible idea except we would currently go right back into a deficit.
Other than the obnoxious upper tax breaks the sliding scale and the removal of taxes on lower income are good ideas.
Trump even mentions a one time 15% tax on the super wealthy if it would go towards eliminating the deficit - not a terrible idea except we would currently go right back into a deficit.
1
This article contains at least one blatant misrepresentation, which makes me believe there may be bias all throughout it:
"In 2013, taxpayers earning between $500,000 and $10 million deducted or exempted an average of 12 percent of their income from tax; for those earning more than $10 million, the figure was 16 percent. If those deductions were abolished entirely ... that would not come close to paying for a cut in the top tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent, which is a relative reduction of 37 percent."
The 12% and 16% numbers are percentage points, therefore you should subtract them from the 39.6 percentage point tax rate now, giving you an effective tax rate paid by 23.6% for those earning >$10m and 27.6% for those earning 500k-10m.
So Trumps 25% plan is not drastically cutting taxes on the rich AT ALL, and is in fact INCREASING the effective tax rate for those >$10m. The fact that you misrepresented this with an irrelevant 37% statistic around the drop in marginal tax rate leads me to believe you're not being fair at all.
"In 2013, taxpayers earning between $500,000 and $10 million deducted or exempted an average of 12 percent of their income from tax; for those earning more than $10 million, the figure was 16 percent. If those deductions were abolished entirely ... that would not come close to paying for a cut in the top tax rate from 39.6 percent to 25 percent, which is a relative reduction of 37 percent."
The 12% and 16% numbers are percentage points, therefore you should subtract them from the 39.6 percentage point tax rate now, giving you an effective tax rate paid by 23.6% for those earning >$10m and 27.6% for those earning 500k-10m.
So Trumps 25% plan is not drastically cutting taxes on the rich AT ALL, and is in fact INCREASING the effective tax rate for those >$10m. The fact that you misrepresented this with an irrelevant 37% statistic around the drop in marginal tax rate leads me to believe you're not being fair at all.
9
That's not how taxes work. If you exempt 16% of your income, then you don't pay tax on that 16%, so you would save 39.6% of that 16% or a net of 6.3%, making the effective tax rate under current law (with exemptions) 33.3%, which is still much larger than 25%.
For a concrete example, say I am paying on 39.6% on $10,000,000 (we'll ignore the first couple hundred that are at a lower rate). I deduct 16%, so I will be taxed on $8,400,000 at 39.6%: I pay $3,326,400. With no deductions, I am taxed on the full $10,000,000, at 25%: I pay only $2,500,000. So Trump's plan saves me at least $826,400, and that is if he eliminates all deductions. I would save more if any deductions remained.
For a concrete example, say I am paying on 39.6% on $10,000,000 (we'll ignore the first couple hundred that are at a lower rate). I deduct 16%, so I will be taxed on $8,400,000 at 39.6%: I pay $3,326,400. With no deductions, I am taxed on the full $10,000,000, at 25%: I pay only $2,500,000. So Trump's plan saves me at least $826,400, and that is if he eliminates all deductions. I would save more if any deductions remained.
1
so there would be a decline in tax revenue from that one 10M taxpayer of just under 25% - nowhere close to 37% as the author tried to imply - which was % of decline in the nominal (but not effective) tax rate, not the decline in theoretical tax revenue - which only goes down 24.8% based on just one 10M taxpayer. But if there were also a one--time 15% levy on that single 10M taxpayer, there would be an increase in tax revenue of 37% versus the tax cut (or an increase of 20% in tax revenue versus the current 39.6% with 16% exclusions, based on the increase in tax rate from 25% to 40%, which is a 60% increase in effective tax rate under the tax cut plan. or an increase in effective tax rate of 20% versus the current effective rate of 33.2% based on 39.6 with 16% exemptions. as they say in a card trick "pick a number. any number." numbers are completely manipulable.
To borrow from the late great Yogi, "it's deja vu all over again". How many times will the Republicans pull out the Laffer curve (aptly named), to pretend their massive tax cuts for the wealthy won't bankrupt the nation? I think the American people have seen enough of that brand of voodoo economics (to quote George H. W. Bush).
7
A tax decrease on the rich will come out of your Social Security and Medicare. If you don't want your parents living in your basement/garage or if you don't want to living in the basement/garage of your children, you'd better think twice.
10
What is wrong with family taking care of family???? Society as a whole would benefit actually. Sad world we live in where that is seen as a negative.
Mr. Trump is different from other Republicans in many ways, but they all seem to agree the tax code should favor the wealthy.
5
With the a tax plan like Trump' we would *need* Mexico to pay for that wall. Heck, we'd need them to pay for our military.
6
Mr. Barro says, "rich people already pay tax on most of their income". That by definition is true, but thanks to loopholes and specialized tax attorneys the extremely rich can have many sources of "revenue" declared as "non-income" (this can cost you about $30,000 a year, but it is a wise investment for many, and even better the fee I believe can be written off against your remaining income). Closing those loopholes would increase revenue. Still, it is a bad deal for most Americans since there is little chance of those loopholes staying closed for long, as was the case with many "closed" loopholes during Reagan's grand tax cut bargain with Congress. In less than a decade most of the loopholes were back and all America was left with were reduced rates for the wealthy and reduced revenues.
2
facts do not matter to an electorate that is accustomed to dealing only in emotion. Such is the current climate that as soon as you start dealing in facts, you are accused of trickery, or worse, have the bible thrown in your face.
Of course Trumps tax plan makes no sense. He is not running on a platform of policy position. He is running on personality only.
Of course Trumps tax plan makes no sense. He is not running on a platform of policy position. He is running on personality only.
3
Mr. Trump is not running a "conventional" campaign. He has one goal: to win the election. For him, it is a contest free of any ideological or policy imperatives. He will do whatever he can to win votes, and his unstated premise is that a sucker is born everyday and he's smarter than the voters. He'll say whatever "plays" with the voters and get the requisite free media attention. Experts can rip the tax plan apart (correctly), point out that it doesn't add up or that it helps the rich more than anyone, but he has gauged that voters like big tax cuts. And, they often do, and they usually don't do the math. I doubt he'll succeed in winning either the nomination or the election, but, if he does, don't blame Trump -- blame the voters and the media that shapes the campaigns to its own interests (market share of viewers etc.).
7
If Trump institutes e-verify, the people who are here illegally will self-deport. Here are a few of the ways in which our economy will improve!
1. Redirect all of the money we are now spending to try to teach English and other subjects to illegal aliens to U. S. citizens and legal immigrants. Think how much more Americans could be learning at school if so much money and teacher time and effort did not have to be spent on those who are here illegally. More more Americans would graduate ready for higher education or gainful employment.
2. Stop forcing hospitals to absorb the costs of medical care for illegal aliens. The hospitals would not have to pass these costs onto the rest of us and our private insurance companies or government insurance programs like Medi-care and Medi-caid.
3. Many citizens cannot find low-skilled or unskilled jobs because the illegal aliens have taken most of them. There are so many under-educated and unskilled or low-skilled illegals that they have driven down both wages and benefits.
a. Some citizens who would be working, if they could find a job, let alone a decent paying job, have turned instead to Social Security’s disability insurance. Our government is now paying for their disability benefits.
b. Other citizens have just dropped out of the legitimate work force. Who knows what they are doing to support themselves? They don’t pay taxes.
1. Redirect all of the money we are now spending to try to teach English and other subjects to illegal aliens to U. S. citizens and legal immigrants. Think how much more Americans could be learning at school if so much money and teacher time and effort did not have to be spent on those who are here illegally. More more Americans would graduate ready for higher education or gainful employment.
2. Stop forcing hospitals to absorb the costs of medical care for illegal aliens. The hospitals would not have to pass these costs onto the rest of us and our private insurance companies or government insurance programs like Medi-care and Medi-caid.
3. Many citizens cannot find low-skilled or unskilled jobs because the illegal aliens have taken most of them. There are so many under-educated and unskilled or low-skilled illegals that they have driven down both wages and benefits.
a. Some citizens who would be working, if they could find a job, let alone a decent paying job, have turned instead to Social Security’s disability insurance. Our government is now paying for their disability benefits.
b. Other citizens have just dropped out of the legitimate work force. Who knows what they are doing to support themselves? They don’t pay taxes.
2
Yet another Republican that thinks they're an expert on what illegal immigrants are doing or not doing. You might want to keep in mind that millions of these people are children the next time you're sitting in your church pew feeling all high and mighty. I find it comical that all you "experts" don't actually know any of these people. Perhaps you should meet one of these little girls or boys you don't want getting healthcare.
For those, like myself, personally challenged regarding understanding taxes and how any economic system except our own works Trump's "self-enlightened" views regarding trade and taxes can come across sounding as if he knows what he's talking about. And then punctuating all that with Trump's material "success" creates a powerful illusion that makes him and his proposals seem more potentially right than wrong. And for any listener who is sufficiently gullible and lacking any semblance of a bull detector Trumps policies-- accompanied by profuse excitement and can-do attitude and energy--makes his ideas profoundly infectious. And that's scary.
4
Here is another example of how the GOP candidates are failing all their courses:
1. Arithmetic: Tax cuts increase deficits, they don't erase them; it's simple subtraction.
2. History: Supply side economic experiments have shown 1 is true, repeatedly; read the record.
3. Science: The earth is old, and warming; despite what the good book and the bad brothers say.
4. Logic: To minimize abortions, it makes no sense to defund Planned Parenthood, one of the most widely used sources for birth control.
I hope the electorate awards them the grade they deserve in 2016.
1. Arithmetic: Tax cuts increase deficits, they don't erase them; it's simple subtraction.
2. History: Supply side economic experiments have shown 1 is true, repeatedly; read the record.
3. Science: The earth is old, and warming; despite what the good book and the bad brothers say.
4. Logic: To minimize abortions, it makes no sense to defund Planned Parenthood, one of the most widely used sources for birth control.
I hope the electorate awards them the grade they deserve in 2016.
95
1. Spending increases doesn't decrease defecits either and we have now had 2 presidents straight spending money like it is nothing. Isn't spending 30 billion to bomb countries with drones wrong? That doesn't help defecits and btw that wasn't a republican president doing that.
2. Supply side economics has never been tried. Your misconception of calling it "trickle down economics" is when if you give the rich more money then it "trickles" through the economy. That is EXACTLY what the current administration is doing through the "wealth effect" and have stated as such. They are raising asset prices (which the rich own) in order ot trickle through the economy. Good think people aren't smart enough to notice.
3. Science has shown the earth has warmed and cooled multiple times thorughout history without human interaction. There is also all of solar science not being discussed. (ever notice its colder at night) We obviously effect our environment, but saying its carbon dioxide takes away from actual issues and adult discussions. This is all in order to give the EPA more power and a larger budget (see point 1).
4. Regardless how you feel about the issue. The government should not be involved either way in something so personal. Especially not paid for with taxes from people who adamantly against it. It should be funded by private charity from people who agree. Not mob mentality in a fascist manner by the state.
I hope the electorate can use ration and reason instead of emotion
2. Supply side economics has never been tried. Your misconception of calling it "trickle down economics" is when if you give the rich more money then it "trickles" through the economy. That is EXACTLY what the current administration is doing through the "wealth effect" and have stated as such. They are raising asset prices (which the rich own) in order ot trickle through the economy. Good think people aren't smart enough to notice.
3. Science has shown the earth has warmed and cooled multiple times thorughout history without human interaction. There is also all of solar science not being discussed. (ever notice its colder at night) We obviously effect our environment, but saying its carbon dioxide takes away from actual issues and adult discussions. This is all in order to give the EPA more power and a larger budget (see point 1).
4. Regardless how you feel about the issue. The government should not be involved either way in something so personal. Especially not paid for with taxes from people who adamantly against it. It should be funded by private charity from people who agree. Not mob mentality in a fascist manner by the state.
I hope the electorate can use ration and reason instead of emotion
1
So, a single person gets nailed again.
A single person will get $25,000, then pay 10% on the next $25,000 and then pay 25% on anything above that. That is if he divided what a married couple gets, by 2.
How to pay for this? Turn the clock back to 1900. Get rid of everything at the federal level, except the military and commerce. They will need a more powerful military, to protect the oligarchs, as riots break out in the streets.
Something to look forward to.
Did anyone expect something less from an oligarch? He is running for president to reduce or eliminate taxes fro himself and his friends. And make it even easier to offshore work and create a true two class society.
From the days of being a colony to now; there has been a middle class on American soil. Mr. Trump, or other Republicans, as well as some Democrats, want to put an end to it.
A single person will get $25,000, then pay 10% on the next $25,000 and then pay 25% on anything above that. That is if he divided what a married couple gets, by 2.
How to pay for this? Turn the clock back to 1900. Get rid of everything at the federal level, except the military and commerce. They will need a more powerful military, to protect the oligarchs, as riots break out in the streets.
Something to look forward to.
Did anyone expect something less from an oligarch? He is running for president to reduce or eliminate taxes fro himself and his friends. And make it even easier to offshore work and create a true two class society.
From the days of being a colony to now; there has been a middle class on American soil. Mr. Trump, or other Republicans, as well as some Democrats, want to put an end to it.
14
Voodoo economics on steroids. However, it won't hurt him in the polls, because his supporters have no interest in facts or policy, just tough talk and bluster.
Every time the Donald is forced to offer something of substance, we get this type of incoherent and unreasonable blather - 6% growth by slashing taxes? Really??? Remember, this type of Republican foolishness preceded and contributed mightily to the crashes of 1929 and 2007! For current points of reference, see New Jersey, Kansas, Louisiana, and Wisconsin. No thanks, Donald. We've seen this movie before.
Every time the Donald is forced to offer something of substance, we get this type of incoherent and unreasonable blather - 6% growth by slashing taxes? Really??? Remember, this type of Republican foolishness preceded and contributed mightily to the crashes of 1929 and 2007! For current points of reference, see New Jersey, Kansas, Louisiana, and Wisconsin. No thanks, Donald. We've seen this movie before.
44
If I were Trump, I'd stick to just talking in terms of vague generalities. It's kind of like why cheer-leaders are able to keep a crowd up on their feet simply by chanting only "Rah, rah, sis-boom-bah". Once people have to say things that people are required to try and understand, regardless if it males any sense or not, people lose all interest in wanting to have to hear them because it forces them to have to think.
2
So after Trump have emptied the federal coffers with this folly, where will he get the money from to build this "Great Wall of Trump.". I guess he really would have to get the Mexican government to pay for it. But wait a minute. Like he said, the Mexicans are smart people and will presume ably say no. What then? Will he seize Mexicos oil supply? Come on my fellow Americans. Can't we do better than this?
7
Alas, all the GOP candidates are fraudulent & corrupt, so what does it matter who wins the GOP nomination.
Far more important is the Dem nominee, the more likely to win in the end. Do we go with the GOP lite HRC … or a real Democrat with no drama, no scandals … Bernie.
Dem primary voters, you'll have a great deal to answer for.
Far more important is the Dem nominee, the more likely to win in the end. Do we go with the GOP lite HRC … or a real Democrat with no drama, no scandals … Bernie.
Dem primary voters, you'll have a great deal to answer for.
11
This plan is not Voodoo Economics. It's Voodoodoo Economics.
129
To make things a LOT more equitable, money earned without doing any work, ie. without having to show up when you're told to, perform the work you're told to, take your meal break when you're told to, and go home when you're told to, needs to be taxed at a HIGHER rate than the money where actual work is done to earn it.
Workers are currently carrying "investors'" tax burden, which is wrong.
People who pile up money on insider information (only fools believe that large stock market and other investment gains are not made on insider information) and then insist it needs to be taxed at a lower rate have been buying their way to that end bribing politicians who control the tax code for a very long time, and it needs to stop.
Taxing these passive gains at a lower rate does NOT 'spur investment' or do any good for anyone except those profiting directly from the practice. The wealthy have had this in place for WAY too long.
How are those two jobs you're workin' just to make ends meet, with both incomes AND any money you manage to save fully taxed, workin' out for ya?
Enough money tricklin' down, is there?
Workers are currently carrying "investors'" tax burden, which is wrong.
People who pile up money on insider information (only fools believe that large stock market and other investment gains are not made on insider information) and then insist it needs to be taxed at a lower rate have been buying their way to that end bribing politicians who control the tax code for a very long time, and it needs to stop.
Taxing these passive gains at a lower rate does NOT 'spur investment' or do any good for anyone except those profiting directly from the practice. The wealthy have had this in place for WAY too long.
How are those two jobs you're workin' just to make ends meet, with both incomes AND any money you manage to save fully taxed, workin' out for ya?
Enough money tricklin' down, is there?
24
One of the many myths propagated by conservatives is that our corporate taxes are high compared to other countries. It is true that our nominal rate of 35% is high, but because of loopholes, this figure is meaningless.
A good parameter to look at is total corporate taxes actually paid divided by GDP because neither of these figures can be fudged by corporations. If you look at developed countries, you will see that Norway has the highest value at 12.5%. The US is tied with Turkey for the lowest at 1.8%. If you look at all the countries touted by conservatives as low tax countries such as Ireland or Canada, you will see that their corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP are higher. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/are-taxes-in-the-u-s-high-o...
In addition, during the Great Prosperity, 1946 - 1973, this figure was about 3 times higher than today
It seems to me that if our real corporate taxes were in line with the rest of the world or maybe even higher than the average, corporations would think twice about leaving piles of cash lying around and would reinvest them to avoid paying tax.
A good parameter to look at is total corporate taxes actually paid divided by GDP because neither of these figures can be fudged by corporations. If you look at developed countries, you will see that Norway has the highest value at 12.5%. The US is tied with Turkey for the lowest at 1.8%. If you look at all the countries touted by conservatives as low tax countries such as Ireland or Canada, you will see that their corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP are higher. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/are-taxes-in-the-u-s-high-o...
In addition, during the Great Prosperity, 1946 - 1973, this figure was about 3 times higher than today
It seems to me that if our real corporate taxes were in line with the rest of the world or maybe even higher than the average, corporations would think twice about leaving piles of cash lying around and would reinvest them to avoid paying tax.
8
Divided by GDP? The US has a much larger GDP than Norway; hence your figure. I mean, really!
1
John when comparing countries you have to divide by GDP. It is not reasonable to expect a small country to collect as much in taxes as a large one.
Just think a little bit.
Just think a little bit.
"At a news conference Monday, Mr. Trump offered another way his tax plan would pay for itself: economic growth, perhaps as fast as 6 percent a year."
Really? At the rate American jobs are being outsourced to China, India and every country in between, exactly what kind of jobs and economic growth does Donald Trump envision that could make up the tax deficit from the continuous huge tax cuts to the rich? What is he thinking? A spin-off of "The Apprentice" which would become a mini-series reality show for the entire American economy?
19
Part of the point is to force those companies currently outsourcing jobs to low-wage countries like China and India to return to the United States by taxing their imports into this country. Protective tariffs they used to be called.
The Republicans want America to become a third world county with cheap labor, oligarchic control of business, healthcare, necessities, food and the media. Forget repairing roads, bridges, airports, and waterways. Forget public education. Forget medicare and social security. Forget security, period. But remember to expand the military, big banks, toll roads,
Who needs roads? we fly over them in our jet planes. Forget education, if you can't afford college, too bad, get different parents.
Remember institutions like the Fed that have made Trump a multi-billionaire with refinanced low interest rate debt and the resultant low cap rates on real estate. Remember the toothless FDIC. Remember the DOJ lack of prosecuting the thieves on wall street. Remember a gutless congress approving everything Paulson needed to bail out wall street. Remember the jobs shipped overseas in the name of global competition. Remember the millions of seniors in their 80's and 90's using up their life savings, instead of reasonable interest rates, due to Bernanke.
What a sad testimony on how such a great country has fallen so fast because of just plain greed and the belief that the money in our treasury belongs only to the wealthy.
Who needs roads? we fly over them in our jet planes. Forget education, if you can't afford college, too bad, get different parents.
Remember institutions like the Fed that have made Trump a multi-billionaire with refinanced low interest rate debt and the resultant low cap rates on real estate. Remember the toothless FDIC. Remember the DOJ lack of prosecuting the thieves on wall street. Remember a gutless congress approving everything Paulson needed to bail out wall street. Remember the jobs shipped overseas in the name of global competition. Remember the millions of seniors in their 80's and 90's using up their life savings, instead of reasonable interest rates, due to Bernanke.
What a sad testimony on how such a great country has fallen so fast because of just plain greed and the belief that the money in our treasury belongs only to the wealthy.
60
And by all means, keep women breeding the next generation of low-wage workers, shoddy-goods consumers, potholed-roads commuters and flex-rate mortgage payors.
The middle class doesn't need a tax cut. It needs to get something for the taxes it pays now. Like free public college tuition for our kids and Medicare-for-all health insurance, childcare and sitters for our elderly parents while we work. Our taxes could be working for us, instead of the upper class.
117
Well said. And indeed, you get most of those things for your taxes in most European countries. We get an oversized military.
1
Something besides fighter planes that don't fly, missiles, bombs, fighting vehicles and wealthy "security contractors," is what she means.
Very disappointing. In Trump there appeared to be an element of "familiarity breeds contempt" that made him look like somebody who knew and understood ultra-wealthy people well enough to realize that they are mostly full of themselves and not to be viewed in a servile, slavish, sycophantic manner.
Only once, really, in the last hundred years has the USA had a president from the upper income strata who was an unambiguous traitor to his class-Franklin D. Roosevelt. Those are really the only types of upper-class people worth voting for if you're not a millionaire.
Basically Trump is selling plutocratic populism. Still less embarrassing than supporting Jeb's attempt at a Second Bush Restoration (the English have a monarch and even they had only ONE Stuart Restoration in 1660), but not the way forward for the USA in 2016.
Only once, really, in the last hundred years has the USA had a president from the upper income strata who was an unambiguous traitor to his class-Franklin D. Roosevelt. Those are really the only types of upper-class people worth voting for if you're not a millionaire.
Basically Trump is selling plutocratic populism. Still less embarrassing than supporting Jeb's attempt at a Second Bush Restoration (the English have a monarch and even they had only ONE Stuart Restoration in 1660), but not the way forward for the USA in 2016.
12
What should we expect from a man who inherited his wealth from a KKK-sympathizer father! (Oh, sorry. I stole the exclamation point from Jeb. My folks lo-o-o-ve free stuff.)
22
Paging Dr. Krugman...
24
Delusional Tax Accounting.....Everybody pays less taxes and we have a magical economic boom.
21
So Trump sticks it to the little man while pretending he is one of them. The proverbial story of the Wolf pretending to be a sheep. Today's low information voter go right into the voting booth and trade away their children's as long as they are promised they will keep their guns, the blacks and Hispanics will be kept in line and that abortion will be repealed. The rural and deep city areas of America are littered with the results of this folly. Just go to rural Appalachia, West Virginia, Upstate NY and pretty much most rural areas of the Deep South to see republican policy in effect.
11
WV was run by Democrats for 70 years. How's Chicago and Detroit doing?
When will the Pubs learn cutting taxes for the rich only helps the rich? Nothing has trickled down to the middle class or the poor. Wait they know this. It is the rest of America that needs to catch up. This should become the greatest lie ever told to Americans.
What cutting taxes for the rich (with the illusion of also cutting middle class taxes as much) have successfully done is to create the greatest income inequality this country has ever known by re-distributing wealth to the rich and from the middle class and the poor.
What cutting taxes for the rich (with the illusion of also cutting middle class taxes as much) have successfully done is to create the greatest income inequality this country has ever known by re-distributing wealth to the rich and from the middle class and the poor.
7
Ok, take note, all you concerned and independent Americans who thought Trump was going to be a ticket out of all these candidates, right and left, Republican and Democrat, who are in the pockets of big donors.
It's time to notice that the only candidate who offers a way out of this noose is Bernie Sanders. Don't let the Socialist label fool you; this is your FDR, this is your statesman, the only one there is.
It's time to notice that the only candidate who offers a way out of this noose is Bernie Sanders. Don't let the Socialist label fool you; this is your FDR, this is your statesman, the only one there is.
66
Bernie Sanders? The man without a program or a clue whose main idea so far seems to be "I'm not them (even though I'm just as much a DC insider)". I don't see Sanders as much of an alternative, really. He's just one more candidate saying what he thinks people might want to hear.
The Donald is diving in the polls like the stock market. We may not have him to kick around much longer.
5
This is the same-old but revised smoke and mirrors tax plan of the Republican Party, modified trickle-down!
President Donald Trump's FIFTH bankruptcy filing will be that of the United States of America!
President Donald Trump's FIFTH bankruptcy filing will be that of the United States of America!
4
Most singles <$25k and married <$50k already don't pay taxes or very much if they do.
This is simply a 'feel good' plan that won't feel good.
This is simply a 'feel good' plan that won't feel good.
4
There was hardly a need for another reason to think Trump unfit for the presidency.
10
If it was Obama's or Hillary's idea it would be brilliant. Forever biased.
4
Nope. This is not brilliant. Period.
Obama and Hillary would never offer a plan like this.
"Waste, Fraud, and Abuse". The mine that contains more wealth than a voter could ever possibly imagine. Always right there for the taking, yet just out of reach.
5
The fact that Josh Barro and others in the establishment media no-matter-what write so vehemently against Trump just has the effect of making Trump more attractive to many people.
Lest we forget Trump's long stated position of raising tariffs on Chinese imports is reasonable. There are many products we could be manufacturing here in the U.S. if only the playing field were somewhat more level.
The idea of massive civil engineering and construction projects that create massive amounts of employment HERE AT HOME is essentially sound. Personally, I like the idea of returning money to our general economy by taking it from our defense budget. Build as many walls as you like, President Trump. =)
The establishment d/b/a Wall Street and proxy puppets like Clinton, Bush & Rubio had their chance, they messed up our economy and system good and proper with their greed, they continue to do the same. What's that old saying about the definition of lunacy being doing the same over and over again and expecting different results?
Whatever you think about Trump, doesn't matter. The establishment, Wall Street, et al has had its day. Real change means changing the way we do business, and maybe the time for that change is now.
Lest we forget Trump's long stated position of raising tariffs on Chinese imports is reasonable. There are many products we could be manufacturing here in the U.S. if only the playing field were somewhat more level.
The idea of massive civil engineering and construction projects that create massive amounts of employment HERE AT HOME is essentially sound. Personally, I like the idea of returning money to our general economy by taking it from our defense budget. Build as many walls as you like, President Trump. =)
The establishment d/b/a Wall Street and proxy puppets like Clinton, Bush & Rubio had their chance, they messed up our economy and system good and proper with their greed, they continue to do the same. What's that old saying about the definition of lunacy being doing the same over and over again and expecting different results?
Whatever you think about Trump, doesn't matter. The establishment, Wall Street, et al has had its day. Real change means changing the way we do business, and maybe the time for that change is now.
4
So much is wrong with this comment. A NYT writer doesnt make the red necks to whom Donald has any appeal any more infatuated with that gas bag. Donald cant change things and he is such a liar that he won't tell his followers the truth. I don't mind big infrastucture projects; just how is that liar going to get Congress to go along? Answer, he can't and won't.
Wait, why am I bothering, Trump is going to drop out anyway when he doesnt get his way and all media starts to really take his ludicrous positions apart.
Wait, why am I bothering, Trump is going to drop out anyway when he doesnt get his way and all media starts to really take his ludicrous positions apart.
Trump's plan will work! Just ask Kansas Governor Sam Brownback!
19
About the tax cut for middle & high class, and corporate bashing:
POOR AMERICANS ARE NOT TAXED (unless you consider buying a pack of cigarettes comparable to over 10% of your income being taxed)
The only place to cut taxes is on the following: middle class, high class, and corporate America. They are the only ones paying taxes in the first place.
This article reads as if we are supposed to be angered that a newly proposed tax cut is going to cut taxes for everyone but the poor. You can't cut what isn't there.
POOR AMERICANS ARE NOT TAXED (unless you consider buying a pack of cigarettes comparable to over 10% of your income being taxed)
The only place to cut taxes is on the following: middle class, high class, and corporate America. They are the only ones paying taxes in the first place.
This article reads as if we are supposed to be angered that a newly proposed tax cut is going to cut taxes for everyone but the poor. You can't cut what isn't there.
5
Poor people who may not pay federal income taxes still pay federal taxes, through payroll taxes that in some cases (i.e., Social Security) are regressive and disproportionately affect the poor. And there are a lot of people that would fit the definition of "poor" but tend to think of themselves as lower middle class who do pay federal income taxes as well.
The problem with Trump's plan is that it disproportionately benefits the highest income earners, and does not have any mechanism to make up for lost revenue. So it is both regressive, and a budget buster.
The problem with Trump's plan is that it disproportionately benefits the highest income earners, and does not have any mechanism to make up for lost revenue. So it is both regressive, and a budget buster.
1
You didn't get it - look again. Federal Tax is a series of flat taxes. In 2015 income from 0-9,224 is taxed at 0%. Nobody pays tax on their first $9,225 of income. The poor don't get a special break. Income from 9225-37450 is taxed at 15%, 37450-90750 is taxed at 25%, 90750-189,300 is taxed at 28%. (The brackets continue to the top marginal tax rate of 39.6% at 413,200 and above) Most people are better off with higher wages than lower tax rates. So offshoring jobs and reducing wages hurts them a lot more than a reduced tax rate helps them, they can't get rich from tax cuts. At the upper end the benefit of a small tax reduction can amount to a lot of money - and a lot of revenue loss for the government. That's why those who favor the rich getting richer love tax cuts. The same people want the loss of government revenue made up by cutting spending on services for ordinary people from infrastructure to education while continuing corporate subsidies.
We should all be angered that Trump is pretending to share the indignation of ordinary people but practicing the same old Voodoo Economics that transferred so much money upward.
We should all be angered that Trump is pretending to share the indignation of ordinary people but practicing the same old Voodoo Economics that transferred so much money upward.
1
This plan is pretty simple in Trump Terms: whatever is good for The Donald is good for America. Should we be surprised? Appalled that it's more of the same trickle-down voodoo? What's really amazing is that there are middle income people (how about just not-rich people) foolish enough to think that move money for the rich, just like Jeb!'s plan proposes, would be a good idea for the average American because that progressive taxation thing is "socialist." Bernie will make mincemeat out of these Republican arguments but no amount of evidence or argument will penetrate: it's all ideology before reality. It'll take the Republicans in the form of Jeb! or Kasich about two years to crash the economy again ---because President Obama will leave things in reasonable shape despite their virulent cupity---but certainly less than that to take us to war.
9
This is your classic "have your cake and eat it too" plan that we've been fed for the last 40 years. If cutting taxes cured the economy then every president would have employed it and every Congress would have embraced it. The voters would get more spending money and the US economy/budget would be healthy. But the magical wild card of 6% growth never materializes and our national debt soars as does income inequality. The difference here is that Trump will now fabricate and proclaim that the "finest economic minds" have endorsed this plan. That will be his method to sell it - don't fret, terrific people are behind it. Sure they are, Donald.
6
This article incorrectly explains taxes on hedge fund carried interest. It is not necessarily taxed at the lower rate; it depends on the taxable rate of realized gains of the fund. If the gains are short-term, then the rate the hedge fund manager pays is also short term (i.e. taxed at the same rate as regular income). As most hedge funds these days trade very actively, only a small percentage of their positions are held long enough to qualify for the long-term rate. I am not commenting on whether they should pay higher taxes overall, merely correcting the author's mischaracterization of taxes on carried interest.
5
then they shouldn't mind that all income becomes ordinary, should they?
I would not dismiss the Trump plan out of hand, even though I personally do not favor his candidacy. The US economy has been running way below potential for years now. Labor force participation is back to levels not seen since Carter was president. Some combination of tax incentives and deregulation is what is needed to put us back on the growth path toward prosperity.
The tax penalty for businesses that choose to keep their headquarters in the US is just way too high right now. The tax penalty on repatriated foreign profits is absurd! It's the new form of foreign aid, rewarding American companies for investing their foreign profits outside the US instead of bringing those profits home to boost our economy. Who comes up with these crazy schemes?
A 6% growth rate would be remarkable, but we did achieve 5% under Reagan. It is possible, and it would make a world of difference to all Americans. Young college grads might even find jobs again.
The tax penalty for businesses that choose to keep their headquarters in the US is just way too high right now. The tax penalty on repatriated foreign profits is absurd! It's the new form of foreign aid, rewarding American companies for investing their foreign profits outside the US instead of bringing those profits home to boost our economy. Who comes up with these crazy schemes?
A 6% growth rate would be remarkable, but we did achieve 5% under Reagan. It is possible, and it would make a world of difference to all Americans. Young college grads might even find jobs again.
10
Just to keep things in perspective, we also had periods of 5% growth or more in real GDP under Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Carter, and rates over 4% under Clinton. Since 2004, though, GDP growth rates have remained below 4%.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=1xIs
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=1xIs
1
Our current tax system is the result of government believing that they can control our economy through targeted use of taxes in all forms. Clearly, they have been extremely unsuccessful at this strategy redistributing from the poor and middle class to the rich, encouraging fuel sources that are less economically viable, changing eating habits to cause large scale obesity, allowing undue private money influence on our politics with big agriculture, oil, energy, and banks. We all need to vote for candidates who favor fair fixed rate taxation with no loop holes. Fair taxation will inject more money and opportunity into our economy than any other stimulus with the exception of a complete overhaul of our litigation system.
2
Phillip, suppose the government spends a million in tax cuts. What do we get for the mil?
Now suppose the government spnds a mil for fixing a bridge. The same amount gets into the economy, but now we have a safer bridge at no more cost.
Get it?
Now suppose the government spnds a mil for fixing a bridge. The same amount gets into the economy, but now we have a safer bridge at no more cost.
Get it?
Bush the Elder called this type of plan where the assumption of growth raising tax revenues beyond any loss due to tax cuts as VooDoo economics.
While he was wrong on much else, he was absolutely right about this. And the new king of VooDoo is Trump. Sadly, this plan is not really much different than the other non-sensical plans produced by Ryan, Bush III, Laffer, et al.
When will we ever learn. When will we learn.
While he was wrong on much else, he was absolutely right about this. And the new king of VooDoo is Trump. Sadly, this plan is not really much different than the other non-sensical plans produced by Ryan, Bush III, Laffer, et al.
When will we ever learn. When will we learn.
6
So, in other words, the same line of hooey that the GOP has been serving out for lo' these many a year? We were expecting, what, something really sensible? Here's what too many Americans are too undereducated to understand: a nation is not like a business, its budget is not like your home budget. A nation is, for want of a better analogy, a parent - it's there to create an environment in which its citizens are: reasonably safe, but with enough freedom to try for greatness, and are able to achieve all that they can. The citizens are like the ideal children, because when they succeed, the nation succeeds. Rugged individuals may have blazed a trail West, but it took the resolve of the millions that followed to truly make it blossom.
Aren't we tired of buying that same old line of hooey that Mr. Trump and his ilk are selling?
Aren't we tired of buying that same old line of hooey that Mr. Trump and his ilk are selling?
11
The Historical Lessons of Lower Tax Rates
By Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.
There is a distinct pattern throughout American history: When tax rates are reduced, the economy's growth rate improves and living standards increase. Good tax policy has a number of interesting side effects. For instance, history tells us that tax revenues grow and "rich" taxpayers pay more tax when marginal tax rates are slashed. This means lower income citizens bear a lower share of the tax burden - a consequence that should lead class-warfare politicians to support lower tax rates.
Conversely, periods of higher tax rates are associated with sub par economic performance and stagnant tax revenues. In other words, when politicians attempt to "soak the rich," the rest of us take a bath. Examining the three major United States episodes of tax rate reductions can prove useful lessons.
By Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph.D.
There is a distinct pattern throughout American history: When tax rates are reduced, the economy's growth rate improves and living standards increase. Good tax policy has a number of interesting side effects. For instance, history tells us that tax revenues grow and "rich" taxpayers pay more tax when marginal tax rates are slashed. This means lower income citizens bear a lower share of the tax burden - a consequence that should lead class-warfare politicians to support lower tax rates.
Conversely, periods of higher tax rates are associated with sub par economic performance and stagnant tax revenues. In other words, when politicians attempt to "soak the rich," the rest of us take a bath. Examining the three major United States episodes of tax rate reductions can prove useful lessons.
5
Well, not really. The first time we enacted large tax cuts (Reagan) we also stimulated debt and credit card spending. While things look great in the semi-phony GDP and inflation numbers, when you factor in the burgeoning debt the government and each individual takes on...its not so great.
22
Actually, there is no such distinct pattern.
6
According to Professor Krugman, this is the exact opposite of what actually happens. Let me think about who I trust more with the facts.
8
So the Donald finally shows his real tax colors - good 'ol trickle down nonsense with tax cuts for everyone, 0 taxes for thousands, tax cuts for the wealthy and the economy will grow at 6%. "OMG! It's really you Santa - you are real!" He is the KING of Bankruptcy and Puffery. Not even close to being among the Forbes 100 but he acts like he's at the top of the list. Dump Trump he's a real Chump.
60
I'm giving me a tax cut - what a great idea!
16
For creating trillions more in deficits..Donald Trump, you're fired.
122
Trump is not merely running for president, he is auditioning for "King of Pandering". He learned how to garner support with first the birther fraud and then the nativist appeal that launched his campaign. Now he is showcasing a "tax plan" designed to appeal to anyone who pays taxes: if he is elected President you will pay less taxes. [hedge fund mangers may pay more but will also benefit from reduced rates]. And of course, he can declare that this across the board reduction will be revenue neutral and simulate a 6% growth rate......and Mexico will pay for that wall.....and we will take that oil.
24
Here's how we will know when the Republican Presidential campaigns are getting serious about winning: the day Donald Trump quits his campaign for whatever reason whatsoever. When he realizes his bid is too expensive, either financially, or publicity-wise, and leaves the race, we can all celebrate a renewed seriousness for the Presidential contest. This man is never going to be President of the United States. He is the new Ross Perot, someone who appeals to dumb rednecks, and to those who believe only business men outsiders can run our country.
Trump is a a fake, cartoon candidate for the Presidency. He is never going to go the distance needed and he is completely unqualified to be President. For the political journalism media to take this man's bid seriously, with lengthy interviews and analyses of his platform positions is understandable only because the news media is part of show business, as we saw with the Brian Williams debacle, where a dishonest but high-profile anchor is now covering "breaking news", as if that sort of news needs less honesty in its reporting. Media, stop giving Trump free publicity.
Trump is a rich, callous, capitalist racist, sexist creep with a schoolyard bully's personality. He makes Vladimir Putin look like a respectable politician. Let's get over this joke of a candidate, America, as quickly as possible. Mr. Trump, please quit now.
69
I think "demagogue" is the label that fits Mr. Trump.
Merriam Webster's definition of "demagogue" - "a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power."
I think this describes Candidate Trump.
I think this describes Candidate Trump.
Media, i.e., in particular CNN should stop giving him so much time.
Trump's tax plan would have no effect on Ford building plants in Mexico.
Yes because Trump's trade policies would.
Josh Barro will learn next year in 5th grade that half-truths are still whole lies.
Yes because Trump's trade policies would.
Josh Barro will learn next year in 5th grade that half-truths are still whole lies.
3
Perhaps you don't realize "President" Trump would not be able to singlehandly change U.S. Trade policy. Seems you, too, skipped the 5th grade.
I would be very concerned about the White-Guilter Elitist liberal hedgefunders wives of the Manhatthan upper east side. The idea they may have to give up a pair of 800 dollars shoes and get one of 700 instead must be terrifying for them. Even worse they may have to reduce the number of "Bash republican" parties they have or "fundraising events" to protect bees in the forests, or yoga club subscriptions, etc. Trump should rethink those tax policies and be more compassionate about these tormented Americans.
4
I am so sick of hearing that tax reductions can be paid for with bonanzas we wiil realize through new economic growth and reducing government waste. The fact is that if we want lower taxes, we need to give up services and benefits. If we want more services and benefits, we need to raise taxes. We need to choose our priorities rather than avoiding the necessary choice with hocus pocus like this so-called "plan".
29
Removal of the estate tax (which currently doesn't kick in until your estate is over 5.4M and has a max rate of 40%) will go a long way to having a permanent wealthy class from the same family. Trump himself would save a large amount from that alone. This plan is the same old conservative Republican plan that was discredited over and over again. I hope someone seriously dissects this plan during it's autopsy.
23
I love people who dislike people who do well. If you make it big and made millions dollars it should stay with your family. The Government or anyone else does not have any right to take it from you or your dependents. It sound like you are Jealous of people who do well and since you have not, you want to punish them before and after they pass away.
Many of the wealthiest got that way by paying less then their fair share of taxes throughout their entire lives. This is accomplished by buying politicians who rig the system in favor of the wealthiest. Then there are people like you who don't know the wealthy are taking advantage of the system they rigged. You seem to think that the wealthy got that way all by themselves. They didn't. How wealthy would they be is they couldn't sell their goods here?
I hope someone drives a stake through this plan's "heart" during the autopsy.
1
Why not make the rich even more richer, right Mr Trump? After all, the country is obsessed with you and many are even saying you will be the next president. So why not just go full-on Idiocracy and rob the poor blatantly. You got away with it this far. Now let us all sit back and see how ignorant the American people have become. I'll tell you, Trump is an insult to all American people and a disgrace of our election process.
8
Another example of double talk. Dangerous beyond comprehension. Only Bernie can save us.
8
All I ever hear from liberals is how the middle class doesn't get a fair shake. Trump has proposed a 56% tax cut for the middle class (using the NYT's own numbers). And what is the response from liberals? Anger that Trump's plan doesn't help the middle class.
You just can't please some people no matter what you do.
But while the NYT will whine as usual, actual middle class people who stand to get a huge tax cut will like this plan.
You just can't please some people no matter what you do.
But while the NYT will whine as usual, actual middle class people who stand to get a huge tax cut will like this plan.
6
You misunderstand the nature or enlightened self-interest on the part of the middle class. As a middle-class tax payer, myself, my concern is that the tax burden is shared equitably and that government spending is properly targeted. Lower taxes for me, alone, is not an absolute good. If my taxes are lowered to zero but we have terrible roads, no regulation of VW or other car makers, no help to the injured or unfortunate, it hurts me more than a tax bill.
10
And what will that get the middle class? Will the cost of college be made more affordable? Will they have social security or medicare to see them into a nominally survivable old age? Will their roads, bridges, tunnels, electrical grid, water systems, food distribution, shorelines, etc., etc., be strengthened against (now) the almost certain disastrous effects of climate change? Will public schools be funded? In short, will the effect of maybe a few thousand (more likely a few hundred) less in taxes make up for all the things that made up the Great Society? Will the overwhelmingly large benefit to the wealthy help to equalize the increasingly dangerous levels of inequality in our economy?
Here's a hint: the answer is no.
Just a hint: the answer is no.
Here's a hint: the answer is no.
Just a hint: the answer is no.
10
No, the response is that the numbers make absolutely no sense.
3
With a tax plan like that, maybe he really _does_ want the GOP nomination.
It's a tax plan that a billionaire could love. To the GOP, who else matters? Including every stripr of so-called radical right "rebel" and "populist?"
It's a tax plan that a billionaire could love. To the GOP, who else matters? Including every stripr of so-called radical right "rebel" and "populist?"
1
The tax code is used for social engineering.
We think that owning your own home is a good idea so we give you deductions for mortgage interest and real estate taxes.
If you are extremely ill and incur large medical expenses we give you a deduction for medical expenses. Hurricane Sandy or Bernie Madoff wipe you out? You get a casualty/theft loss deduction. (See, we have a heart!)
If we do not permit you to deduct what you give to charity charitable contributions would decline you would expect the charities like cancer care, the poor, the heart association, medical research, the hospitals, march of dimes, to be knocking on government's door with their hands out. The religions? They'd really go begging. Government would be precluded from giving them a nickle.
You spend money to make money, keep your money, find a job, you get deductions. That all makes sense. There are more examples.
As such, the idea of a flat tax, as some have suggested, is a horrible idea.
We think that owning your own home is a good idea so we give you deductions for mortgage interest and real estate taxes.
If you are extremely ill and incur large medical expenses we give you a deduction for medical expenses. Hurricane Sandy or Bernie Madoff wipe you out? You get a casualty/theft loss deduction. (See, we have a heart!)
If we do not permit you to deduct what you give to charity charitable contributions would decline you would expect the charities like cancer care, the poor, the heart association, medical research, the hospitals, march of dimes, to be knocking on government's door with their hands out. The religions? They'd really go begging. Government would be precluded from giving them a nickle.
You spend money to make money, keep your money, find a job, you get deductions. That all makes sense. There are more examples.
As such, the idea of a flat tax, as some have suggested, is a horrible idea.
4
Finally a Republican with the courage to kill the job-killing "death tax" that cripples our economy by taxing 2 out of every 1,000 estates.
51
Finally a Republican with the courage to say, without equivocation, my platform is to keep myself rich! and my heirs too!
I suppose Trump will make up for the lost tax revenue by having Mexico pay for it.
23
You mean to tell me the people who pay the most taxes, get the biggest tax cuts? Amazing how math works, huh?
3
No, corporations with entire accounting departments dedicated to finding every loophole and moving funds overseas, pay little to no taxes.
No, the people who should be paying more taxes, because they make so much more money, have found numerous ways to not pay what they owe.
No, the tax laws are written by those who can most benefit from them.
The rest of us, who make much less, pay a much higher effective rate of taxes and fees. Some of us spend all of our money (because we have to), and pay taxes, in one form or another, on every cent we make. That can not be said of those above.
No, the people who should be paying more taxes, because they make so much more money, have found numerous ways to not pay what they owe.
No, the tax laws are written by those who can most benefit from them.
The rest of us, who make much less, pay a much higher effective rate of taxes and fees. Some of us spend all of our money (because we have to), and pay taxes, in one form or another, on every cent we make. That can not be said of those above.
3
Yes, as they've been getting since 1980. Eventually we will reach our goal of a negative tax and the rich will receive massive payouts from the government. Oh, wait...
Trump: Attention government funding of responsibility for protecting the well-being of the American people from those in corporate America who would pollute the air, water and ground, and who would take advantage of the average person who lacks a reasonable way to protect themselves from it: YOU'RE FIRED !
1
The lower his poll numbers go the louder he'll get.
Watch the volume of this petulant child grow as his influence fades...
Watch the volume of this petulant child grow as his influence fades...
24
I guess the stock market just LOVES Donald's tax plan. Only down 3%.
3
Virtually all of Trump's "policies" come down to "trust me: it will be great." Here, we have a tax plan built on a growth assumption that is unproven and unlikely. And remember, we are going to have a military that is "so strong that nobody will dare mess with us." That won't be cheap.
11
Wow - he is so much more impressive than Jeb! He is so high energy that he might be able to produce a 6% growth rate, 50% more than Jeb and 3 times what we're getting from President Obama. And while I'm ready to cast my ballot for him today, I'm just going to wait and see if Carly or Ben Carson can come up with a plan that might produce an 8% growth rate. Or maybe Marco could come up with a plan that might even get to 10%
Sarcasm aside, I'm just hoping PT Barnum was wrong......
Sarcasm aside, I'm just hoping PT Barnum was wrong......
20
The very notion that the super-rich should pay even less tax than they pay now makes me nauseous. What an absolutely disgusting and unacceptable proposal!!!
5
Wait, you're saying Trump's policy ideas aren't realistic? Get out!
10
Another Trump flip-flop? Surprise surprise.
4
With so many of these tax-cutting plans, it's just a question of where their authors insert the "miracle happens here" step.
6
Trump is a fine satirist. Who knew?
2
The bottom line is the so called businessman Trump (who would be better described as the marketman Trump) doesn't really know the first thing about the business of running a country but like Romney, Bush, and the rest of the rightwing knows a lot about giving themselves a big tax cut and getting other people to pay for it.
7
Ah yes, the Sam Brownback plan but on a national scale - cut or eliminate taxes for some and the economy will grow. Sorry, it hasn't worked in Kansas and won't work for our national economy. Most people pocket it, not spend it or invest in our economy in other ways. His performance on 60 Minutes last night was classic ... the promises were spewing from his mouth like lava from a volcano. It was one thing after another. Comical ... and scary that people take him seriously as someone who can lead this country.
14
So you are saying a business person who is a Republican is giving us a bogus tax plan?
I don't believe it. You are making it up.
I don't believe it. You are making it up.
7
Donald Trump is lying? That's hard to believe. He's always seemed like such a modest, upstanding fellow.
10
"But there is no evidence to support the idea that such rapid growth can be produced through tax cuts."
well obviously, no one dared to try it yet. trump can argue otherwise -
'there is no evidence to support the idea that such rapid growth can NOT be produced through tax cuts.'
well obviously, no one dared to try it yet. trump can argue otherwise -
'there is no evidence to support the idea that such rapid growth can NOT be produced through tax cuts.'
3
See Kansas, as mentioned elsewhere in this thread and in a rather extensive feature in the Times magazine a few months ago, showing Kansas ultra-conserve legislators _raising_ taxes because cutting taxes and education and infrastructure was somehow not luring enough business to their state to maintain even the most basic services. Teachers were leaving the state.
There's PLENTY of evidence that tax cuts do not produce rapid growth, offsetting the loss of income to the govt. Look at Kansas' experience under Sam Brownback. The state cut taxes (and services) during the recession; it's economy is STILL depressed relative to neighboring states. Very close to a controlled experiment, with the results confirming the folly of the Laffer Curve.
Why don't you compare 1946 - 1973 with very high tax rates on the Rich and growth of 3.8% on average with what followed when taxes were cut.
2
Much of the middle class is subject to the alternative minimum tax (AMT) because it comes out higher than the regular income tax. Unless Trump also changes the AMT, his changes will not reduce the tax liability for these taxpayers.
2
I can't find the reference, but I once read that 85% of the AMT is paid by people earning over $200,000 a year. Hardly middle class.
Yes yes, everyone paying attention knows he always lies. Claims he had a great education when in fact he was sent to boarding school to try to discipline him. Claims he's a good businessman when he now owns about half what his father gave him 25 years ago (adjusted for inflation). Four bankruptcies too, claims that was good business because all the investors who lost billions weren't nice guys anyway.
So yes, he lies all the time, we all know that. Except for his supporters, who I can barely guess what they might think, if they do.
So yes, he lies all the time, we all know that. Except for his supporters, who I can barely guess what they might think, if they do.
12
Assuming he could get all these changes enacted, how does Trump propose to pay the cost of rounding up the 11 million illegal immigrants and then deporting them? Perhaps a mileage tax on trains, boats, planes and Greyhound buses used to move all these people outta here?
1
If all businesses and home-owners would use e-verify before hiring someone, then illegal immigrants would not be able to find work here. They would self-deport.
We could direct all of the money we now spend on them (for medical care, education, translation services, correctional services, and on and on) to opening opportunities for our own citizens and to legal immigrants.
Way too many of our own people have dropped out of the labor force because the illegals have forced down wages for unskilled and low skilled jobs, and taken most of them. Using e-verify would help the economy.
We could direct all of the money we now spend on them (for medical care, education, translation services, correctional services, and on and on) to opening opportunities for our own citizens and to legal immigrants.
Way too many of our own people have dropped out of the labor force because the illegals have forced down wages for unskilled and low skilled jobs, and taken most of them. Using e-verify would help the economy.
With tax cuts like these, how does Mr. Trump expect to pay for that greatest great wall on our southern border?
3
Mexicans will build it, and then Mexico will pay for it ')
What do you mean? Under Trump, Mexico pays for that wall.
As a middle-class person looking at Trump's tax plan and seeing how it differs from what he's been saying, I have a couple words for him: He's fired!
11
Very informative analysis. This is why I read NYT.
2
More smoke and mirrors from a first class huckster. Once he gets battered a bit for the ludicrous positions that he will stake out, he will leave the race like a spoiled child who doesn't get his way. Just wait for it.
1
I kind of hope he does in June of 2016, leaving the GOP flummoxed with no candidate next year.
Anyone can create a new tax structure that sounds like it will deliver a free unicorn to everyone.
I would like to see JUST ONE candidate tell me why they think our deficit is too small, why they think they country is in a recession that can be ended via deficit spending, or what exactly they are going to cut from the federal budget.
If a candidate said "I am going to cut $400 billion from the DOD budget and return it through these tax cuts" I would be interested. If a candidate says "I am going to cut taxes by hundreds of billions of dollars", and that's the end of the story, I laugh and work on plans to move to a sane country.
I would like to see JUST ONE candidate tell me why they think our deficit is too small, why they think they country is in a recession that can be ended via deficit spending, or what exactly they are going to cut from the federal budget.
If a candidate said "I am going to cut $400 billion from the DOD budget and return it through these tax cuts" I would be interested. If a candidate says "I am going to cut taxes by hundreds of billions of dollars", and that's the end of the story, I laugh and work on plans to move to a sane country.
5
David, here are a few things to think about. The deficit measures the flow of money FROM the federal government TO people, businesses and state and local governments. A surplus measure the flow FROM us TO the federal government. What do you thing has happened when we have had surpluses for a while?
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 36% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
Are you sure you want to reduce the deficit?
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 36% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
Are you sure you want to reduce the deficit?
'The usual fee structure for a hedge fund is called “2-and-20”: a flat management fee (often 2 percent) on all assets, plus a performance fee (often 20 percent) on profits above a set threshold. '
I suggest a 20% penalty for profits below the set threshold. After all, these hedge-fund managers are brilliant; that's why we pay them so much.
Seems reasonable to weed out the not-so-brilliant by assessing a modest penalty for poor performance, don't you think?
I suggest a 20% penalty for profits below the set threshold. After all, these hedge-fund managers are brilliant; that's why we pay them so much.
Seems reasonable to weed out the not-so-brilliant by assessing a modest penalty for poor performance, don't you think?
5
Do NYT writers fear not being invited to the next wine party in Park Slope if they ever write something nice about Mr. Trump? Openminded moderates and liberals are most certainly going to find this plan alluring.
4
The worst tax is the job killing payroll tax and it remains. The best tax is the estate tax that affects the rich, and only the rich, and only after they no longer feel the pain. That Mr. Trump wants to eliminate. Unrealized capital gains (i.e. increases in property values) will never be taxed and the wealth gap will grow at the expense of the middle class and the poor. Trump has shown his true colors and has lost the election by his greed.
8
A friend once told me that the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the Democrats, as least modestly (and admittedly, sometime foolishly) actually care about other people. Republicans, by and large, only care about themselves. That is why the GOP base will applaud and embrace anyone who promises to lower THEIR taxes, whether its crazy and totally unworkable or not....
63
While the idea of trusting a Donald Trump would never occur to me, a Trump is going to have advisers draw up a tax plan and a Trump will pay no particular attention to the plan. As for advisers, these folks are Republicans and will draw up a Republican plan no matter what Trump might have wished if Trump ever could actually wish otherwise.
3
"But there is no evidence to support the idea that such rapid growth can be produced through tax cuts." What? Real GDP per capita averaged 3.05% under Reagan versus 2.14% under Carter. The main thing Reagan did was cut taxes, it was his entire 1980 platform. How can a person of even average intelligence make a statement like that? Federal revenues averaged 17.5% GDP from 1982-1989, versus the 1974-1981 average of 17.8% GDP. So yeah the growth more than covered the tax cuts. I'm not a Trump fan as I prefer Fiorina and Rubio but get your facts correct sir.
4
Not a very good experiment, since Carter and Reagan served during different phases of the economic cycle. A better, more controlled experiment is provided by Sam Brownback's tax cuts in Kansas in response to the Great Recession. Six years on, Kansas' economy is still lagging that of neighboring states. So the evidence runs against your faith in tax-cuts as a means of economic stimulus.
If you insist on comparing presidents, perhaps your should consider the contrast between Clinton (raised taxes but oversaw high growth) and W (lowered taxes but saw only anemic growth). Indeed, the growth under Clinton outpaced that under Reagan.
If you insist on comparing presidents, perhaps your should consider the contrast between Clinton (raised taxes but oversaw high growth) and W (lowered taxes but saw only anemic growth). Indeed, the growth under Clinton outpaced that under Reagan.
4
I would like to see a tax plan that raised long term capital gains rates to 28% as Reagan did in the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
3
FFS - Yeah, but Carter had to deal with the oil crisis. Also per capita GDP growth was higher in 1946 - 1973 with much higher tax rates on the Rich than under Reagan.
http://equitablegrowth.org/research/post-war-history-u-s-economic-growth/
http://equitablegrowth.org/research/post-war-history-u-s-economic-growth/
2
I did enjoy reading the article as there is valuable information in here. I was a bit troubled by the various inaccuracies through out though. Facts must be straight and researched before inundating the public with partial and even mis-information.
3
Can you let us know what inaccuracies you are talking about?
2
It is intentional. The writer is hoping to influence those who will not read Trump's tax plan for themselves. More blatant propaganda supporting the two party one donor class system. I will not be sad at the loss of trillions in tax revenue, heck I will be glad. I think the whole country will be celebrating the trillions of dollars back in their pockets instead of in the pockets of the corrupt government.
1
What's intentional? The clear analysis of the plan in the column or the claim that it's full of inaccuracies?
1
We don't want to become the United States of Kansas -- failing, bankrupt and driving every last talented non-billionaire in the state to other lands. I hope the media actually attacks Trump's positions for the utter chaos that they'd lead to. There is no "fair and balanced" approach to critiquing this plan: it just belongs in the incinerator.
66
"I'm not a real conservative, but I play one on TV." A true conservative would raise enough tax revenue to pay for expenditures. A true conservative would cut Medicare and Social Security disability spending, both programs which are pretty much broke.
1
And who would pick up the slack? Let me guess, the free market....
2
I don't think any discussion of taxes in the United States can be complete without noting the following:
We are the lowest taxed people's in the first world.
There, I took care of that.
Now, folks, proceed with your discussion.
We are the lowest taxed people's in the first world.
There, I took care of that.
Now, folks, proceed with your discussion.
221
You didn't take "care of that." Taxes don't happen in isolation. What do citizens receive as a result of paying their taxes? (education, healthcare, infrastructure, and a long list of other items must be looked at along with the amount of taxes paid.)
That is not true. Switzerland, Singapore, and Hong Kong have lower taxes than the US.
2
Well, Mr. Wood, now that you mention it, we also have the smallest amount of government (or government guaranteed/funded) services in the first world.
Thanks for the reminder.
Thanks for the reminder.
4
His tax plan is about as realistic as building a 30 foot wall over 1900 miles long and deporting 11 million people. The problem is that the Republican base doesn't deal in a fact based universe. They love his immigration plans and will probably love this tax plan, too.
246
There is already a chain link fence along most of that 1900 miles. Why not upgrade to a 30 foot wall? The fact is that Trump's wall would force immigrants to go through his nice, air conditioned gate where they would immediately receive visas. Isn't that better than having people walk across a hundred miles of desert by human traffickers and being raped or murdered? The truth of the matter is that Trump's immigration plan is more humanitarian than anything that anyone else has ever come up with. His tax plan is great too, who really wants to give Washington DC more money to go bomb Iraq, Iran, ISIS or whatever scam they come up with next. Less money to Washington is more money in the states and more money in the real economy. Trump's plans are good for everyone.
1
The 30 foot wall will produce an economic boom in Mexico with the explosion of 31 foot ladder companies.
6
It is quiet incredible to see the cycle of politics. Republicans want these gigantic tax cuts for the rich, the deficit explodes, they lose credibility and the Democrats are elected and spend eight years cleaning up the mess. The new stability results in growth in the stock market and the real economy.
Over the past 100 years the stock market and the economy have done much better under Democrats than Republicans. Shock and awe.
Over the past 100 years the stock market and the economy have done much better under Democrats than Republicans. Shock and awe.
148
The deficit (and debt) has "exploded" under Obama much more than it did under Bush.
2
Don't confuse the Bush crime family that has been running this country for the past with real Republicans like Barry Goldwater and Abraham Lincoln. The truth is that both parties have been taken over by the rich and powerful. Donald Trump is the first real threat to them in a long time and the media is reacting as such, criticizing him at every opportunity. The stock market is doing well right now because of banks pumping cash into it via quantitative easing and negative interest rates. We have never been in a system like the one we are in now so it is a little ridiculous to compare that far back in the past. Watch the Keiser Report if you want to learn about the difference between inflated asset prices and the real economy.
1
The complaint that the debt & deficit has "exploded" under Obama is simply explained - GWB, or 43, if you will. The present POTUS did not significantly raise spending but he did have to clean up George's mess as soon as he was inaugurated (sort of like FDR) and he had to deal with obstructing Republicans bent on his failure (another expensive mistake). Oh and btw, does it bear repeating that GWB was handed a surplus when he arrived and totally blew it (Cheney says they don't matter). It's true, the pattern is revealed: Republican mess, Democrat cleanup. Vicious cycle but you'd think smart people would connect the dots.
4
Trump is running for the Republicans, it's no surprise he doesn't appease liberal demands to increase taxes on the rich.
Most Republican tax plans will claim to lower taxes on the poor and working class, but hidden beneath that is also unspoken that it also benefits the rich, often far greater in dollar amounts.
We need a candidate that can address income and wealth inequality directly, and fix the problems it is causing for the majority of american families!
Most Republican tax plans will claim to lower taxes on the poor and working class, but hidden beneath that is also unspoken that it also benefits the rich, often far greater in dollar amounts.
We need a candidate that can address income and wealth inequality directly, and fix the problems it is causing for the majority of american families!
15
How can we reduce inequality? It is very hard to solve at the local level, but we can do things at the state and federal level. Let's compare periods of high inequality (the 1920's and the 2000's) with the long period (1946 - 1973) of low inequality to see what can be done.
1. Strengthen unions - Outlaw "right-to-work" laws which allow deadbeats to enjoy the benefits obtained by unions without paying dues. Prevent companies from coercing employees against unions, e.g. threatening to close plants. As in Germany, require union representation of boards on directors.
2. Have very high tax rates on the Rich and higher real corporate tax rates. This will encourage the Rich to take lower compensation and discourage companies from leaving oodles of cash sitting around. Today corporate taxes actually paid as a percent of GDP are about a third of what they were after WWII and are the lowest among developed nations.
Higher tax rates on the Rich will also discourage wild financial speculation.
3. Strongly regulate speculation, e.g. outlaw naked credit default swaps, require buyers of future contacts to show ability and willingness to take delivery, etc.
4. Pump more money into the private sector and get it to the people who will spend it. Have the federal government finance worthwhile projects like fixing infrastructure, grants to state for education and police, more research, a new efficient power grid, etc. Realize that debt and deficits do not and have not ever hurt us.
1. Strengthen unions - Outlaw "right-to-work" laws which allow deadbeats to enjoy the benefits obtained by unions without paying dues. Prevent companies from coercing employees against unions, e.g. threatening to close plants. As in Germany, require union representation of boards on directors.
2. Have very high tax rates on the Rich and higher real corporate tax rates. This will encourage the Rich to take lower compensation and discourage companies from leaving oodles of cash sitting around. Today corporate taxes actually paid as a percent of GDP are about a third of what they were after WWII and are the lowest among developed nations.
Higher tax rates on the Rich will also discourage wild financial speculation.
3. Strongly regulate speculation, e.g. outlaw naked credit default swaps, require buyers of future contacts to show ability and willingness to take delivery, etc.
4. Pump more money into the private sector and get it to the people who will spend it. Have the federal government finance worthwhile projects like fixing infrastructure, grants to state for education and police, more research, a new efficient power grid, etc. Realize that debt and deficits do not and have not ever hurt us.
4
If you want to make more money get a better job! If you want to know Donald Trump's tax plan then read it on his website. If you want to continue down the same path that has brought us to this system of wealth inequality keep listening to what the propaganda news tells you and keep blaming the rich for all your problems.
1
That candidate is Bernie Sanders.
5
Unless there is a clear explanation of the revenue side, no tax plan that discusses "rates" means anything.
No administration (Democrat or Republican) in the last sixty years has actually reduced the budget below the year before (not the paper budget, but the amount we actually spend in one fiscal year).
So any credible tax plan has to produce as much revenue in its first year as the revenue we are currently gaining.
You can change who pays. You can tax homes more and boats less. You can give the little guy a break and make it up from some rich people.
But the plan has to produce as much revenue as we are currently collecting.
Anybody who promises otherwise is prevaricating.
I think Trump is prevaricating.
PS - "We're gonna cover the shortfall by cleaning up waste, fraud and abuse" simply won't wash.
No administration (Democrat or Republican) in the last sixty years has actually reduced the budget below the year before (not the paper budget, but the amount we actually spend in one fiscal year).
So any credible tax plan has to produce as much revenue in its first year as the revenue we are currently gaining.
You can change who pays. You can tax homes more and boats less. You can give the little guy a break and make it up from some rich people.
But the plan has to produce as much revenue as we are currently collecting.
Anybody who promises otherwise is prevaricating.
I think Trump is prevaricating.
PS - "We're gonna cover the shortfall by cleaning up waste, fraud and abuse" simply won't wash.
88
Clearing up waste, fraud and abuse sounds great. Who can disagree with that. It is like saying you are going to be tough on crime. What does your opponent say to distinguish themselves? I'll hug the crime out of them?
Of course Trump doesn't say HOW he will clean up waste fraud and abuse.
I do agree that de-coupling taxes from budgets is illogical. Too bad all past proposals that bills 'pay as they go' have been shot down.
Of course Trump doesn't say HOW he will clean up waste fraud and abuse.
I do agree that de-coupling taxes from budgets is illogical. Too bad all past proposals that bills 'pay as they go' have been shot down.
"We're gonna cover the shortfall by cleaning up waste, fraud and abuse"...because that has worked so well every other time we've tried it? This is yet another case where the GOP sticks to a strategy that will never work.
1
It should be obvious to all that any attempt to change personal income tax rates will never fly. Better to focus on corporate income tax rates first. The idea that you can have real reform in personal income tax rates that address the 1% is a fools errand, especially since they now pay 40% of all personal income taxes. As usual, the deductions and loophole is always a way to pay for personal income tax cuts. All that would do would produce new and different winners and losses. Until every single person is on the hook for some income tax, government will continue to grow. Free stuff for the 47%'s will grow. Hey, it is the way we got ourselves into the hole we are in.
4
What is your source for the statistic that the 1% pay 40% of all personal income taxes? Is that federal, or state and federal combined? Are you including payroll taxes?
3
Since the top 1% have about 40 percent of the wealth in the US, that seems reasonable. However, if you look at the total Federal taxes paid, the top 1%, it's about 24%, and if you look at all taxes paid, federal, state and local, it's even lower. The poorest 20% pay state and local taxes at about 10%, and the top 1% pay about 5%.
6
You do realize that "free stuff to the 47%” includes people who've worked long and hard, have saved and aren't wealthy, and at a relatively young age have cancer? Their only recourse is Social Security and Medicare. Add to that the prices drug companies charge, and even if you aren't in the 47%, you'll be there soon after you start paying for an effective cancer treatment that prolongs your life.
6
Time to start dealing with tax inversions.
What we need in our country are laws which DEEM all money earned by US corporations and their phony-baloney foreign subsidiaries to be US Taxable Income regardless of where it's earned and regardless of whether the US corporation ever brings that money home.
This is exactly how individual US citizens are treated under the same circumstances. As with individuals, the corporations would, of course, get dollar-for-dollar tax credits for foreign taxes paid on those same earnings.
When corporations start paying their fair share of the taxes on all income from whatever source derived we can drastically reduce our income tax rate on all corporations. 18% seems about right.
Do that and the world’s tax haven will be US.
What we need in our country are laws which DEEM all money earned by US corporations and their phony-baloney foreign subsidiaries to be US Taxable Income regardless of where it's earned and regardless of whether the US corporation ever brings that money home.
This is exactly how individual US citizens are treated under the same circumstances. As with individuals, the corporations would, of course, get dollar-for-dollar tax credits for foreign taxes paid on those same earnings.
When corporations start paying their fair share of the taxes on all income from whatever source derived we can drastically reduce our income tax rate on all corporations. 18% seems about right.
Do that and the world’s tax haven will be US.
72
Second the motion! Individual US citizens abroad pay taxes on their world wide income, so why not corporations which after all are persons, just like me, no? Oh, they're not? But the SCOTUS said they are.
it would be interesting to analyze how Trump's finances would be affected by his own plan.
In addition, it would be nice to demonstrate how the deficit would be affected by such a plan. I assume the debt would go up with no positive affect on growth, which is what most of these GOP tax plans do. Funny how Democrats would take on more debt in order to put people to work, stimulate the economy, and produce public goods while the GOP would take on more debt in order to further fill the coffers of the wealthy.
In addition, it would be nice to demonstrate how the deficit would be affected by such a plan. I assume the debt would go up with no positive affect on growth, which is what most of these GOP tax plans do. Funny how Democrats would take on more debt in order to put people to work, stimulate the economy, and produce public goods while the GOP would take on more debt in order to further fill the coffers of the wealthy.
82
I think Donal Trump would do both, considering that he has been a Democrat for most of his life and has put thousands of people to work and produced infrastructure that millions have enjoyed. Trump's plan wants to fill everyone's coffers, not just the wealthy, and he has said multiple times that he will pay down our debt. You can debate about how he might do this or that but the truth is that we won't know until the deal happens and the job is done. I trust him to cut taxes on the 99% which is what this plan does. I trust him to raise taxes on the .01% which is what this plan does. I trust him to reduce our debt by brining wealth and jobs back into the country, which is what this plan does. This is Trump's plan, not the GOP's, in fact the GOP elite hates Trump more than most Democrats do.
2
While I prefer a flat tax, where all Americans are responsible for paying something into the cost of running our government, I think this is a good first start. No one has a fool-proof solution that will be passed through Congress, but this at least has elements that both parties can agree on. Throwing around proposals that don't have a realistic chance of coming to fruition is like tilting at windmills. Bravo to mar. trump, for at least showing practicality over dogma.
10
that is in practice a regressive tax.
25% of my income is not as dear as 25% of a poor person's income.
25% of a billionaire's income may be dear to them, but it will not force them to eat ramen for a month.
This idea that making 'the poor' pay taxes is bound up with the social darwinist idea that the poor are willfully so. All they need is to 'just work harder'.
25% of my income is not as dear as 25% of a poor person's income.
25% of a billionaire's income may be dear to them, but it will not force them to eat ramen for a month.
This idea that making 'the poor' pay taxes is bound up with the social darwinist idea that the poor are willfully so. All they need is to 'just work harder'.
18
The article said that in spite of what Trump has claimed, his plan would amount to a huge tax cut for the wealthy. That is about as close to Republican dogma as it is possible to get.
14
Ray -- Here's the problem with a flat tax: it's much more onerous on poorer people than it is on richer people. That's because it's tougher for people who have less money to pay out a given percentage of their income in taxes than it is for richer people to pay out that same percent. Let's say you make $1,000/year and the flat tax is 10%. After paying for rent, food, gas, and other living expenses, you're less likely to be able to easily find that $100 to pay out in taxes. In contrast, if you make $100,000/year, after you're done paying for your living costs, you can probably find $10,000 more easily to pay out in taxes. The tax system we have right now places the burden on those who make more (by taxing them at a higher rate) in order to offset the cost of taxing poorer people at a lower rate (which helps them keep more money in their pockets). Granted it doesn't work perfectly (far from it), but the idea is to prevent poorer people from being disproportionately burdened.
15
Trump should rename his tax plan as the Deficit Explosion Tax Cut Giveaway Act to reflect its real-life mathematical consequences and philosophical spirit.
His tax cut would drive the country toward bankruptcy, also known as Trump's sweet spot.
More supply-side fraud from another GOP poster child preying on small children with tax-cut candy.
You think America's infrastructure is embarrassing now; Trump's plan would make the nation's roads, bridges and tunnels unpassable from a lack of government revenue.
His tax cut would drive the country toward bankruptcy, also known as Trump's sweet spot.
More supply-side fraud from another GOP poster child preying on small children with tax-cut candy.
You think America's infrastructure is embarrassing now; Trump's plan would make the nation's roads, bridges and tunnels unpassable from a lack of government revenue.
301
hahahaha great comment
2
1. The deficit has already exploded thanks to Barack Obama.
2. First credit downgrade in American history? Obama.
3. Supply side, trickle down economics? You mean like the Obama bailouts?
4. Obama: extended Bush tax cuts more times in 2 years than Bush did in 8.
5. America's infrastructure can't be embarrassing, Obama's shovel ready jobs fixed that, no wait...
2. First credit downgrade in American history? Obama.
3. Supply side, trickle down economics? You mean like the Obama bailouts?
4. Obama: extended Bush tax cuts more times in 2 years than Bush did in 8.
5. America's infrastructure can't be embarrassing, Obama's shovel ready jobs fixed that, no wait...
3
When will Republicans finally understand that the Reagan era "Trickle Down Theory" has never worked!! They shamelessly continue to promote this tax policy nonsense--tax cuts to the rich have helped them amass great wealth and none of this wealth has trickled down to the rest in the form of jobs, opportunities, and new businesses that the theory always claims will occur--the only beneficiaries are their chauffeurs, pilots, housekeepers, chefs and mansion homebuilders.
7
Would love to pay less taxes but this is fantasy and not reality. The term fuzzy math comes to mind when Mr. Trump tries to explain how the tax cuts would be paid for. If you're going to be a serious candidate Mr. Trump, please put forth a serious tax plan.
106
The tax plan will be paid for by the elimination of government. Don't you read the Republican play book . . . er platform?
1
Trump's tax plan is sheer nonsense. But the idea of a multi-tiered no deduction tax, say 10%, 20%, 30% and 33% with a sizable personal exemption to help the poor is interesting to me.
11
What is interesting to you is exactly Trump's plan just with lower percentages.
1
Gosh, I has holding my breath for a populist tax plan from the great middle class defender and I can exhale now because its the same ole same ole proposal from the same ole GOP politician. Sceptics were laughing at 4 percent growth prediction from Jeb, and now its nothing to expect 6 percent from that middle class politician and defender of women, blacks, Spanish and everyone else that the Donald thinks is in love with him. It reminds me of the famous Bugs Bunny quote, "what a maroon" I guess the more things change the more they stay the same.
132
Did you read his tax plan? It is available on his website you know. Or did you just read the NYTimes propaganda? Go ahead, read the plan for yourself, I dare ya.
2
His plan does not meet with the reality of the world we live in. I'm just wondering if it would take him getting elected and failing before most people would realize this.
You can't just assume massive growth to make up for short-comings in the rest of your plans. Everyone should assume the same growth for these estimates to be comparable as I'm sure they're all thinking their plan will grow the economy in the same way.
You can't just assume massive growth to make up for short-comings in the rest of your plans. Everyone should assume the same growth for these estimates to be comparable as I'm sure they're all thinking their plan will grow the economy in the same way.
26
I agree. This is a classic failure of Republican tax plans; they figure on unrealistic growth. We are almost certainly at the limits of growth as a large mature nation with a high population and a lot of immigration (legal & illegal).
However, consider the failure of DEMOCRATIC plans -- they too assume unrealistic growth. And THEY base their gains on "soaking the rich" with very high taxes. They also let too many people under about $60K off the hook for any Federal taxes, which I think is wrong. I think everyone no matter how poor should put a few dollars in, to be able to say they have "skin in the game". (Give it back in the form of refunds or EITC or credits, but let everyone feel they have paid in, and are not "takers".)
Frankly, what is scary is that NOBDOY on the left or right seems to have a clue as to how to structure the tax system to make it fair, or collect enough revenues to pay our bills, fund our national projects (SS, military, Medicare and Medicaid) and repair our infrastructure.
However, consider the failure of DEMOCRATIC plans -- they too assume unrealistic growth. And THEY base their gains on "soaking the rich" with very high taxes. They also let too many people under about $60K off the hook for any Federal taxes, which I think is wrong. I think everyone no matter how poor should put a few dollars in, to be able to say they have "skin in the game". (Give it back in the form of refunds or EITC or credits, but let everyone feel they have paid in, and are not "takers".)
Frankly, what is scary is that NOBDOY on the left or right seems to have a clue as to how to structure the tax system to make it fair, or collect enough revenues to pay our bills, fund our national projects (SS, military, Medicare and Medicaid) and repair our infrastructure.
2
Like any sociopath, Donald Trump will tell people what they want to hear, and then do what he wants to do. It's up to the people to delve into the truth, if they are so inclined.
229
Sociopath? You just defined "politician."
3
The problem is that he knows very well that most of the public is not educated enough to understand the implications of his tax policy. This duping policy also explains how George W. was re-elected after the whole world had exposed him as a liar about WMD! This is shameful manipulation of a mostly decent, but sometimes under-educated electorate.
5
Dump Trump now. He's a Bum. He doesn't know what a middle class person even looks like, let alone someone struggling with minimum wage.
154
When it comes to money and economics..... I trust the ultimate American business man Mr Trump more than Mr Barro. Besides, your wasting your time. It's nothing but a winner for Trump - the VAST majority of people won't have to pay taxes. You lose - Trump wins again!
9
Dear John,
Trump is a lousy businessman, although as you support him I have my doubts you're able to accept facts. He was given 0.5 billion by his rich dad 25 years ago. He now has 1.4 billion in assets minus 0.25 billion in debt, for 1.15 billion. As inflation has increased 450% since his daddy gave him that money, what he was given would be 2.25 billion today. He has just over half what he had 25 years ago, and has had four bankruptcies in that time.
He's an awful businessman, like anyone who loses half their net worth and can't create sustainable businesses. Casinos, tie companies, perfume companies, Miss America pageants, The Apprentice, they've all failed. He's a loser, face it.
Trump is a lousy businessman, although as you support him I have my doubts you're able to accept facts. He was given 0.5 billion by his rich dad 25 years ago. He now has 1.4 billion in assets minus 0.25 billion in debt, for 1.15 billion. As inflation has increased 450% since his daddy gave him that money, what he was given would be 2.25 billion today. He has just over half what he had 25 years ago, and has had four bankruptcies in that time.
He's an awful businessman, like anyone who loses half their net worth and can't create sustainable businesses. Casinos, tie companies, perfume companies, Miss America pageants, The Apprentice, they've all failed. He's a loser, face it.
362
Over 25 years Trump has been using his businesses and taking $$ out of his businesses to fund his opulent lifestyle. You can't therefore just look at the "net worth" left in his businesses to score his success. From the other angle, surveys that look at Net Worth often don't subtract out the debt of the businesses (which they should, since the debt amount belongs to creditors, not the business owner). Since Trump's companies are privately-owned, not publicly traded, we don't have enough info to calculate if he under- or over-performed a hypothetical benchmark.
6
Dear Dan,
Clearly, you are exaggerating some facts here. As opposed to your claims, Trump's father could not have given him $0.5 billion as he didn't have it; the total volume of assets in his possession was only $0.3 billion (at max) which were equally split between his four children (Trump and his three siblings). (Yeah, too bad for him, Trump didn't get to eat the whole pie.) So, even with the inflation, Trump must have quadrupled the assets he'd gotten from his daddy. How can you call that bad business?
Clearly, you are exaggerating some facts here. As opposed to your claims, Trump's father could not have given him $0.5 billion as he didn't have it; the total volume of assets in his possession was only $0.3 billion (at max) which were equally split between his four children (Trump and his three siblings). (Yeah, too bad for him, Trump didn't get to eat the whole pie.) So, even with the inflation, Trump must have quadrupled the assets he'd gotten from his daddy. How can you call that bad business?
2
Wow! So even Trump could not resist appeasing the donor class of the GOP by offering tax cuts for the wealthy. So much for all of those predictions that he would challenge the GOP establishment with his populism. It won't make any difference with his supporters. GOP voter have been voting against their economic interests since Reagan's regressive policies.
276
Did you read his proposal for yourself? I would ask that you please do so. Trump's plan cuts taxes on the 99% and raises them on the .01%. He is the only one with a proposal to do so. Also his corporate tax plan makes us competitive and will bring jobs back and create new jobs. His plan is populist, but you wouldn't get that from reading the NYTimes propaganda. Please read his plan for yourself and decide for yourself. Why would you trust the same media that told us Bush won the election in 2000?
4
Don't seriously tell me you are really surprised? And who seriously ever really said or meant that "he would challenge the GOP establishment with his populism".
Populism?? Where?
Hopefully very very people are really being taken in by this fraud.
Populism?? Where?
Hopefully very very people are really being taken in by this fraud.
Trump's plan is simply a give away to the wealthiest Americans. 50% of low income Americans do not pay Federal taxes now.