The Earned Income Tax Credit is not really “earned”. It is a welfare subsidy to “top off" the wages of the working poor. Congress wrote that the undocumented would not be eligible for this. But, the I.R.S. decided that it did not have the jurisdiction to determine who is here legally, and so, it gives cash to all poor people who apply and meet the income criteria, including the undocumented.
The undocumented are also improperly receiving cash under the Child Tax Credit. The Treasury Department Inspector General discovered that, in 2010, the IRS had paid the undocumented $4.2 billion just under this program. He wrote that these payments were encouraging migrants to move here illegally.
According to a 12/9/14 Politico article titled "IG: Billions lost to potential child tax credit fraud”, at least $5.9 billion was improperly paid under this program, in 2013. The article notes that while the Inspector General did not actually say that the money had been paid to the undocumented, it noted that he had said that they were the recipients of improper payments in reports on earlier years.
Those who advocate on behalf of the undocumented have long claimed that they did not come here to collect welfare. And yet, we see that many of them have been availing themselves of 2 welfare programs - the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit.
The GOP is right to want all future recipients of such welfare programs to have valid social security numbers
9
This is in reply to the comments made by SJG…
His comment – “Why on earth should there be income tax deductions for adopting a child or for moving 50 miles for a new job?...If the government wants to employ social engineering to incentivize certain behaviors, let them do it outside of the tax code.”
Here’s “Why on earth”. In most cases, the government realizes, that in allowing the deduction, the burden on the government is lessened. Any idea what it would cost the government to provide for that child not adopted? More than the allowed deduction. And being able to deduct some expenses to move to a new job? Try comparing the deduction to the expense to the government in paying out an unemployment check. An indicator of a manufacture-based economy is the sale of durable goods, i.e., washers, dryers, refrigerators. Home ownership encourages the purchase of these durable goods. Being able to deduct interest on a mortgage encourages the purchase of homes – or does the slump of new housing starts during an economic down turn escape your notice? Encouraging home ownership is also a recognition of the stabilizing effect it has on society as a whole.
So the question is now, "why on earth" do Republicans want to take these deductions away just to make sure they can conform to a rule that would allow them to let the rich get richer by needing only 51 votes as opposed to an impossible 60 votes. Certainly not because it’s in the interest of a government beholden to the people!
15
I'm a graduate student in Tennessee and my take home pay would theoretically put me in the 12% tax bracket under this new plan. However, because they want to tax tuition waivers, actual taxes on my take home pay would be about 25% (in federal taxes). In order for someone in a normal job to pay 25% on their take home pay they would need to be making nearly a quarter million dollars a year under this tax plan. It's so good to know that the GOP is trying to, as my senator told me "...keep more money in Tennesseans’ pockets..." I guess just not my pockets, or anyone I know.
9
Make up your own mind.
https://waysandmeansforms.house.gov/uploadedfiles/tax_cuts_and_jobs_act_...
Let's make American second rate!
4
The roots of the tremendous income inequality that the US currently enjoys lie with the Reagan administration, its massive tax cuts for the wealthy (enabling them to accumulate more and more wealth without having to share anything with the nation that nurtured and supported them.) When is enough wealth enough? People say that the wealthy pay the most taxes but hey, they have the most money so why shouldn't they?
7
"The bill repeals numerous education deductions and credits. It also makes taxable the value of the tuition and other benefits universities give to their graduate teaching and research assistants." This tax bill will force many graduate students out of their programs. They are paid a pittance for the work and research they do. Making their tuition and stipends taxable will cost doctoral students, like our daughter, hundreds of dollars a month when she and her colleagues already live and work on a shoestring budget. By now it should be widely obvious that the Republican party cares nothing about education and research in this country. Their only concern is to give the ultra-wealthy a tax cut that they don't need or deserve, in order to satisfy their pay-masters. The outrage boggles the mind.
7
I honestly have no clue where these republicans are coming from. It’s as if they have slept for 50 years and just woken up. The economy has been growing for the last 7 years and unemployment is at a low not seen in over 10 years and going lower. Who wants to mess with that? What is the case for a tax cut? Not everyone is experiencing good times, but I just don’t see how this program benefits anyone who is struggling under the current tax program. There is little evidence in our economic history that says a tax cut will help boost the economy in these circumstances. In fact there is just much evidence that a tax increase would boost the economy as well as we saw during the Clinton years.
The fact is that giving more money to corporations is unlikely to be invested in production. There is just too little demand for companies produce more because low and middle income earners have seen little or no gains. Why produce more for those that cannot afford to buy more. More likely businesses will invest more in automation and force more workers out of the workplace. How does this help us? Republicans need to put out or shut up. Make this case and support it with real facts and evidence or go home. Otherwise, they’re just taking up space and wasting good air.
6
Not only are the lying Republicans providing a giant tax cut as Reagan and Bush II did, it will likely result in the same: another recession where the only people who are hurt are the average Americans who end up paying all the bills.
I suppose the main reason the Republicans won't learn is that they, too, are usually rich enough to line their pockets deeply with money scammed from the poor, working poor, middle class, and elderly.
We need to vote in new legislators who will work for all the people, not just for the rich people and corporations.
5
So much for family values--unless the family happens to be rich.
4
Just in case no one noticed, America has become a "knowledge based economy" which requires an education work force and more and more manufacturing jobs are going to robots. So, if we stop promoting the education of workforce and there are fewer jobs for manual laborers, what do Republicans expect the rest of us, and our children do for a living? And, where do they think their future tax revenue is going to come from once the wealthy have their give backs and rest of us are unemployed?
3
We should not be talking about technical adjustments that will raise or lower taxes on one group or another, but rather about what general principles should guide our tax system. We should talk about the sort of income distribution that would give the best results for our society in terms of opportunity and security, and let experts design (with our input) the programs that would lead us towards that distribution. We should talk about how much and why the childless should subsidize the children of others. We should talk about whether the healthy should share their good fortune with the chronically sick before we talk of how to do it -- allowing the sick to pay lower taxes via a deduction for medical expenses or subsidizing the cost of health care in general.
Once we have decided what we want to do, then we should decide how we want to do it, and before we have decided what to do, we should make only minimal changes.
6
No, no, it can't be true! Trump himself said that his accountant told him that he'd be "killed" financially by the GOP tax plan. And Trump wouldn't lie, would he?
6
It is important to realize that the claim that the standard deduction is “doubled” to $24,000 to lower your tax and simplify your filing in really a double lie. Here's why. For a family with one child the old personal and dependent exemptions total $12,000 and the standard deduction was $12,000 - exactly the same adjustment as the “new” big, non-deal. And they raise the minimum tax rate from 10% to 12%. At first the “new”increased (but non-refundable) child tax credit compensates for this rate increase – but it is only temporary. There is even more skulduggery with this great, wonderful, fantastic non-increase in the standard deduction. Now, even if they decide to allow itemized deductions for high state and property taxes, the bar for advantage in itemizing is effectively doubled. So with this great, “much lower” tax plan effectively doubles the bad rather than the standard deduction. So most of us at the low end and the middle help pay for the real tax deductions for the rich and companies. This allows the huge, greatly fudged deficit to be low enough to get passed with a 51% vote. Write your representatives. Tell them double-NO.
4
November 9, 2017
Paradise lost and likely to never to regained with the smarts of Democrats – hope is eternal in America and the rest pays taxes and carries the burden for the grand theory of capitalist might, and power for we the people ideally.
jja Manhattan, N.Y.
1
Health care is so expensive and so determinate of how well we live and contribute to society, that nobody can afford to do without it but nobody can afford it with their own assets. Nobody who seeks care can shop around nor negotiate over the price nor can providers refuse to provide care when doing so will cause harm. Health insurance must be offered for whole lifetimes to achieve rational risk management for the whole population. The issue of choice that is so hotly discussed is as irrelevant to the issue as whether to buy one automobile or another. But it has consequences. If health care costs are not well managed only some people's needs can be meant. Reducing taxpayer supports for health care will not reduce the need but it will reduce the availability and it will increase bankruptcies where health care costs lead to insolvencies.
2
The public colleges and universities were once considered a useful investment for tax money, and the money spent has enabled improved economic performance that doubles the money spent but tax payer support has diminished so much that without awesomely huge student loans only the super rich can afford to send their children to universities, public universities. By the time these loans are repaid, the graduates have lost a decade of savings and big purchases, and greatly reduced their ability to prosper over their lifetimes. This is bad for our country. Having a huge amount of capital in the hands of a small proportion of the population does not make up for the hobbled talents and potential of our smartest and better educated young people.
4
I'm sure there are at least some positives that the author failed to mention like standard deduction doubling.
Also missing was how this would help the rich which I was very interested to hear but the author failed to mention any.
Do I trust an article that was only written to make it seem like this is a really bad (which it probably is) but since times did not deem pupil worthy enough to make their own decision but one given to them, I would pass on the judgement until I have all the information.
1
It is important to realize that the claim that the standard deduction is “doubled” to $24,000 to lower your tax and simplify your filing in really a double lie. Here's why. For a family with one child the old personal and dependent exemptions total $12,000 and the standard deduction was $12,000 - exactly the same adjustment as the “new” big, non-deal. And they raise the minimum tax rate from 10% to 12%.
Elimination of deductions frequently used by middle class are well documented in this article. Where is the elimination of loopholes that allowed Trump and other wealthy individuals and corporations to pay no taxes?
5
In an economy with great disparities in annual incomes and wealth overall, to lower corporate rates while eliminating many middle-class itemized deductions in such an environment seems almost obscene.
A drop in the corporate rate from 35% to 20% would continue to empower the current corporate schema where intellectual property protections, such as patents and copyrights, are exploited to develop variations of single- source supply contracts. These intellectual property protections create obstacles to entry, which exclude new entrants from entering these most profitable sectors, and these protected profits remain above more normal levels.
Warren Buffett, at Berkshire Hathaway, and other private equity fund directors use very high stock prices and entry fees to gain access to a targeted subset of very rich investors; which is another obstacle to market entry. Corporate profits drive stock prices. And, corporate profits are at record levels because IT-designed machinery and equipment have been integrated seamlessly into production and service regimes. Workers have been replaced by cheaper and more efficient machines with higher ROIs. As a result, in the comparative ROIs to capital vs labor, i.e.; stock price gains are up, while US workers' ROIs are down; due to increasing machine and foreign labor substitutes for them.
Stagnant wages in such an economic environment are unsurprising. The tax increases and tax cuts seem misdirected.
[JJL Th 11/09/2017 12:28pm Greenville NC]
2
It sounds like Trump, Ryan and their friends had fun coming up with this tax bill. I can just imagine their giddy conversation.
Sir, we need to make some cuts to come up with 1.5 trillion.
Oh, how about adoption. If people aren't attractive enough to find another woman to bear their child, they shouldn't have children.
Oh, and medical bills. They're better off dying anyway.
And dependent care? Why would people need it when the wife is home?
Nobody needs to buy a house; I'll give people special rates at Trump properties. LOL.
Colleges are evil places that educate people and turn them against me. Nix it.
Oh, and we definitely don't need to subsidize solar and wind, since climate change is a hoax.
Oh, and if we stop helping undocumented immigrants, we might not even have to build a wall!
3
Why don't we first start collecting the taxes on that income being hid through the games played by big corporations and one-percenters. Otherwise, the middle class needs to start working together to stop paying their taxes until such time as the government finally gets serious about making the favored few and big corporations start paying their fair share. We can all play this game.
This is how this country destroyed it's middle class. But I guess if they act like sheep, you might as well treat them like sheep. Baaaaaa!!
2
You missed the big one.
Want to have a social safety net: The tax rewrite assumes massive cuts in Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Whether or not the particular tax provisions that change negatively affect you, you are going to be living in an America without the social safety net.
7
Inadvertently the Times makes the point that the current tax code is loaded with special interest breaks for everyone. Simplifying the tax code has to get rid of hundreds of these special deductible and credits no matter whose plan is considered. And will the Times at least acknowledge the absolutely unfair and 1% tilted SALT benefit?
1
I am a teacher who lives in the Hudson Valley. My mortgage is paid off, but the Senate bill means I don't get my exemption for myself, I don't get to write off my state taxes (so I get taxed on money I was already taxed on), I don't get to write off my town, county and school taxes and no more medical deductions. So I figure instead of getting back about $1600 like I usually do, I will end up owing about $3000 a year. That'a a substantial chunk of change for a middle-class person. That's going to be that less of my money going into the economy. I fail to see how this unnatural disaster of a tax "plan" will help the middle class in any way or how it will have any stimulative effect on the economy, which already benefits those at the very top so disproportionately that one has to wonder if the guillotines are being taken out of mothballs and sharpened for our version of the French Revolution. Republicans hate income redistribution unless it violates the laws of gravity. Then they go all gangbusters for it.
6
the lapel pin patriots are preaching the Gospel Of Prosperity and sadly their base thinks it's for them
3
Fox News has very little to say about this tax cut, instead focusing headlines on the Clintons and Bergdahl instead. Perhaps even the GOP’s propaganda arm knows this would be unpopular for with their base too - they are trying to distract them until it is passed.
3
It appears that most will see their taxes go down....however, the rich get steak while the rest of us get carrots. Clever tactics.
A do-nothing Congress is far more appealing than a do-something, do-anything Congress.
4
"Are an undocumented parent raising a child who is an American citizen: The House bill would require at least one parent to have a Social Security number to claim the refundable portion of child tax credit. Hurting young citizens in this way would add up to $21.7 billion.”
It is not necessary to pay income taxes to receive this; it need not be a credit. It can be cash. The Inspector General for the Treasury Department found that the I.R.S. had paid $4.2 billion dollars to the undocumented in 2010 under this so-called "child tax credit". The I.R.S. gives Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITIN’s) to undocumented immigrants with which to file income tax forms. Most of the undocumented do not earn enough to pay income taxes. They use their ITIN’s to apply to the I.R.S. for cash.
The I.R.S. claims it lacks the authority to determine which applicants (and which dependents) are here legally (or even in the country). It, therefore, pays all applicants, regardless of their legal status or the location of those they are claiming as dependents. And, it pays them year after year.
An Eyewitness News Team investigated the allegation that some undocumented migrants were each receiving about $20,000 from the I.R.S. for nieces and nephews who had never been to the U.S. See a video of the report on youtube. It is titled "Part one: 13 Investigates IRS tax loophole”.
The undocumented have been scamming taxpayers.
Can I meet your tax preparer? According to IRS form 8936 for 2016 Qualified Plug-in Electric Drive Motor Vehicle Credit, the tax credit for electric car purchases is $2,500, not $7,500.
I cannot stomach the hubris of these people who would so blatantly lie and pass laws that result in even more wealth gain for those who have it at the cost of those of us who toil every day to have decent life. I finally received a cost of living raise after 5 years and now I lose that x10. I am blessed with a good job but this will set my family back in ways that I never thought would be allowed. I will be put on the edge and those who are already on it will be pushed off. All for the sake of funneling more into the pockets of those who have no need. Trillions in offshore accounts but we see no action in an effort to get those taxable dollars accounted for. Egregious does not begin to define what we are being asked to accept. VOTE.
5
An average $64K tax cut is chump change to the 1%. What are Repubs thinking? Simply NOT morally justifiable.
2
The top 10 % does not care. The Times has consistently been making this point in the magazine: when stress levels increased painfully in the 80s, When maids cleaning 1 % er's home could not ask to use bathrooms. Lincoln was wrong this time. Unless voters given the dems a veto proof majorities in both houses, this income shift will be permanent.
I am losing sleep over my precious deductions going away.
How will I ever going to have kids, get a degree or buy a home ?
Sad !
1
The new tax bill cuts deductions for adoptive parents, but the infamous June 2017 Don Jr. meeting with Russians was "for the orphans"?
And 35% of voters still buy this?
We need to support our President and make sure this tax cut gets passed. It is the only way the public will learn the value of the Republican Party's policies. Perhaps then we will see the death of the Laffer Curve and be done with the sociopathic ideas they promote.
This is the most blatantly discriminatory tax bill in a lifetime. So let me guess, Republicans want uneducated families, families that don't adopt, teachers who don't care about their students, and people to stop having kids.
This is not what they intended, but will happen. Already my colleagues in tech have 1 kid, can barely buy a place due to the staggering cost of children and housing.
Of course, having to choose what to be, and do, in life, depends at least partially on the means available to you...to see them through. And having a fair system that rewards your efforts, and allow comfort in fulfilling the basic needs for a contented life, would be appreciated. Now, we live in a capitalistic society where capital always trumps labor; and it's tendency to become more and more unequal, without regulation, is highly dangerous for it's own survival. The 'rich and powerful' allegiance to 'greed' may blind them to this reality; and if inequality, and it's inequities, becomes the norm, it is caving it's own destruction. What's wrong with sharing the pie more equitably? And seek strength in being inclusive, and tolerant, and solidary with the least among us? Couldn't we apply the 'golden rule' in our dealings, so the poor rich may feel, for once, useful to the rest, not a parasite living at the expense of the majority? Let's remember that, the higher we go, the more power we accumulate, the higher the responsibility to do the right thing, share the wealth. But the republican tax bill, in this regard, is a farce and a fraud, an institutionalized violence; one we must oppose on principle. For that, we must start thinking for ourselves, to prevent demagogues a la Trump/Ryan/McConnell to stick their filthy fingers in our mouth
The GOP wealthfare for billionaires must end, those people don't need money and are uselessly buying real estate which has the effect of driving up real estate prices to the point that the average person can't buy a thing. We need to remove some money from their pockets so they stay out of the housing market. If the GOP doesn't want everybody on public welfare, they apparently do want all of us at the mercy of billionaire landlords. It stinks everything about the GOP is beginning to smell like three day old fish.
3
Paul Ryan made the comment that the tax credit for adoption was not necessary because you "get back $600" per year per child. At every turn of the adoption process, there is someone out there with their hand out for thousands of dollars.
We adopted 2 boys and the total cost was around $30,000. Let's see Paul, if you could do some arithmetic, it would take 25 years to get help with that. I would never expect the whole cost to be covered, however since there are no reforms in the adoption process, since these are children without families, because we should be a decent humanitarian country and adoption should not just be for the rich - those of us who are middle class need help with that upfront cost. WE are talking about children here!!!!!!
3
Watching the machinations of Trump and the GOP led congress one understands how violent revolution is fomented in a country where civil society has more or less prospered for generations, granted with it's share of social, economic and political problems. We are being led by an ignorant narcissistic madman and his army of drones, obsessed with "destroying the administrative state" while somehow preserving government. Disinformation is king. Let's hope the faint light at the end of the tunnel with Tuesdays elections are the beginning of a path back to sanity, decency and some modicum of truth in public life and discourse. Unfortunately I have my doubts.
1
I do know one person who will be greatly helped by a tax cut: Donald J. Trump stands to save tens of millions per year on his taxes, and then his family stands stands to save nearly a billion when he dies. All this at our expense. This is a gigantic, grotesque conflict of interest! Trump is pushing this tax "cut" to benefit himself!
4
Sad state of affairs when those that are elected to protect and foster the growth of America sell their souls and lie to us about their true intentions.
But I never thought I'd see the day when Republican politicians would side with Russia to reward the rich in our Country but there was previous precedent.
In the 30s, a substantial portion of wealth in our Country sided with Fascism.
Like I said sad state of affairs and we have to push back. We will make America great again.
2
Eliminate offshore tax havens for Americans. Simple, fair.
2
The GOP is anti-human. Odd for a party that lives and dies on the “pro-life” sword.
Our Rep, Peter Roskam, of IL-06 is on the W&M committee writing this horror show and he hasn’t shown his face to his constituents to explain the perverse “benefits” of this plan.
He’s a fraud. As is the GOP.
4
Let Us Pray...Dear God, Please make this awful man and his devoted followers go away. Our profound gratitude will be eternal. Amen.
1
The billionaires are in charge.
4
Presently, I don't know anyone who wouldn't be damaged by this GOP bill, forget sooner or later.
1
To Republican supporters, it doesn't matter what they do, it is what they say. Who are you going to believe, those educated in determining the effects of policy (obviously these people are liberal elitists) or your own ya-shucks representative. Any negative results are, by definition, the work of Democrats, especially Obama and Hillary.
1
This is excellent! It is the best plan to propel people to vote these dishonest politicians out of office, take congress back next year and impeach the most dishonest president of history.
3
IF you could guarantee that all that would happen, l would be content to be silent, BUT the sheep are willfully blind, and will vote as they are told
I am all for increasing taxes on families with more children. The world has too many people already. No one should be getting a tax break for birthing 5 kids and speeding up the demise of the planet.
And be sure to eliminate the availability of low-cost birth control. That is the Republican way to population control. Perhaps jailing them also. Or Johnathon Swift’s ‘A Modest Propsal’?
Taxes on more than 2 kids ok, IF they stop attacking reproductive rights.
Oh boy, that trickle down economic policy ,again
2
I am practically speechless! Not one bit of the "reform" benefits those of the middle class. Who voted for these scoundrels? A lesson to Republicans, you will be voted out upon the nest election, i.e. New Jersey. Politicians never listen to their constituents. Loss of student loan interest deduction: They do not want us to be educated, Loss of mortgage interest deduction: they do not want us to own a home. These companies will never return manufacturing to the US. They will also NOT pay us what we are worth and deserve. My 2% raise covers the increase in medical costs. The year 2020 wil be the last election that I will vote in, if they put a monkey to run against the Republican we now have, the monkey will get my vote.
1
A snake oil salesman with a loud mouth, a small mind and hatred in his heart is transferring wealth from the working class to the very rich.
2
The old get old, and the young get stronger.
May take a week, and it may take longer.
They got the guns, but we got the numbers.
~ Jim Morrison
2
And where are President Trumps tax returns????
2
Agreed! And no mention of him in the Paradise Papers? Surely he is in there with the rest of his pals? In his words, he would be crazy not to take advantage of those loopholes.
1
Chris Collins is a Republican Congressman from NY....this is what his rich donors told him about the tax cut:
"My donors are basically saying 'get it done or don't ever call me again."
'nough said!
I am not in favor of this tax bill. It seems to be a needless giveaway to the rich, all while Trump sells it as as "for the middle class". What nonsense! I think congress should just reject this bill. No Tax Give Away to the rich! Just leave things alone Congress!
2
If the fact that there are so many Republicans in Congress (plus a very special one in the White House) is not proof of the adage "sucker born every minute", I don't know what is.
1
As Leonhardt points out in another post, to pay for all of these “cuts”, the Congress will have to gut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Which, in the end, is the real goal of all of this...reaching the AynRandian dream. (And putting the peasants in their place.)
1
There will be people who will take the attitude " I got mine, so too bad for you. You shoulda, woulda, coulda" until they find themselves in the same boat. Then it will be time to to blame Obama, Clinton, the Democrats, immigrants, the weather, young people, Bambi, The Three Musketeers, Elton John and Rock and Roll.
If lipstick came out of a firehose you could not put enough on this pig to hide its true identity. That is, unless you got your "news" from the tweets, Fox and Limbaugh.
1
Trump's base don't care. They want the struggling middle class to fall into the gutter. Misery loves company.
The criminal GOP have just signed with their own death warrant with this bill. Tuesday's election results have shown them the grave that they have dug for themselves over the last 40 years, they have now stepped into it and are awaiting 2018 election cycle to bury them.
Get more angry at the bums and throw them out. Resist, march, vote.
1
Thank you, NYT, for continuing to shine the light on this "tax reform" obscenity.
1
For starters, to be lied to so blatantly... is a crime or should be. Every politician who is behind or backing this lie should be branded a liar from this moment on. So Liar Trump (long time liar) and his VP Liar Pence (new to game liar) and Liar Ryan ( long term liar about taxes) and Liar Mconnell (Band leader of the liars).. The media should not accept that these men and women are telling any kind of truth about the tax plan.. It is time for a call to the truth reporters out there. You have a mountain of evidence that they are lying.. make em come on your shows and convince you they are not lying... Otherwise you will be nothing but enablers of liars and in such liars as well.
1
It's a little disingenuous when the NYT points to the medical expense deduction which was effectively killed in 2009 by the Democrats.
7% greater than AGI was jacked up 43% to 10% by the Obamacare Bill.
They have no idea what they voted for.
Tax Reform
1. Read Paradise Papers
2. Fix
3
I agree that the GOP tax plan is not the best but NYT your journalism is SO misleading. You can still own a home! You just can't write off more than a $500K mortgage. How many of us "normal" Americans have $500K mortgages? I read somewhere it's like less than 3 percent. Please be honest in your reporting! I would like to find a newspaper that is not slanted in one way or another. I don't think it exists anymore.
Please read this for accurate information about the percent of US housing valued at $500,000 or more (11%). Read the whole article, because it also explains why this number is misleading: In many markets the percent is much higher. http://economistsoutlook.blogs.realtor.org/2011/04/12/high-valued-homes-...
Working people have to live where the jobs are. If they can't afford to buy in those more expensive markets, they are stuck with renting at sky-high prices from companies that Trump hopes to give a big tax cut. Factual? Yes. Fair? No.
1
My 11 year old daughter said:
So, we’re giving more money to the really really rich? That’s so dumb.
2
Here is a novel idea. How about we have a tax code that takes into account all of the country's expenses, and taxes its citizens accordingly to pay for those expenses.
2
Such negativity, Failing NY Times! Get with the program. Sure, these are little losses for losers, but think of the benefits. With all the new economic activity triggered by the flood of money into the wealthy's pockets, the benefits will trickle down to the middle class right soon. Corporations, when the repatriate the offshore profits, will give big raises, right after they pay out special dividends, buy back stock, and give executives big bonuses for being so brilliant as to be CEO when the money fell from the sky. Failing NY Times, you just don't have that "winner" attitude.
Oh but no abortion allowed, and too bad too hard to adopt children! Once again the hypocrisy of the greedy old patriarchs is showing.
1
The substance of the article does not live up to the hysterics in the headline...
1
This bill is a bad Hombre.
Reading this made me want to throw up.
At last ! Some financial restraint ! The Democrats would spend you too oblivion. As for the illegals, deport them! Use your tax dollars for Americans who desperately need help.
Now Dems/NYT are for lower taxes. Precious!
1
My husband and I both have graduate degrees, one in a lucrative field. We do not have student debt. We still choose not to have more than one child...If you want to give your child the best education, it will cost you...And this country apparently does not care to provide good schools and good healthcare for everyone...For the rich, by the rich, of the rich...
Land of the theif, home of the slave. WEB DuBois
Republicans know the value of a simple slogan: "Make America Great Again." The refrain of this article, and every Democrat's speech, should be: "The Party of the Rich, Bait and Switch."
The GOP has long told us that they are the party that supports cutting taxes, because of, you know "big government".
Now that they finally have the power to do so, they're working on a bill that would do the EXACT opposite: most Americans who would see a change in their taxes because of this bill, would pay MORE taxes, and only a tiny minority of Americans (the wealthiest) would get cuts, huge cuts even.
Conclusion: this is not a tax CUTTING bill, overall, it's a tax INCREASING bill, in other words, big government, $1.7 trillion in additional deficit included.
A bill that increases taxes for tens of millions of Americans all while cutting them for a couple of thousand, cannot possibly be called a tax cutting bill - let alone a "cut cut cut bill".
Instead of making America great again, the GOP now only wants to make exploitation of "we the people" through the wealthiest Americans great again.
Shame on you, GOP!
1
Why is running up the deficit 1.5 trillion acceptable now? We just listened to the GOP scream for seven years about "deficit! deficit!" while they blocked the needed infrastructure proposals from the Obama administration. The same complaint from the GOP on virtually every other Obama initiative as well. Now the deficit doesn't matter. Down the road, they'll use it as an excuse to further cut Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. It seems rational for the wealthy to revolt and reject the cuts being offered them, in the enlightened self-interest of living without the need of a body guard every time they venture out of their mansions.
2
This is just too much. The overprivileged are overreaching. They may soon find to their detriment what real class warfare is all about.
3
The Republican tax plan is designed to cement power in an aristocracy in a new America where money buys politicians, policy and power. They mean to shift wealth from working people striving to get ahead to the already obscenely wealthy (and powerful), by robbing the means with which Americans get ahead: owning their own home, getting a college degree, protecting the health and welfare of their family. They mean to double-tax blue states (the donor states – New York sends $48 billion more to the federal government than we get back), in order to reward red states (debtor states that pride themselves in low state and local taxes so they have horrible public education, health care and infrastructure, but so what, New York and California will pay) for their bigotry and xenophobia. This is about political power.
The Republicans intend to destroy the federal government by exploding national debt, and using this as an excuse to cut Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, education and infrastructure spending and research investments (especially in renewable energy).
2
Did I miss something? The standard deduction is DOUBLING. Many relatively poor and middle class RENTERS such as myself will BENEFIT from the Trump bill. Clearly there are winners and losers here, but EVERY tax plan has winners and losers. I think more people will gain on the lower end of the income spectrum, especially renters, than will lose. The rich pay more in taxes to begin with and often find creative ways to pay less taxes regardless of the tax code.
My children are both grad students in STEM fields. Neither owns a car, and they barely scrape by on their stipends while taking classes, doing research and teaching. Most of their classmates are from China, Korea, and India.
Our congress wants to tax their tuition and tiny salaries while estates over 5 million should be exempt?
Madness!
2
Should you also ask why college tuition is so expensive?
Tuition costs should be be accepted at face value and further aggravated by trying to get the govt to transfer funds to private universities that cater to foreign students and, in some cases, have billions of $s in endowments.
I would point out that the Gincgrich Congress (in '95?) ended an earlier tax deduction for interest on student loans, which affected me personally. I've since paid the loans off. But let's just say that this is a perennial Republican item.
If this bill is allowed to become law in any of its current iterations, millions of Americans will suffer. The GOP does not care and yet their base puts them back into office election after election. The GOP base and Trump supporters will all pay more taxes under these proposals. American voters need to inform themselves better about economic issues proposed by both political parties instead of focusing so intently on social issues--which are also important--but if you can't feed yourself, pay for housing, or put clothes on your back then racism, bigotry, and white supremacy really won't matter that much.
Tax breaks for the 1% increasing the deficit to HUGE historic levels...and all this while Porto Rico & USVI are still without power, clean water, housing etc.....did we forget these Americans? Winter is coming....are we allowing this suffering to continue?
Can someone explain to Trump what happens to a country already in debt to the tune of $22 trillion at the time of the next banking crisis? Can someone explain to Trump what will happen to social cohesion when the funding of public services are slashed to pay for are tax cuts for the rich? Can someone explain to Trump what happens to the credit rating and cost of borrowing of a massively endebted country when the markets lose their nerve? What do you mean he doesn't care and is deliberately holding his fortune in an offshore account? And you say he had a friend and mentor in Russia who managed to make money out of his own country's economic misfortune. I see..It's all beginning to make sense now. Quite a clever man after all!
GOP Strategy for Destroying the Safety Net:
1. Give Tax Cuts to the Rich (aka, "Deficit, what Deficit?")
2. Wait for the Deficit to Explode
3. Scream For Spending Cuts To Reduce the Deficit (for The Sake of Our Children, of course)
4. Pass Legislation to Cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.
5. Repeat As Needed
Thank you NY Times for calling the bill what it is, "immense tax giveaway to the rich". I would add one thing, however, the bill is an immense AND UNNECESSARY tax giveaway to the rich.
Our economy is fine. It doesn't need a boost. There is no reason for this travesty other than as a gift for the big Republican donors. Everyone will be hurt save for the top 10% and the big corporations. The very idea sounds like something out of the Onion, only this is for real.
Call you Senators and Congressmen at 202-224-3121 and voice your objections. You will get a recorded message asking for your zip code. You will then be put in touch with your Senator or Congressman where you can leave a recorded message.
This bill is a blow against the American people on par with the Republican attempt to do away with healthcare. Stop them.
1
Are Human Rights included in this Tax Bill? How much would that cost me? I still am wondering who is responsible for stealing my Human Rights. (I am in Generation X). And, I am still waiting for The World to happen. Those organizations who have the word World attached to their Title/Name, like World Bank, are not really World Level, but only World superficially, because they themselves say so. Waiting for the World to happen, World Citizenship to happen, thus putting these GOP and Dems who allow for offshore tax junk inequality to happen, "out-of-business". Vote for the World Citizenship Party... to appear sometime in The Future, I think.
Only Liberal zealots could refer to allowing taxpayers (whether rich or poor) to keep more of their own money as a "giveaway".
If is the supreme folly of Liberalism--to suggest that government is more entitled to our money than we are.
Would you let a government bureaucrat pick out a vehicle for you...or a house...or decide where your children will to go college? Nope...but Liberals think government should handle our health care, our retirement, and the education of our children.
The only way America can return to true prosperity, is to shrink government to the size where its only roles are those outlined in the constitution--Defense, Law Enforcement, Infrastructure, Trade and Foreign Relations.
2
Please read the article, or any other factual analysis of the proposed tax plan. It does NOT allow middle income people to keep more of their income; it raises their effective tax rate by moving them into higher tax brackets.
1
You mean true plutocracy, or true oligarchy (your choice there). Only extreme head-in-the-sand conservatives believe that capitalism without any outside constraint actually ends up functioning to the benefit of the general population. There aren't any real world examples.
1
I want to highlight the role of Paul Ryan in this act of aggression against main stream America. Taking away deductions for the middle class on education, like interest on student loans, on housing by limiting the mortgage interest deduction, on health care, and on and on. It singles out for special punishment folks in the middle who pay high state and local taxes which would no longer be deductible from federal taxes. You know who gets to keep those state and local tax breaks? Businesses. This is beyond hypocrisy to outright lying and deception.
Ryan's takeaway from the big democratic victories? He claims it doesn't mean anything, doesn't change anything, it just adds pressure to get things done like pass a tax bill. Of course those election victories mean much much more than that, many other things than that. For one the beginning of the rejection of the hate and negativity, the toxic pollution of our airwaves on a daily basis by this very sick and vulgar man. But the point about Ryan is this there is no pressure to pass the wrong tax bill. He wants to pretend that WHAT the bill is secondary to passing a bill, any bill. But to come out with a straight face and say this is a family friendly tax bill is is such a huge lie, how can he say it without squirming at his dishonesty. For a guy who thinks he's a boy scout this tax plan is a vicious attack on the middle class. The Press needs to confront him on the family fraud story.
You have to give it to the very wealthy and corporations that have successfully taken over both parties ever since the Lewis Powell memo from 1971. The corrosive, trickle down economic system we have been living through for several decades is now close to achieving what it was intended to accomplish....the complete rot and destruction of the working and middle classes along with the "de-construction" of government and democratic institutions and finally, the complete shift of the tax burden for the "common good" to be paid for by the lower classes only. The United States is well on its way to the gutter.
1
The New York Times analysis “excluded individual filers and households headed by people 65 or older." The U.S. Census Bureau reported in 2015 that there were 109 million unmarried people ages 18 and older in the nation, making up 45 percent of the adult population. There were 19 million U.S. residents ages 65 and older who were single, defined as never married, divorced or widowed. So, the Times analyses excludes about 50 percent of U.S. taxpayers.
Why, oh, why isn't this information being published as headline news every day? Why, oh, why aren't the Democrats shouting it from the rooftops and running ads on TV, radio and newspapers? Everytime one of these tax increases is proposed, those opposed must, must get that information out as widely as possible.
1
What about the reduction in taxes on pass-through income which the wide majority of the top 1% draw their income? This would give the top 1% an Immediate tax cut of 50%. Please report this.
3
First, I'm not at all in favor of a tax cut for the rich. I don't believe for one second they need it, they will be motivated by it to invest or that it will benefit the country as a whole. That's nonsense. Furthermore, the super rich have largely got rich by skimming of the top of the middle and lower classes. (Lower wages in the name of "shareholder value".) . They don't need a tax code to help.
That said, I don't think it's in the public interest to subsidize adoption, larger families, larger mortgages, education or much else through the text code. It just creates too many winners and loser. If these are public goods fund them directly, particularly education and health care which are needed by everyone.
I do find the argument against the state and local tax deduction interesting. The low tax states are usually the states that are big on 'states rights' and local control, almost always resulting on fewer services.
It seems to me that the higher tax states are actually putting local control into action by taking local responsibility for providing services, often resulting is less need for federal funding. So why should citizens of these states be taxed twice on the same money?
If the states rights argument is taken to the extreme, the tax code should provide a credit (not a deduction) for state and local taxes. From the states rights perspective, that would be a double-win: much more local control and a smaller (tiny?) federal government.
5
Every year exactly at the beginning of this month I have a planning session with my wife in order to pick our benefits from the company's benefit plan. Last years have been difficult to figure out since I had not have a pay raise for a two years in a row and this will probably will be the third, ok I'm lucky to have a job. Since the portion of the health care insurance we pay increases its price every year we have to be creative. The same happens with the cost of day care increasing year after year, I also take advantage of the dependent care account from the company but I'm not able to maximize it because I cannot afford it. After a lot of thinking I finally got back to school for a masters degree, knowing the company already suspended the reimbursement program, because of the bad economic situation, I decided to go ahead since I still could deduct the interest from the loan.
We started by cutting contribution to the 401K. The next year we cut on vacation duration. We are not big fans of eating out often but now we stick with a plan of doing it only once a week. My point is, we've been in a discipline mode for a couple of years with the money, and yes we took advantage of those deductions.
Why in the world the corporations cannot do the same ? How can this guys are trying to sell a 15% reduction in corporate tax by eliminating the deductions that help millions of families to break even ? They are really looking for money where there isn't !
7
"Have or develop chronic illnesses:"
The medical expenses deduction also includes deduction of premiums for long-term care insurance.
I would guess that's a selling point for insurance agents ... wonder what the lobbyists for the insurance industry are doing
2
Certainly the progressing Tax Bill needs to be monitored but a more balanced view would be appreciated. For example, how would the typical family benefit from a dramatically increased standard deduction to contrast with some of these cuts? Also, the Senate deliberations have important differences that aren't mentioned here.
The role of the tax code should be to raise revenue for the Treasury - not a platform to be manipulated by every special interest group in existence. The code needs to be dramatically simplified and that must include prized deductions going away. The analysis should contrast the eliminated deductions with benefits to get a true picture.
6
What about the Cost of the LOSS of the PERSONAL EXEMPTION
This editorial addresses one issue with
"Have dependents you need to take care of:"
Another potential financial burden for the taxpayer, is the loss of the personal exemption deduction. I don't think increasing the standard deduction is an equitable way to eliminate the personal deduction.
What if one has an adult child with a disability or chronic illness -- no more personal exemption if one is caring for that person.
And, at the other generational side of the family, what about caring for a parent with dementia, or another chronic or terminal illness.... if that parent moves into one's home for care --- no more personal exemption
6
Thank you for framing the "tax cut" bills this way. Most people naturally care about the pocketbook issues that affect them. And virtually everyone will be impacted by this legislation: young people (child care and adoption expenses, among others); middle-aged people (deductions for home ownership/college tuition/medical expenses; older people (medical expenses, etc.) This is the way to present this issue to the American public.
6
Agree but the analysis should also contrast deduction losses with benefits obtained by higher standard deductions, etc.
Not saying they balance out. Not sure because that analysis is not what is being presented.
Voters shouild make it very clear to Republicans that they will not accept new tax breaks for the ultra-rich and that if any new laws go in that direction the GOP will have to pay a heavy political cost. Our democracy will not survive if the ultra-rich are allowed to not pay their fair share, especially in a country where firearms are easily obtained.
2
This tax cut ensures three things, and only three things:
1. The top 1% (>$450,000) will save more,
2. The lower 99% will save less, and
3. Our national debt will increase.
How is this good, conservative fiscal policy? Are 50% of Americans truly happy with this policy? If they are happy, why?
8
Anyone who hasn't figured out what it means to be a member of the Republican House of Representatives or a member of the Senate Republicans, should follow the money. This bill leads right to the heart of what they are really all about. The question now becomes, "Who voted for these people to lead the nation and what were they thinking?"
4
There's more not commented on here so far too. Middle class persons tend to have, and are encouraged lifelong to have, a lot of their savings in 401k's and similar. When they die, all such moneys will be considered immediate income. For many, this means that once they're gone their estate will have to pay a 35 or 39% tax on their lifelong savings. Not even considered capital gains. Income! But the truly rich? Under the new bill they won't pay a dime!
7
Lowering the corporate tax rate is probably a bad idea, but if lowering the corporate tax rate from 35% to 20% is going to be done, require several things of companies to qualify.
The 20% tax rate should be a minimum tax rate. Whatever profits are declared, 20% of that amount gets paid out to the IRS in corporate income tax. If not paid by April 15, penalties are due. If no profits are declared, there will be no dividends paid on stocks and no bonuses to executives .
Companies must calculate their taxes under both the old and new rates. They may then pay at the lower rate if and only if at least 50% of the tax savings are distributed to employees earning less than $100,000 per year in the form of retroactive pay raises to the beginning of the tax year or bonuses. Those raises or bonuses will be distributed on a sliding scale so that those with the lowest salary rate or hourly wage will receive pay rate increases that are double as a percentage of pay rate that those at the top of the scale (or $100,000) receive. Repeated annually for 5 years. After 5 years pay scales must either be made permanent or comparable bonuses tied to the profitability of the company must be made a permanent part of worker compensation. This way the tax relief actually will "trickle down".
End the oil depletion allowance and tax breaks for fossil fuels and carried interest exemption. All personal income should be treated the same and taxed progressively. Remove the Social Security cap.
5
All personal income above one million dollars per year should be subject to payroll taxes and that million dollar threshold should not be adjusted for inflation. However the cap on payroll taxes should continue to be adjusted upward for inflation until such time as the payroll tax cap reaches one million dollars. When the cap rises gets to one million dollars per year, the million dollar per year threshold for all income to be subject to payroll taxes should be allowed to rise with inflation. Income from the new taxes will be used to "redeem" government bonds held in trust for social security and provide modest increases in social security benefits. At such time as there is no social security debt, payroll taxes rates may be reduced in inverse proportion to income level--that is the lowest paid workers will get the largest reduction in payroll tax rates. If such reductions in payroll taxes result in Social Security account deficits, higher rates will be resumed.
Other tax changes must not increase the deficit. Any offsets or spending reductions must be passed by congress, signed by the president, and in place before any changes in tax rates are allowed. However bills for offsets and tax changes may be sent to the president for his signature simultaneously.
The budget of the IRS must be increased and enforcement and audits of high income earners prioritized.
I’m actually somewhat hopeful about their plan to tax graduate student tuition.
At first I was horrified, but after a few moments of reflection, I think it could work out for the better.
When I was in graduate school I worked long, hard hours in the lab. I had no overtime, no social security, and I was constantly burdened with university paperwork and fees because I was a “student.” I also signed a form every week that said I only “worked” 20 hours. It was all a farce.
Maybe this plan will lead to the reforms grad students need. They should be treated as professional staff more than as students, and the huge amounts of money paid out to research grants for them shouldn’t disappear into the university as “tuition”
1
The GOP wrote a tax bill that takes from the middle class? And wants to take even more? The class that fuels economic growth and supplies the labor for growing companies?
I am shocked! Shocked, I say.
2
This bill would for all extent and purposes, end the American middle class, which has been on a downward spiral for decades. It would enshrine the aristocracy of the rich through tax shifting. This welfare for the super rich bill, in conjunction with quasi legal rampant wealth hiding of shore, see the Paradise Papers, would cement the two class system of modern feudalism. My question is at what point do the red hats emerge from their trailers and say, enough is too much already.
3
Corporations make up 5% of businesses, but receive 60% of revenues. If you are a small business owner this tax cut cut for corporations is going to hurt you. Most small businesses have "pass through" tax status. Your profits are taxed as ordinary income and you use the deductions that workers get, the ones listed in this article. Pass throughs will get a lower top rate, but only 14% of small business are paying more than that 25% rate now, and most of those are actually investment clubs for the rich.
This tax bill was being sold as simplification, but there are no plans to simplify corporate taxes by taking away their deductions. So corporations will get a 20% reduction in their taxes from the 15% average tax they pay now, meaning that the federal government will be subsidizing the average corporation.
All of the "simplifications" either benefit the rich, like eliminating the estate tax, which only applies to the richest .05% of the population, or hurt the middle class.
The global corporations have been using small business people to sell their special advantages for decades. If you are a small business owner, you need to realize that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is almost completely funded by global corporations. They want to put you out of business so they can have your customers and they want you to pay higher taxes to subsidize them.
Global corporations use the government to increase profits and cut competition at your expense.
Stop supporting your biggest competitors.
5
In my former occupation in consumer products we were required to provide demonstrable evidence that our [engineering] changes would be a cost benefit and do what they are supposed to do.
The Reps don't do this with their tax bill. Instead they engage in fantasy role-playing and offer no facts or data other than their blind faith in their own ideology.
1
The republicans in congress want to give their billionaire donors and themselves(some of them are ultrawealthy) a huge tax cut at everyone else’s expenses. A few in the middle class will get peanuts, a few hundred dollars in cash at most, while giving away ten times more down the road. The deficit will rise by at least 1.7 trillion, to 20 trillion. We and our kids , and some day theirs, will be burdened with this debt, in addition to mortgage and student debt and higher child care costs. Medicare, medical and social programs will all be slashed. Why republican voters want poverty is a mystery.
5
Before we marvel at all the hoops the GOP is trying to jump through in order to not add more than $1.5 trillion to the deficit shouldn't we be asking the GOP how, when and why adding even "just" $1.5 trillion became unacceptable? Where are all those Tea Party people now?
5
As the paradise papers shows, the 1% and the corporations don't need any tax cuts, instead they should be forced to pay the fair amount of taxes for our society. All over the world.
8
The average tax cut for the rich $64K, is greater that the average gross income for a family of four $59.5K. Nuff said.
6
It's my first time writing a comment on NY TIMES. For purpose of practicing writing article, I would say it is not an ideal article for a person who is not a native speaker like me to leave my opinion about this miserable news. However, this is a great opportunity to express my feeling about President Trump. Since president Trump wins the election, every decision he made not only amaze the Americans but also the people elsewhere. I could see Mr. Trump is just a businessman instead of a reliable leader. As an individual who is always apathetic with respect to politics, I barely see any helpful policy from Trump government has pragmatic effects to narrow rich-poor gap. And what those policies can do for American people is to deteriorate the whole system once and for all, and chip in the degeneration of our environment to live at the same time.
5
I read through the article and fail to see how I will be adversely affected. It seems like a total spin job to me.
I make 110,000 dollars a year. I have two children. I'm divorced. I can still deduct the mortgage interest on my house. And when that fails to bring in more money then the newly revised DOUBLING of the standard deduction I will take that. The child tax credit increases to 1500 dollars.
I will be saving money for a long time and so will most people. Just the fact that the standard deduction is DOUBLED should benefit more people then the minority mentioned in the article (undocumented cant deduct? GREAT).
The "rich" will also see the inability to deduct mortgage interest on houses over 500G. Pretty sure no working class person will be affected by that.
And high income earners will still be taxed at the 39 percent margin.
Looks pretty fair to me so far.
4
Assuming your 2 children are personal exemptions for you, what about that loss?
You didn't mention the loss of the deduction for medical expenses. Inevitably, that will affect you, as nothing is more certain than death and taxes.
People focus too heavily on tax rates without consideration of the base that rate is applied to.
Please send this article to anyone who thinks, just because it is NOT a plan conceived by Democrats, this is a good thing. Will you change their mind? Probably not. But it's worth a try. The consolation I get from all of this is that if the GOP DOES pass it, they will be justifiably and unmercifully criticized in the 2018 elections. If they DON'T pass it, bye bye donor money. Sad.
1
Is there really a grassroots groundswell to eliminate Estate Taxes? If we're a meritocracy, where one fairly prospers by the sweat of her own brow, fattening privilege for those who did not earn it is not be in keeping with those values. Yet the Republicans manage to sell this pig-in-a-poke to its poorer fan base. It speaks to the limitations of our political system. Even Andrew Carnegie knew that redistributing money from the dead is a good idea, especially given US's history of slavery, monopolies, selective giveaways to robber barons.
I have grave doubts about our country's ability to thrive after automation and artificial intelligence eliminates our skewed means of wealth distribution: jobs. Born of shortage of serfs decimated by the Bubonic Plague, "liberal" capitalism will return to its "conservative" feudalistic and bondsmen roots while surplus populations will be stigmatized as undeserving along the usual lines, resulting in disease, death and perhaps even a pogrom or two as scarcity suppresses access to wages. And not even a war can save us this time. "Little Rocket Man" has nukes. And much of our industrial base has been relocated overseas so China gets to rebuild. Last, there's talk, these days, about a Universal Basic Income. That requires taxing the rich -- a long way off when even war veterans are abandoned and civilian disability requirements are tightened. White supremacy has frustrated the unifying notion that we're all in this together.
2
The Paradise Papers give lie to any idea that the very wealthy and big corporations need any kind of tax cut at all. The reforms we should be looking at are ones that would make these kinds of tax havens illegal.
4
I'm surprised I haven't heard anything about an effect on churches and charities. It seems to me that with the increased standard deduction and limited mortgage interest deduction, fewer taxpayers will be itemizing. When I write a check to a charity for $100, I'm conscious that it's really only costing me $70 (since I itemize). With fewer people in that category, I'd think there may be an impact for these non-profits.
1
This is basically a summary of special interests stopping real tax reform (but it is also accurate that current plan is a big giveaway for the ultra-rich).
2
I didn't know taxing dependent care accounts was in this. That means I will have a ~$2,000 increased tax bill next year instead of 'just' the $1200 higher tax bill I was thinking I would have. In fact, if this bill was in effect in 2007 onwards, I would have had a bigger tax bill EVERY year, all-told, I would have paid $50,000 more in taxes. During that time, my wife and I have made between 60,000 a year combined (in 2007) to 165,000 a year (this year). During that time, we afforded our first car (a hybrid) with a special tax credit ($2,000), I went to graduate college for 6 years (which the GOP plan would have added a sum of 30,000 in taxes on my waived tuition and fees), my wife went to graduate school for 3 years (GOP would have added another 8,000 in taxes for that too), I did some rather expensive work-training overseas for two years (which I was able to deduct as unreimbursed employee expenses which made it affordable due to $7,000 in tax reductions), 6 years we had a childcare FSA ($1,000 in reduced tax cuts a year), we deducted thousands in student loan interest from our undergraduate degrees (the GOP would have taxed us an extra $1000 for that). The state income tax deduction loss would have resulted in 5,000 more in taxes. That is 60,000 in extra taxes, offset by only 10,000 due to the shift in tax brackets and doubling the standard deduction (for the years it mattered). I rose economically above my upbringing, and the GOP would have taxed that very thing to death.
4
I even forgot the loss in moving expenses deduction. To rise through the ranks professionally, I have moved five times before settling down, costing 12,000 in moving expenses. That means you can add another 3,000 in extra taxes I would have paid.
Yes, you got it. That's about the size of it. A vast number of Americans can simply fill in the blank: "I didn't know ____________ was in this." That's why Republicans are so urgent to pass this.
I particularly love the talking point now going round Congress: "I don't care about the politics. I just want to get things done." Sounds really noble and diligent, as if they expected to be praised and rewarded for doing things without regard for what they've done. Perhaps a good bet. I don't know. The American people are pretty gullible. Maybe we are precisely that kind of sucker. We do love our "doers."
Tax expenditures (deductions, credits, special rates, deferrals and exemptions) cost at least $1.3 trillion a year. The total does not include the break for high earners who avoid payroll taxes or the much larger tax avoidance for unrealized capital gains.
Some type of charitable tax deduction and tax incentive for retirement savings is necessary. All the other tax expenditures should be eliminated and replaced with spending programs "where necessary".
The adoption tax credit sounds heart warming but perhaps children would be adopted by families that don't need government money and the children would be better off.
The medical expense deduction was needed before mandatory health insurance. Today we have Mr. & Mrs. Romney writing off horseback riding as medical exercise.
Some tax free savings for retirement, health care and education is necessary but a $500,000 combined savings per taxpayer (One million per couple) should be enough government support. You can save more than a million without government help.
Deductions for moving expenses are not needed if the new job really pays more.
We don't need the federal government involved in any way in local housing decisions. All can be accomplished with zoning and local tax adjustments.
I don't see why a federal education dime should be given to any kid who graduated in the bottom half of the (free) high school class. Get a job and go to a community or state college at night if you want to turn your life around.
2
I love the way the Times cherry picks the negatives in the new tax plan. If only there was still such a thing as an independent journalist, we, the voting public, might actually be able to understand what is being proposed and make an informed decision.
For me, what I want from this tax plan is for businesses to come back to the US and start hiring people again. I’d like to see real wages rise due to increased demand, not through some artificial and arbitrary raising of the minimum wage as Democrats propose. I’d like to see my son, a College graduate, be able to get a full time job with benefits, instead of short term contract jobs.
Or we could just continue down the path that Democrats prefer, taking money from the middle class and the working poor and redistributing it to the non-working poor. Certainly that’s what Obama care does, make people who don’t have jobs with benefits foot the bill for everyone who can’t get insurance in the private sector. Makes a lot of sense. Can’t imagine why that didn’t work.
5
You can't simply bribe businesses and wealthy investors to pursue new ventures, new capital expenditures, new hiring where there is no significant prospect of profitable return. This kind of tax giveaway only drives up stock prices in a financial market that is increasingly divorced from the kind of productive business activity you and everyone else desires.
7
The tax rate went from 99% to 39% for the wealthy in 1986, and all they've done is socked away about $3 trillion in off-shore accounts. With that huge tax break, why haven't they brought the money here to pay higher salaries? You have to pay $120,000 on average, for a college education to become a receptionist, but you're still starting them at $15 an hour--if that? I was making that in the 1980's. No, the wealthy and corporations WILL NOT pay higher salaries, and they will invest in automation and technology, so they can employ LESS people. That's what they did, that's what they're doing, why should we believe they will do anything different? Corporations will get the tax break, but we cannot DEMAND that they pay hiring wages and bring jobs back, especially since they're fighting tooth and nail to keep the minimum wage down. No, history does not prove that lowering corporate taxes actually helps anyone but their shareholders. Legally, that's the only constituent that corporations MUST benefit--NOT their employees.
2
You are deluded. Demand is what drives the economy, not the dividends and stock buy-backs that will come with these tax cuts. What drives demand is ordinary folks with disposable income, not plush-bottoms receiving dividends. Joe Sixpack will have less to spend. So the notion that cuts for the so-called job creators will lift all boats is hogwash. This legislation will turbocharge inequality and scew the working man (including, by the way, elite professionals). Call it "The Let Them Eat Cake Tax Act of 2017. "
Good pointing to the obvious: that to give away that much to corporations and the top 1 percent, and yet stay under $1.51 trillion, new revenue has to come from somewhere. And it does. In the tax code shuffle, giving with one hand while taking away with the other, Republicans chip away at the working class, the middle class, even the upper middle class as much as they dare, hoping no one notices until it is too late.
But this good list skips right past the elephant in the room, which is the $1.51 trillion itself. The GOP is proposing to loot $1.51 trillion from the future, in the form of additional national debt, to pass it out to corporations and the wealthy in the here and now. We necessarily ran up the national debt during the recovery from the financial crisis of 2008. This time of relative economic prosperity, albeit very unequally distributed, should be a time of retiring some of that debt, running surpluses, not bloating it further. We should be increasing the taxes on precisely the most prosperous in our economy, corporations awash with cash and the top 1 percent. Otherwise, where will we be when the next crisis comes, economic, military, or natural disaster, requiring significant deficit spending?
The same-old-same-old GOP trickle down excuse that this giveaway will goose the overall economy is speculative at best. A bad bet at best. And it's our future they are betting on a wishful hunch to reward deep-pocket campaign contributors with utter certainty today.
10
"The GOP is proposing to loot $1.51 trillion from the future..."
You and the liberal democrats apparently had no qualms when the Obama administration heaped $9 trillion more to the debt. Hypocrisy runs rampant on the left to no one's surprise.
Tax cuts have become a magic silver bullet that makes everything right. Then comes reality. First, the nation must go on working and that means government must go on working, so the lost revenues must be replaced by borrowing money. The middle class will use there money as they must, so if they are finding it hard to get by with their long term slow salary increases, they will pay bills and make some delayed purchases. The rich will save the money or invest in securing what they have, or invest in mergers and acquisitions, but not new ventures in the U.S. while the economy is slow. If the economy has been growing or government revenues are in surplus, tax cuts can improve growth but their must be untapped demand or it does not promote the greater good.
The Republicans propose removing programs and services that enable a huge proportion of citizens to live decently with middle and lower incomes in order to assure themselves re-election next year. They are forsaking the greater good for powerful offices.
4
In other words if you are not part of the economic 1% this bill hits you in every way possible. The GOP is very democratic that way. They make sure to hurt everyone who doesn't make or have at least 10 million dollars stashed away somewhere. Since that means most of us they aren't truly working for us. They are working for the likes of the Koch Brothers, the Walton family, and others who really, really need a tax break.
7
Argue for a higher standard deduction, or a still lower bottom rate, or a higher trip point for 25% bracket. Not for giving a select few a break at the expense of others.
3
Our infrastructure is in serious need of repair, and it would be nice to move into the 21st century re: transportation with high-speed rail and other modern modes of transportation. One major cost of these tax cuts is the money needed for basic maintenance and improvements. If we cut taxes, we can only take on infrastructure and other critical needs by - well, cutting Medicare, Social Security, health care spending, shredding what's left of the safety net, etc.
And then, there's the stated GOP goal of increasing military spending.
These tax cuts might help me a little bit, but they will hurt our country a great deal.
While Congress looks for offsets for funding health care for children (CHIP) "so the deficit won't increase", this tax cut guarantees it will.
12
you have sneaked up on what is clearly the truth:
the GOP knows from long decades of experience that "tax cuts" and "tax reform" are concepts that sell, especially if you make sure people don't look too closely at ehat you're actually proposing... and -
their true purpose is to beggar the federal government, reducing its ability to help average taxpayers and the poor while freeing corporations and the ultrawealthy from the onerous burden of regulations that keep them from harming everybody else.
Another way to think about it:
In 2016, the federal budget was $4 trillion. Also in 2016, personal income and payroll taxes provided about 80% of all revenue, equivalent to $3.2 billion of the spending (let's ignore deficit spending).
If every person in the US paid an equal share of tax to fund this spending, that would be $10,000 each, or $40,000 for a family of four. Any deviation from this reflects policies to benefit one or more groups.
4
An insane way to think about it.
First of all, it's ridiculous to expect a waitress making 20, 000 a year to pay half of that in taxes, while a therapist making 100,000 pays only 1/10th. That is clearly not fair or plausible; if you can't understand that you do not belong in this conversation.
Second, a family of four should pay 40,000? What, because kindergarteners need to start pulling their weight?
This is not a jumping off point for fairness, it's an abstraction to the point of meaninglessness.
Be careful everyone. I bet the final bill will reverse some of the most egregious provisions in this bill -- but don't relax. The Republican MO is to throw the worst at us first, and expect us to get worn down. We need to fill our representatives Town Halls and phone lines. This needs the same attention as the healthcare bill. No reverses on the Estate Tax. No more to the 1 percent. Fix our roads, bridges, and healthcare.
11
I would not mind my taxes going up if it provided free universal healthcare and college. Otherwise, no way.
14
One other thing not mentioned.
Some people increase their payroll with holding exemptions, so they get a smaller tax refund, but a larger pay check. By getting rid of many deductions, and by eliminating personal income tax filing exemptions, these tax payers will either see a very large tax bill (and penalties), or a smaller paycheck (have to cut back on with holding exemptions). Thus, there will be less after tax money to spend.
So, not only are the Republicans creating a $1.5 trillion debt, they are also going to cut after tax income. In an economy where consumer spending makes up most of the spending, this will certainly create a recession. The wealthy, and corporations, will be rolling in cash, and most everyone else will even having more trouble making ends meet. This could create a downward spiral because of less cash flowing into the economy.
In addition, everything listed, in this article, is impacted even more, as most workers will have less take home pay. Compounding every one of teh items listed.
The GOP already created two bad recessions in 2001 and 2008, but they coudl create a new one; worse than the previous two.
7
You post make no sense. Your tax bill is the same whether or not you prefer to pay more up front and get a refund (dumb idea) or pay less and break even or pay a bit at the end of the year. I generally aim to stay under the maximum under payment limit. Why provide a free loan?
The proposal could be better and there will be changes coming from the Senate. Moving from a deduction centric system that favors one group over another to one that is fair to all is an improvement.
Daphine,
Let's say you estimate you deductions, and personal exemptions, will cut your AGI by $10,000. You take of 5 W$ exemptions to not provide a "free loan". Under the proposed tax law, let's say your AGI is only reduced by $5000, now you have too many W4 exemptions, and if not changed, you will owe taxes. If you change it to less w4 exemptions, your take home pay will decrease.
1
Very useful analysis. What it leaves out is what every discussion I've seen on this issue leaves out: the Republican's NEXT bill, which they promise is going to be "Entitlements Reform." I suggest that Congress put the tax bill aside until such time as they're ready to present the Entitlements reforms they have in mind. I'm pretty sure the plan is this: pass the tax cuts and then savage Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security because "we have to address the deficit that's in store because of the tax cuts." For me, that means they plan to give me an extra tax refund that amounts to less than half of one mortgage payment, and then take away thousands and thousands of dollars in benefits I've paid for and worked for and now depend on to survive. If that IS the plan, let's insist on looking at both bills together.
27
Why does the Editorial Board believe that demanding proof of legal residency by way of a valid social security number as a requirement to receiving certain tax credits is not a good idea? I may not agree with the proposed “tax reform” the GOP is currently pushing but on this item I’m in full agreement. We will never address illegal immigration as long as we continue to make it easy for undocumented immigrants to receive benefits intended for those here legally. Opposition to these reasonable proposals fuels the anti-immigration rhetoric preferred by Trump and many GOP members.
10
It’s a bad idea because it hurts the US citizen children of these people. It’s a problem unless one is into hurting children. You tell me if you see hurting children as a problem or not.
Arithmetic:
The Ivanka's of America get to keep their Daddies" stolen billions -- no estate tax -- this is less than 5000 estates per year, but the tax raises $18 billion a year.
Nearly 9 million families incur about $90 billion a year in extreme medical expenses not covered by insurance. Over 75 percent of them earn less than $100,000 a year; and 40 percent earn less than $70,000. These are extreme diseases that insurance cannot or will not fully cover: spina bifida, cancers, brain diseases. With their current deduction, they still have to pay these bills; with the deduction, they get to pay the bills with pre-tax dollars, saving about 20 percent of the overall expense.
The "cost" of giving this medical expense deduction to the middle class -- 9 million middle class families = yes, the same $18 billion a year (the effect of the deduction on $90 billion in expenses).
The GOP tax plan takes away $2,000 , on average, from these middle class families dealing with severe diseases (as if having the disease wasn't bad enough), who are earning about $75,000, on average, and have, on average $10,000 in these extreme additional medical expenses, on average.
And the GOP then uses those dollars, all $18 billion of them, to give 5000 Ivanka's, heiresses whose inheritance will be over $50 million each-- to give them an extra $3,600,000 in tax breaks, each, on average. (Not to mention all the off-shore billions they will have access to).
Spina bifida versus Ivanka.
27
I get a tuition benefit from my employer, for my kids. I regard it as deferred compensation, given that I have been paid below market rate for many years. What's with all the bill's attacks on universities and students? You would almost think the GOP doesn't want Americans to be educated, innovative people. Oh, wait ...
38
The proposed tax bill is an abuse of power and a continuance or Republican irresponsibility in the face of real existing needs in this country. This is no time for a tax cut that benefits the wealthy, in any way. The income inequality that already exists will only be made worse, and this is a hurtful prospect in a democracy that is already on the brink. As well, the rational that this tax cut for businesses will promote growth is a sham. Our country's growth pattern is more determined by demographics, and ours is not conducive for growth. The only thing that will grow as a result of this tax package are the wallets of the wealthy.
20
Trump claims this bill would result in a higher tax bill for himself. He could prove that by releasing his tax returns, but he won't because doing so would prove the opposite -- that he's (surprise!) lying once again. House and Senate members should tell Trump that they will not consider this bill until he releases his returns. Those who vote for this bill without exacting that promise should be voted out of office.
10
I'm not sure why this would be a surprise to any of us. The Republicans have clearly shown over and over, through their actions (not their words), that they only care about their patrons/donors, and their own pocketbooks. It's obvious in every decision they make and every bill they propose.
What I don't understand, though, is why the 27.3 million who voted for Trump don't see this. Either they are not paying attention at all, or they don't care to know the truth about their hero. Our GOP run congress is corrupt, and there is no equivalence between the right and the left, even though some will try to convince us that there is.
20
36 years of extracting wealth from the middle class to further enrich the already rich and the answer is even more of the same, a tragedy cheered on by its most wounded victims.
16
You did not even mention state and local taxes not being deduction? Taxes on taxes was,a republican mantra, but I guess it stops when you need tax cuts for Billionaires. I guess that's what you get when you vote for a billionaire.
12
The real kicker in the bill is the increase that hits a few years out. The immediate effect is that the deduction increase means most people’s taxes go down and fewer itemize, so the loss of deductions is somewhat disguised. But the bill cynically turns the cuts into an increase for the middle class (in five years, I think), while the benefits for the wealthy and corporations remain. Meanwhile, areas of the economy that benefit from targeted deductions suffer (charitable organizations, home builders, higher education, states that take care of infrastructure, etc). The timing provides cover for the GOP and for re-election by allowing them to call the net package a “cut.”
12
The more I learn about this Administration - being bent on destroying our democracy by undermining education, health care, the environment, working families, women, and minorities the more I realize how fundamentally cruel are the President, GOP leaders, and many Trump supporters. Anne Frank was wrong when she said that "Despite everything I believe that people are really good at heart."
14
Every ordinary family with a spouse or parent suffering from dementia is going to need the tax deduction for high medical expenses - in our case, $100,000. expenses per year. Every ordinary family with a member suffering from a severe, prolonged disease will be driven faster into poverty without this deduction.
Tom Cotton, Republican senator, went on record as opposing what he called "conspicuous compassion"! He and legislators choose to be blind and deaf to the obvious needs of fellow-citizens. (And of course they would cut all possible aid to students, since they'll need ignorant voters for the future.)
17
Tom Cotton is a PTSD afflicted, fast talking motor mouth, that is a double/triple dipper (army pension, the $200,000 (?) undeserving yearly salary, subsidized best of medical care). The guy needs to be silenced at each step. What is disconcerting is that more of the war veterans are entering politics and the administration appointees are war veterans. This democracy may soon turn into a military run society!! You heard it here for the first time!
Learning about any bill in Congress is as painful as having a tooth pulled without a pain killer. Add to that a tax bill, and most of us just give up. This whole thing is really about “playing with numbers”. I doubt if any sane citizen is satisfied with the current tax system. Our system does have to be reformed, but the way the Republicans and stupid President Trump are attempting to do this is INSANE. I always thought that the reason to have three houses of government was to safeguard us; the American Citizen. Perish that thought.
What we have now is a Fox in the chicken coop.
I was really encouraged Tuesday by what took place throughout the country during the election. It shows that people are fed up. Good for them. Now let’s all of us really get involved in our government, from the national scene to our local school board. We’ve let it get away from us and it’s time to take it back.
7
It is more than 45%, I’m sure. I have been a contractor for years and they will hit all 57 million of us with this terrible tax “cut.” I promise if you are squarely middle class like me (making under 100k) your taxes will rise and the increased personal exemption does not make up for it. They are lying to the American people — straight up lying. I’m so tired of their lies. And I’m tired of my tax money going to corporations and the 1% instead of infrastructure. As a developed country, we are among the least taxed (individuals not corps). We also get the least benefit. What little benefit there was is quickly being destroyed by the current government.
10
Predictable and despicable. Attacks on educational deductions and credits have not received as much attention some of the other atrocities on this list, but they make clear that Republicans have no idea or interest in how America became "great" or could do so again. This approach is fully consistent with the DeVosification of public education. Education must produce a profit or tax break for the you know who's.
6
I hope this does not pass. Permanent tax cuts for the very rich but only a temporary one for the middle class, provided there is a measly tax cut for the segment of society that bears the heaviest burden, always?
Also, with less money in the federal coffers, expect our infrastructure to deteriorate further. There's simply no money to repair things.
But it is ok to give the very rich even more money via tax breaks? We are becoming a banana republic faster than anyone would have imagined....
3
If everyone voted, this kind of stupidity would be less likely to happen. Eventually the people will get it right. Even hard core right wingers have a limit to the pain they can endure. Mean while, pony up and support the rich.
4
When Bush implemented lower tax rates for investors revenues plummeted and the deficit exploded.
Now Trump wants to create a new lower tax rate class for pass throughs benefitting LLCs, S-Corps which would specifically benefit business owners like Trump.
Trump wants to pay for these enormous tax breaks for himself on the backs of workers who earn salaried or hourly wages.
This is the story. This is the lead. This plan is outrageous as it increases taxes on the backs of workers to benefit those that already have more than they need. There will be no money for healthcare, infrastructure or education...this is an enormous transfer of wealth from workers or donors.
There is a huge difference between a business owner that earns $150K and one that earns $5M. They should not pay the same rates. They are not equivalent.
Any person who votes for this deserves to be primaried. Vote America, vote in every election, every year, every time.
7
Tax giveaway? How about reducing the massive burden on the wealthy who already pay 70% of all our taxes for us. Half of us don’t pay any income tax. Fair? The persuasive writing is so clear; “giveaway” is loaded but the facts are not nefarious.
1
As if a mid-level Daddy Warbucks wannabe, making a mere $100 million a year, actually gave 70 percent of his income to the government, he would still be left with $30 million with which to buy groceries, new tires, heating oil for the winter, and all the other necessities of life. True, he might have only $28 million in mad money left annually after all the essential bills were paid, and dealing with such a devastating economic blow would require a major ego adjustment, no doubt. But a few sessions with a mental health professional (covered by insurance) should help him cope with his sense of loss (“What about my vaycay getaway in Costa Rica?”) and anomie (“The grief is overwhelming, Doc.”).
Of course, no one pays 70 percent of their income in taxes .... even though it wouldn’t hurt - i.e., create genuine economic stress for - these multi-millionaires and billionaires if they did. And if everyone in America actually did foot the tax bill in line with their ability to pay, we wouldn’t even be discussing the possibility of cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs that are essential to the survival - the SURVIVAL - of millions of our fellow Americans.
As President Obama once said (and got lambasted for doing so), no one becomes rich and successful all on their own. We all owe a debt to our nation. I pay my share willingly. The richest should do the same.
1
Yes, why not a straight 10 percent tax on everyone--no exceptions. That way everyone pays the same and everyone has skin in the game.
This is such an old and tired excuse. The poor and middle class fund government with taxes on wages. The wealthy do not pay 70% of governments expenses. Income tax isn't a big deal compared to wage and sales taxes. Quit the cherry picking.
I do not see how anyone can continue to buy "trickle down' economics. How many hardworking people think they only deserve the trickle of crumbs from the table of the 1% when all of us contribute to the economy of this country? Why do people defer to self- appointed economic "wizards" such as Paul Ryan who claim to be working for their constituents when all they obviously are are wolves in sheeps' clothing working for their oligarchic donors? By now every American should be aware of the republicans' "starve the beast" and destroy the social safety net goals which they have been TELLING all of us they want to do for years and somehow convincing people that this is for their own good?
7
Well, those who voted the republicans into the house and senate will suffer too. But do they understand or do they care what this would do to the country. It is really astonishing how the republicans is trying to get away with this massive tax cuts for the rich and everyone seems to be silent. This is really depressing.
1
This bill will cause immense social disruption. Massive Media needs to continue to simplify this. This is even more dangerous than the Republican so called health care plan. In too many parts of the US homes are expensive with very large mortgages. This bill would rapidly depress home values, perhaps to less than the value of the actual mortgage. Is that fair or part of the plan? Potential retirees, those who have worked for thirty years to pay off that mortgage can forget about that nest egg. In the end, will their profits be taxed, too in a sneaky "revision"? Republican's are anti social security, anti-pension, anti middle class, so anything can happen. Want good public schools for your children? State and local taxes, you get it, not a deduction, but a double tax. School boards may struggle as children are hurt again. The list goes on and on for the middle. Ryan talks about a $1000 tax cut for some, but most will actually pay thousands more per year. This so called tax reform bill may be a bit academic, but please continue to simplify it, and show what a personal attack this is on the average voter. This is a great real estate bubble about to burst to reveal great social disruption. It is time to stop the Republicans and their nefarious plans.
2
I have a hard time believing that Congress could take away such essential tax deductions from our citizens, Two of my children are still paying off student loans, two have big state and local tax burdens even though their salaries are about median for the area. One of my children has huge medical expenses for children with autism and a yet undiagnosed medical problem. My mother was able to stay in assisted living until she was 95 because she sold her house, was very frugal all her life, and could deduct the medical expenses she incurred. Her monthly income from both Social Security and a pension was $2000. We are a very typical middle class family. We’ve never had big salaries. My parents and I were lucky enough to have a pension and health insurance from our employers. My adult children will have no pension. They will have to rely on their savings in old age. I guess our representatives in Congress don’t think they will have to face these problems because many are rich and those who aren’t have wonderful benefit packages — a pension and health insurance. Why should they care about the rest of us? We need to clean out Congress and the Presidency as soon as we can. They are robbing us blind. Oh, and do we really need a tax cut?
10
This is the Republican Party's idea of social engineering via the tax code; and a stark revelation (or confirmation of our suspicions) of the Party's values.
Those values do not include economic security for anyone who is not reasonably wealthy, education, sustainability, compassion and health care for the sick, a leg up for the poor and the immigrant, or anything else that smacks of a generous, egalitarian nation.
But hey, we get their thoughts and prayers.
2
The most confounding thing about this whole issue continues to be how so many middle class people who are hurt by the Republican obsession with making rich people richer continue to vote for them. But I guess, as long as they all hate the same people, that's ok with them.
5
Tax reform was never ever an issue in the mind of the electorate in 2016. This is a total fabrication on the part of the Republican leadership that they MUST pass a tax "reform" bill. The economy was an issue, but it is another bald-faced LIE that giving corporations a major tax cut will help the economy by creating jobs.
Given the low unemployment rate, what we need are better jobs and wage growth. Find the path to that, work across the aisle and let corporations figure out their own existence without government aid. Talk about welfare queens...look no further than the White House.
2
I would feel better about this bill if Trump and his cabinet release their tax forms and show that they and their families will not personally benefit.
1
Your editorial gives no thought to those whose estates are above $5 Million who have to spend untold hours and dollars with tax attorneys who have to figure out ways to shield their inheritances for their children. When you are born with a silver spoon in your mouth you can't be expected to go out and work for a living. When would you have time to shop.
And Corporations, who as we were famously told by Mr. Romney, are people too are certainly concerned that their executives salaries are commensurate with the salaries of executives at other corporations, and that their ability to lower the executive tax burdens by gaming the tax "code" also takes up a lot of time.
So, don't fault congress for doing a lot of the work for their corporate and multi-billionaire patrons, that is after all what servants are hired to do.
5
Our "democracy" is working quite well isn't it?
This is bad news for all those middle class Americans planning to drive their Teslas to their new wind power farms. The deductions on renewable energy investments, electric car purchases and mortgage interest benefit the rich more than the middle class. Their elimination doesn’t support the argument of a tax cut for the rich.
120 million taxpayers will assume $1.5 trillion in new debt to pay for a tax cut for the wealthy. That is $12,500 in new debt for each taxpayer.
My wife and I requested that our senator not saddle us with $25,000 in additional debt to finance a tax break for Mr. Trump.
The stock market is high, borrowing rates low, companies awash in cash and the problem identified by our imbecilic congress is lack of corporate cash? Their idea of stewardship of the economy is to funnel additional money to the wealthy and to corporations rather than addressing income inequality or addressing our obligation to repair infrastructure. "Sad!"
8
What do we do about it?
Want to have anything to do with providing healthcare benefits, healthcare treatment, living without angst of losing everything you have because of a healthcare condition?
Vote Democrat and in the meanwhile speak,up. Not only have Trump and Republicans not delivered on "day one" or day 100's, of their promised "more affordable care act" they're trying to even change medical tax legislation to do further harm.
Come on, fellow healthcare providers. Resist! Speak up for patients and fellow Americans. You didn't get medical training to sit back and allow this. Call your legislators and vote to do no harm. The oath has been taken, now follow through outside of the hospitals and medical arenas as well as the inside. We voiced our credibility regarding the ACA when they tried to devour it. Now voice opposition to this this inhumane medical tax legislation.
Now is the time.
6
Now is the time for Medicare for all!
The most outrageous thing about this bill, aside from how it favors the rich, is the effect on the deficit and the debt. The Republicans were screaming bloody murder about the deficit under Obama, even though it went steadily down under his leadership. But now they are aching to borrow 1.5 trillion dollars so that they can hand it over to the wealthiest Americans. Of course they are arguing that eventually the tax cuts for the wealthy will result in benefits for everyone else (trickle down economics) but it never happens. It's just a flat out lie. Americans should be up in arms (not literally) over the hypocrisy and the stupidity of the Republican agenda.
6
I can't believe people are not making more noise about taxing tuition benefit to graduate students. This is insane. It would utterly decimate graduate education in this country, and strikes me as a blatant attempt to dramatically cull the ranks of the well-educated (who are evidently thoroughly despised by the republicans who came up with this draconian idea).
Just to paint the picture for those who might not be familiar with it, doctoral students in STEM subjects are typically paid a small stipend of 25-30k a year (which they have to live on for 5 years, often in expensive cities like Boston or New York where half of it will almost certainly go toward rent in an apartment shared with several other students). They also receive tuition that would otherwise cost something on the order of 40-50k per year -- note that the graduate student never sees this money, and most years they are not actually taking any classes, they are helping to teach them! Taxing that tuition benefit would make it all but impossible for students who do not have another source of wealth to attend graduate school without incurring mountains of debt on top of the already significant debt they have likely incurred to get their undergraduate degree.
8
hitting graduate students with a huge tax bill will surely affect the research carried on in our universities. Maybe creationism studies will be exempt?
8
WOW- this really is a bill that punishes people who are trying to do the right thing. We need people to adopt kids, care for family members, be able to care for and deal with medical costs impacting families. We need to encourage people to do things to help the environment, and we need to help educate people for our future. The GOP short-sightedness and downright cruelty is astounding. Not only are they set on destroying the present - they are going full throttle to destroy our future too.
4
Also stay with CPI.
There has to be a solution for kids caught up in DACA, however paying out anymore tax benefits to non citizens must also stop. Twice in this essay it bemoans the loss of credit due to a parent not having an SSN. The author then goes onto say it hurts these young “citizens” which, while I hope most can be, they simply are not.
1
Every media outlet that covers this tax bill blithely states that deducting medical expenses is for people with serious or severe illnesses. I've also seen a "Chief Medical Correspondent" on CNN opining about Obamacare repeal efforts go on about people on individual health insurance paying "$40 to $70 a month" and say it was an issue for the lower middle class.
I realize that NYDC works very hard to put themselves into a bubble of ignorance about how the rest of the country lives but this is ridiculous.
If you, for instance, preserve your COBRA benefits after losing a job because you either begin contracting or have trouble getting hired, you may actually pay closer to $600 to $800 per month to do that for a family of two. The need to do that (were you not to have protections afforded by Obamacare, e.g.) would be that it would prevent a future employer's insurance company from limiting your coverage due to pre-existing conditions.
At double the median income in this country, for a couple as above, it requires very little illness and certainly not a "serious chronic illness" to end up in medical deduction territory.
No wonder there's all that anger out there over NYDC. You don't even know how the middle class lives in this country. You only understand the point of view of a permanently employed journalist (can't be displaced by machine or factory moving abroad) with employee benefits (medical insurance).
Please try at least to start the slow climb towards numeracy.
1
To borrow one of the Republicans favorite phrases, they're going to "ram this down our throat" in just six weeks? A complete rewrite of the tax code that took three years leading to passage in 1986? This bill is the Titanic made out of twigs and tissue paper! It's not only not seaworthy, it should be (another favorite GOP phrase) "drowned in the bathtub!" Look, I am not a scientist, but any fool can see that this disastrous piece of legislation has no future, now or in the future! The only urgency is that it win passage before anyone has a chance to read it and see through the GOP lies! Even the corporations that this charade attempts to benefit can see that it will speed the nation's path to bankruptcy, putting them, the wee people and everyone else out of business. What a sham!
4
What would happen to our budget if we went to a straight flat tax, with deductions only for charity and mortgage?
No, why describe how deplorable this tax bill is when hopefully much of it will be repealed when the GOP wakes up and asks themselves why they are unemployed, mowing the front yard, and saying over and over, "where did we go wrong."
1
In order for someone to win unearned wealth, someone else must lose. It's basic economic physics.
3
Most of these comments can be summed up as cut my taxes too, but don't take away my free stuff. Yet they whine about the people paying the most getting tax cuts.
Shame on you Zebra. Are you a true Vermonter?
"That is why taxes would go up for about 45 percent of middle-class taxpayers by 2026 under the House bill"
You should have pointed out that the taxes would go up for the UPPER middle class in blue states. For the lower middle class, the taxes will go down.
1
Dancing around the golden calf again.
We see that over here too.
But the pendulum will swing back.
1
Trump cult is Right wing on steroids. Just like the tax cut that was called a healthcare bill they almost passed, they are pushing Right wing and out of touch programs.
Americans really are too ignorant for their ability to vote. There are a shrinking number of people who still cling to the carnival barker that was the Trump cult propaganda. But there were enough brainwashed last year, yes there were.
So again, as always, it turns to the fact that we cannot have grown up conversations about Americans being too ignorant for a Democracy. Americans are easily swayed by the simplest propaganda.
3
Well said.
As laudable as all of these activities are, they are essentially giveaways to people who do specifically what the government wants them to do, while others have to make up the difference. There is no free lunch...unless the government makes someone else pay, which is what NYT is asking for. As for tax "giveaways" (of their own money) to the rich, a few basic statistics reveal why the middle or working class should not expect bigger tax cuts: In 2014, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97.3 percent of all individual income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.7 percent. The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (39.5 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (29.1 percent). It's hard to cut what, for many, is practically nothing--it's just reality.
2
This deranged tax plan is a $1,500,000,000,000 federal loan directed straight into the pockets of 35,000 (1%) wealthy Americans. While the wealthy loot the Treasury, our elected officials are intent on pushing the middle class into poverty. After decades of Reaganomics, the GOP only needs to muster a little nudge to push us over the precipice. If the other 99% of the country allows this to happen, we are no more enlightened than the North Koreans. We too can swallow propaganda and starve with the best of them!
2
I agree with everything in this editorial except for the bit about adoption credit. Why should anyone get a credit for adopting a kid from a foreign country or a new born (people are lined up around the block to buy newborns, already). The credit was meant to help people adopt American kids out of foster care and thus save the system that money that would have beens spent on foster care. If you are going to give a tax credit for adopting a baby, the exact same credit should be given for birthing a baby.
As a fiscal conservative there is much about the proposed tax bill to dislike. In particular, I believe fervently that the elimination of the estate taxes which only affects people with estates greater than $10M ( of which I am one) is patently unAmerican. It encourages a concentration of wealth into a group of people who did nothing to earn it and perpetuates a division of wealth based on family and not merit. However, the Nytimes board is biased. The basic framework of the bill simplifies the structure of the tax code and eliminates the government picking winners and loser to a greater degree than our current system. It limits interest deductions not only for house owners (>$500K mortgage) but also limits deduction for private equity and encourages reducing corporate debt. It favors lower rates for few deductions. It also encourages investments by companies and lowers the incentives to move offshore. There is much to dislike but only a partisan would see it in completely black and white terms
2
All this time the Republicans have tried to hoist Paul Ryan on us as a brilliant policy wonk and now it comes to light, like all ridiculous things that languish in the dark, he's a disaster and this tax bill is a disaster. What it will do to the poor and the middle class and this country makes you wonder if there's a single digit IQ being shared in this bunch writing these bills and pretending they're doing the work of the country. My goodness, I do hope Tuesday's election will spread and spread. We've had enough of this cruel and destructive experiment while the fake president is on his trip embarrassing us and his hosts further.
2
And let's recall as recently as June, Koch and other major Republican donors hreatening to withdraw funds. There is no pretense that Republicans are serving the agenda of average Americans. "Koch network 'piggy banks' closed until Republicans pass health and tax reform"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/26/koch-network-piggy-banks...
1
Two of the not-so-surprising memes, I believe these terms can qualify as, that Republicans seem to have picked up as terms that are passed on easily by people who want to act as-if they grasp and have thought through implications, are "choice" and "access."
These probably surfaced as benefits of repealing the Affordable Care Act, A.C.A., when in fact, or in effect, neither choice nor access were realistic descriptions of the positions that most people needing to apply for this health coverage could reasonably compare. In point of fact, then and even now, families and individuals mostly have to take what the parameters dictate are asvailable. There is some choice of bronze, silver , and gold that describe high, medium, and low deductibles as compared to low, medium, or high monthly fees. Other than those "choices" the plans manage as well as anyone what services are available. Thereby lets in the discrepancy between access and "affordability." I have never, except maybe when I was a small or pre-pubescent child was in a situation where cash was paid for medical care. While I wass in the US Army, medical care was trickled out only when waiting, such as for a broken bone or contagious illness, was not an option. Fortunately I was healthy and stayed that way throughout my Twenties. Most health costs were about $400 per year.
Similarly, decisions that allow people to decide about tax options are only available for a short time, such as 25 to 55 years of age. Unless you're rich.
1
It is not true that tax cuts for corporations will prevent companies and jobs from moving abroad. Low wages are the main reason, and the fact that companies do not have to provide health insurance and retirement benefits, for their foreign employees; these are assumed by national health and pension programs, which otherwise would add more than $2,000 to the cost of an imported Japanese car. Not having to deal with "restrictive" regulations is another reason. However, even that may soon change -- as is already happening in China-- as host countries are beginning to impose their own regulations to deal with resultant air and water pollution problems attributed to lax manufacturing procedures by some U.S. companies that can't seem to understand that it is cheaper to prevent environmental problems emanating from lax business practices, than to "clean them up" if that is at all possible to do. No, the real reason for big tax cuts for corporations is greed -- pure and simple. Based on past experience, most economists project only modest economic gains at best from tax cuts. If one is looking for proof in that regard, compare the recent experiences on the effect of taxes on the economies of Kansas (where taxes were reduced) and California (where taxes were raised). The economy of Kansas has become a "basket case", whereas the economy of California is booming -- and they even raised the minimum wage there to $15 per hour as well. I rest my case !!
4
Every dollar given to the wealthy and the corporations comes out of the hide of working families, the retired or the poor. The first $1.5 trillion referred to in the article is already proposed to come out of Medicare and Medicaid in the House bill.
For every additional trillion dollars of tax cut to the wealthy and corporations a typical working family will give up an $20,000. This is based on an estimate of 100 million full-time workers with two full time workers per typical working family.
So the idea that working families will get a tax cut is a cruel hoax. The reality is that millions of working families will be pushed over the financial cliff. Here in Sarasota County, 30% of families already skip one or more meals a month in order to make ends meet. How many more empty stomachs will it take to line the pockets of the wealthy?
This is a recipe for anarchy and revolution. Bannon and Mercer will be pleased.
115
So you don't support doubling standard deductions because you currently benefit from dozens of deductions ?
This bill sounds like trickle-down economics on steroids. It hasn't worked in decades, but pointing that out to the current ruthless GOP mafia won't do any good. They don't care. They just want the money.
What are taxes for?
- To raise revenue for general funding of government spending.
- To raise revenue for funding specific programs.
- To encourage or discourage certain business behavior.
- To encourage or discourage certain personal behavior.
- To redistribute income or wealth.
While these all have political dimensions, all but the first two are decidedly political and unavoidable pit select groups against each other.
And I wonder what a discussion of how to assess tax liability would sound if we only worried about the first two.
1
Taxes for the US government are to ensure that the US dollar retains its status as the only acceptable currency and to regulate aggregate demand. Taxes do not fund Federal spending. Taxes can of course, be used to modify certain business and personal behaviour but given that those with behaviours most needing modification are fully in charge of the levers of government, that is highly unlikely.
The weirdest part about the graduate TA/RA tuition tax is that by the time TAs/RAs are working, many of them have already finished with their required coursework. The tuition is "money" the university charges, and then pays back, to itself.
1
You left out, are you 65 or older, or blind?
You lose the extra exemption that you can take. The doubling of the standard deduction, is less than one standard deduction and two exemptions. Couple that with an increase in the tax rate from 10% to 12%; seniors and blind people, will see their taxes go up, at both the federal level and state level (fro states which tie income tax to what si paid in federal income tax).
3
The bill will increase the deficit by estimates of $1.5 to $1.7 trillion dollars. At 3% that's $45 billion dollars in debt service per year. At 5% its $75 billion per year. This is outrageous. If we hit a Cateresque spell of interest rates, say 12%, debt service would hit $180 billion dollars per year. Worth noting the Iraq war with interest has cost the US $2.4 trillion. This is what the GOP does to America. We cannot afford to have Republicans in office, they can't count. And they don't care about the future of Americans. It's all about keeping the campaign money train going.
12
There are too many tax deductions and these are some of them. These deductions have only increased over the year cutting income from the government. Be prepared to pay for your children. People have children because they want them and not because they are a deduction. The same for houses. If you want a college degree go to a community or state college, do not get into debt and you will not have any problem. It is quite simple.
3
As simple as saying "dumb down your dreams". A child who has the aptitude and scholastic criteria to attend an elite college should settle for simple. A hard working American who has the chance to buy his first home and find a way out of poverty for his family should just toss that on the scrap heap because it's too complicated? Try a bit of empathy right before you click "Submit".
Why stop there?
Planning to get sick? Don't.
Planning to take care of an elderly parent and work? Why bother?
Planning to further your education with graduate school? Forget it.
Planning to adopt a child? Nah.
Of course, if you are wealthy, you will have all the money you need and more thanks to these cuts. As for the rest of us, get registered, get organized--2018 is coming.
The drive to create more favorable rates for investors over W2 income has driven wealth and inequality. I don't begrudge anyone their income but I fail to see why investors should pay lower rates than workers on all of their gains.
I could support a lower rate for the first $100K or something but why should anyone earning $5M or $500M pay a lower rate than a two income salaried family?
If wealthy people pay most of the taxes it is because they earn most of the income - that alone does not justify a lower rate when many of those people are already paying lower rates than workers.
Any tax reform that address different rates for income is not tax reform
We must begin by taxing all income as ordinary income and that includes capital gains, carried interest, dividends and pass-through.
22
It appears that the GOP wants to give people with dreams the lives of deplorables through tax policy. This bill isn't just a tax cut for the rich, it is a tax cut for the lazy rich. No jobs from this disaster but the campaign money stream will remain assured.
10
In other words, Trump and the Republicans are striving to turn the US into Russia.
1
Scrambling to preserve revenue, rather than simply reducing the tax cuts for corporations and wealthy, all to allow the legislation to pass with only 51 votes tells you everything you need to know about what the GOP is doing and why.
Doing it now, well before the 2018 elections, and with delayed implementation, further shows they know exactly what they are doing, but are willing to gamble the public is too uninformed or disinterested to figure it out. Enough said about the character of these men who will personally benefit as well.
17
I see where there are a lot of people currently getting deductions of various kinds who won't like losing their deductions. But what's happening to the base tax rates. If I lose a couple of deductions, but my basic tax rate goes down, maybe that's not a problem. What is the offset between reducing rates vs. losing deductions?
6
If you want to stimulate business, put the cuts at the lower end of the spectrum rather than creating barriers to creating business and spending money at the lower end. Seriously, coming from a family in the 1% who created multi-million dollar businesses, this doesn’t mean increased investment in any meaningful way; this means creating additional cushion in the retirement accounts of a select few, probably off shore. The most productive aspect of the Bush tax cuts was the payroll tax reduction.
17
I totally agree. The spending of middle and low-income people directly stimulates local businesses and the economy - rent, mortgages, food, clothing, education, transportation, phone service, cable, life insurance, health insurance, doctor's and health facilities, products, electronics and sundries of daily living. The Republicans are intent on destroying our society.
Does anyone really believe anything the NYTs says about any Republican plan or Trump. Read the WSJ if you want real insight to any tax or economic issue. I may not agree with every aspect of the proposed tax plan, but many of the issues, including the elimination of the state and local tax deduction and lowering the corporate rate have been talked about for decades and had bipartisan support. This is the conversation that needs to happen to have a simpler, fairer tax plan that could help the economy grow and produce better jobs. And what would be the conversation if the Democrats won? More taxes on the rich and more class warfare.
9
Spoken like a true Republican. "Class warfare" is their mantra when the wealthy are being asked to pay more in taxes. Yet the true class warfare is feathering the gilded nests of the wealthy by rewarding them with lower taxes on income which is derived from investment, not by actually working at a job.
3
A mind is a terrible thing to waste. Believe what you wish about how much support the idle rich require from everyone else. At least think, however, about what a proposal actually does and who it targets. This is now the business of government taking from some and redistributing to others. At least be clear about who is taking from whom. Unless, of course, you do not believe that to be important.
2
Isn't the Republican tax bill based on class warfare? The rich 1% get 80% of the tax cuts. Leaving at best 20% for the other 99% of the population.
I would think that is class warfare at its best.
3
I don't know. Tax reform always involves lower rates and fewer deductions. This is an appeal to self-interest, not progress.
8
The focus of this editorial looks at national impact, but the GOP bill is intended to reward its own financial and territorial base, not for an equitable impact nationally. I would like to see a state by state, city by city, analysis of the impact on citizens of the proposed tax bill, taking into account regional income, cost of living, and political and cultural differences re:value of education and social services, adoption of tea party austerity, etc. The analysis offered here accepts the announced paradigm of the bill's proponents too readily, when the impact is intentionally disparate.
15
I am always terrified when Congress takes on large complex initiatives for a host of reasons: they pander to the very wealth as they need the campagin contributions. Few members of Congresshave time or the commitment to truly listen , think through and understand the implications of tax legislation, in my opinion. I do believe our corporate tax structure needs some modification to help bring billions from off-shore and help keep US industry competitive. Perhaps addressing that issue carefully , throughly and effectively is a good first step.
9
"Yet, the Republicans may take the knife to even more middle class benefits, because the Congressional Budget Office said on Wednesday that the bill would overshoot the $1.5 trillion target by nearly $200 billion."
I remain astounded the GOP is painting this as a good deal for the middle class. It's just plain Orwellian double-speak when a we can see it's raining but are told, no, we're dry as a bone.
This bill deserves all the publicity it can get, now that it's emerged from the closed doors of Republican committees fiddling with their calculators to demand more and more sacrifice of the middle to pay those at the top.
Please, Democrats: start quantifying, as this article does, how average families will suffer from this bill, how it's nothing more than a raid on the middle class, whose ox gets gored over and over to increase the coffers of The Trumps, Adelsons, Kochs and Mercers of this country.
And if you aren't angry enough, take a spin through the Paradise Papers. That might convince you how deep American greed extends, from the tax evasion of corporations that produce your coveted $1000 iphone to the increasing annual take of billionaires shielding their assets offshore.
Just remember this: the middle, for whom deductions and tax breaks can spell the difference between self-sufficiency and poverty, is being asked to bear all the sacrifices of making the rich richer.
51
Now we see the heart of the beast. If one didn't understand before, it's in plain sight now. The Republiicans don't care one wit about you if you are not rich. If you work for a living, you are working to support the wealthy and corporations. Sorry, but it seems that not one of them cares. Welcome back to the plantation.
47
"“This bill helps Americans keep more of the money they earn for expenses that arise throughout their lives — such as medical bills — rather than providing a myriad of provisions that many Americans may only use once in their lifetimes, and only if they go through the hassle and frustration of itemizing,” said Lauren Aronson, spokesperson for the House Ways and Means Committee" [NYT article "...Gut Punch to Middle Class"]
Sorry, Lauren, you have it backward. The current medical tax deduction offsets the additional tax liability of draining tax deferred retirement savings accounts to pay for extraordinary medical expenses.
I wonder what reaction GOP lawmakers and staffers have when they read the real stories of people who will be harmed by their horrible proposals. Maybe they ought to hear from constituents how this hurts people.
18
The biggest problem with this tax bill
Is that it provides “tax relief” to those corporations and individuals who have never been wealthier at the expense of working Americans who struggle to keep their heads above water. This bill will cost my upper middle class family more money.
We should not be passing tax legislation when our infrastructure is crumbling, our health care system is expensive and broken and 45 million baby boomers are retiring and our debt to GDP ratio is 105%.
We have been down this Republican path before. It will not be good for my pocket book or the country’s. Deficits do matter.
35
If you buy a an electric vehicle, install solar/wind power, a home or have a child, you should not get a tax deduction nor tax credits. You want other people to fund your lifestyle choices. The alternative power technologies have come.down in price and can easily be cost justified. As for federal tax credits for college, you must be a US citizen to claim them unless the credit applies to foreign students who are legally in the US. It is only fair to US citizens. Taxing graduate students is an interesting idea but this really is a barter situation. I teach/work essentially for my tuition and a small stipend that may or may not cover my expenses.
Training and keeping an educated work force is important to the security and well-being of any country. It is time for many of the foreign worker visa programs to end or be greatly reduced. Companies are exploiting foreign workers whilst denying their home countries of their talents.
I also need to see the deductions being eliminated for businesses in this tax bill. If it does not contain any, the bill should be DOA.
7
I also worked my way through college, but I totally support free tuition funded by the federal government. To me that is a much, much better investment in our country's future than spending billions trying to police the world--prticularly the Middle East.
Since you didn't mention tax cuts, the big elephant in the room, in your list of things you don't approve of, I assume you are for them.
1
The real question to me is when we pull the rug out from under those who want kids, a degree AND a home, plus adequate healthcare coverage and any number of other things that the middle classes and even the working classes both want and aspire to, in order to make their economic life outcomes truly upwardly mobile.
Because if we continue to go on as we are, with a tiny percentage of our earners paying an enormous proportion of the taxes that make the trains run in America, that time surely will come. The class that pays the bills has been revolting for a long time – nobody in Congress is proposing legislation with the slightest chance of even keeping such taxes at current levels, much less increasing the burden. The most excessive on the right want to cut them dramatically and broaden the tax base significantly to make up for it. But if nothing is done, our debt will explode as our needs increase until we can no longer afford to spend anything on those needs – everything will be consumed by entitlements, which benefit everyone BUT those paying for them, defense and the servicing of our enormous and mounting debt. Debt robs succeeding generations of the ability to address their OWN challenges, for the political expediency of looking after ONLY the interests of those living today.
The Senate version of the tax bill is far more moderate than the House’s, and I expect that the final product that President Trump will sign will need to be more moderate still.
4
To me, the best version likely possible would be:
. Eliminate deductibility of state and local taxes only for high earners – revenues wouldn’t dramatically change since the Alternative Minimum Tax also is proposed to be repealed and it already limits such deductions for the well-heeled;
. Repeal the mortgage interest deduction, because the U.S. government shouldn’t be in the business of artificially escalating real estate prices or even incentivizing citizens to buy homes;
. Decrease the number of tax brackets and cause that a large percentage of the 45% of Americans who now pay no income tax to pay some, paying something for the entitlements they now enjoy (and making them more cautious about voting for additional entitlements);
. Keep the increased standard deduction and child tax credit;
. Keep the Senate’s proposed scaling back of the Estate Tax (rather than the House’s repeal of it);
. Repeal the “carried interest” loophole used by some to pay a mere 20% on their vast earnings; and
. Forget about providing “pass-through” income tax relief for Subchapter S and Limited Liability partnerships.
We would create two corporate tax brackets, one at 30% (lowered from the current 35%) and one at 20%. The lower rate would be effective on all smaller sized entities plus all large companies that can perform to targets established for creating jobs in the U.S. and keeping them here.
Now, that’s a moderate but Republican tax plan, balanced and workable.
8
Your proposed tax plan, or most of it, is also one many Democrats can support. I, for one, think it makes sense (I seldom agree with you); however, I don't agree that taxes on the wealthy are too high. I would not give high-income earners a tax cut at all. In fact I would add a higher bracket for multimillionaires and billionaires. I would give middle income earners a tax cut. If financial history teaches us anything, it is that spending by the "masses" is what really creates demand for more products; that increase in demand will be the basis for growing the economy.
11
People on the left and right would complain but if after evaluating it the bill is close to being deficit neutral and the middle class will not pick up the burden I'd have no problem with it. Compromise is not evil nor being a traitor to the U.S. Not sure how we got so far down that road on the right. The left doesn't need to overcompensate and become a mirror image to the current administration.
The medical expense deduction targeted for repeal by Republican tax writers is an especially cruel proposal which could potentially hurt all but the wealthy. Presently, the threshold for qualifying for the deduction is very high… it can only be claimed in a year when outstanding medical expenses exceed 10% of a taxpayer’s income, and only the amount exceeding 10% can be claimed.
Thus, a household with a $50 M income could only claim medical expenses in excess of $5m.
Likewise, a household with an income of $100M could only claim medical expenses that exceed $10M.
The high barrier explains why it’s used by only 6% of taxpayers; those who are in financial distress due to serious illness or injury. While the cost to the federal budget is modest, it is not a trivial option for those with major medical expenses.
It’s even a protection for those who have never claimed it because large medical costs can be moments away for any of us. It was clearly designed as a catastrophic safety net.
Just some of the costs that can add up quickly and sometimes unexpectedly are uninsured nursing home care, installing specialized medical equipment in the home, out of network doctor bills, major dental procedures, long term care insurance, and medical transportation.
Unlike charitable tax deductions which are discretionary, medical expenses are nearly always mandatory , leaving people with few or no options.
22
Medical expenses are optional; average middle class America just does not want to face reality. We do not have a right to receive needed medical treatment in the US, which means if you cannot afford the treatment and cannot find nor qualify for financial assistance, you go without.
Many Americans do not have deductions that exceed the standard deduction so are not benefiting from the current medical expense deduction. Even though the $6000 they are paying out of pocket DOES exceed 10% of their income, they cannot claim the deduction. So the current situation isn't helping the poor nor the sick middle class person.. Maybe your outrage would be helpful if it were directed towards making basic care and treatment a right for all, not just those who can pay.
1
But medical costs are not the governments problem. Too many things are subsidized by the government so they prices stay artificially high. Including healthcare!
Raise the top 10% of wage earners 3%. Bring down the 12% to 10%. Leave everything else alone except what they have to tweet to get to 1.5 trillion. The rich can afford the increase and have money to spare. As for the Democrats...we would not even be talking about middle class tax cuts if they won the elections. They would be talking about social issues, civil rights etc. Nothing that puts money in your pocket. I am not a Trump fan but he certainly changed the conversation.
If democrats had been elected, we would not be on the brink of war with North Korea..if Gore had been elected we would not have attacked Iraq and started an endless war in the Middle East! "Regulations " might have prevented the financial disaster that was handed to Obama. So "the conversation" is something we could all do without!
The Republican tax bill is Anti-education:
* Tuition Waivers taxed as income
* No deductions for education related expenses
* No dedications for student loan interest
* Universities will pay taxes on the their endowments leading to higher tuition rates and loss of scholarships
* No deductions for teaching supplies
45
And not to be forgotten, the deduction for the state and local taxes that pay for secondary education.
2
No. It's just anti-somebody else paying for YOUR education. Although, I know, you feel entitled.
How dare Donald Trump even TALK about the possibility of changing one single line of the tax code when we STILL don't know anything about his own taxes!
Trump is stonewalling on disclosing his taxes---something that all previous presidents have voluntarily disclosed and should be required to do legally.
Donald J. Trump: It's time to come clean and show your cards. The old, hoary excuse about "their under audit and I'll show them to you after that's over" just won't wash anymore. (And how about your 2016 taxes; are you going to claim that they're under audit too?)
Unless Trump shows us his tax returns he shouldn't get the vote of one single member of Congress. And now, it's times to start asking THEM: "Will you pledge to withhold your vote on any future tax legislation until Donald Trump shows us HIS taxes and how this tax bill would effect HIS bottom line?"
If Trump won't listen to the citizens who demand that he prove his integrity and show us his taxes, it's time to put pressure on his sycophants in Congress and ask THEM to demand the president lead the way on full disclosure in matters of taxation.
60
Please, this is about Congress, not Trump. Congress is cobbling this legislation together, nkt Trump. If you do not like what is is this bill or any bill, contact your congressional representation and tell them what you want the bill to be.
We need a functioning government, not a continuation of the last 8 years. I really do not care if Satan himself was president, he is only a part of our government. The House and Senate make and pass legislation. The president is only a check and balance that can be overridden. Do yourself a favor and learn how the US government is supposed to work. Then use your voice to participate in OUR government.
Welcome reader votes and ideas for properly renaming the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" (House name; Senate not released). For your consideration:
1. Welfare for the Idle Rich and Tax Avoidance for Corporations Act
2. Maximizing Pain, Suffering and Hardship for 99% of Americans Act
3. Mnuchin's Wife's and Marie Antoinette's Memorial "Cake" Act
4. Taxes are for Chumps Act
5. You've Sure Got to Hand It to the Republicans -- They'll Never Give Up Until They've Destroyed America Act
6. Real People Will Suffer Real Consequences if This Act Passes Act
7. We Were Lying About the "Tax Cuts" for You and "Jobs" Parts of this Act's Name Act; It's Really the Pickpocketing Americans Reverse Robin Hood Act
Thank to all for helping get this straight.
32
i vote for #1. thanks for adding a bit of humor into this very unfunny tax proposal.
2
Hard choices here, David! All in all, I vote for #5.
1
The more money accumulated by those who has lots of surplus money, the more money they are supposed to lend and invest that will create new products and businesses, which will increase jobs and pay, which will supply demand for the additional goods and services offered for sale. This process is supposed to generate a great deal of wealth if left to work on it's own. The basis is the presumption that rational agents will drive this process along, taking risks where the odds show favorable overall outcomes far more often than not. There will be ups and downs but the rational agent sees ahead and is not worried by short term outcomes. It's a reasonable and measurable and predictable kind of model. The problem is that people do not react to uncertainty and sluggish economic circumstances with the assurance of the rational agent, they react with aversion to possible losses instead of remain confident in the likely gains and they bet on slim winning odds instead of cutting their losses short on certain losses. So they stow their money until the economy begins to grow very strongly, consistently. The Republicans' plan will not stimulate a faster recovery but it may cause a temporary recession, and it definitely is going to reduce the ability of middle class consumers to offer additional demand to businesses which can justify increased production. It's voodoo economics, distracting from more reasonable behavior like infrastructure projects.
18
Mortgage interest and state/local tax deductions are subsidies of the well-to-do by those who earn less. That liberals who claim to be for helping the working classes support these deductions which they disproportionately benefit from is telling.
We should levy taxes without discrimination regarding how people spend their money. If we can't politically stomach a direct cash subsidy, we shouldn't be making it.
State and local tax deductions is a transfer of funds from those who get few services from their state to the higher earners in communities that choose to purchase more services. A taxpayers obligatory to fund a fair share of the national government is unaffected by whether borrow to buy a home or rent, whether they choose a expensive local government or a stingy one.
4
Your argument about funds transfer is conservative misinformation.
High tax states like NY have always sent more in Federal taxes to Washington than they receive back in benefits. Much of this occurs because of funding formulas for programs like job training, welfare and Medicaid that advantage other states. The late NY Senator Patrick Moynihan famously kept a book detailing all the ways NY was disadvantaged.
The same is true for other high tax states.
25
A - your argument only has merit if 100% of blue state taxpayers are Democrats.
We eliminate every deduction except for legitimate business expenses to produce the income, then tax every dollar of income above an exemption set at the poverty level that is earned by every person, corporation, university, church, charity, investor, and every other income receiving legal entity at the same flat rate, that rate set annually by the CBO to match government expenditures. No favoritism. No tax code manipulation of personal choices. Post-card form for employees.
3
Canada has a moving expenses and a miserly medical expense deduction...one has to rack up a lot of expenses to claim it. I have no idea about nursing homes. There is no mortgage interest deductions.
4
The passage of this bill is contingent upon Trump releasing ALL of his tax filings for the past 15 years, right? Obviously, we constituents will need an assurance that this legislation does not unfairly benefit The Donald.
20
Tax cuts for the rich. Tax increases for the middle class. Increase the deficit. Brilliant plan as usual from the Republicans in Congress.
26
With Industry moving their profits to off shore accounts the congress has put the burden on the middle class to make up the difference. The problem is the off shore accounts are billions of dollars more then the middle class can meet.
The decrease in industries tax cut makes the situation worse then the congress realizes or just ignores.
WE need a tax plan for the middle class. Industry can make up for the tax break by sending more money to off shore protected accounts.
I wish I had gone to Business School rather than obtaining a PhD in applied sciences. As I am now 71 and retired it is too late and will have to suffer the new tax legislation.
7
How about a 5 year cooling off period before any Congressional Representative or Senator that votes yes for this Tax Bill can go to work for any large US companies or lobbying firms that have profited the most from this Bill. A number of very large US firms actually pay zero in taxes and some actually receive a government supplement, i.e. negative taxes!
12
Noam Chomsky asserts the republican party is the most perilous threat to homo sapiens ever. I agree, but would add, it's even worse if you're American homo sapiens.
16
Please keep this discussion and the Paradise papers showing the extent of the ongoing tax scams on the front page...this bill is robbing everybody blind who works for a living (i.e. receives a salary rather than plays with money). Disgusting...and the GOP tells us about how this helps American families...yup, it sure helps the 400 families who own us all.
16
For members of the "middle class" without these trappings, folks that have always taken the standard deduction, the proposal is not bad. If enacted as written it would cut my federal taxes by nearly 17%. To call the proposal "a give away to the rich" because it calls for eliminating or reducing carve outs primarily benefiting the rich, and near rich, is, well, rich. Little mention of the "claw back" of the 12% bracket here. Do the math.
2
Reducing corporate taxes benefits the wealthy owners of most corporate stock as corporate profits go up. These profits will not be invested unless net demand increases substantially. Most will go to stock buybacks or increases in dividends. Since the "near rich" (upper middle class) will have less after tax income, their (very large) share of demand will DECREASE. Thus, little investment, few new jobs, little increase in wages.
6
Phil,
Saving for retirement? You own or should own an equity index fund. Have a pension? Your pension fund is or should be invested in equities. More capital gains = more capital gains taxes. Corporate profit tax = corporate tax + capital gains tax.
The tax proposal is aimed at <$1,000,000 household income. Doing away with and reducing some deductions is a good thing. Argue for a higher standard deduction, or a still lower bottom rate, or a higher trip point for 25% bracket. Not for giving a select few a break at the expense of others.
Also profits distributed to shareholders are taxed either at the income tax rate (usually the marginal rate) or at the capital gain rate.
Any good tax bill would tax having children as effectively as possible. Ideally it would be a progressive tax. Any reasonable deterrent to population growth is progressive.
9
This is the biggest tax giveaway to the rich that congressional republicans can get on a straight, party-line vote.
They were already willing to deny healthcare to tens of millions, consigning many to poor health and early death.
They are happy to allow the ongoing gun carnage and opioid epidemic to rage across the country.
They continue to support an illegitimately elected president who almost certainly colluded with a hostile power, and who endangers countless Koreans, American expats, and overseas service people with his reckless 'diplomacy.'
Why would they possibly care who's hurt by their tax bill?
8
I just can't understand why any fair-minded taxpayer would object to subsidizing my purchase of a million dollar home or compensating me for my state tax payments. As an American, I have an obvious right to make personal choices and have them subsidized by others. Glad to see so many folks standing up for the oppressed top-ten-percent earners like me that rely on these deductions to live in the manner to which we have grown accustomed.
6
The fact that wealthy Republican donors are so determined to have this tax bill should tell you who the real winners will be. NOT the lower or middle middle classes. Them, the donors.
5
I would be willing to give up some of my state income and property tax deduction if this tax proposal weren't a blatant rip off by the very wealthy of everyone else.
I would be willing to give up even more If I were sure my taxes were not being used to subsidize racist, bigoted Trump supporters in red states and used to buy their assault rifles, opioids and luxury 4 x 4 pickup trucks..
Trickle down economics of the 80s increased the federal deficit by more than double. Tax cuts by Bush2 took the positive balance of the federal deficits to 2 trillion dollar deficit. Now the Trumptrickle will increase the deficit ten fold. Is any one surprised? Tax cuts and trickle down economics have never worked. It is all “voodoo” economics. Only the middle class suffers.
9
A regressive tax system led to the French revolution. History is repeating itself.
Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite ou la mort.
There are a lot of weapons in the population. And a lot of anger.
8
Here's the thing. I don't mind spreading some pain when it comes to tax reform. The mortgage deduction, even though it's money in my pocket, is an anachronism and we need to help first-time buyers. We also need to help those with student-loan debt, in order to keep our workers competitive. We all will be paying more taxes in the future to fund entitlement programs as well. The thing that I will not tolerate, in return for these concessions, is tax breaks for the wealthy, especially blatant giveaways like eliminating the estate tax. I know there's some pain coming, if we can create a package where the pain is for the benefit of positioning the middle-class to be successful in the next decade, then I'm OK with pain.
21
The blue states with high state and local taxes already fork over a high percentage of the federal taxes of their citizens for distribution to other states that have lower incomes and lower state/local taxes in place to support their own needs. Part of the reason we have higher state/local taxes to to ensure that we have the revenue necessary to support our larger population states, the infrastructure, the diversity of needs and income, etc. Losing the deduction means we will be paying higher federal taxes that will be distributed to places like Mississippi or Kansas that can't support their own states on their own taxes. No fair!
37
As a blue state resident and business owner I resent supporting the policies of backwards red states who can't meet their own bills due to their poor budget & tax schemes.
If 45% of the middle class see our taxes rise, while we see corporations and the 1% benefit with lower taxes, Republicans are done for.
19
lets hope so
Not a big fan of the proposal to eliminate deductions described in the article - but why did NYT omit the fact that the size of standard deduction is supposed to double? Coincidence???
2
That standard deduction even doubled will still fall below what a mortgage deduction and higher state and local taxes deduction represents.
18
Because the elimination of the personal exemption makes it basically irrelevant. For my family of 5, it’s actually a net loss. They haven’t doubled anything, just combined the deduction and exemptions.
16
"Doubling" the standard deduction does not make up for the loss of these deductions. The reason being, is that while they are proposing to (not quite) double the standard deduction, they are also eliminating personal exemptions ($4050 per person), so taking that into account the difference is only $1600 (current $10,400 standard deduction and personal exemption vs. proposed $12,000 new standard deduction) for a single person. For large families there would likely be a loss as the increased child credit of $600, does not make up for the personal exemption of $4050 per child taken away.
The whole "doubling of the standard deduction" is a shell game used to convince people that they are getting a great deal, when in fact even this is designed as a tax cut for the very wealthy. Personal exemptions faze out at high levels of income in the current tax code so they are of no use to the 1%. So for the 1% the doubling of the standard deduction and eliminating the personal exemption is a great deal.
7
It’s a disgrace! Trump and his mGOP are destroying the middle class,the environment and the country. He needs to go! What a transparently evil bill benefits the rich only and created by the rich for their hypocrites self interests!
9
Dear NYTimes, I think this article would benefit from showing what percent each of these tax cuts makes to the overall budget and compare that to other government spending that eats up the budget.
3
Excuse my whiplash - according to the Grey Lady - loopholes are bad unless of course they are not bad.
Random scatter-shot give-aways are good as long as the recipient has a sad story to tell.
Tell you what - why doesn't your editorial board huddle up and come up with a coherent and consistent view on "fine-tuning" our tax system - kinda beyond rich people=bad poor people=good middle-class=meh.
8
If you support tax exemptions and deductions for certain favored groups, realize that lawmakers have their favored groups, too. A tax code that offers breaks for first home mortgage interest, municipal bonds, "Accelerated Depreciation", religious organizations, political groups, farms, "green" cars ... will be necessarily complex (2,600 pages, according to Slate).
What if reducing/eliminating these giveaways could allow for lower income/sales tax rates?
By the way, the "rich" have always been able to game the tax system. If you want to stop that, cut out the deduction games that lead to awkward questions like why Uncle Sam chips in $7,500 for a new Tesla P100D.
8
Because "rich" people in the coastal hubs with kids and mansions should not pay any Federal taxes. Taxes are for the little (single) people right?
6
How can Cable News Pundits say it is imperative that Republicans pass their "benefit the biggest corporations and the most wealthy Americans tax bill?" Here are a few recent newspaper quotes:
1. Wall Street Journal Headline: "On the eve of the tax cut bill, few Americans actually want it"
2. In the Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released this week, only 25 percent said the bill is a “good idea.”
3. A CBS poll released recently found that 80 percent think that taxes for big business should stay the same or go up. This echoes a Washington Post-ABC poll in September, which found that 73 percent of Americans believe that the current tax system favors the wealthy and 65 percent believe businesses pay too little.
I don't think passing a bill that is not supported by 80% of the American people can help the Republican Party. Or is this Voodoo Politics?
39
Why should any of these things be subsidized by other tax payers?
5
Why should I pay school taxes when I don’t have children? Or buy auto insurance when I drive carefully? Or subsidize anyone else’s Social Security? Because we live among others. Because other people’s children might be smarter and better citizens in they learn to r ad and write.
2
It looks like they so hate immigrants and everyone who is not the donor class, that they will cut it all. And what do we get back for our taxes paid, a big deficit to pass on to our descendants. You forgot one other thing being gutted: spousal payments to those divorced in 2018 and forward. So if you are young and thinking of having a family, don't get married just in case it doesn't work out.
1
Listened to some economists on NPR that said they were dumbfounded at the thought of reducing taxes in a time of near full employment - and, increasing the national debt by a trillion ...one lady asked “who does such a thing?” Well, greedy self serving politicians...that’s who.
22
Have we learned nothing in the past 12 months? We can avoid all those unpleasant outcomes simply by denying they exist! We'll call it a "Massive Middle Class Tax Cut" and we'll have Paul Ryan swanning around with an important-looking binder in his hand. We'll give it a catchy name like "Cut Cut Cut Tax Plan". By the time anyone knows what happened, we'll be safely decamped in Mar a Lago. And under indictment.
10
The Republicans say I'll be able to do my taxes on a postcard-size form. Let them show me the form before they cut taxes for the rich! Then I can actually do the math and see how big a liar they are.
26
This *should* be the final nail in the coffin for Trump and Congressional Republicans. Hopefully, Americans have finally woken up!
20
Kids vs. Taxes? You can keep both, they are overrated and undervalued.
1
I wonder if the people of Wisconsin realize how duplicitous their Representative and House Speaker is? How can Speaker Ryan say with a straight face that this is a tax bill that will benefit the middle class? How many citizens of his own state will be hurt by this bill, if it becomes law? Does Ryan care? Do the people of Wisconsin care that they have been sold a bill of goods?
19
They should send us all to war, take all the silver spoils for themselves, buy up all our land, and then, when we have nothing left to offer, they can say that not only may the army never cross the Rubicon river back to home, we personally have no business here either anymore. Worked out great for Rome...
4
As a graduate student, I can safely say this bill could ruin my career before it starts. In the past 24 hours, I've encountered three other graduate students at public universities who will have to leave their programs if their tuition waivers are taxed as income. And while the subject areas most affected will be in STEM, students who come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds will be hit hardest regardless of academic department. If we have to work two jobs to afford rent and a steady diet of instant ramen, the extra burden of $3000 in taxes may knock us out of the system entirely. We work incredibly hard, teach up to 400 undergraduates per year, are hideously underpaid and underappreciated (even by faculty who purport to "mentor" us), and now the government wants to make it impossible for us to continue, even when we've already given three, four, or five years of their life to teaching others? That's not adding insult to injury; it's kicking us when we're down and then setting fire to the place.
67
This is no "coincidence" or "unintended side effect." The agenda here is clearly political and quite intentional.
You see, Republicans hate higher education being available to anyone except for the very privileged and connected elites, like themselves. They'd like it to be as it was 100+ years ago where ONLY the very well off sent their pampered progeny off to college.
Trump and the modern day Republicans detest higher education and the people who are associated with it. They see them as a threat to their hold on power. They don't want people who think, read, write and speak well; they could stir up "trouble" so better to create fewer of them.
We all have to unite and Fight Back against this horrendous bill. If we don't they'll be even MORE emboldened and this will only be the beginning of their constant attacks on the lives of those they consider the "servant class" for them and their very small, ultra-wealthy circle.
36
Well then, maybe those universities can open up those multi-billion dollar endowments and spread the wealth ! There's an idea whose time has come !
Agreed, wholeheartedly.
The economy is humming. Unemployment is very low. I don't hear anyone complaining about their taxes, except the very rich and their government cronies. How about closing the off-shore secret loop holes and then lowering the business tax rate...probably come out even in the end and the GOP can say they did something. No one suffers and the debt doesn't go even higher.
33
The majority in Congress and the current White House occupant seem to not realize or care that their tax plan is crippling the primary engine that keeps our country going - the workforce masses. It appears that Republicans are still drunk on the Reagan "trickle-down" kool-aid.
The neo-liberal Democrats, while not quite this destructive, don't get pass, either. They've done plenty of damage since Bill was in office: cozying up to Wall St., forgetting their Rooseveltian heritage and Johnson's "Great Society", thinking they can get by on social justice issues while mostly ignoring the widening economic disparities. We liked Obama, the ACA was a tolerable first attempt, but let's face it, on the economic front, he was a disappointment.
Meanwhile, our country's physical infrastructure continues to collapse, Republicans (except for maybe Jeff Flake) ignore the transgressions of the Executive Branch, and Mr. Trump may yet pull a "Frank Underwood" to deflect attention from whatever he's hiding.
None of this will end well.
13
Want to save more money? Mothball Air Force One and the rest of the military air fleet used to ferry DJT, cabinet and Congress members to meetings and golf courses. Let them fly commercial like the rest of us.
22
What can we do? Who can well call or contact?
This needs action now. This is horrible..and if we just stand by and watch it happen without doing anything.. what's the point in that?
7
Oh what a tangled web they weave
when tax cuts for the rich are all they want to achieve
12
The kicker for me in this proposal is that property loss due to hurricanes is deductible, but losses due to earthquakes and fires aren't. Talk about picking winners and losers!
Stop pretending that this bill is about lowering the taxes for families and individuals. It's all about lowering business tax rates.
13
And now, they want to pass it by delaying the hard parts until Democrats are in office so they can point and shoot. Evil, cheating, creepy, you choose.
27
Making America Last, Making America Small and Mean. Let's get rid of the smart and intelligent people, see how that works. Sad.
9
Exactly, right. They're betting that the REAL and VERY PAINFUL consequences of this won't be felt until years from now, where very likely a relatively new Democratic president will be in office. They realize that in culture with such poor short term memories, they'll be screaming at him or her instead of the actual perpetrators of this criminal tax legislation.
Since the 1970s, we have seen a massive shift of wealth toward an increasingly tiny percentage of the population, and it seems to be picking up speed since the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision. We have been complacent as big money tightened its grip on our democracy, turning it into a plutocracy. Big business doesn't seem too burdened by taxes. (Have you seen the stock market lately?) It's the wage-earning middle class, what's left of it, that's stuck paying 30% or more of its income in taxes while billionaires pay half that, or less if they've got smart lawyers or offshore accounts. This "tax reform" bill seems unsympathetic to working families, to those with chronic illness, to university students, to immigrants. This tax bill reveals Republicans are deeply empathetic ... to the pain and suffering of the wealthy.
8
Why aren’t we marching in the streets?
30
An Alternative Minimum Tax on business income would solve your problem. Most economic growth is created by small and mid-size companies. Let them use the extra money the reforms provide. Eliminate deductions as earnings reach the stratosphere.
1
Our Congressmen have to serve two masters - the people that elected them, and the people that financed their elections. Until we reform campaign spending to reduce the influence of wealthy individual and corporate donors, I don't think we can expect the priorities of the constituents to come first. This tax bill feels like a direct result of that tension, and it's obvious that campaign donors shape policy in Washington.
10
Karen: Unfortunately, any campaign finance reform went down the drain with the election of Trump. Citizens United will be with us for a long, long time.
4
Our Congressmen have to serve one master...the people who financed their elections
4
This just in, real tax reform from DT
Any state who voted trump their taxes will stay same. Any state who went Clinton your taxes will be doubling soon.
Good States Deserve A Break!
How has this happened to us? I want to be with the Sane States! Yes, the ones who taxes will be doubling.
3
If the Republicans want our buy-in for this "tax cut" bill, all they need to do is publish the "sample" tax return postcard and let each taxpayer see how the tax bill impacts their life. If the bill does what they claim it will, publishing the "sample" tax return postcard will ensure an enthusiastic response from the taxpaying public and unanimous approval in the House and Senate.
8
This tax bill will force the Federal government to cut basic programs. We will have no Federal money to build new infrastructure, or maintain old. Education, environmental programs, parks and Federal lands already suffer from lack of funding. This tax bill forces even more.
In the near future, Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare will be forced to cut services to their recipients. What will middle class people do when their parents can not longer afford to stay in the nursing home because Medicaid has run get of money? How will middle class parents of handicapped children be able to afford their care? Where will the poor get quality health care?
This tax bill is more about shrinking the Federal government than it is about giving money to the rich. It does that, but the real harm will come from what government services it takes from our middle class and poor as time goes on. This is a miserly and stingy tax program built for the rich and the wealthy on the backs of the working Americans. Republicans ought to be ashamed presenting it to us, but greed and avarice have no shame.
20
What about the loss of medical deductions for senior citizen who have major medical costs? Seniors will face a major tax increase. What do you say Mr. Speaker?
5
History has shown that at a certain point a critical mass of greed is met and the people rebel and confiscate the property of the wealthy by force and put them in a labor camp.
11
*sigh*
My daily prayer !
In economic terms "labor", also has another job: living, raising a family, and seeing another generation go on. We are in an experiment, in US Capitalism, to see how little resources we can put into that function.
College graduates put off marriage to pay down tuition loans. Housing costs push off, into the future when families can be formed. Paying for your children's college education competes with saving for your own retirement and helping your aging parents.
Marry when you are 30. Buy a house at 40. Lose your professional career at 55 due to age discrimination. It all does not pencil out, as it already stands.
Now the GOP wants to take more out of this miserable trajectory. This isn't middle class tax cuts, this is setting fire to the whole society and burning it to the ground.
22
The Republican bill is a hit list. They are attacking what they hate: education, blue states, sick people, renewable energy, people who don't own mansions, research, the middle class, and the working poor.
The Republican bill is a wish gift list at Tiffany's for the wealthy wedded to their greed and profits. The estate tax end would institute a permanent aristocracy in the U.S. by helping only the top .2% of the wealthy. Those are not family farmers: those people are multi-billionaires, much like the Trumps.
This is an open paean to greed, profit, corruption, and the destruction of ordinary Americans and American infrastructure and American small businesses and American opportunity and American health care -- everything that has helped Americans in the past.
This isn't just a new gilded age. This is a glittering diamond chandelier for the top 1% and wealthy corporations who don't care anything about the little serfs, indentured servants, and other "little people" who don't even deserve to live, have access to medicine, get an education, or breath clean air.
Do unto others? The golden rule? Forget it and die already, in debt and early.
29
These are all bad ideas but eliminating the deduction for high medical expenses is truly mean-spirited as it targets those who are not only suffering greatly but are also under tremendous financial stress already. Clearly the Republicans are now openly declaring themselves as the party for the very rich and only for them.
16
Right now Peter. I have heard very little about this terrible change.
2
It will benefit President Trump a billion dollars if the estate tax is repealed.
7
I am the director of the PhD program in our department. We are already loosing applications by international talent to European and Asian universities. If graduate tuition waivers are getting taxed, we'll have to close shop - and I assume the same would apply for most PhD programs around the country. No more training of scientists and educators. Is this making America great again? Passing educational and scientific leadership to the rest of the world? Where do you think the Apples and Amazons of tomorrow will come from if we abandon our interest in education and science?
The only way PhD programs can survive this tax plan would be by only admitting wealthy applicants regardless of qualifications. Ivanka, please let me know if you'd like to earn (aka buy) a PhD...
35
Of course, there will be winners and losers with any tax reform. Why does the Times, as well as other mainstream media, focus almost exclusively on the losers? Why not describe the 68% of the middle class that, according to your analysis, will see their taxes go down in 2018? Why not discuss whether the GOP goal of simplification is being achieved?
2
Furthermore, why not ask the important analytical question of whether any of these deductions/credits/waivers ever really created the economic stimulus or social mobility they were designed to do. They were not handouts but intended to have a desired outcome. Did they work? Or did they just become something one side of this political divide used to further their political grasp all the while making the tax code more and more complicated — with no economic nor policy upside, just political.
3
The taxes go up for 45% of the middle class--go back and read the article again. The tax code can be simplified without further shifting the load from the super-rich to the middle class that has already been steadily losing ground.
5
Because this is being hyped as a tax cut for all, which it is not. Plus:
- why tax pass-thru income at a lower rate?
- why repeal the estate tax which only will apply to 5,500 families a year? (Keep in mind each individual gets to pass on the first $5M tax free; 11m tax free per couple)
- why keep the carried interest loophole?
None of these policies create jobs, but are just a means of taxing unearned income at even lower rates. This plan strongly favors passive income and is, at best , indifferent to earned income.
Look at who benefits from this plan in a material way. Look at who benefits in not so material ways.
Look at who will see a tax increase under this plan.
This is not a middle class tax cut.
11
While the details are predictably awful coming from the GOP, much greater emphasis needs to be placed on the fact that these "deficit hawks", who won't pay for disaster relief because of deficits, are borrowing $1.5 TRILLION to comfort the comfortable. They are truly without shame.
10
Trump says his accountant told him he would suffer the most of anybody on taxes but his willing to sacrifice for the middle class which seems to be standard hyperbole for this buffoon. Ivanka and Trump discussed the repeal of the estate tax and they agree it will save the republic and Jared concurred from Saudi palace.
4
Republican populist base to Congress: Please sir, may I have another.
7
I suspect that many of the provisions now targeted for elimination were written to benefit special interests, not middle class taxpayers. Allowing workers to deduct moving expenses means employers don't have to pay relocation costs. Health care deductions feed higher health care costs. Deductions for interest on college loans clear the way for the outrageously high interest rates now changed on those loans. This editorial doesn't moan the loss of the property tax deduction, but such a deduction allows property taxes to climb -- just another example. Taxpayers have gotten used to their deductions, but special interests are the true beneficiaries.
6
The adoption tax credit cut is so misguided, the government saves $3 for every $1 spent, as these kids will need infinitely less government assistance ($120k is spent per foster kid.). Do we really only want the wealthy to be able to afford adoption?
The hit on college students is perhaps even more cruel then the above
Regardless of whether you gain or lose in this tax bill in cash back, we all lose in terms of less government services (infrastructure, etc) and higher national debt..
7
Of course, every tax deduction means that someone else pays more to cover the difference. We all can sympathize with the one family we know that benefited from a particular deduction, but none of those deductions is "free." Rather, we all pay for those deductions in the form of a more complicated and frustrating tax code plus higher marginal rates. Indeed, the editorial laments the loss of the electric car tax credit--pity the poor folks buying $150,000 Teslas (or Elon Musk) who won't have the benefit of middle class taxpayers making up that lost tax revenue. The same goes for the renewable power energy tax credit, again effectively paid for by all other taxpayers. In many respects, the editorial is not surprising as the Times' financial statements show that the company understandably takes advantage of every tax incentive possible. Wouldn't it be refreshing if we had a much simpler code with lower rates, nearly no deductions, and that didn't try to socially-engineer our lives (or that didn't kowtow to lobbying groups)?
6
I as a middle class person enjoyed the electric vehicle credit for my reasonably priced 23k Nissan Leaf.
The more obvious social engineering at play here is to encourage families to not have to work for generations via a protected class of wealth that will pass from heir to heir without tax consequence, and taxing the income on that wealth at favorable rates.
9
My taxes will be going up. But I would not mind if my tax dollars would directly improve the job market. Say a big infrastructure plan where people in construction, real estate, civil and structural engineering, etc. are in demand, and we build projects of public value that improve the country. We could repair roads and bridges, build new ones, fix old and damaged dams. These would be high value, high reward jobs. They would directly improve both the wages of middle America and the economy in total.
3
We shouldn’t be providing tax relief to undocumented people. I’m fine with provisions that accomplish this.
As for everything else, in direct and indirect ways, they hurt our chances to grow as a country, and to provide our citizens with the opportunity to improve their lives or deal with unexpected and enormous medical expenses. I could go on.
Aside from the meanness of the bill, did the GOP drafters think this could possibly pass, even among its own members? Fortunately, this bill is headed in the same direction as healthcare legislation - nowhere.
On the one hand I’m happy to see the GOP continue to self destruct. But my desire for a better America overrides that. What on Earth is the matter with these people?
8
People have insisted we should have a simpler tax code for decades: https://www.brookings.edu/testimonies/tax-simplification-issues-and-opti... . Now we see, again, why it is so hard.
Many congressional Republican do not have the goal of helping a majority of working families in this country. They are, as is often the case, attempting to take money from those less affluent to give to those at the upper ends of the income scale. How else are they going to get the funds?
There might be ways to curb mortgage interest deductions, ways that maintain the benefit for most of the middle and upper middle class. Child tax credits would help all sorts of families, of varied shapes and sizes. Any number of other ideas might be considered--if motives were something other than what the Republicans favor based on long-standing partisan theology and might attempt to force through as a single-party effort.
It does not take sophisticated number crunching to understand what is being attempted. As with health care, they have a reverse Robin Hood mentality. There are better ways to do this, if both sides could sit down and talk and plan. That remains a tall order. For now, we'll get tribal squabbles and polls.
No doubt serious reforms would make everyone unhappy. All the more reason for bipartisan efforts. The guy in the White House is so interested in any perceived short-term "win" that he would punish the entire nation to feed his ego.
2
The essential flaw in all this is that now is not the time for tax cuts. We need tax cuts when the economy is slowing or in recession, although tax cuts are not the most efficient way to stimulate the economy.
Everyone hates taxes and our politics is dominated by promises to cut taxes. Then, in due time, there is a need to also cut spending. So, people lose important services even if they get a tax cut. If you lost services and don't get a tax cut, or even suffer a tax increase, there is a double whammy.
Time to stop and think about this. Does fulfilling a promise to big donors to cut their taxes really make sense?
4
If flexible spending accounts lose their tax preference, taxpayers would be better off if they are abolished altogether, since any unused portion of FSAs are forfeited at the end of the year, and there is a ceiling on contributions for them.
1
And the biggest cuts of all are in the proposed budget - $1 trillion in Medicaid (so there, Maine), and $500 million in Medicare (Wait a minute! I already paid for that and the Medicare Trust is good at 100% throughout 2027.). And apparently Social Security, which is not an entitlement, but a benefit paid for by payroll taxes. The Republican Congress needs to be booted out of office.
8
Honestly, as a resident of NYC I am opposed to numerous aspects of this tax proposal. With that said, the dozen or so illustrated items in this editorial are excellent examples of what's wrong with our complex tax code. Virtually every one is a carve out for some special interest group. For instance, what other country on this earth gives out enormous tax deductions for mortgage interest? None that I know of. Does any other country give income tax deductions for adoptions? And moving for a new and presumably better paying job, a tax deduction, really? That is crazy. Then there is the medical expense deduction; all employers currently deduct that enormous expense from their business taxes. It’s nonsense that the editorial is – in effect – advocating for a double tax deduction. Finally, the two line items referencing tax deductions for undocumented people – regardless if their children are citizens - is frankly outrageous. Any and all tax benefits should only go to someone who is working and living here legally.
At the end of the day, the Republicans are taking a lame stab at simplifying the tax code. And further, I have no problem with the government attempting to incentivize certain positive society behavior via limited tax deductions. With that said NYT’s editorial loses its credibility by endorsing and cling to dubious special interest tax deductions. Tax simplification can and should be a noble and attainable goal.
4
So in other words the middle class population will be poorer, sicker, less educated and homeless or beholden to the landlord. In addition, the the child born to a woman who gets pregnant because she doesn't have access to either birth control or an abortion will now be less likely to be adopted by a middle class family.
Oh and BTW the tax cut of $64000 on average to the 1% is more than the medium household income. Now that's one messed up, heartless tax plan.
6
So the GOP is lying to our faces, insisting this is great for the middle class, and Trump insists it is bad for him. I may be naive, but isn't there a way to write tax law so that corrections could kick in?
Something like:
- If you are middle class (within a specific income range) and your taxes rise under this plan, then the amount of this year's increase will be a tax credit next year.
Or
-If you are a top 1% taxpayer and your taxes turn out to be, in fact, lower (proving the falsehood that is this plan) then a certain process kicks in to cap your windfall.........
1
When Reagan argued for severe tax cuts which clearly favored the rich, he justified it with the assurance that while the rich would benefit the most, their investments would stimulate such rapid growth that the effect would be not only to offset the revenues lost for government but it would proportionally enrich all, it would raise all boats. Well, thirty seven years later, we have seen the rich become far richer and everyone else has stayed in the same place or seen a real diminishment of their share of the wealth. If anyone thinks about it, when the rich pay higher taxes, the money becomes available for the public to use for common needs and services, but when those taxes are cut, the rich decide how the money is spent and they don't spend it on the common needs and services needed by the country. They don't even invest in domestic industries if they can make more in low wage, undeveloped countries, with a rock bottom standard of living that no one living in the U.S. could use to meet even barest needs. So Reagan's vision was not clear and the results of decades of lower taxes has resulted in higher education which only the very rich can afford and a rotting public infrastructure. It's time to start considering the total picture of costs and benefits from tax cuts and reducing regulations instead of falling back on Reagan's speculative ideas.
5
It was briefly touched on in the article, but the section on education does not really get across how big of a problem the tuition waiver tax will be for graduate students. I am a doctoral student living in an expensive area of the country. My stipend of ~$35k allows me to live somewhat comfortably, but frugally. My current tax burden is around $3000. My tuition waiver is around $45k. This would mean that my taxable income would go up to around $80k, and raise my tax burden to around $10k. I have no idea how I could possibly afford such an increase. My only hope is that the university will give us a raise to account for the tax. Even then, though, what this tax bill would end up becoming would be an indirect cut to the NIH/NSF budgets which provide the grants that pay the graduate students. So, the GOP is either utterly unaware of the consequences of their actions, or in their anti-science/higher ed fervor, they seek to undermine in more indirect ways.
8
Of particular concern to folks pursuing graduate degrees is a provision in the tax plan (The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act’s provision of repealing Sec. 117(d)), which results in tuition remissions being included in taxable income for students.
Grad students either win fellowships or do work as a teacher's assistant (or similar) to pay for tuition and get a small monthly stipend for living expenses. The school charges tuition, then pays itself for this tuition as long as the student has one of these academic appointments. The student never sees that money. To be taxed on that money would be a huge bite out of grad student budgets already walking a tightrope. By some measures, under this tax plan, grad students could be subject to the highest tax rates of any filers.
A civilized nation should have a social vision that deeply integrates higher education in its cultural calculus. Taxing grad students, who already essentially take a vow of poverty to pursue advanced degrees, will curb future entry into the research community by dissuading all but the most well-off from entering academia.
39
I am a member of the 1% but happen to reside in California, so my taxes will actually increase because the top rate of 39% will remain while my state income tax deduction will disappear. Yes, this will help the super-rich (top .5%) everywhere, but will especially those residing in red states which generally don't have state income tax.
14
Not so sure about your situation, but the bracket for the top rate will now start at double its current level. And other brackets will be set to transition at higher break points too. There is a pretty good chance that the rate cuts will be more valuable to you than the loss of deductions. Your deductions would have been limited already under current law anyway. And the proposed abolishment of the AMT should seal the deal in your favor too.
1
Only 7 states don't have state income taxes. Georgia, for example, has one. This is definitely trying to attack the economies of successful states like California and pull them down though.
1
This tax bill would mean an immediate $15,000 tax increase per year for a graduate student I know (by counting $50k in waived tuition as earned income). She is spending the best years of her life trying to gain the expertise she needs to help solve the looming problem of widespread antibiotic resistance. And now on top of that people like her are supposed to pay an extra $120k in taxes over 8 years so that our GOP can hand a multi-billion dollar windfall to the Trump kids? Who do we think is going to solve the challenging problems of the future if we gut higher education?
134
Re education: One thing we need to do asap is to get rid of that Betsey DeVoss...she is a destructive force and totally anti education. Get her mercenary brother Eric out of our lives too...they are unAmerican in my opinion and need to be blocked out.
1
Why, China, of course!
1
Unless and until our so-called president releases his tax returns, how can any congressional rep or senator vote for the house proposal? Do any republican representatives or senators have even the slightest concern that our so-called president may support the house tax proposal simply because it would personally enrich him?
45
No, they don't, because it enriches them, also. The median net worth of a Congress member in 2014 was slightly over one million dollars. At the time, 50.8% of Congress were millionaires. They don't think the way regular folks do because their incomes and lifestyles do not dovetail with the public at large.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/01/one-member-of-congress-18-ameri...
15
On the other hand, have Americans ever looked at the tax structures elsewhere . . .?
The variety of tax credits in the US tax system is simply mind-boggling. How many tax systems in the world have tax credit for child adoption, medical expenses for chronic illnesses, moving for a better job, help in buying a home, paying for college or help for undocumented parents or students?
Also, compare the process of preparing tax submissions. In some countries such as Singapore, the entire process is fully automated such that a typical employee with a fixed income spends no time at all in tax submission. That's right, exactly zero second. Every year you just receive a statement summarizing the income and deductions (tax exemptions rather than tax credits) and the tax you need to pay. Shouldn't this be how it ought to be in this modern day and age?
4
Actually, adoption expenses and chronic illness expenses are deductible in all countries I've lived in (Norway, Italy and Canada), and while Norway, for instance had an automatic system similar to what Singapore has (only with full civil and democratic rights on top of that), there are extra forms to fill in for specific expenses.
There are many, many good reasons for a society to try to mitigate the expenses of adoption and the burden of chronic illness, among the best: creating a fairer and society where trust is built and facilitating successful adoptions (thereby lowering long term expenses connected to childhood trauma).
25
Yes but some of those same countries have universal health care, free daycare and medical leave from jobs and free and affordable college.
I am a retired teacher and public official living in NY and living on social security, a pension and IRA investments. My home is paid for, and I want to stay in the area but might be forced to leave because of taxes taken from my pension, social security and I R A gains. Also the taxes on my house are sky high, especially school taxes, and now I won't be able to deduct them. I don't have all the loopholes avAilable to the very wealthy who avoid paying their fare share.
Those senators and congress people who are proposing this tax plan as well as the president and all their rich donors should have all their assets and income taxes analyzed to see how the new proposals will effect them. I bet if that was exposed they would all run for the exit doors.
They all belong to an elite club who have the power to further enrich themselves and their cronies. Then they talk about how the average family who might save 1,000 dollars will use that money to renovate their house or pay their cell phone bill.
Let's see them give up their government health insurance , forego their social security benefits and all their tax loopholes first. As a single mother I worked two jobs and helped my children through college and graduate school. I pay high school taxes and have no children in school. The taxes keep going up and there is no end in sight.
13
You have a point, but the immediate problem is the Republican "reform" which will move the middle class closer to poverty and and make real reform that much more difficult.
5
And what loopholes, tax treatments and tax-based advantages for businesses' taxes will be going away? Any of them?
All based upon the fallacy that a tax cut will create huge new economic growth.
No competent business manager, in times of economic growth and low inflation, invests in equipment, new employees or R&D because the tax rate went down. It will just go to maximizing the ROI of the owners and investors (known as the GOP donor class). And we middle-class drones get to pay. Perfect.
34
If I had to discuss these issues, I would have difficulty remembering the details. Hence an informed conversation would not be very useful. But it feels like it shouldn't be necessary; that the details of the reality of conservative tax programs are overwhelmingly obvious in their repudiation of the needs of the vast majority of people and of the welfare of the country as a whole.
There is a mindset a work that, to me, seems fundamentally flawed; that does not see the benefit of everyone being the benefit of everyone; that we live in a world where you need to win and everyone else is a loser.
14
You cannot fight against privileges while at the same time advocating for them - there should be no deductions, just a rate. Deductions create shadow prices. I guess that Real Estate industry donates heavily to Dems.
5
The whole tax system is a social construct and society is free to shape that system however it wants. There is no law of nature that says that all income has to be equally subject to taxation. A tax system that is "just a rate" isn't necessarily the fairest or most effective. Having "shadow prices" isn't inherently bad and may serve a useful purpose. Economic systems accommodate this kind of thing all the time.
Regarding the mortgage deduction, maybe we should also allow deductions for rent, as some localities already do. Then we could make our political donations to either party independently of whether we're owners or renters.
1
This argument is so old hat, there seems to be no point in arguing with you, everything has already been said.
Education is a privilege ?
Silly me - I thought it was an investment in your country’s future
6
Not sure why people are complaining about this tax bill. A Republican Congress was elected which has the same goals and ideals of all recent Republican platforms since at least Reagan. Nothing new here. That is, lower the taxes on the wealthy and when needed to accomplish this, throw the middle class under the bus. No matter about the future and the national debt. Oh, and smile sweetly and lie through your teeth to the middle class while doing so.
51
It also eliminates the tax deduction for people who have losses from Western wildfires.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-wildfire-tax-deduction-20171107-st...
7
This is taxation without representation. The fake ceiling of 435 house members set in 1918 when the population of the nation, especially large states like CA and NY were dramatically smaller means that we are woefully underrepresented in the House. If we had a proper number of seats, something like this tax law would never, ever pass. This is the point people like Mike Thompson should be hanging their objections on.
4
Want medical care for a serious problem? The tax bill will hurt yo
14
This bill is designed to deliver immediate tax cuts at the expense of the younger and future generations and I not just talking about the $1.7T added to the deficit over 10 years. It's also funny how a lot of the credits will be phased out after 5 years... just longer than the term of a president. Guess the next person will have to deal with tax increases.
- Taxing benefits like day care and elderly care - This would affect people starting families, people with young families and people who are taking care of elderly family members
- The adjustment on the calculation of inflation - This will have a small effect in the short team, but will really impact the people who will still be in the workforce 5, 10, 15 and 20 years from now
- Mortgage interest deductions - This will only impact mortgages moving forward, not the people who already have their mortgage in place and own a home (unless they move)
- Education deductions and credits - this will only impact people who will be going to school and not the people who have already graduated.
- Electric car, wind power and green energy deductions - global warming won't kill the world today... that is something that the future generations will have to deal with
- Moving for a better job - Do people move for a job the year they plan to retire? nope.
- Adopt a child benefits - This is a 2-fer making it more expensive on the families who are adopting which will almost certainly make it harder for children to get adopted.
13
America, 1967: 1 income = 1 house + your college + college for kids + health care + retirement
America, 2017: 2 incomes = 1 house or 1 kid or retirement; pick 1
64
Perfect! and totally true.
2
Don't forget, while the GOP wants to end citizen deductions with a measly tiny tax cut added, for corporations, they are greatly cutting taxes while LEAVING their deductions.
16
Those that contributed to the representatives and senators in our current congress frequently referred to themselves as "investors" - not "citizens" or "political activists".
They invested millions and now stand to reap billions - a smart move. In the words of Vito Corleone, "its business".
Its too bad that the rest of us don't have the millions to "invest".
8
The more money you make, then the more taxes you should be paying progressively to a cut off of 100%. ( say a billion dollars per tax year )
Having said that, the greatest tax rebate would be a single payer health care system. The next biggest fix would be to eliminate the FICA cap on social security. The third fix would be to eliminate tax inversions.
Doing JUST the above would allow tax credits to be fully paid for to those that really need it and not to those that have multiple times more zeroes in their bank account.
Just a thought.
20
Oh my, you changed your icon again! But regardless of image, we share a lot of ideals, and I thank you mightily. (Not in favor of cigarettes, tho')
1
Your Graphics people are terrific artists. I enjoy them as much as the reading.
4
These deductions seem to be directed at the suburban middle class. After what happened in the suburbs of Virginia last night, the GOP might want to give this a little more thought.
28
Or not.
Let them ignore it. Please.
Maybe more people will wake up to whom the GOP really caters to.
2
This proposed legislation just happens to be going on at the same time as reporting on the Paradise papers. While corporations and the rich seem to have no end of ways to hide their money from the tax man, Republicans are doing their level best to get rid of credits and deductions that are used by the rest of us.
18
We have to be understanding. The billionaires *need* all the money because they want us to help them to get to be trillionaires, so it is not too much of a sacrifice on our part to work for nothing, while giving everything this formerly great nation produces to them. Once they are happy, they might feel generous and hire some of us to polish their shoes, therefore making America great again!
11
This historic pattern repeats itself in finance and taxation induce/promise the population to save then raid the bank.
Democrats were bad but the Republicans made it an art form.
2
actually, Democrats have lowered the debt repeatedly. Clinton after Bush's expeditures. Obama after W.'s expeditures. It's the Republicans who are the big spenders - both historically and in this tax bill.
6
The pre-revolution Russian nobility owned everything, and paid for nothing. This “fair deal” led to Marxism and Leninism. Extremists have ruled Russian ideology for hundreds of years. Lately, the downtrodden Russians who never saw the sunlight after Genghis Khan, allowed Putin to storm troop into office. He and his ruling oligarchs have replaced the old Russian nobility. This is what Republicans and Trump are aiming for now in America – rule by the “worthy” of the “unworthy.”
12
Eliminating the incentive to adopt children was profound ignorance of the highest order as adoptions are an unheralded solution to abortions.
14
Worth noticing is the fact that in addition to generous tax reduction for corporate rates, none of the exemptions regularly enjoyed by the gas and oil companies, large business, etc. are being phased out. It is a bonanza for them. For the rest of us - many of "goodies" put in the bill to make folks think they are getting actual tax reform, are in there with a sunset provision to expire in 10 years. Gives feathering the nest of donors to elections a whole new meaning.
22
You just don't get it.............Republicans have to give the rich kickbacks for their campaign bribes.
25
Giving special tax breaks for those who adopt, those who get child-related benefits, those who decide to move, new home buyers, those paying for college, the undocumented, electric car buyers, and investors in wind projects seems inequitable to me. (those with chronic illnesses are different). Individual decisions that are mostly for personal benefit do not warrant special treatment. But just eliminating the special treatment is wrong. What makes sense is to take the billions saved and to increase the standard deduction across the board. That way the entire middle class benefits and no one gets special treatment.
It’s clear that everyone affected by these cuts simply needs to shelter their money on some small foreign island. Don’t worry about the impact of the cuts, worry about how you can avoid paying taxes at all. Clearly, no one else is paying theirs.
FWIW, I agree if you don’t have a social security number, you can’t claim an exemption. Or anything else.
5
I already know what the Trump/GOP Tax Gouge will cost me because I ran the numbers. I'm a 68-year-old single female living in the Bay Area and making mortgage payments. I will lose my Personal Exemption, and my ability to include my state income taxes, my personal property taxes and points on my Schedule A. My net Federal tax increase will be between $1,500 and $2,000 in 2018.
I'll itemize anyway, though, because the amount more I'll pay in Federal Income Tax by itemizing will be dwarfed by the amount more I'll pay in California Income Taxes if I just take the standard CA deduction. So it's a juggling act. I'm hosed either way, the only difference is how much and by whom.
My income is well under $100,000 a year, which is not "upper middle class" by Bay Area standards. And I'm getting a tax increase, while fat cats and multinational corporations will get a big tax cut.
If that's the GOP's idea of "reform," I shudder to think what their idea of a revolution is. Me and others like me living in debtor's prison, I suppose.
Ah, but wait, there's more. After their Tax Gouge, which runs up the debt by $1.5 trillion, what will the GOP do to right the financial ship? Yes, of course - gut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
So folks like me can go live in debtor's prison and die of a preventable disease or treatable injury due to lack of health care.
Got it: The GOP's message to me and others like me? Die already.
42
I am with you on the opposite coast. Single. Living in home with mortgage. Under this plan, albeit without knowing where it will ultimately end up, my federal incomes taxes increase $2066 a year. That $176 a month would have meant a different decision about a recent car purchase had I known then what I know now about my Trump tax cut, cut, cut (for him).
8
I hear you, Marie. I'm driving a 15-year-old Toyota Echo. Looks like a beater, runs like a top. I'll keep that car for another five years at least. And when I replace it, it'll be with another cheap, gas-sipping commute box.
If there's one thing I've learned over the years, it's to tighten my belt and do without. No new cars, make things last, buy as little as possible, and save every penny I can. Because the powers-that-be in D.C. don't give a hoot about me. The want me to die, and to die broke. Not if I can help it. (And I ALWAYS vote, and vote Dem).
If everyone spent money the way I do, the economy would crater. I'd spend a lot more if I didn't dread what I knew the GOP had in store for me. But I know what that is, I dread it, and I don't see it ending anytime soon.
The GOP gets it backwards. Folks like me would like to spend, but if you're smart you rein it in. To the detriment of the overall economy, which is largely powered by consumer spending. I know I'm not helping the economy much, but what choice do I have? This latest tax hike will simply mean I'll spend even less.
5
it seems clear to me that if they pass this bill the Republican party will cease to be a national party, losing all their representatives on both coasts. Can they rule the entire nation from the flyover states? We'll have to see.... Remember, they have the electoral college on their side..
3
Of course, it is a sham. And look for Republicans to try to put more ornaments on this "Christmas tree" (e.g., new attempts to cut subsides for the ACA or for Medicaid, maybe another shot at doing away with Planned Parenthood, etc.).
What we need instead is (A) no new tax cuts for anyone, including corporations, and (B) new higher marginal taxes on incomes over, say 50% of any income over $5 million, and higher marginal estate taxes, again say 50% on estate values above $50 million. We used to have this sort of "progressive tax system" (meaning progressively higher taxes on high incomes and estate values), before the word "progressive" got hijacked to mean something un-American like "socialism" or, to many Republicans, even "liberalism."
By the way, for those whose main defense for the Republican tax proposal is that it will stimulate economic growth, please consider that "supply side" reforms like tax cuts on corporations have been shown to not result in much if any new net investment and jobs. That is a discredited fiscal policy that no one should be fooled by any more.
7
this is poor politics. tax reform that does not give more money to the rich would be a win for the country and trump himself. he won't need the republicans if he came up with a plan that was good for the vast majority of the people. that would take courage
2
You can't make a tiger change its stripes. This is the party of irresponsible Reagan tax cuts, irresponsible Bush tax cuts and now irresponsible Trump tax cuts. This is the party of "fiscal conservatism." ("Well, we meant that when we were the opposition party. We've got contributors to please...")
7
On the education front it is important to note that in this plan graduate tuition waivers would be taxed. When this was announced I had a conversation with a former student now in the second year of a science PhD at a prominent research institution. She told me that her tuition waivers would be more than her stipend. Under the GOP plan her taxable income would more than double but her cash income would stay the same.
Graduate PhDs in the sciences take about 6 years of intense effort. Graduate stipends are not generous. How does greatly increasing the financial burden on these students benefit our country? How can we expect to maintain our preeminence in science when we impoverish the next generation of scientists to further enrich the current generation of billionaires?
37
Well, trouble is, Congressional Republicans have all the cameras at their beckoning call while this paper only has 2.5 million readers, some of which will not read this editorial. Life was never just. What you need to do is produce a media outlet that streams ticker type summaries of the news stories while urging viewers to visit the site or buy a print copy to read further. That's something I always wanted to see from you.
In the "Mean" time, a pun, this is not unexpected news about the House tax bill. I take it in stride already knowing how vicious and barking these dogs are, but they are entertaining pets.
4
Democrats are hypocrites - they want to redistribute wealth but they won't tax the wealthy to do so....they just want income and special deductions and protections for an already protected wealthy class.....
3
Excellent article NY Times, thank you!
6
If we ever get to see Donald Trump's tax returns (please, Robert Mueller!) we will be able to see how much wealth the Republican tax reform proposals will ADD to his and his family's wealth. So far I see nothing that reduces Trump's deductions and tax chicanery, including the carried interest benefit he takes advantage of. Maybe this topic can become its own editiorial.
9
Republicans must find the money
to offset their Tax Cuts for Corporations and the Wealthy.
Hint: They already have it.
(ref: The Paradise Papers)
2
This is just baffling. It's political nihilism.
I feel like I'm of a different species than the people proposing this stuff. It's so fundamentally against everything I value - the driving ethos here simply does not care about other people, but more importantly does not understand that the accumulation of wealth is enabled by a cohesive social fabric.
When these pillagers are finally done shredding our society, they'll find that the wealth they covet above all else is no longer being generated.
They were all clearly absent when Ms. Smith read "The Goose Who Laid the Golden Eggs" in kindergarten.
7
A nation which punishes families and children,
does not bode well in history.
A nation which nourishes weapons of war,
and arms the insane.
Ends up pretty much the same,
on the dung heap of history.
22
After reading several analyses of Trump's and the Republicans' "tax reform," I have not seen analysis of the impact of the higher national debt on the proposal and on the economy.
With the Federal Reserve unwinding its quantitative easing program. you would think interest rates on federal bonds, notes and bills would rise. Consequently, the cost of servicing the additional $1.5 trillion in new debt could outweigh proposed savings from cuts in tax benefits for middle- and working-class Americans.
Also, wouldn't this new federal debt crowd out demand and funds for private debt issues. Republicans believe that federal debt issued in support of programs that benefit middle- and working-class Americans crowds out private debt. Just saying.
122
The memo from the Koch brothers’ addresses this concern. While the previously advertised that the government debt would lead to a Chinese takeover of America — when the Democrats had control. Now that they want the tax cut they've pad for and memo of talking points stated:
“Avoid getting distracted on revenue neutrality; economic growth increases revenues. Some Republican Senators have expressed concern over supporting comprehensive tax reform that adds to short-term deficits. Though we fully appreciate those concerns, the long-term economic growth that would result from the first comprehensive tax reform in a generation would help to offset short-term deficits over time. That was the result of the Kennedy and Reagan tax reforms—there’s no reason this time will be any different.”
So you see, the marching orders are not to worry, it will all work out.
https://theintercept.com/2017/10/13/koch-brothers-internal-strategy-memo...
2
Thank you John S!
The conversation has revolved entirely around the personal impact of a $1.5 trillion tax cut without examining a) whether the $1.5 trillion will really stay $1.5 trillion over the course of a decade and b) whether adding $1.5 trillion to the deficit is a bright idea in the first place. I have to agree with you. I think the basic premise defies common sense in this economy.
Hypothetically, I hope this tax bill goes through in the hope that every GOPer who voted 'aye' would lose his or her seat so that the new Congress could repeal it and then do other things in the public's interest. But, that is too chancy. More likely is that a good portion of this bill will be enacted and the public will go along with it willingly and happily.
1
Bad strategy, Egert. For one, many people still see a tax cut for a few years before the back end stuff kicks in. But more because it's a lot easier to repeal tax hikes than tax cuts. Clinton raised taxes that ultimately balanced the budget, but it enabled Gingrich and the GOP to take over Congress. GW put in many tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 that had 10 year sunsets, but Obama/Democrats had little choice but to make them permnament as part of negotiation in the aftermath of the crash.
If these corp cuts go in, any attempt to undo it will be met with claims that it will crash the market and everyone's 401k. That's already been put out by SecTreas - if this doesn't pass, the market will blow up.
1
If you give a poor guy a tax cut, he will spend most of it on what he needs. Refundable tax credits that go to incomes below about $50K get spent quickly and boost the economy. Tax credits to employers for hiring those with special problems getting work also help---longterm jobless, homeless, handicapped, ex-cons, disabled veterans, for example. Hiring people in these categories would help a lot to reduce the overall level of need in the country and the various social ills related to poverty. I have seen close-up helping a friend in trouble that a huge number of US problems stem from harsh legal systems that push people into homelessness and more crime instead of giving people a break with housing, jobs and a path to living respectably again. A smidgin of help in these areas would help a lot---billionaires and their heirs can spare those nickels and dimes. We don't need any tax cuts.
13
The Republican bill also attacks higher education by eliminating the above line deduction for student loan interest. Additionally, it favors the top 1% by eliminating the already generous estate tax scheme while KEEPING the unlimited step up in basis for inherited property. This provision will allow appreciated property transferred at death to never be taxed.
7
For some reason this piece leaves off one of the big hitters, elimination of the state and local tax deduction. I guess, to use the meme of the article, you could say that if many in the middle class simply want to continue living and being citizens of their current state and locality it will cost them... bigly.
7
It is frequently pointed out that senators and house members do the bidding of their wealthy donors. It is worth remembering that many of them are millionaires themselves, so they vote for tax bills that help themselves. Donald used to always say that he could be independent because he was so wealthy he did not need donors. (although that turned out not to be true). Now comes the other side of this argument, I am so wealthy that I too can use the many millions of dollars I will get from the tax cut I push through.
283
re: WHM
The Senate was called "the millionaire's club" beginning after the Civil War , in the 19th century. I guess we once had a slightly more intelligent and active group of wealthy men willing to work in Washington, D.C. before air conditioning and decent steam heat.
Though they ruined the Paris Peace accords between the Allies and Central powers in 1920, leaving us on the straight road to the Great War, part 2, in 1939, at least most of the Senate's dolts got out of Roosevelt's way once the Japanese and Germans attacked , declaring war on a USA still trying to find the door back to Kansas in 1890.
Why do you think this is something new? The tax code was written by members of Congress on behalf their paying patrons and themselves. Do you think the tax loopholes were unintended? Where have you been while they've been to the Caymans Islands, Ireland and every other offshore tax haven?
For the rest of us it's bread and circus. Well, more like bread crumbs. We are the clowns.
Not to mention one House member who admitted the other day that his donors have been calling him and saying that if they don't pass this tax bill to benefit them they will no longer donate to him. Blatant, no?
With Trump we may well be on our way to the kleptocracy that now defines the Russia he so adores.
I think a couple statements are wrong. Undocumented individuals can obtain an Individual Tax-payer Identification Number (ITIN) and use it to file taxes or even buy a home get a mortage and open a bank account. Only the earned income credit is strictly closed to those with actual Social Security Numbers (vice an ITIN). Other tax breaks are available to those using ITINs.
1
I feel sick to my stomach every time I read the news. How can one human being do that to another one
23
Seriously? If you know anything about human history, you know that humans have been raping, torturing, imprisoning, robbing and murdering each other for millennia.
Yes, some people and groups of people have more of a propensity to do this than others, but it's certainly nothing new.
The trick is to identify groups and individuals with that propensity and to deprive them of power. That's what voting's all about. That's why it's important - now more than ever.
6
Republican party and their huge pocket donors who installed this president in a WH, making this country a real banana republic and a laughing stock of the world They are the real enemy of the people, their brand should be eradicated and dismiss from any government position as fast as possible this toxic poison already spread all over the country and will be fighting endless battles over and over again, with no end in sight. This insanity should be stop!!! I don't want my grandchildren to grow up here that's why many years ago we moved from USSR, now it feels like I'm back again, what a nightmare!
10
But you know....make sure you use those bootstraps.
9
This bill very quickly repeals many deductions and exemptions that benefit the middle class, but essentially leaves behind the many loopholes already used by corporations to avoid taxes. What gives?
The other very obvious problem is that many of its benefits phase out eventually resulting in higher taxes for the middle class, later. Was this designed to deceive the unplugged electorate and those who figure more now is better than nothing? Essentially, it looks better now than it will in 5 years, when there is no going back.
10
This is extremely distressing. I don't know what we will do without the flexible spending account for childcare expenses. We are on the tightest possible budget already. We save about $1000 a year from our flexible spending account. How is eliminating that tax break good for American families?
399
Who cares about American families? We are not the ones padding the reelection accounts of GOP members - big corporations and wealthy donors are the ones funding them, so they get all the benefits. Heartless? Sure. But whoever accused the GOP of having a heart?
Yes, us too. And quite honestly, the $5,000 cap on the dependent care FSA is already much too low, as our *monthly* childcare expenses for two children (one preschooler and one elementary school child) are around $1,700.
It isn't.
I’m for all the provisions in this bill that further my economic interests and righteously indignant about all the provisions that go against my interests. It’s not that I’m opportunistic. I’m utterly principled. Not a selfish bone in my body. It’s just that for some reason, my principles and economic interests are always in perfect alignment. It must be the stars.:-)
3
"America, where are you now, don't you care about your sons and daughters..."---the Steppenwolf band. This isn't the first time Congress and the administration have acted like a foreign "other" to the vast majority of the American people, and because budget and tax debates are much less tangible than being drafted to die on a battlefield, the debates go over the heads of many people. They fail to realize that inadequate taxation especially of the rich results in more financial and political inequality, growing debt that enables the rich to get richer by buying bonds, sitting in the shade and sipping lemonade while the rest of us work our tails off to pay the bills AND THE INTEREST on the debt. And there's an equation in national income accounting that says tax cuts hurt the job market by making our business sector less competitive, more likely to be bought out by foreigners or just put out of business. Additionally, big deficits make increased investment in education, vocational education, and other human-capital factors more difficult. Still another way tax cuts mainly for the rich are disastrous is that they result in rich people putting their extra money into slow-moving investment accounts, slowing the overall velocity of money and thereby slowing economic growth.
10
If you give a poor guy a tax cut, he will spend most of it on what he needs. Refundable tax credits that go to incomes below about $50K get spent quickly and boost the economy. Tax credits to employers for hiring those with special problems getting work also help---longterm jobless, homeless, handicapped, ex-cons, disabled veterans, for example. Hiring people in these categories would help a lot to reduce the overall level of need in the country and the various social ills related to poverty. I have seen close-up helping a friend in trouble that a huge number of US problems stem from harsh legal systems that push people into homelessness and more crime instead of giving people a break with housing, jobs and a path to living respectably again. A smidgin of help in these areas would help a lot---billionaires and their heirs can spare those nickels and dimes. We don't need any tax cuts.
6
The U.S. Congress: mother to wealthy Americans and wealthy foreigners; step-mother to middle- and working-class Americans.
5
I would consider buying a Tesla, but probably won’t do it if I can’t get everyone to pitch in and give me $7500 to help with the cost. But it is a great car.
1
More electric cars & alternative energy = better environment & better health thereby saving everyone in the long run.
2
Here is the perfect name for the Republican tax revisions:
The Leona Helmsley Tax Plan.
Only the little people pay taxes.
43
Is that too obvious? Here is another name:
TAKE
The Taxes Advocated by Koch Empire act.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/10/14/the-kochs-want-that...
6
The TAKE Act
2
She was wrong on that count....she did a great job though organizing the prison laundry dept while she was incarcerated for her crimes. Count that as one win for the "little people". More to come.
In spite of the fact a majority of the congressional legislators are GOP at this point in time, the tax bill is being dictated by a tiny group of US citizens and non citizens. That would be the oligarchs, the 0.01% who fund those GOP legislators. Those GOP legislators are virtual employees of the 0.01%, thanks to the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court, which makes it possible for oligarchs to funnel hidden money to candidates. This is destroying our democracy. How can you vote intelligently if you don't know who owns your candidate?
And believe me, the virtual employees of the oligarchs do not have your family's interests at heart, in fact, they intend to con you into paying their share of the tax burden.
9
I'm not going to say I'm on-board with this tax proposal. But this editorial is fantastic evidence of what's wrong with our tax code. Why on earth should there be income tax deductions for adopting a child or for moving 50 miles for a new job? This is nonsense. If the government wants to employ social engineering to incentivize certain behaviors, let them do it outside of the tax code. Including these "benefits" in the tax code complicates things and buries them in a way that many would-be beneficiaries never get to take full advantage of them. Of course, the GOP doesn't truly want to simplify the tax code. And they will likely cling onto whatever deductions are in line with their agenda the same way others are likely to cling to the ones that are make theirs.
95
Anybody can play that game with their personal opinions. Why should my money pay for FILL IN THE BLANK. Cause policy should be based on what is best for the most.
6
For the moving 'deduction', it just lowers taxable income, not a deduction. And frankly has been invaluable to my family when we've had to use it twice. We are modest, lower middle class, and for various reasons had to move for work. We paid out of pocket for those moving costs and received a small deduction on our taxable income, but it really, really helped when April 15 came along. Moving expenses can be enormous, as you must know. Providing that little benefit in taxes helps average people 'make it.'
8
For one thing, responsible citizens have responsibly structured their finances based on the existing tax code. For another, huge corporate tax cuts have been PROVEN to add only minimally if at all to economic growth. (Look at Kansas which was supposed to be the GOP tax showcase: they enacted many of these same ideas. Economic growth? Kansas showed up last out of all 50 states.)
For another, if we are all supposed to "share the pain" why is it necessary to give huge tax cuts to the richest of the rich? For another, corporations get huge tax cuts while KEEPING their deductions. Private citizens will either see a minor tax cut or actually pay more in taxes --while seeing their deductions eliminated.
And -- don't forget -- the same GOP is making all of our health care costs higher while eliminating them as a deduction.
2
Three cheers for the Russian-Republican-Reverse-Robin-Hood-Robber-Baron political party !
Nobody works harder to suppress the votes, healthcare, wages, pensions and bank account balances of the non-rich than the Grand Oligarchic Profiteers.
Nice GOPeople.
132
This article did not mention SALT (eliminating state and local tax deductions). That has a huge impact on people in highly populated states like NY and CA.
8
That's a relief. I thought you were talking about Strategic Arms Limitation Talks.
1
Which is EXACTLY WHY those SALT exemptions are due to expire if this awful legislation passes; they assume that "their voters" don't live in NY or CA or any of the other blue "urban" states where such deductions on federal taxes are essential.
It's all about "tribal warfare" and "getting even with THOSE people" for Trump and today's Republicans. And if we let them succeed, it will only embolden them to go even further and do even more destructive things, relying on the "culture war" they've created to confuse and mislead people from understanding the real issues that effect their lives.
4
Making America great again! ;-)
1
The rich are people too! And if the Republican plan is any measure, they deserve even more than so many in the middle income area!
Seriously, a middle income tax cut? Pure fiction. The rate cuts alone benefit the wealthy far more than any changes in deductions.
8
A tax cut to cooperation who sit on billions of dollars and the wealthy at a time when we have a relatively strong economy and almost full employment financed by dept is economical suicide and makes no sense. We will pay for this with another great recession, cut in health care, social security and education as well as a further grumbling infra structure. This is simply math and I hope that the average voters realize that they will pay for this down the road. Than however they voted for Trump .....
6
Have no kids, have all your degrees, have a home already? The current tax rules currently cost you.
2
Wrong. I know many people with zero kids, all the degrees they ever plan to have and own their home---and they STILL are against this odious Republican tax plan for literally over a dozen reasons. Look more closely at this horrendous legislation and you'll undoubtedly see SO many other reasons why this bill is an absolute sham and a disaster for ALL Americans---including the very, very wealthy who are able to see beyond their own finances in assessing what constitutes a good quality of life.
The entire tax code - and all the bills that have ever been written to make it "better" - is, to use your word, Odious.
A flat tax takes away all the emotion, and all the loopholes, from the code. Yet you and your ilk are against this, because what you really want is to punish the successful and reward the worthless. Yet you never ask: By what right?
You are the peasant with the pitchfork and the torch, you are the Luddite smashing the powered looms. You are the one who would rather everyone be working in the fields instead of building skyscrapers.
Perhaps if you spent more hours being productive, you too would earn enough to realize that you are taxed odiously.
1
What happened to Trump's promise to eliminate the carried interest loophole, in which a large portion of the earnings of private equity and hedge fund managers is taxed at capital gain rates?
2
Although our current legislators are paying back their campaign donors, the many, not the few, that they are supposed to represent are finally going to the polls and throwing the spineless corrupt bozos out. This will continue until we get the representation we deserve.
5
I understand and agree with most of the sentiments of this article.
However, the NY Times editorial board loses all credibility when it equates hard working people losing benefits to not giving benefits to illegals, regardless of the fact that their children might be a citizen. That citizen is the result of an illegal being in the country illegally. They should not be citizens, nor should they get any financial benefits.
5
The law of land states that if you are born in this country, you are an American, afforded the same rights as all American citizens. The provenance of your parents does not come into play.
1
I smell a weasel. I keep reading statements like, "taxes would go up...by 2026". What am I to make of this? Are the Republicans trying to sneak in unpopular policy by making sure it doesn't kick in until well past the next election, hoping nobody notices? Or are liberal-leaning editorial boards making a stink about what would happen when parts of the bill expire, even though the bill's authors hope to make those policies permanent?
1
You got it right the first time: "Are the Republicans trying to sneak in unpopular policy by making sure it doesn't kick in until well past the next election, hoping nobody notices?"
6
Want economic growth, increased wages, and keep more of your income?
The tax bill will work for you.
3:39EST
3
Right, it worked so well under Reagan and Bush, just lower the taxes for the well to do, and they will invest it in starting new businesses and raising the wages of their employees, you know, spread the wealth, raise all boats. The little company in Hamilton, Bermuda must be salivating by now.....
6
Actually it won't, Steve MD. Unless, perhaps, you're a very high paid physician. Is that the case? And is that why you're so indifferent to the details of how this truly terrible tax bill would impact almost everyone else who isn't a highly paid medical professional.
7
I am a well compensated physician and I own three businesses in total. I also employ over 50 people.
My taxes will go up.
My marginal rate remains at 39.6%.
Deductions will go down. My property taxes are greater than $10,000, and I have the SALT to lose.
I am more interested in the countries well-being then my own financial gain.
That's why I'm not a Democrat!
5:10EST
Corporate taxes go down. 1%ers taxes go down. The two groups who need a tax increase! This is ridiculous.
8
I just spoke with a friend - retiree - who voted for Trump - hates liberals - and just realized this tax act is going to cost him money. he was shocked!
But how do you get the word out to the other 40 million who don't read the NYT and have no clue this is coming at them because get all their news from Fox and Rush
I'd be happy to see them get their just deserts - If I didn't have to share the pain too.
10
Your friend is gullible.
I voted for Trump, I'm well into the top 5% of earners and will experience an increase of my taxes. However, I live the Blue NY state and will take one for the team just to stick it to Cuomo, the master of anti-business, profligate spending and corrupt government.
2
A middle class tax cut would state that there is no federal income tax on everyone's first $100,000 of income. Then raise the cap on social security (not limited to $112,000 or so). Two problems solved.
5
i'm in the 1%.
Taxes rates of most 1%ers - those like me, who get a big w-2 - are going up significantly under the Trump plan, because state and local taxes will no longer be deductible.
I don't think we deserve pity, but we should not be forced to pay even more of our earnings (already close to 50% for those living in CA and NY) to pay for tax cuts for real estate billionaires, LBO honchos and restaurant magnates. It's a ripoff!
8
Okay. Understood. So then JOIN WITH WE "LITTLE PEOPLE" AND TOGETHER, AS ONE BROAD COALITION, WE CAN DEFEAT THIS TRULY HORRIFIC BILL!
1
with regard to tax brackets this house plan is basically doa in the senate:
bloomberg:
Senators are looking for ways to maintain “progressivity” in individual income taxes, said Senator John Thune, the chamber’s third-ranking Republican leader.
“We want to maintain the existing progressivity in the code,” Thune, a South Dakota Republican, said Wednesday. “We’re trying to look at making sure the tax burden remains similar to what it is today.”
so while the house bill is very regressive there's hope that something better will come out in the senate and the senate is holding the cards because they can only lose a very few to get something passed meaning their influence is substantial.
think of it like this: the house bill is guided by ayn rand and the senate bill will be guided by the wizard of oz. more crumbs for ordinary people with the senate but still favoring the elite.
2
Remember, we still have Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and a handful of others who may not be so quick to jump on board with this odious attack on the middle and working classes of our country.
Write and call your senators NOW if you want to stop this true monstrosity of a tax bill!
The bill will also repeal the New Markets Tax Credit, a vital community development tool that has been used to finance over 5,000 businesses, hospitals, health clinics, daycare facilities, schools, manufacturing facilities, resulting in the creation of over 750,000 jobs in some of the nation's poorest communities. Repeal of the NMTC would hit hardest in communities that can least afford to lose the incentive for community investment, and is particularly ill-advised since the NMTC program not only pays for itself but is a net revenue generator as a result of the additional tax revenues generated by NMTC-financed businesses.
This bill will also repeal the Rehabilitation Tax Credit, which has been used to help finance the preservation of over 42,000 architecturally significant buildings, created 2.4 million jobs and, like the NMTC program, is a net revenue generator for the U.S. Treasury.
3
And where oh where is the provision to eliminate the carried interest loophole? Oh, I guess they forgot. Maybe next time...
9
It came into the bill Monday night via an amendment( read the WSJ).
1
Sure, college education costs for your kids and huge health / medical expenses shouldn't be deductible and mortgages and state/local taxes on homes bought by the little people shouldn't be deductible but taxes on estates of $5/$11 MILLION should evaporate and corporations should pay LESS tax than now!
What an utter and complete giveaway to the rich and big business! On the backs of the middle- and working class too!
571
The proposed rollbacks of deductions for mortgage interest, state local and property taxes are set at levels that hit wealthy taxpayers in Blue States particularly hard(i.e., interest on mortgage debt > $ 500,000, property taxes> $ 10,000). These are generally not people who voted for Trump so what did they expect? But please stop saying that this proposal doesn't impact the rich; most folks would consider anybody with a mortgage>$ 500,000 and/or property taxes > $ 10,000 pretty well off!
2
Our corporate tax code must be competitive with the rest of the world.
As far as personal taxes go, would be nice for the IRS to not be in charge of engineering social policy and focus on raising funds for the Treasury.
That said, would like to see tax rates and increased standard deductions balance out the loss of all the pet deduction that currently exist now.
1
you conveniently forgot to mention that homes over 500G will no longer be able to deduct mortgage interest. AND the "rich" will still be taxed at 39 percent.
The elimination of the estate tax affects very few people.
After the revolt against Republicans across the suburbs of America yesterday, the effort to eliminate middle-class deductions to allow tax cuts for the wealthy should be the nail in the Republican coffin next November. Hopefully, this bill is headed for the same fate as the attempts to "repeal and replace" Obamacare. If not, the voters will perform their own "replace and repeal" by voting the Republican rascals out with their Democrat replacements voting to "repeal" this bill.
4
Republicans could start by dropping their plan to end the estate tax. Talk about boondoggles for the very rich! (P.S. The number of family farms and businesses that have had to be sold to pay the estate tax is approximately zero.)
23
The GOP can stop going on about helping out the middle class, since they're obviously intent on destroying the very existence of it.
13
When Bernard Madoff's Ponzi scheme was unfolding, there was a lot of talk about whether he was a sociopath. In fact, wondering about this from prison is one of the last things he says at the end of the HBO version of the story starring Robert Di Nero, based on the book "The Wizard of Lies."
What has emerged in recent years, and especially with the rise of Trump, is the sorry fact that we are surrounded and overwhelmed by sociopaths of precisely the same ilk, except that what they are doing--well, a lot of it--is legal. Are they really any better than he is?
19
The sad thing about this is that the "alternative facts" media from which Trump voters get their information will not report the real facts set forth here. His voters will happily accept that their taxes are going down, because Trump and his Republican henchmen say so, and Fox News confirms it.
Alongside that compelling evidence, the larger check they will write to the government next year won't convince them; it's mere reality.
18
The sadness in all this is, only a handful of Republicans will even be aware of these proposed changes to the tax code that will hurt their pocketbook. Even if their directly affected. Why? Because they will not read anything like this at Fox News, or Breibart, or any other conservative news outlet.
What they’ll hear is Paul Ryan with his, “a rising tide lifts all boats” phrase. Meaning giving a huge tax break to the corporate world will in some way trickle down to the rest of us in the form of more and better paying jobs. Not once though will they hear of a reasonable, succinct, lay term explanation of how that will occur. Because there isn’t one.
21
donald trump will realize $40 million savings per year if this tax bill passes
10
Really? I've read in several places that Trump's savings in taxes will be far higher than a mere $40 million per year. But who knows for sure since Trump STILL refuses to come clean with the public about his taxes.
And while he mendaciously claims the excuse that his taxes from previous years are "being audited" as the "reason" for stonewalling on this information, what about his taxes for the year 2016, which clearly WEREN'T under audit when he made the "audit" excuse in last year's campaign, and should have been filed earlier this year?
Why isn't the media---which Trump and the GOP claims is so "liberal" and "biased"---raising THIS issue?
2
Which is why the Republicans and Trump are trying to get this stuffed through by the end of year, before people have a chance to find out how badly they will be hurt by this.
445
And the worst of the worst in this show is Paul Ryan, who actually believes in the wonders of supply-side tax cuts on corporations.
2
Republicans want the discussion on this to go away long before the mid-term elections. They just hope that people give up caring and vote Republican. They will use the 2nd Amendment as an election platform to say they are protecting your rights to bear arms. This is a tactic to deflect attention to the real things that will affect your life.
1
Fortunately we are in the dawning of a huge awakening that's likely to be filled with desire to correct and pay attention. They keep delaying that tragic bill as more revelations come to light. It's hard to hide horror these days, after all, it sits in the White House. Everything is suspect.
1
Republicans are determined to deprive healthcare to all but the wealthy. If they have their way they will repeal the Affordable Care Act, evicerate Medicaid and reduce Medicare, and eliminate the medical expense deduction formula. A trifecta of stupidity, immorality, and mean spirited abandonment of, not least, the voters to whom they have promised "a beautiful thing".
The elimination of the medical expense deduction has not received anything near the attention it deserves. This is used by the fastest growing demographic cohort to help with the fastest growing expenses that cohort faces. It is material,if not essential, to the financial stability low to middle income retirees whose medical expenses easily exceed the 7.5% or 10% threshold for deductibility without which they would quickly exhaust their resources. And we are all living longer.
Republicans don't give a hoot.
32
The GOP and Trump are draining the swamp and flooding the 99% with all the swamp water.
10
What's everyone worried about? All the benefits to the rich are promised to trickle down, just like they did when Reagan cut taxes for the rich! Fat chance!
15
We will live through this kleptocracy, but if this bill passes we will feel the effects for years. Just like Reagan's trickle down economics, gave us trickle up poverty which we continue to experience to this day. If you have money now, you can keep it, let's not worry about the future and the people who run the country in the next generation. We are entering the Chinese era and Trump will be known for burying America in debt, to pay off a few of his cronies.
13
Congress goes after everyone with a W-2 Form and calls it “Tax Reform”.
Meanwhile the Paradise Papers points out that the US Treasury is being defunded by offshore tax avoidance scams that are ignored by the members we elect.
No one complicit in these scams
deserves a tax cut. No one writing
legislation that cuts health, education, and welfare deserves a seat in Congress.
945
As they try to approach this offshoring of money the screams of protest have already started. It would be amusing if it weren't so sickening.
The tax bill intends to cut tax bill for W-2 earners ? Did you read the bill ?
About the offshore tax avoidance, there are laws in the tax code, e.g. FATCA, Subpart-F income etc. It's up to the IRS to enforce the tax laws. If there are some loopholes that you can identify, let your representatives know.
Is it possible you misinterpreted that post in your first sentence?
Is the goal adding less than $1.5 Trillion to the deficit (ie each year), or less than $1.5 Trillion total to the national debt over 10 years?
1
This listing of potential pain points is so extreme it seems absurd. And yet, we allowed a reality TV star to become our president, didn't we? So why shouldn't this Republican proposal be just as ridiculous, as insanely narrow in its interest? All for the vague, tired, and debunked claim that lower taxes stimulate economic growth and everybody wins. And how much extra money in the pockets of the already extremely wealthy is enough? Where is our country's sense of proportion? Of equity? "American Dream"? How about "American Nightmare"?
11
This tax plan will definitely accomplish its intent - crush the middle class, de-fund and bankrupt our government, and give the rich the ability to rule our country as an oligarchy. The senate and congress will be mere puppets in this dark future and we will be relying on the largesse of the Koch brothers.
16
"Largesse of the Koch Brothers" sound like the title of a very scary movie--one I'd pay a lot of money to avoid. On the other hand, when I file my taxes, I am reminded that I am part of a Democracy and paying for that is as appropriate as paying for my groceries. To all of those who agree: let's bombard the tax bashing, self intersted baloney artists with a whole lot of truth and even more disgust.
2
Everyone who has anything to do with the nation's tax system is required to have a social security number or tax ID number. I don't see how this is a burden on non citizens living in this country. Maybe be being deprived of free money is a burden but American citizens certainly are not exempt from the requirement to have a social security number if they want government benefits.
1
Taking diaper money from poor orphans and giving it to rich kids inheriting billions?
Is it a Charles Dickens novel?
No, it is the republican tax plan.
147
Modern Republican politicians see this tax bill as a "once in a generation opportunity." They mean to make the best of it, just as they did in the 1980's and during the Bush II administration. The goal of the party is to pass laws that benefit the very wealthy and big business, including huge tax cuts and cutting regulations that protect the environment and benefit working Americans. Everything they want to do is for those ends: voter suppression, right-wing propaganda, attacking civil rights, dividing the country. They really don't even care if the Russians are manipulating our elections as long as it benefits their politicians.
701
Shoot, they are ALLIES of the Russian oligarchs. This isn't our fathers' Russia...
1
I already had vulture investors call yesterday offering me $100 k off Market value
1
Warren Buffett said, "Through the tax code, there has been class warfare waged, and my class has won, It's been a rout." The forces driving inequality through the class warfare that Warren Buffett points to are cumulative. It is the compounding effect of shift away from taxes on capital income such as dividends, capital gains and inheritances each year as the rich get proverbially richer which is the prime generator of inequality.
Since 1966, there has been a tremendous shift in the tax burdens away from the rich on onto the middle class. Corporate income tax receipts, whose incidence falls entirely on the owners of corporations, were 4% of GDP then and were 1.77% in 2016. During that same period, payroll tax rates as a percent of GDP have increased dramatically from 3.27% in 1966 to 5.95% in 2016.
One does not have to be a Keynesian to see that shifts in income to those with lower marginal propensities to consume will cause an increase in savings and a decline in consumer spending. The wealthy clearly have lower marginal propensities to consume. As explained in http://seekingalpha.com/article/1543642
This cumulative shift of wealth from the middle class to the very wealthy has profound impacts on the economy and securities markets. It creates a cycle where initially the wealthy pour significant amounts into investments they perceive to be safe. This can first cause an increase in economic activity. In 2005 many considered mortg .."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4067359
1
Really, anyone who believes anything the republicans promise has to have their heads examined. They do not work for us, the people, they work for their wealthy, and corporate sponsors. At the very least, everyone needs to reach out to their legislatures and tell them "no, no, no" on this tax "reform". Yesterday proved we can band together and get these servants of the uber-wealthy out of government, let's keep it up!
43
Keep digging into the details and exposing them. Otherwise, this thing will pass easily.
13
It's brilliant! Cut corporate taxes, unleash economic growth and create millions of decent paying jobs in manufacturing that have been lost to off-shoring. Then, millions more people will work on assembly lines and coal mines instead of going to college and getting an education, since education could make them start voting in their own interests. Or, god forbid, like stinkin' liberals.
I am not suggesting that workers in manufacturing are incapable of voting in their own interests or of thinking critically. I am, however, suggesting that the current Republicans see educated voters as a threat.
26
Actually, Chris, you seem to be the one in need of a "clue." Republicans ARE very threatened by more Americans going to college, particularly to study something other than STEM or business. Why? Because college helps people learn to think---and education can make people more reflective, more introspective, more thoughtful and sometimes (gasp!) smarter and more independent.
Which is why conservatives tend to detest higher education and the people involved with it. (Your name calling and slightly hysterical characterization of "EVERY college campus" only buttresses my point.)
Go back and look at the vicious, hateful and demeaning comments made about college education by GOP presidential candidates such as Marco Rubio, Rick Santorum, Chris Christie, Jeb Bush and so many others, including the man in the White House who snarks publicly about how much he "loves the poorly educated."
And then, Chris W, please tell us with a straight face that Republicans don't regard many college graduates as a very real threat to their power and dominance.
However, if I WERE a Republican, I'd fully endorse the tactic of denigrating the very idea of attending college---while FULLY promoting it in private to MY OWN children who I'd, of course, expect to complete a four year degree, preferably at one of the "elite" colleges Republicans love to publicly criticize.
Keeping as many Americans as unaware, uninformed, incurious and unmindful as possible is a critical element of any GOP strategy.
7
Increased taxes relating to higher education costs, two-earner families paying for childcare, and loss of the property/state/local tax credit all seem to be politically rather then economically motivated in order to hurt the blue states that didn't vote for poor little Donny.
83
With the recent release of the Appleby firm thousands of documented examples of how the rich avoid paying any taxes on billions of dollars stashed over seas or laundered, I would expect the proposers of this take away from the middle income and lower income classes, "tax plan" (read: relief for the 1% wealthiest), to withdraw this embarrassment and crawl back under the rock from whence they came. But then that would be acknowledging GOP legislators as having a conscience; which of course they don't. It ought to be clear by now if you are not party to the 1% (an income of $400,000 or greater), the GOP is, and has been working against your well-being. Please wake up.
A talking point touted is to 'get the economy going'; as if we have forgotten how the previous GOP administration created the greatest economic disaster since the depression of the 1930's, and the economy is already "going" no thanks to the GOP. This is worse than the previous "trickle down" economic disasters, resulting in ballooning deficits.
We as a people need to get money out of politics and campaigns. All donations need to be public, and any Congressman/Senator receiving such donations enjoined from proposing or voting on any legislation connected in any way with said donation.
Otherwise, the corruption continues until the masses arrive in D.C. with torches and pitchforks.
17
That's just it. They're not embarrassed, although they properly should be. They're lying with a straight face about how this benefits low and middle class folks, when in reality they're enriching themselves at our expense and laughing at the gullibility of folks who truly believe they're going to be $4,000 richer by the end of the year next year. It's almost bald-faced derision, the knots they're tying themselves into to justify what amounts to an absolute windfall for the truly rich, who are not known to share their largesse with the public at large...no matter what that public would like to believe. And that's what Republicans are banking on - the suspension of disbelief of the masses who hear "tax reform" and think it *actually* applies to them.
2
There's no doubt that all of these measures hurt many people and they are reprehensible. However, please stop speaking about the 1% as if it were a monolithic block. It is not, and not all will benefit if the proposed plan becomes law. In fact, as one of your articles pointed out yesterday, those whose income is primarily from labor, and I'm going to *guess* that it is the case for a majority of the 1%, will end up paying more, especially if they live in NY or CA. The tax is primarily geared to benefit corporations, certain business owners (Mr. Trump chief among them) and those who primarily derive their income from investments, not work.
13
From what I saw the lower quarter of the 1% would likely end up paying more taxes. I've seen some commentaries regarding the 0.1% vs. the 1%, where it appears the 0.1% would fare much better under this tax plan, while the 1% would be more prone to their individual state taxes and deductions. I have friends close to the "top 1%" in the more expensive suburbs of DC and they are by no means in the "upper class", since even a townhouse may run you 750,000 in a desirable area. Inserting the "in-utero" language didn't make me any happier, I'm hoping the current version fails miserable after it flies through Congress.
I would make a different guess, specifically that 1% income is primarily from investments (not wages) for the majority.
Not that anyone is holding him to it, but on the campaign trail, Trump bragged that he knew all the tax tricks of the rich, and he promised to close those loopholes. It looks like Congressional Republicans are taking away all the middle class loopholes instead (the rich never used those deductions because of the Alternative Minimum Tax) while giving more substantial and sustained breaks to the top brackets and businesses -- opposite of campaign trail promises. Surprise.
5
You think a majority of the 1% derive that income primarily from labor?
Lead me to the thousands of jobs that pay $60 million a year.
9
Everybody's tax situation is different, however, the proposed tax legislation trends toward taxing "the rich" more, particularly in the high income/high taxed blue states( which of course explains the slant of the article) because of:
1. the disallowance of the interest deduction on mortgages in excess of $ 500,000;
2. disallowance of the state tax deduction; and,
3. disallowance of the property tax deduction in excess of $ 10,000. I live in the NY blue state, I'm well into the top 5% earnings group( does that make me rich for purposes of this analysis?) and yes my taxes would increase under this act. However, I'm willing to take one for the team because:1. I think that the corporate side of the proposal will help the US economy, and 2. I don't mind sticking it to Albany in hopes that it will curb its corruption and profligate spending and stop viewing businesses as piggy banks for funding its social programs.
4
There is absolutely no evidence for saying that this tax bill or ones like it will spur growth. In fact, the likely outcome is minimal growth if any, much more debt for all Americans and higher taxes now and in the future for many more Americans. So you are not taking one for any team but the very wealthy and corporations. Your charity is misguided at best.
11
pete, I won't argue / debate with you whether reduction in corporate taxes will stimulate the US economy. Not because I think you're correct (I don't) but because I don't have the background to make a legitimate argument one way or the other. I would suspect that neither do you. I will suggest that your "sticking it to Albany" is absurdly misguided. Not that Albany, (along with Sacramento here in California) couldn't use a little or more likely a lot of "sticking it to". It's that sticking it to the "liberal spenders" accomplishes exactly nothing which is exactly the Republican formula. If you want to rid the waste, graft and corruption of government you actually have to work, analyze and come up with solutions, instead of pushing hot buttons like Trump and the GOP. That always has been and always will be their idea of a Solution, and it will never, ever work.
3
And what "team" is that, Pete? The Robber Barons? The Hedge Fund Sharks And Snakes? The Well Connected Functionaries Of The Ruling Elite? The Global, Pampered Children Of Privilege That Don't Have To Do One Honest Day Of Work In Their Lives?
And why would you ever want to be on such a "team" of miscreants who only care about themselves and the small circle they're a part of, anyway?
1
So graduate students who drive electric cars and want to adopt undocumented children will get hurt. They are the "average" Americans?
There's a lot wrong with this bill - especially elimination of the deductions for chronic illness and State taxes. It also unfairly benefits the wealthy by leaving as is the lower capital gains and carried interest tax rates, and eliminating the estate tax.
My view is that it will pass and we'll live with it - just as we live with the current unfair tax system. Personally, I'm thinking of moving to Florida, if not Canada.
4
Double taxation is unfair. There’s no question about it. So not being able to deduct state and local is unfair. Especially if states that tax little or not at all get more federal dollars than those that tax a lot. There’s also no evidence that lower taxes will help growth, lower unemployment raise salaries, and generally improve society. In fact, quite the contrary — see Kansas in exhibit.
25
Well, it will hurt many more people than the stereotype you open up with. Although what's wrong with attending graduate school, choosing a car that doesn't spew poison emissions and adopting indigent orphans? Why should our tax system work against any of those folks either?
10
RJV,
Living in a high tax state is your choice (and mine). People living in low tax states making the same income as you should not have to compensate by paying more federal tax than you do.
1
Any Republican that supports this should be voted out of office next election. This is simply helping the rich get richer at the expense of the middle class.
81
Some of these are just plain ridiculous. Who in their right mind thinks that grad students should be charge taxes on the value of their tuition - money that they never even get to touch! What unfeeling, meanspirited lawmaker decided it would be a good idea to punish children (young American citizens) of undocumented parents and cut off tax benefits for those who adopt children in need of safe, secure, loving homes? What millionaire with government insurance decided we should raise the cost of healthcare even more for regular folks by taxing medical expenses?
All in the name of less than $250b in savings, which would then be passed directly into the coffers of some of the wealthiest individuals and companies in the world.
Only wait, it gets worse. Not only will billions be taken from the middle class and given to the 1%, hundreds of billions more will be BORROWED on the people's dime, and given to the 1%. This bill is pure insanity. It's clear now that when they said 'tax reform' what Trump and the others really meant was 'reinstatement of the robber barons'.
198
How to Republicans look at their constituents and propose getting rid of the medical expense deduction, you have to have huge medical expenses to take it so you are talking about the sickest people, or parents who are taking care of sick or disabled children. How do you do away with that deduction so David Koch can buy more $100,000 bottles of wine.
Same, can be said about the deduction to student loan interest (which already fades out the more you make). So many young people and families are breaking under the burden of student loan debt and the Republicans want to make it worse not to pay for a war but so Trump can avoid all taxes (the repeal of the AMT being the only reason Trump paid taxes in 2005).
86
Your Koch bashing is unwarranted in this case.
They are some of the biggest donors to medical research anywhere.
1
Actually what the Koch Brothers donate to medical research is just a tiny little pittance when you consider how many BILLIONS they're sitting on for the "hard work" of being born into a mega-wealthy family.
Like a lot of billionaires, the Koch Brothers are really cheapskates and tightwads. When they toss a mere (tax deductible) million at something, which actually they don't do all that often, it's like your average income person giving 3 cents to a beggar on the street and then bragging to everyone how absolutely "generous" they are.
3
I hope Republican voters will finally get it. The GOP is not conservative, but plays one on TV. They talk the talk to get votes, but Republican politicians only march to the tunes of the very wealthy.
203
Do not discount the politics of spite. Some, nay many, Republican voters cannot see how these policies will hurt them. They are blinded and comforted by the fact that it will hurt those with less, the lazy and undeserving in their minds, and they are all for that.
1
The GOP is not "conservative " in any way...they are actually extremely radical and represent a genuine threat to the well being of most Americans.
1
For the typical middle class person, home equity is the largest asset. This bill will likely lower the market value of that asset. By eliminating or curtailing deductions of state and local taxes and mortgage interest payments, the net monthly payments required to buy a home will go up, and consequently, the market value of the home will go down.
503
Lester, IF this element of the tax plan goes through, it is time for citizens in large population states like CA to band together to fight this. Our slogan needs to be "no taxation without representation." (hey, it worked in 1776!) Becasue the house member ceiling is set at 435 (based on the 1918 population) we are underrepresented by a huge factor. This is a big factor in so many elements of our lives, but when it comes to double-taxation it should be a deal breaker. There is nothing about this ceiling in the Constitution which the GOP claims to worship. It must change or we in CA, NY, etc need to "just say no."
6
If you can own a home. Perhaps all renters need to deduct the cost of home spaces within reasonable local prices. The home mortgage deductions drove up the prices of homes. Real estate agents count on that.
3
oh does the typical middle class family have a mortgage> $ 500,000 and property taxes > $ 10,000( which are the treshholds for nondeductibility of interest and property taxes)? I don't think so!
Also, does the average middle class family have itemized deductions of $ 24,000?; because that's what the standard deduction will be under the proposed act.
2
This is INSANITY. Why isn't everyone up in arms about this? This affects all of us. Us 99% of the population. I can't deduct FSA. My husband and I have been saving to try to buy an apartment, now that will become even more difficult. If we want to relocate for better employment, that will be made harder too. My sibling who is struggling to survive on an adjunct professor's salary, will be impacted too with the education cuts. Our friend who is planning to adopt a child will have that made even more difficult (as if being childless and going through the adoption process and expenses isn't bad enough). Tell me who isn't impacted other than the Donald Trumps of this country (and there aren't that many of them). Why should the entire country suffer to help them get even richer? Why are our Congressmen and Senators agreeing to this?
266
Simple answer - follow the money. Trump and friends pay for these Congressmen and Senators to act as they do. The only way to change this is to vote the bums out.
7
" Why are our Congressmen and Senators agreeing to this?"
Simple, they are out of touch and simply don't care.
Purpose of the Tax Reform bill is the continued CRUSHING of the middle class.
102
Thank you, New York Times. Please publish more articles like this one, specifically setting forth the impact of the GOP's horrendous proposals on ordinary Americans.
168
15 years ago I started my PhD program. I happened to go to a fully-funded program at a private university. Back then, my yearly stipend (which I lived off) was 16k. My tuition, which was waved, was about 25k a semester. PhD programs usually insist that their students not hold down a second job while receiving this support because their first job is being a student (and serving as a TA, grader, preceptor, etc). At most in my program, you could TA an additional class and net yourself an extra 2k for that class, which many of us did. If I had had to pay taxes on that 25k tuition waiver, I wouldn't have enough money to survive on. It would have made it near impossible for me to get a PhD. As it was, living on 18K total is hard even when you find cheap housing, drive an old car, travel little and survive on lentils.
This tax plan will decimate higher education. And even though everyone likes to pick on the professorate as essentially broken, elitist etc., there are some of us who do not come from elite backgrounds--are minorities (often in more ways than one) from more humble backgrounds who do manage to get through, graduate, get permanent jobs and influence and educate the next generation. Sustaining and growing that diversity of people who teach and conduct research is important. And this tax plan would end that.
540
education is the fastest way to move up in the world. taxing it is criminal.
6
Decimating higher education is a feature, not a bug, of this tax cut plan. The Republicans hate people who are educated.
5
There's a lot not to like in the tax bill. However, in reading your case, how about you realize that someone has to pay taxes.
1
While I understand the concern over the impact of the tax cuts and changes, it is important to note that the wealthy pay the vast majority of the taxes - a significant portion of the population, not just the very young and very old, pay no taxes at all. The US has one of the most progressive income tax systems in the world. I hope that we might see an expansion of the earned income tax credit as this is one of the most effective ways of addressing poverty but we need to find another way to pay for this, such as reducing the benefits paid to government employees. A value added tax is very regressive and not a great solution.
3
Nobody "pays no taxes at all" Some may not pay federal income tax, but everyone pays sales tax. Everyone directly or indirectly pays property taxes, excepting the homeless.
5
This argument never fails to amuse me. If the wealthy pay the vast majority of taxes in our progressive system, isn't that the best piece of evidence of all for a problematic level ofincome inequality? If the wealth gap weren't so significant, the wealthy would be paying a smaller percentage of the taxes overall.
5
The rest of the civilized world pays higher taxes, but then of course those taxes, in lieu of insurance premiums, get them their health care. In Europe, wealthy individuals pay higher taxes than they do here, but businesses are taxed at lower rates (which is why our corporations incorporate outside the United States). Much more sensible: Let businesses grow, and let their executives pay on their various remunerations.
Social engineering via tax policy is probably not a good idea. I'm not sure that adopting or having children means your taxes should be lower. (Or, for that matter, that baby making needs to be subsidized at all. You have 'em, you're responsible.) And college tuitions were lower when colleges didn't have a lot of federal dollars coming in. Sometimes well-intentioned things backfire.
Hopefully, here in CA, our SoCal neighbors are going to tell their US Reps - YES, vote for the tax cut and You will be looking for work after next year.
24
Thank you for mentioning the elimination of the pre-tax $5000 dependent care benefit (the first time I have seen this mentioned in any print publication). For a family with young children in the 25% percent tax bracket, that alone is an automatic increase of $1250 in taxable income, effectively offsetting the increased child tax credit (due to a higher income threshold). Not mentioned: it appears that health FSA's are also gone. HSA's would still be considered pre-tax deductions, but -- health plans with lower deductibles currently don't allow workers to opt into HSA's. So if that rule did not change, you can add increased health insurance costs (in the form of higher deductibles) to the increased tax tab. And of course, this doesn't even account for the elimination of personal exemptions. All in all, a typical family of four with two working parents and young children could stand to lose $30,000+ in deductions, with the only carrot being the $1600 per child tax credit. There is no way that middle class earners won't end up paying thousands of dollars more in taxes per year, plus all the additional extra expenses you outline here. One possible silver lining: the results last night in Virginia should sound a huge warning bell to all Republican House members whose districts cover big-city suburbs. There are loads of 2016 "party over country" Trump voters living in these areas who will not be happy to see their tax bills hiked up. A vote "yes" will be politically perilous.
48
My wife does tax accounting. Her reckoning is that this single provision, let alone the other middle class tax increases, would make us homeless. Two working professionals with university degrees unable to afford to continue to live a home we bought 13 years ago all so TheLazyRich can buy more absurd luxury items to fill up the new mansions they will be able to afford from money stolen from my and your pockets.
43
Silly me, John. Twenty years ago we bought a house that, were anything untoward to happen, one of us could afford on our own. We paid off the mortgage very quickly because the stock market was tanking and we thought it best to use the money for something solid.
Fast forward twenty years. We love our home, we have spent personal sweat, and money, on it; but the neighborhood is pretty "marginal" (to put it nicely), and we could, after all, with the benefit of hindsight, have afforded a home in a less marginal area. In our middle 60s, we have only so much time left, and it would have been nice to be somewhere a little more peaceful.
So I hope your wife is simply being cautious -- and that you have a lot of good years in your house.
Do they actually buy luxe items? Just having money does not mean you have taste & style and if they are uneducated & uncultured how can they use their $ productively? In the past the wealthy helped support the arts & fine craftsmanship etc...now they are generally crass, eat junk food and dress poorly. They need to support US companies.
First step is for the media to call this bill what it truly is, a tax cut for the rich and not a reform bill. Next, this bill will hurt the nation by creating an even wider gulf between rich and poor that will put an even greater burden on the middle class. Such an onus hurts our democracy which needs a strong middle class for it to prosper. Finally, this bill will put immense stress on family by limiting opportunity, undercutting community, and fracturing economic growth. Let's remember what came about because of the last major tax cut: 2008.
608
Agreed.
It's not just democracies that need a strong middle class. Historically, if you impoverish your independent farmers / peasantry, you destabilize your country, even if it's an empire like Rome. Bad things happen when the rich get too powerful (and greedy).
4
Since its debut, the media CONSTANTLY (and correctly) paint this Republican tax proposal as a tasty giveaway to the rich, courtesy of the middle class. Perhaps you meant to say the "first step is for *FoxNews/talk radio/Breitbart/Facebook* to call this bill what it truly is...."
2
Eric, who exactly is the middle class?
Is it the "middle" middle (i.e. the middle 20% of US households)? If so, they paid an effective total federal tax rate (including payroll taxes) of 12.8%, and altogether funded a 8.9% share of the total.
Is it the "bigger" middle (i.e. households in the 21% to 80% range)? If so, they paid an average total federal tax rate of 13.8% that funded 29.9% of all personal taxes.
For comparison, the top 20% of US households had a rate of 27% and paid 69% of all personal taxes. (all data from the CBO report for 2013)
Can we at least talk about the tax "burden" on the middle class with actual numbers instead of rhetoric?
I forget when I voted for this.
27
I think that once, perhaps twice, in my 50+ years of filling out tax forms, I have been able to deduct even a dime for medical expenses. Since the amount had to exceed a percentage of gross taxable income (after exemptions but before any deductions were taken), the amounts were less than $1,000, meaning the reduction in taxes owed was probably less than $100.
Today, medical expenses are on the order of phenomenal, starting with insurance costs, if you have insurance, even for the healthy, and still most taxpayers can't get a break on April 15.
For those lower on the economic ladder (say, 2 or 3 x the minimum wage) medical deductions, including insurance premiums, should start with the first dollar of income, not after some unreachable dollar amount. For those at some higher level above the minimum wage (10x or so), employer provided health insurance should be included in taxable income. For some portion of the middle range between those two, employer-provided insurance should be neither deductible nor taxable.
Getting taxes right shouldn't be rocket science. The Republican philosophy of Robin Hood inverted certainly meets that qualification. But taxes should not be on the same plane as extortion and highway robbery, especially of the poor and middle class, either. On that count, Republicans are guilty as charged.
63
And it was the last time the Republicans wanted to "broaden the tax base" (that's conservative speak for taxing workers more) that medical expenses as an itemized deduction first had to exceed a percentage of AGI.
In 1986 that percentage was 7.5% but two years ago it was increased to 10%.
11
You can thank Obama for raising the medical expense deduction allowance from 7.5% of gross income to 10% of gross income.
1
Isn't it more accurate, Jerry, to say that Obama, in an attempt to work with Republicans rather than be constantly at loggerheads with McConnell, Boehner & Co., acquiesced to the 10% threshold? He was willing to share the blame to pass legislation. I hardly think the Republicans talked him down from a higher number.
3
Want to give the corporate head high honchos a tax break? If they don't squirrel it away in tax havens, luxuries, perks for their own "class", they'll use it to replace workers with machines which don't need benefits or bathroom breaks, time off, temperature control, don't have accidents or need decent working conditions.
"Welcoming Our New Robot Overlords" https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/23/welcoming-our-new-robot-ov...
Please take a look. It's a rich article, here's just one small extract:
"Symbotic’s customers ... aren’t keen to draw attention to their interest in nearly human-free warehouse systems. “There is some sensitivity, given our . . . political situation. ... “It’s just a reality of the times that we live in.” But the Wall Street Journal has reported that Target is trying a Symbotic warehouse and that Walmart has installed several. Gahagan allowed that what he called the “red” cola giant—Coca-Cola—is using two Symbotic distribution centers. (“It was tricky with the unions, but they’ve made it work.”) Now, he said, Coke’s main competitor, the “blue one”—Pepsi—wanted to try the system.
“If someone can start a warehouse with automation and sell for less, everyone else has to follow. ... Consumers buy on price, so the cost on the supply chain matters. Walmart, it made a very efficient supply chain and that’s why it was able to offer the lowest prices in its stores, so everyone else had to compete. And now you’re seeing that happen with automation.”"
13
You make a good point. So in the future the only way that our goods and services can be purchased will be either through the graciousness of our over lords or by taxing the 1%.
1
It's great to tell this to us, but how do we affect the votes in Congress? My state's representatives are already likely to vote no to the tax reform bill, and I have told them of my position. So many arguments (think sensible gun safety regulations) are logical and have support, yet Congress seems to do whatever it wants.
106
But I'm out of luck to think my Representative (Paul Ryan) will ever listen to any of his constituents. He never responds to calls or e-mails now.
6
Gerrymandering.
2
Write them and call them. Do that one small thing. If many of us do it, it CAN have an effect.
The tax bill also hurts those who are seeking to reuse an older building for their business. The bill cuts out the Historic Preservation Tax Credit, which for qualifying projects reimburses 20% of qualified rehabilitation costs for income producing properties. It is the major national incentive for the reuse of our historic building stock, a job creator, leverages large amounts of private investment in preservation, and helps keep our towns and cities recognizable and charming.
168
Historic preservation tax credits are a subsidy to real estate investors. Seems likely that these people are well to do. These credits are what are termed is tax expenditures that only go to a very small but very loud constituency. Tax expenditures means that the rest of the taxpayers shoulder more of the burden of government and it provides relief to people who don't need it.
2
That would definitely slow the rehabilitation and reuse off the empty old mill buildings up here in Maine, as well as the preservation of the wonderful character of older cities like Savannah, GA and Charleston, SC. To see the difference, visit a city like Atlanta where the new high rises are constantly squeezing out the wonderful remnants of the old city.
3
I didn't realize the tax bill removed the HP Tax Credit--key legislation which has saved thousands of National Register-eligible buildings that need substantial rehabilitation. Tax breaks for certified rehabilitations began in the late 1970s --before that, only new construction got tax breaks. If this tax is passed, much more of our visual history will be lost forever.
3
I am against most of the cuts, but am for the following, because illegal immigrants should not be receiving subsidies in the first place.
"Are an undocumented parent raising a child who is an American citizen: The House bill would require at least one parent to have a Social Security number to claim the refundable portion of child tax credit"
"Are an undocumented student: House Republicans want to require students to provide a Social Security number to claim access to the American Opportunity Tax Credit for tuition and related expenses. "
5
Exactly right. Trump and his Republican cronies are a loathsome lot, but the Democrats embrace of freebies for law breakers will be their undoing.
2
"Freebies?" What freebies are you talking about? Can you be specific? And since Trump LOST by 3 MILLION votes exactly one year ago tonight, I don't think your predictions hold much weight when it comes to the future of our political parties.
4
Why are we taking away things from the middle class and the poor to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest among us, i.e. the 1%?
How much money do these obscenely rich people need?
The gap between the rich and everyone else in this country is the biggest its been, since the last time we had robber barons.
Yesterday it was reported that Apple is offshoring money so they can avoid paying taxes. Yet, they are based in California, all their top executives live in California, and want to live in Woodside, Atherton and Palo Alto.
But, they don't want to pay to improve the very roads they drive on, the airports they fly in and out of, the air they breathe, the water they drink, the stoplight they stop at, the trade agreements that protect their products, the military that protects their lives, the satellites from NASA that their GPS uses.
The last time I checked 99 is bigger than 1. The rich better look themselves in the mirror and figure out why they are such lousy citizens, why they are so unpatriotic, why they think 99% of their fellow citizens should suffer so that they can have even more.
621
A tax break that would be ended under the House bill which is not frequently discussed, is for charitable deductions for businesses. This means that large and small businesses will provide less community support than they have in the past. Support for the arts, for cancer walks, for little league teams, will dry up. For all the benefits that this bill would provide to corporations, this deduction would be terminated? Crazy.
23
People who fly in private jets don't need to care that much about the condition of roads or transit.
7
Not only does the corporate side of this bill takes deadly aim at the Apple issue you cite above but it also incentivizes US multinationals to relocate their operations here.