Winners and Losers in the Trump Tax Plan

The plan lacks many details, but one group of losers seems to be upper-middle-income people in blue states.

Comments: 171

  1. Like any idea this Administration has, it is poorly thought out and self serving. Go figure...

  2. trump will fall, or the republican party will in 2018, but we, the people, will lose. A day of stupid tax plans, federal offices set up for victims of immigrant crime (I hope that includes all the bankers and brokers here on visas) and free rein to ISPs. One can only hope that the inevitable climatic, economic and social repercussions fall on trump and his administration and supporters first. trump has not been in his home city since he was sworn in. Americans should reflect on that. We knew him for what he was from the beginning.

  3. You call it a plan, I call it a pie-in-the-sky posturing to consume media minutes and demonstrate "action". This plan is nothing but a Trump speech - lofty in rhetoric, red meat for supporters, devoid of specifics and, ultimately, completely unachievable. Nothing to see here folks, move on.

  4. The deficit will balloon under this plan just so corporations and rich people can get some tax relief. Will the world be willing to finance this tax give-away by buying up all those new government bonds the Treasury will have to issue? Probably, but at a much higher interest rate. The interest we pay on the national debt will go up, squeezing out more social spending. The dollar will tank making everything more expensive for the common American. Maybe that's not what the Trumpsters cheered for but that's what they'll get.

  5. I'm all against Trump tax cuts (which, like all Republican dream plans, overwhelmingly benefit the wealthy), but this article (first draft?) completely ignores the effects on middle and low income earners. Isn't that most of us?

  6. Winners: the 1% and big corporations. Losers: everyone else.

  7. ...and the Trump base keeps cheering as if they are going to be rich enough in their lifetimes to take any of the largess offered to Trump, himself or his fellow troupe of fat cats.

  8. Seriously. I am still puzzled as to why these people support him. I have read countless articles explaining it and it still doesn't make sense.

  9. California and new york over overwhelmingly voted against our President, guess this is their reward , continue to live in welfare states and be happy you cant deduct your taxes, im moving to florida

  10. Which ones are the welfare states again? Seems to me the real welfare states are all of the red states that proclaim low tax rates while accepting huge amounts of federal funds to keep themselves going.

  11. When you move to Florida, Happy camper, better make sure it's high ground. With the EPA gutted and the federal government's income slashed, you're going to be on your own when most of the state ends up under water.

  12. California is the 6th largest economy in the world.

  13. main point of placing this one-page bullet point trump tax plan (call it trump's "Red Herring Tax Plan") this week and/or trump's "Dead Cat Health Care Repeal Plan" back on America's front porch this week is to crowd out any further examination or discussion of Mr. Flynn's or Mr. Kushner's secretive problems or associations with Russia and other suspicious patrons -- or how these two or anyone else on 'Team Trump' obtained a Top Secret security clearance.

    shall we call these sudden alarms and diversions ("Oh, look over there at that shiny tax proposal") the white house's 'Night of The Living Dead' zombie proposals. they're obviously already dead, but seem to be moving toward us in an awkward and threatening manner.

  14. No promises even truly attempted to his base. Well, except those like Kid Rock, Ted Nugent, Sarah Palin (nice photo kids, at the white house huh?).

    We all knew this was going to be worse than Bush Jr. At least Cheney actually ran Haliburton, Big ol T "REX" can't even get a full staff because of his boss.

  15. Neil Irwin buries the lead. Way down at the end of the list of "winners" under this plan is none other than Donald Trump. Irwin makes him last in the list, although the fact that he benefits from virtually every cut he proposed should have put him first on the list. That's Neil Irwin for you.

    And also buried way down there is this little tidbit: "It also would eliminate a 3.8 percent tax, used to help fund Obamacare, that applies to investment income over $250,000 for a couple."

    Trump is defunding the Affordable Care Act, potentially eliminating health insurance for over 20 million Americans.

    Think that should have been given more prominence? So do I.

  16. I don't see a need to accuse Neil Irwin of not giving this prominence. Including Trump at the end almost reads as a sarcastic addendum to what is obviously a self serving plan.

  17. The Republicans' tax attack on the blue states is not especially surprising. It might just backfire on Republicans, however. Imagine progressive types moving away from places like California, New York, and Massachusetts, to places like Arizona, Pennsylvania, and New Hampshire, or even farther afield, and in the process converting red or purple states to blue ones.

  18. All the more so for a transfer of blue state population into red state population because some of the latter are nearly tipping into becoming blue! Calling those states red now hides that upsurge of blue in those red states. The map may indicate red, but a growing population in them is blue.

  19. More likely we won't move to red states because who would want to live there. Our real reaction should be to further defund the federal government and spread the pain of this plan.

  20. Won't happen...

  21. Other losers would be those with high medical expenses.

  22. Indirectly, red states would lose too. They tend to get they highest transfers (i.e. they get more federal revenue than their residents pay in federal taxes). You have to believe that this tax plan would entail significant spending cuts. Blue states could replace lost federal dollars with new state taxes which would provide for the lost federal services. While these state taxes wouldn't be deductible, that would partially be offset by states not having to pay for services in other states.

  23. The only way the federal spending gets cut is if Democrats stop trying to bribe red state voters into voting for them. It is clear that this tax plan is bad for blue state residents, especially the middle and upper middle class ones.

    Perhaps, this will be a wake up call that it is time to defund the federal government and demand yet more tax cuts, especially for the middle class. This Trump plan is heavily weighted toward the very rich and the business owners who will get very low tax rates.

  24. Jazz Paw - Where do you think money comes from and how does it get into the economy?

  25. Losers: the next generations which will have to deal with no (or grossly inadequate) public schools, crumbling / decimated infrastructure, a monstrous national debt, demoralized military, police, firefighters, and other public servants, no (or grossly inadequate) health care, and a permanently ruined environment.

  26. Indeed. This is a "burn it down, collect the insurance" tax plan. Sort of like the environmental plan...

  27. You say that as though American children have nice schools, when they don't have good schools. All of this in spite of the fact that Americans spend more tax dollars per child (12,296) than any other country in the world. I live in California where we are taxed out of our shoes for gas for infrastructure. They didn't spend the money on infrastructure, so the infrastructure is crumbling. Now they have put even MORE tax on the gas for infrastructure - and they are wheeling and dealing to take that money to spend on other items as I write. Lets get real. Go Trump!

  28. That 12,296 divided by 180 school days a year comes to 68 dollars a day. about 8.50 an hour. That's cheaper than a baby sitter. People still moan about the cost per child. Why focus your anger their and not at the people unwilling to pay America back for making them rich?

  29. I pay out of pocket for my health insurance as I'm self-employed. My deduction for medical expenses is very important.

    I also pay for financial advice and tax preparation -- I don't have the expertise to handle this alone. Those are also very significant deductions. This tax plan sounds disastrous to me.

  30. You are self employed. Your company now pays you $1 per year. The rest is corporate profits. As the owner of the company, you end up paying 15%. As the employee that makes $1/year, you pay nothing. You win. It is a windfall for you, not a disaster. It is a disaster for others, but certainly not for you.

  31. Trump tax plan checklist

    1. Form LLC and change to contractor from employee
    2. Move from progressive state to federally dependent red state (loss of state tax deduction)
    3. Invest in real estate (to keep mortgage deductions and get LLC cash flow)
    4. Have net worth over about 10m to maximize inheritance tax

    So sad

  32. Some states generate more revenue from income tax, others from property and sales tax, all currently deductible if you itemize. So this hits more than just the Blue States if other taxes are taken off the deduction list as well.

    Many in the Blue States are already talking about defunding the Federal government, and keeping the tax revenue under state control instead of the current ginormous transfers to Red States. More than 40% of Mississippi GDP comes from Federal transfers, and many other Red States aren't far behind.

    This plan sounds like at least a $2.4 trillion downpayment on that idea. The TrumpCare plan sounds like another effort to cut revenue transfers to the states where Medicaid keeps the hospitals open, mostly Red and rural.

    This could work out alright, if you live in a Blue State.

  33. The assumption that spending will be cut is dubious. We don't know how this will work out on a state-by-state basis because blue states have many pass-through taxpayers, who will benefit, and have some very rich folks who will cleanup.

    The losers in this plan will be those in upper middle class neighborhoods who have a mortgages a substantial property and income taxes from their states. The tax rate will not change, the brackets may ease a bit, but the net deductions will shrink substantially.

    If you ar upper middle class in an urban of successful suburban area, prepare to fork over $3-6K more in federal taxes each year. Some tax cut.

  34. Disappointing. Small reduction for families, huge reduction for business. Unfair that business will pay 15% but people pay 35%. Trump found a way to break another promise.

  35. Subchapter-S profits can be bracketed just like income tax, the sky is not falling.

    Corp profits are like water, it always seeks its lowest level, and it's mobile. The price to invest in Ireland is 12%, why invest in the US? Workers on the other hand are not mobile. Their wages are dependent on productivity, which has been flat due to a lack of business investment. More small businesses have failed than were started under the past WH. Frank-Todd and Ocare are job killers.

    Tax reform should be welcomed by everyone who is not a tax and spend liberal.

  36. Same approach on pass-though worked very well in Kansas to completely destroy their state budget and make sure the Koch brothers had a lower tax rate on their billions than their employees paid on their wages. Pure and simple give-away that makes ghouls like Grover Norquist smile as schools fail and roads crumble.

  37. Another ten years of further wealth redistribution to the already wealthy is more than enough time to completely turn the US into an oligarchy, and crash the global economy again. Try to remember how Bush Juniors tax cuts turned out. And remember, when the global economy goes bust, and the next Dem president is voted in to clean it up, it will still be "no time for tax increases" because as we all know you can never ever increase taxes on the super wealthy during a recession.

  38. Most of the commenters to this article appear to be single dimension thinkers.
    Unless dividends are no longer deductible there is no advantage to incorporating a sole proprietorship. The corporation will pay 15% tax on income, distribute 85% to the individuals who own it, who will pay taxes at their individual rates. Lowering the corrate will result in the 95million not in the work force becoming winners, if they choose to work. Corporations tend to reinvest arming which create jobs. It will also slow the tide of corporations moving overseas and will encourage corporations to bring back trapped earnings from overseas investments.

  39. Voodoo economics.

  40. " The corporation will pay 15% tax on income, distribute 85% to the individuals who own it, who will pay taxes at their individual rates. "

    Not sure how a company survives by paying out 100% of it's income, or why multimillionaire owners like Trump who already pay little or no taxes need more tax cuts than they've already gotten in the past 30 years.

  41. They won't distribute but accumulate ... no dividends. they use their now more valuable stock to secure mortgage loans of which they can deduct the interest paid again from the taxes. building property will increase in price. rents ... at least in the cities (which very often are anti-trump) will rise ... hurting low income people.

  42. I wonder how the average Trump supporter who is ecstatic over saving $60 in federal income tax will feel 10 years from now when as a result of the deficits created by this tax plan we are dead broke and the Social Security he was depending on is kaput.

    Let's hope this "plan" goes nowhere.

  43. How are you able to comment on a tax plan without knowing the income levels for each rate??

  44. Better than $1,000 for an average Joe.

  45. Steven Mnuchin maintains the Laffer curve interpretation that a tax cut will pay for itself with more growth. Even Laffer, and multiple economists who study such macro public policy decisions, know that interpretation is erroneous when tax rates are below 50-60%. Then surrogates get out in front and push those the necessary growth numbers that will pay for the tax cuts. What are those numbers? Well, certainly not current 2-3%, or even a historical 4%... but--quoted, "8-9% growth". Talk about laughable. If that growth existed it would certainly be an unsustainable bubble outside of any American historical perspective. It might be funny if it was a skit put on to demonstrate political silliness, but this could become US policy.

  46. It is now becoming apparent what "mission" Trump has been given by his biggest political and financial backer, Vladimir Putin: utterly destroy the United States of America as we have known it and sew as much confusion and class warfare within it as possible while eviscerating whatever moral authority it ever retained in the eyes of the world. The United States will resemble Russia -- an oligarchically ruled society characterized by rabid unchecked corruption and composed of relatively few well off people and the rest of the population with marginal incomes or less. There is enough circumstantial evidence that the Trump financial empire, such as it is, is deeply beholden to Russian and Russian influenced financiers in much the same way as Marine LePen in France. If Jim Comey is the patriotic legally upright honest broker his supporters say he is, it is imperative that he ramp up his investigation of Russian ties to this utterly compromised, self-dealing and amoral presidency. Lacking that, one fears that the next July 4 need not be celebrated for it will have lost all its meaning.

  47. On August 15 1971 Bretton Woods came to an end. Now we are seeing the end of a Global Economy controlled by the USA. The swamp is about to be drained.
    We here in Canada are thinking we really need a wall.I am an atheist who is doing a lot of praying. It is going to be hard adjusting to the Global Military power being isolationists economically.
    It has been 1000 years since China first declared a fiat currency I sure hope they have learned something we are going to need new world leadership.

  48. Most Americans will be losers. This PowerPoint of a tax plan ignores a key purpose behind cutting taxes, and that is to stimulate the economy. Sure, that's been mentioned, but I really haven't heard much about the goals. I don't even hear a mention of "trickle down" and "voodoo economics." Just tax cuts for everyone. Even the Bushes weren't this mercenary.
    I guess we will find out how hypocritical Republicans are when this explodes the deficit without any benefit to the average American.

  49. In 2012 the Kansas legislature passed massive business tax cuts touted by our Republican governor as, "a shot of adrenaline" for our state's economy. Today our state budget is in shambles and Kansas is dead last in job creation compared to all other states in our region. Kansas is one of the reddest of red states but we have proven beyond any shadow of doubt the fallacy of the right wing, trickle down mantra of tax cuts paying for themselves through growth. Now our president wants to impose this folly on the entire nation. Unbelievable!

  50. He is putting his own economic interests and those of his heirs at the forefront of this policy, and is throwing candy to his voters. Short term goodies at the expense of future generations who may incur even higher debt and who may be unable to pay for progressive programs.

  51. I might agree to lose the federal deduction for state and local taxes in high-tax places like California, New York and Minnesota on one condition: reduce the federal taxes paid by residents of those states that subsidize residents of low- tax southern states. Maybe they'll appreciate northern urban elites a little more.

  52. Yes - blue states have been subsidizing red states for decades. If red states are so enamored of cutting taxes with no way to replace the revenue- I don't need my tax dollars to subsidize their ignorance. Some of us actually believe in the notion that there is a cost to having a civil functioning society.

  53. In what universe is Minnesota considered "urban" or "elite"?

  54. The USA is, again, contrary to progress of humanity and democratic values. WW1 was the last gasp of plutocratic & autocratic rule in Europe and Turkey (Ottoman Empire). President Wilson, by way of income tax sought to both pay for USA's war efforts and tamp down the possible rise of plutocrats & autocrats - he had great disdain for the bunch involved in WW1.
    Beginning with President Reagan the GOP has made a steady march towards turning the USA into the autocratic & plutocratic society of fallen Europe in the early 20th century. The tax proposal by Trump is only the latest measure in this goal of gutting the American dream of democracy and a level opportunity field.
    This years marks 100 years since WW1, a war that came about from concentration of wealth by barons, earls, kings, potentates and their lackies. Making America Great requires a complete rejection of this redistribution of national wealth to the top 1% at the expense of beggaring all others. This plan is Un-American to its core.

  55. The elimination of all itemized deductions other than mortgage interest and charitable contributions affects most seniors since they have high health insurance premiums and out-of-pocket medical expenses and copays.

  56. Probably not true - most (99%?) have Medicare which is free. Some pay for supplements, which are relatively inexpensive, to cover prescriptions and co-pays. The vast majority of seniors do not reach the threshold above which medical expenses can be itemized and deducted.

  57. @Casey
    As a Medicare recipient, I'd like to know the source of your information re "relatively inexpensive" additional costs not fully (or even partially) covered by Medicare. You seem unaware of co-pays, medical appliances, special tests, treatments, therapies, eyeglasses, hearing aids, dentistry, travel to/from medical facilities, etc. etc. etc. that are not covered by Medicare.

  58. You are simply wrong. dementia care can cost a family 100K a year and medicare pays nothing

  59. And if fewer people pay any income tax at all because of the proposed doubling of the standard deduction, will we have abandoned the principle that citizenship implies a sharing of the costs?

  60. When Romney was governor here in Massachusetts we were thrilled to have our income tax cut. Until we went to pay for our car renewal registration, our license renewals, etc. Because all of those fees went up incrementally to cover the revenue loss. The little guy still can't win lol

  61. I am entirely in favor of eliminating the state and local income tax deduction. I shouldn't have to underwrite rich people in New York and California.

  62. someone has to pay taxes to cover all the failings of the red states

  63. Without that deduction there is double taxation.

  64. Actually, the rich people are already unable to deduct state and local taxes so it doesn't affect "rich" people, only people who make a relatively high income but aren't rich.

  65. So no deduction for the hardest working, most stressed out and responsible class? Trump seems keen on gutting the economy.

  66. Does anyone know the phone number for Trumps accountant? If all or some of these bullet points are approved I will need a creative account like Trump has.

  67. Why is this news? Trump has a thumbnail sketch he calls a plan, but nothing happens without action by the House and Senate. It will be pronounced DOA when it arrives on the Hill. Why waste news space on a speculative proposal written by the same crew who botched travel bans and threats against Sanctuary cities? Is there nothing truly newsworthy happening today?

  68. 'The plan appears to raise taxes for upper middle class people in blue states' . . . Of course it does.

  69. I think these bullet points are in the wrong order; the first and only bullet point needed in the "Winners" section is the Donald J. Trump one. The entire plan is just a self serving mish-mash of benefits for him and his family businesses. (Although you can be sure none of his businesses are structured in a way that fall into the higher tax rates.) Disgusting, but completely true to form. One thing about Mr. Trump; he may be incoherent, but there are no surprises when it comes to lining his own pockets.

  70. Trump ran for president to boost his brand. He was as shocked as everyone that he had any chance of winning. One of the first things he said as president elect is that he Is absolved of conflicts of interest. He has spent 100 days proving that.

  71. So much for populism.

    Instead we have yet another pseudo-scientific set of arguments in favor of plutocracy.

  72. This is Kansas writ large because between Trump and Mnuchin and Kevin Brady (probably the dumbest and most deluded fool ever elected to public office) we will repeat Kansas's road to bankruptcy on a massive scale. Who will win? The answer is clear: Mr. Trump and his ilk, who will no doubt be looking to invest not in the US but in the tax havens of the world where they will be protected from the results of their ignorance. Who will lose? Equally clear: all of us who believe that government is more than bombing and benefiting the most craven and greedy. With a tax cut like this there will be no money for the governmental things that benefit ordinary people--things like education, the environment, our national treasures like the our parks and forests and monuments. Of course this will embolden the right wing dimwits of Congress to kill social security and medicare and medicaid and CHIP. Their dream of ensuring that everyone but their friends will be economically and socially destroyed by the thieves who are the Trump administration will no longer seem like a pipe dream of the Ayn Rand besotted gray haired adolescents. It will be the reality all of us will face.

  73. So is Don the Con going to pull a Bush on us, cut taxes then start a war. But love how he cuts all the taxes he pays.

    Why are we cutting Corporation tax rate, they won a court case that gave them to rights to be called an individual so there are no corporation anymore, so they should pay the same rate as an individual.

  74. So, where do they go find the money to replace all this lost tax revenue once they ram this through Congress with no Democratic support?

    Oh, I guess they'll just come gunning for Social Security and Medicare--the last two programs that allow retirees to survive. See? The good news is you won't have to pay many taxes. The bad news, is you will likely die pretty quickly without a regular source of income and with far higher healthcare costs.

  75. You have more tax payers from companies spending their extra money to hire. Say this causes companies to hire an additional 1 million workers, taxes on that alone would generate trillions. And guess what? More people are in the workforce and wages go up.

    Why do you want the government to have more of our money?

  76. But when you die from lack of health care you have the joy of knowing your heirs won't pay taxes....

  77. @Dave: you have to be kidding! Companies, every time they get a tax cut, never hire more workers. They SIT ON THEIR CASH, or do stock buybacks, or reward CEOs and other managers. The last thing they do is expand their businesses, or hire more workers. Where have you been since the 80s? No tax cut has been accompanied by business expansion. Niente, nada, zilch. Don't believe me? Do some research. Supply side economics is not proven, it's a theory that's never ever worked.

    As for why I want the government to have more of "our" money, governments exist to provide essential services from defense to administration of long-established programs.

    By the way you ask that question, I assume you believe in no government at all. Already, we have few people except working stiffs who are actually paying taxes. Corporations (see Kristoff editorial) certainly don't pay them, and fat cats like Trump don't pay them, you can bet Steve Mnuchin doesn't pay them.

    That leaves thee, and me, and the rest of the middle class--unless you are from the 1%.

  78. While the plan is tremendously fiscally irresponsible, the administration should get some credit for proposing significant increases in the standard deduction and elimination of many itemized deductions. This would likely shift many millions of Americans from itemizing to claiming the standard deduction, allowing them to dispense with Schedule A and file a significantly simpler tax return.

    In addition, eliminating the state and local tax deduction has significant pluses and minuses (and is almost certainly intended to punish blue states), but there are strong policy arguments to eliminate it. By allowing deductibility of state income taxes, the federal government implicitly subsidizes high-tax states and provides substantial cover for them to continually increase taxes, much as California and New York have done over time.

    The overall Trump tax framework needs a lot of work, and large parts of it are prone to substantial abuse if poorly designed (the 15% passthrough rate, for instance). But something good could end up coming of this if more work is done.

  79. If I read that right, it would eliminate the deduction of medical expenses. That would be a big f-n deal. That would cost me thousands of dollars in increased taxes.
    Why not eliminate the charitable deduction, as that is voluntary. Good people will give anyway, and the charity deduction is rife with cheating.

  80. When the D's get back in, they could punish the Red states by closing their military bases. It's about time to move that Houston space center over to LA where it belongs.

  81. Ah the blue states - and who do you think pays for all those pork belly projects in the red states?

  82. You don't mention the big losers - most everybody who isn't rich, because this plan is halfway to a flat tax. It's regressive, and just what conservatives and the wealthy have been pining for ever since the income tax was invented. Though we don't know the bracket details yet, we know that fewer brackets means larger brackets: somebody who earns, say $50,000 could find themselves paying as much tax as somebody who earns $150,000, and somebody who earns $200,000 would pay as much tax as somebody earning $1 million. Or put another way, somebody who earns $1 million pays the same tax as somebody who earns $200,000, and percentage-wise not a whole lot more than somebody earning $50,000.

    Republicans: synonym for endlessly, infinitely disgusting.

  83. somebody earning $1 million pays 5 times more tax than somebody making $200,000 and at least 20 times more tax than somebody earning $50,000

  84. I misspoke - I should have said percentage tax, not total amount. My basic point holds: this is regressive taxation and not far removed from a flat tax. A progressive tax structure is much more fair - yes, it redistributes wealth downward, instead of upward as Republicans have managed to pass off as tax reform over the past few decades. If someone who earns $50,000 pays 10%, that $5,000 hurts; if someone who earns $1 million pays 35%, that $350,000 leaves him with $650,000 - not so bad a deal at all for the millionaires, but the middle and lower-middle class suffer. A regressive tax means the relative tax rate decreases as the ability to pay increases. Progressive taxation means less income inequality; and since people who aren't in the top 10% in income vastly outnumber the rich, and since they have to spend every penny they have, the economy as a whole benefits far more than if the rich keep more of their money in tax shelters and offshore accounts.

  85. I am in favor of getting more money in the private sector so people can buy more stiff, businesses will expand and there will be more jobs. Tax cuts do that, but in a very inefficient manner.

    First of all, they have to be for those who need money and will spend it, and not to for those who do not need the money and will use most of it for financial speculation. Trump's plan does just the opposite.

    Then think about this. Suppose we cut poor Joe's taxes $1,000. That gets $1,000 into the private sector because Joe will spend it, and it will go to help producing jobs for others. But suppose we pay Joe, $1,000 to cut the White House lawn. We still get the $1,000 into the economy, but we ALSO get the lawn cut.

    That is why federal spending is always a better way to get money into the private sector than tax cuts.

  86. Approximately $350 billion in corporate taxes were collected in 2015. A change in rates from 35% to 15% would result in approximately $200 billion less in corporate income taxes annually (and more as the economy grows over the years). The budget deficit was still $440 billion that year, so cutting corporate taxes by $200 billion would increase the deficit by 45% alone.

    It's insane to have a corporate rate substantially lower than the highest individual tax rate because it creates an incentive for everyone wealthy person to incorporate and become a LLC (besides the lower tax rate of a corporation, they would also benefit from more options for deductions to lower the taxable amount).

    GOP hypocrisy is utterly stunning. Republicans only care about budget deficits when a Democrat is President.

  87. Kind of a weak article. Misleading and clearly written from a negative perspective. Several statements actually state "depending on how it is written", which by default means that no assumptions can be made.
    Still, I do think we should view any major change with a bit of skepticism. We know the wealthiest among us are the ones drafting the legislation and we haven't seen much evidence over the years that they are looking out for our best interests.
    Couple of things that came to mind...
    1. Those saying the cuts will benefit only the rich, "might" be right, but consider this: If the corporate tax is 15% and the wealthy make even more money, their additional income will be taxed at 35%, right. Probably some nuances, but something to at least consider. They can't hide it "all".
    2. The article fails to highlight that a major piece of the corporate tax puzzle is the closing of loopholes and the elimination of (as yet to be specified) corporate deductions. The net on this is that companies who are now able to pay close to nothing will end up actually paying some taxes (in theory). Not saying it will be "neutral", but the net outcome might not be as bad as we think.
    3. I go back and forth on the inheritance tax. That money has already been taxed. I'm not sure I agree that the government is simply entitled to something just because someone dies.
    4. I'm going to sit back a bit longer before forming an opinion. Waiting for more details. A bit pessimistic, but open to being wrong.

  88. I pay tax on my income. When I pay it to my plumber, he pays tax on it. Money is taxed when it is transferred. So why shouldn't I pay tax on money when it is transferred to my heirs? That's not double taxation.

    Furthermore, 85% of the money in estates that pay any estate tax is investment income on which NO TAX HAS EVER BEEN PAID. If it is not for the estate tax, no tax will ever be paid on this money. Repealing the estate tax means zillions of totally untaxed dollars for the very, very, Rich.

  89. @JustSaying: about the inheritance tax.

    First, let's put to rest the canard that money that has been taxed cannot be taxed again. If that were the case, you should not have to pay sales tax or property tax because you were already taxed on the money when you earned it. Every dollar in circulation has been taxed multiple times. If it were not, the entire mechanism of a civilized society would seize up.

    Secondly, the very idea of inheritance tax is less to raise money than to prevent the already wealthy from concentrating their wealth ever more from generation to generation. That's the way to aristocracy and its mirror image, serfdom.

  90. All of these professional partnerships (doctors, lawyers real estate brokerages etc) will now claim to be small businesses under Trump's proposal and pay far less then middle and working class salaried taxpayers. Corporations will have the best of all worlds...they keep their deductions while paying far less in taxes. The middle class will foot the bill while Trump and his compatriots laugh all the way to the bank while bankrupting the treasury with its resultant impacts on national and domestic security.

  91. The IRS already has a separate tax rate schedule for "personal service corporations" where the people doing the work are the owners. Currently this is a flat 35 percent tax rate. So there is already a mechanism in place to prevent employees from turning themselves into corporations and paying at a different rate than for wage income.

  92. If I read that right, it would eliminate the deduction of medical expenses. That would be a big f-n deal. That would cost me thousands of dollars in increased taxes.
    Why not eliminate the charitable deduction, as that is voluntary. Good people will give anyway, and the charity deduction is rife with cheating. Or just eliminate all deductions. They mostly benefit the wealthy anyway.

  93. You sound a lot like Trump and his posse of uber-rich money grabbers.
    As for medical over charitable deductions, why eliminate either of them?
    The value of deduction elimination depends on whose ox is being gored it seems.

  94. To all the naysayers: let's talk about fiscal responsibility - how do you characterize taking in record taxes and still maintaining a record deficit? This, while at the same time allowing an open border and proposing the naturalization of millions of illegals that would allow full benefits from systems (such as ACA) that already can't function without Obama funneling billions into them under the table to keep them afloat?
    I'm sick of being taxed to death and still being the bad guy. Who is my advocate in the gov't? Every time I turn around, some new ridiculous bill passes that sticks it to the evil tax-payers. Again - who advocating for taxpayers that pay all these bills?
    To all of you that want higher taxes - have at it. I'm sure the US and state treasuries would welcome your extra donations.

  95. WE have record taxes because of the booming economy . The TOTAL tax burden in the USA is about 25% of the GDP. The average for our international competitors is 35%. But the whiners never stop. They want the benefit of an advanced economy without paying for it.l

  96. Why are we taking this "plan" seriously? As anything Trump says it cannot be taken on its face value.
    This is not even a plan; a plan in my book contains the details how to achieve these tax cuts within the framework of our institutions, affordability, and impact on the economy and people alike.
    No hard work from anybody will be able to even come close to realize the bullet points Trumps put forward.

  97. Remember when Lincoln used the line
    "and that government of the people, by the people, for the people"

    Well we now have Trump's rejoinder
    "A tax code for the Trump's, by the Trumps and who cares about the rest of the people"

  98. McConnell, May 20, 2012:
    “The issue is the debt,” the Speaker said. “If we don’t begin to deal with our debt and deficit in a serious way, we’re not going to have many options." My how time does change things.

  99. " It is striking how many of the categories listed above affect the president and his family."

    Striking? Surprising? Unexpected? Not really. And just wait until the details get laid out. There should be no consideration of a White House Tax Plan in any form until President Trump publicly discloses his federal tax returns for the last 10 years.

  100. During the run up to the Affordable Care Act my conservative friends would say "I want people to have health insurance but we can't afford it" or "Just tell me how we are going to oay for it." (while personally benefiting from the tax-advantaged employer-provided health insurance). Going back to the campaign, not one of those friends said anything along the lines of "I'm all for giving business and high wage earners big tax cuts but we can't afford it" or "Just tell me how we are going to pay for it." Weird.

  101. Well after years of Kafkaesque tax regulations, this shows much promise.

  102. Red states get more federal dollars per capita than blue states largely because of defense spending which blue states want no part of. Blue states have largely created their own disparity. Also, not all red states are the same; New York is more dependent on federal largesse than Texas. So there.

  103. New York is 32.8% Federal aid as a percentage of state revenue; Texas is 31.8% dependent

  104. Are these alternative facts?

  105. These high tax blue states should cut their taxes if residents can't deduct those huge taxes. Paying outrageous taxes is one thing, but having your taxes taxed is just too much.

  106. There is one sentence in this article that needs expanding: "That implies either a very large increase in the national debt or huge reductions in federal spending." You could write a whole article on the "losers" from that alone.

  107. Robert M - Yes - didn't see any thing about medical deductions which is of concern for some. Think a much simpler approach would have been to just leave everything alone, but limit the sum of your deductions. Let people choose if they want to give to charity, buy a big house, live in California - just say there is a level of limit for all - maybe $100,000 at most. Again - why not treat everyone the same - and let us make our own decision? And conversely - why ask someone who rents or lives in Texas be on the other side?

  108. A few words on CA mortgage limit: we are a donor state. Rust belt / confederacy aren't our equals

  109. This article only mentions the elimination of the federal tax deduction for state and local INCOME taxes. But I have seen from other sources that the deduction for state and local property taxes would end.

  110. "Reform" is supposed to make things fairer and better. But the Trump and GOP tax "reform" policies just make the federal tax system less fair and worse for everybody but the wealthy. And when you add it all up, you see it is intended to starve the federal government to death. Add in Trump's stated budget goals and you have a President and GOP that is trying to reduce the federal government to the military and national security -- which definitely is not what the Founding Fathers intended and which is a recipe for destroying America.
    To Trump and the GOP tax "reform" and simplification clearly mean reducing the taxes the wealthiest amongst us pay. It's always been sleigh of hand. Simplifying taxes to them means reducing the number of tax brackets -- which has never been a problem for anybody to determine which tax bracket they're in. And as you reduce the number of tax brackets you create a greater incentive to cheat on your taxes because the stakes a much higher to get into next lower bracket than when you had dozens of brackets where the difference in tax rate between brackets was comparatively little. And reform to them means lessening the taxes paid by the wealthiest households and businesses.

  111. It is sad that some of the best economic policies,such as creating wealth in the 1990's,for all Americans is being replaced by a Kansas economy. We are about to throw America out with the bath water. We will have riots in the streets before Trumps term is over with. Just remember,the Founding Fathers biggest fear in creating our government ,was the French Revolution. The fear of mob rule because the government of France was so out of touch with the starving citizenry. Wasn't a great fault of the French government that it believed in France ,not as the well being of the populace,but of its leaders? Are not the Trumps a mirror image of the Bourbon royal family ?

  112. It's nice to see everyone reacting exactly how their told to, right on party lines without using any though or effort. Congrats America.
    I'm a middle class business owner and I don't believe the 1% are the cause of all our problems. The 35% for the "rich" seems sufficient, giving up over 1/3 of their income to help better America. Why should you pay a tax because you die, regardless of what you managed to accumulate? The business taxes are stifling and have created the incentive to move job producing corporations elsewhere. Why is that so hard to comprehend? I like everything about this plan and believe the long term effect will help bring jobs back and in the process bring more tax base here. We are all in this together so please quit blaming everything on the 1%, that's political propaganda. Is there a KIA in your driveway? Why? That doesn't provide $60k a year jobs to anyone here. How many Chinese/Taiwan good are in your house. Look there America.

  113. People have Kias because the "American jobs" that are left don't pay enough for the Corvette they really want. Or the Jeep etc.

  114. You live in Ohio. Move to a place where the 1% are everyone and I guarantee you will be singing a different tune.

    The 1% are part of the problem. Not all of them but many. The widening income gap in America is real and we have to address it as a nation.

    Corporate America IS harming this country.

  115. Trump is serving himself and his family and is fully captured by 1% at the expense of vast majority of his supporters. i just wonder what his low middle class and middle class supporters from Mid-West and Appalachia are thinking?

  116. // Upper-middle-income people in blue states. The plan would eliminate the federal tax deduction for state and local income tax. If you are in a place where such taxes are high, like New York or California, you would lose a valuable deduction.//
    suggest upper middle income and high income people in blue states. this is so obvious - high income people lose the most in this scenario.

  117. I wonder if the working class whites who voted for this president understand that they have been taken for a ride. I am in the lower end of the middle class and don't see any benefits in this plan for the middle class.

  118. If you were trying to flim-flam someone, would you give him a detailed, multipage explanation of how, or a single page of rah-rah bullet-points ripped from your toolbox of mendacities to gull him into trusting you?

  119. So the alternative is do nothing and continue with 1.5-2.0-GDP growth? For the 90% of people who are against this, please explain to me how allowing the government to abscond with more of our money creates jobs and growth... seriously. I'd love a simple explanation. News flash, there isn't one. The government doesn't create jobs, people do. END OF STORY. Want an example? ask anyone in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece how they feel about the government creating growth and jobs. Here's a genius idea, how about we create a welcoming environment for business so that they can grow and create jobs. Genius, right? I own a small business and can attest to the fact that is it next to impossible to grow your business paying 40% to the government and additional state tax, local tax, payroll tax, etc. Everyone needs to wake up.

  120. That's the problem. Most folks don't understand what it takes to run a company/small business and the endless taxes, fees, etc., we're required to pay.

  121. This Trump "plan" is a joke, right? I looked it up and read what text there was. Don't be suckered into believing these paltry bullet points are anything more than a show for "100 days" credit from the unthinking.

    How can there be any "reform" with consideration given just to tax rates, breaks, and deductions? I want to know how much (less!) revenue this "plan" is going to produce, if it's going to be sufficient to meet needs, and how Trump expects to manage the difference if it doesn't.

    This article implies we'll face debilitating deficits and debt or have to cut spending to the bone. In either case, it will be Americans who are the "biggest loser," as the economy crumbles unable to manage the debt while programs supporting citizens' economic security erode.

    As this Trump "plan" goes forward, I urge the NYT and other responsible media not to lose sight of the probable consequences well beyond whether a taxpayer's bill goes up or down in the short term.

  122. Supporting the least well off in our country is called by the Republicans 'socialism'.
    In other advanced countries it is called having a social conscience.

  123. It's interesting how they want to eliminate medical benefits for working people in their proposed new ACA plan but give the super rich all kinds of income benefits in this tax plan. As with all things Trump, it's outrageous!!!

  124. Four words:

    Where's Trump's Tax Return?

  125. Wow! If we could go back to every Tea Party propaganda statement over the last 12 years! Aren't these the folks that complain about spending, budget deficits and the debt every chance they get? Where are they now? Make America Bankrupt Again? What are we doing?

  126. I would still like to see a flat tax enacted. No deductions, no exemptions. Everybody pays the same rate. A truly fair tax for everyone.
    Plus, no more H&R block needed. Your tax form would consist of one page and would take about one minute to fill out.

  127. How is a flat tax fair? Those earning $1000 still don't have enough to live on. Someone else earning $1,000,000,000 still has more than they need and no incentive to pay for roads or bridges or garbage collection that benefits everyone.

  128. Assuming, say, a 20% tax bracket in a flat tax system -- feel free to substitute another percentage and do the math -- wouldn't the $200,000,000 in federal taxes suffice?

  129. Does someone making a million times more than someone else get a million times more police protection? Do they get a million times more firefighters to protect them? No.

  130. Smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom. Sounds like the country is FINALLY on the right track for a change.

    Of course those "Upper-middle-income people in blue states" can always vote for politicians who will lower their state income taxes to put them more in line with the rest of the country. If you vote to keep the folks in office who tax the living daylights out of you then you have no room to complain.

  131. It's pretty simple bud. The numbers on this tax plan don't add up. Next he'll say "who knew basic math was so complicated?"

    The blue states are much healthier economies than the red states who are net takers of federal monies. You live in a blue state. The state that is now the 7th largest economy in the world since Jerry Brown took over. Trump's tax plan with bring all the economic success of Kansas to the national stage. Gird your loins.

  132. The happiest country on earth by many measures is Denmark, where my friend paid close to 50% of her income in taxes. I'd be happy for that if I had excellent health care from cradle to grave, my kids got paid to go to college and there were no homeless people everywhere. Taxes are the price we pay for civilization. Without a well funded government, we don't get infrastructure, life-saving research, good public schools, help for the needy. What we get is might makes right.

  133. It's funny to see the Left always point to tiny european nations as models when they don't have to pay for military expenditures or vast infrastructure like the US. To fund their socialist programs they pay massive excise taxes and the notion of private property rights is nothing but a quaint notion when half of your income goes straight into the govt coffers. I'll take our nation and fundamental principles of individual sovereignty and private property rights any day and apparently millions from socialist nations that want to come here agree.

  134. Will the Real Estate Carried Interest and lost deduction loopholes be eliminated under the Trump Plan?

  135. This is in response to a recent post of someone from the "Left Coast." I am a "Left Coaster", and I suspect you may be one of the folks who are taxed 3.8% to help pay the health insurance premiums for the poor. I'm not saying you are, but maybe. If you are not, a thousand pardons. I see bikers on my way through Golden Gate Park in the mornings, out for a morning ride all dressed-up in their matching outfits that cost $500.00. The tables were packed at Monsieur Benjamin down in Hayes Valley, where a glass of wine costs $15, and some immigrant (legal or illegal) is cooking your dungenous crab cake? I had my nose pressed up against the window. I don't know if these descriptions fit my fellow Left Coaster, but this is what I see living in San Francisco.
    I do agree that there is waste and fraud in our government. I agree that there are citizens and non-citizens taking advantage of the system. But, this tax plan is a disgrace. If a student of mine handed in one page of bullet points on something as crucial as a revamping of the tax code, they'd earn an F.

  136. Given the lost revenue, you have not mentioned the areas of national policy where government spending will be slashed or eliminated--the CDC (Center for Disease Control); NIH (National Institutes for Health); scientists investigating global warming; the Federal Reserve; enforcement of the law by various government agencies; Medicaid block grants; research into electric car batteries; alternative energy generation. In short, everything intended to make America and the world a better place to live. Why ? Because people making money off the current state of the art are threatened by progress and pay republicans to head it off. In short, the biggest threat to making America a better place to live for our kids than we have it is the republican party.

  137. More than ever, we need to know about Trump's tax situation. E.g., does he even pay the state income taxes that no longer would be tax deductible.

    Actually, the whole thing is just back-of-the envelope smoke to look like he's getting something done. No point in over-analyzing any of this stuff just yet.

  138. Most of the tax loopholes are based on creative manipulations of what income is or or where that income has been earned. And people earning paychecks always get the short end of the stick as their income is defined by their employer and not by their CPA and tax lawyer, while corporations and partnerships enjoy all advantages of creative accounting.

    There is only one solution to this problem: There should be no tax on earned income other than Social Security and Medicare. Instead, there should be 25% VAT (value added tax) on retail purchases. This will generate roughly the same amount of tax revenue as current tax revenues from payrolls. And instead of deductions, everyone should get a VAT tax refund roughly the same as current standard deductions if they file a "tax return", which should also automatically register them for voting. This will provide a way to compensate for the progressive brackets in the current tax system.

    And there should be a simple (5%) tax on corporate revenues (not income) which is only fair considering all the privileges corporations enjoy.

    Social security and medicare taxes should be applicable to all income, including passive income, etc.

  139. Hillary warned us all. "Trumped up trickle down" "Republicans on steroids" We scoffed at his chances then and we would be foolish to scoff now. The threat is real. Democrats and moderates need to take back congress in 2018.

  140. Love the Trump tax plan. Can't come soon enough!!

  141. Once a charlatan, always a charlatan. And who would have thought that the carpetbagger was just a part of our history and not a part of the present. Can you say "Voodoo Economics" revisited. I know I always state this, "will this ever end?"

  142. State tax-free Wyoming here I come. I don't even need to move; I just need to say that I'm planning to move there.

  143. Who cares...this nonsense won't pass. Another diversion.

  144. As Ronnie used to say: "Here we go again!"... Trickle down economics!

  145. Anytime I hear 'tax breaks' I know that I (a fixed lo income, former business owner, single woman, with no property, of a certain age) will lose - again.

  146. Sounds like you were very successful. It's hard to give people who pay no federal income taxes a break. How many poor people ever gave you a job?

  147. Funny--almost everything benefits Trump directly. Guess corruption and profiteering by his office just aren't enough.

  148. It will be fascinating to see how true fiscal conservatives respond to this. Not that we don't already know about their integrity to principles! Greed Over People.

  149. The Trump tax plan is a weapon aimed at the gut of essential services for the citizens of this country. Cuts to many of these programs and rolling back regulations that keep this nation in good shape are just part of a poorly thought out series of policies.

    Middle class tax payers aren't really getting a cut. The services provided through Ferderal programs will become the problem of the states. State tax will go up to compensate. Property tax will rise, local governments will be scrambling to finance road repair, and water will cost more to cite a few examples. Only the rich can win this crooked game.

  150. "I would still like to see a flat tax enacted. No deductions, no exemptions. Everybody pays the same rate. A truly fair tax for everyone."
    the flat tax plan suggested by steve forbes was the right one. it never flew because this country wants a progressive tax. in reality it was a progressive tax. since most americans are numeracy challenged the Left challenged and successfully sunk the plan under the forbes plan everybody receives a $10,000exemption. a family of 5 would pay zero on the first 50k of income. if they earned 51k they would pay 20% on $1000 or $200in taxes or .004 or 4/10 of one percent in taxes. if bill gates made $100 million, he would pay $20 million or 20 per cent in taxes. we could get rid of the IRS and CPAs. and billions of hours spend on filling out forms and just fill out a post card.
    this is the way to go. unfortunately there is no leader who has been successful in explaining this plan, including the originator, steve forbes. he should have called it the simple simon progressive tax plan. it might have won the day for the american people. and created a boom which could have lasted for years.

  151. No deductions? Can a grocer deduct the costs of groceries sold? Can a carpenter deduct the depreciation of his saws? Flat tax is very simplistic. Could an accountant deduct advertising? Are you talking about itemized deductions? No problem, that is what Trump is proposing, but progressive rates. One step at a time.

  152. The only item I find objectionable is capping the pass-thru rate to 15%. Pass-thru business income should get taxed at individual rate. No matter how many rules are put, the 35% to 15% rate differential is big enough incentive for people to try to game the system.

  153. Please let us be clear, the real purpose here is to explode the deficit. There is only one solution to the inevitable shortfall that Republicans will consider. They intend to gut Social Security and Medicare which have been in their cross-hairs for years. Add these to the list of losers

  154. I especially love the deletion of the state tax deduction - could this be payback to the Clinton voters? Upper middle class people in blue states? This would increase taxes for a lot of people by at least $1500.

  155. Donald Trump's Estate will save over $3 billion with his tax reform. Back in 2000, Mr Trump was willing to have a wealth tax on the very rich to eliminate the national debt in exchange for eliminating the estate tax. See The America We Deserve. As President he will save billions with no quid pro quo and no reduction in the national debt. Trump is making a very good deal for himself.

  156. "Upper-middle-income people in blue states. The plan would eliminate the federal tax deduction for state and local income tax. If you are in a place where such taxes are high, like New York or California, you would lose a valuable deduction."

    Definitely worth eliminating. California's economy is largely driven by speculation in Silicon Valley (e.g. Uber) and a lot of folks are well off because of the likes of Travis Kalanick and that's fine. Visionaries like him are driving the driving the progressive global economy. But if the state government wants a large piece of that fine. But that's no justification for the deduction for federal income tax purposes.

  157. Perhaps if the USD is broken, developing countries won't be as exploitable, in turn minimizing deforestation and such. Though overdevelopment would likely then become conservationists' hurdle.

  158. The article is incorrect in several places. The 3.8% tax on net investment income starts on the first dollar of net investment income once in is over $250,000. Many higher income taxpayers with incomes between $100,000 to $800,000 cannot benefit from the deduction of state and local taxes due to Alternative Minimum Taxes. Mortgage interest is already limited to $1,100,000 of mortgage debt on your 1st and 2nd residences. The elimination of estate taxes could raise revenues by the elimination of the step up in basis on inherited property.

  159. Emperor Trump would finally avoid audits if his tax plan is passed.

  160. There's so much more thats involved in the tax code that's not even touched in this 'plan.' Depreciation?? Is that going to charge, and will it still be a deduction for business owners? As a business owner I'm biased. I'd say it should be fair, but the tax code has never been fair. Nor will it be

  161. Oh yeah, Red-State voters who are older are going to love losing their ability to deduct medical expenses and prescriptions.

    Trump is going to reap the whirlwind on this one. Good.

  162. "A law passed via the Senate’s budget reconciliation process ... is not permitted to increase the deficit beyond a 10-year window."

    And, of course, the GOP-led Senate would NEVER consider changing the rules to fit their billionaire owners' needs.

    Oh, wait...

  163. Every day Trump and his administration come up with yet another way to take money and benefits away from the middle and lower class and give themselves and their buddies more. I just don't understand how this can be what Trump voters want, and how they can still think these policies are great.

    I am more discouraged than ever as I watch our country's slow destruction. It is heartbreaking for anyone who is actually paying attention.

  164. This just makes me so very, very sad. Is all this money which will benefit greatly Trump & his family stave off death? It will not. Maybe there is justice in the universe after all?

    What saddens me most of all is that Trump & family never knew or became friends with ordinary Americans. He and his ilk are poor in the deepest sense and they will die die never knowing anything truly deep and worthwhile.

    They are the poorest of the poor.

  165. Don't think for a minute that we will not have an explosion of shady characters shelling out 50 bucks to set up a dodgy LLC to take advantage of the 15 percent passthrough rate.

    Couple this with an underfunded IRS and the guarantee that nothing, absolutely nothing, will be written in this legislation to prevent abuse of this provision and you guarantee that St. Reagan's fiction of the welfare queen will actually come to life.

    But, the welfare queen won't be some ghetto black lady driving a Cadillac, but some tax-dodging white guy wearing a Trump "make America great" baseball cap behind the wheel of a monster pickup truck.

  166. The "people"vhave elected crooks who wan to line their pockets. Weep for the regular people.

  167. As anyone with eyes and a reasonable sense of the political situation will see, this is a tax break for the billionaires like himself. His loyal followers will soon wake up and realize his campaign rhetoric was a very successful sales pitch ... and they bought the goods. But the warranty, well, it just is no good.

  168. So! Big surprise! Tax cuts for the rich and for corporations, especially targeting our taxpayer-in-chief. The rest of us, as usual, get a pittance, then suffer from cuts to programs that the rich don't need or want, but we need a lot. I mean, who needs Meals on Wheels? Who needs the arts? Who needs HUD rent subsidies. Nothing new here, bub, move along...