The article says it all ... Republicans did it to us again. And it was clever and so well calculated that the trickle down is just enough to create a critical mass of good PR that they can rationalize a defense to hide behind. The American Worker relegated to being a by product in sharing the wealth they help create -- but in proportion since it had to be made to look legitimate. I recall Trump telling us all of ..."oh, the hit I'm going to take on this one. I'm going to lose so much money." Stop it yer killin me. Let's face it finally, republicans for decades have been a syndicate of shill operatives for wealthy interests and this tax bill charade that amounts to money laundering to the rich proves it. Hopefully this scheme didn't get them votes they'll need from the depreciation of honesty Trump has provided. The SOTUS is going to be ....sooo painful to behold.
6
Apple is socially bereft.
BOA is a bank about to exploit their poorest customers, again.
3
Well, the money paid out to shareholders doesn't disappear into thin air. The company paying it doesn't have any good use for it, so they pass it on to shareholders - who must now find a good use for it. The only thing they can do is either spend it or invest it in some business that does need capital. Both courses are accretive to GDP and the national payroll.
I know one guy who has a huge holding in one of these stocks. If he gets a couple hundred thousand dollars in an extra dividend, he will be spending it on needed repairs to his house. About 5-8 men will be employed on this project for several months, and they will be the ultimate recipients of this dividend....until they spend it themselves.
1
What kind of title is this? Bonuses don't tell us much? A bonus is not a raise. It is telling you that you are not getting a raise!
3
Sour grapes in the NYT. Most middle income workers will get more in their check from the tax cut, even in NY State. Of course to writers and readers of the NYT $1,000 or $2,500 is peanuts and just shows how stingy companies are with their employees.
1
You forget health care premiums increase owing to republican party decisions. And allowing increasingly dirty air, contaminated water, etc will increase health issues and costs.
I predict another crash like that of Bush43 only worse because Mnuchin is a fool, and a crook to boot.
2
Most of the pay raises will go to the coupons lickers.
1
This "tax cut" is a new tax in disguise.
The tax cut is going to cost 1.5 trillion dollars to the government. How is that going to be paid for? With inflation or reduced government services.
Who is affected by higher prices produce by inflation? Every single American that buys anything. Inflation is just a form of a flat, regressive tax.
Who is affected by reduced government services? Not the 1%, of course.
A heckuva raw deal we got here.
5
The 1% pay far more in taxes than they consume in resources. Take a recent legal immigrant with 4 kids working at a minimum wage job. Everyone is on Medicaid, probably get SNAP, and they get the earned income tax credit. Probably pay $2,000 in Social Security tax, I don't begrudge them one bit since the person is working hard. But who do you think is paying for all of this?? The person making $250,000 with two kids is paying $70,000 in Federal taxes and consuming far fewer resources. That's how the system works.
3
If your $250K exemplar really pays $70K in taxes, he needs a better accountant
3
Legal immigrants are and always have been strictly limited in what tax payer benefits they can access. Most legal immigrants are employed in higher paying professions - its how legal works.
1
Stagnant wages form one corner of an economics triangle. The other two corners are foreign competition and drastically reduced influence of private sector labor unions. Things will not improve as the Trumpers set their sights on public sector unions.
1
It's amusing to watch conservatives feed on the carrion scraps the corporations are giving them, while praising their masters for giving them 1% of the amounts they are giving to rich shareholders. The bottom 80% own 8% of the stock wealth. This law has always been about the rich. And when government benefits get cut, the poor get hit for more than these pitiful bonuses.
4
I would say that trillions of dollars is more than a trickle, it’s a downpour. The impact of those repatriated dollars will start to show up big time just before the midterm elections. If Democrats are going to make this a campaign point they need to start handing out their own $1,000 checks first.
3
Not happening right away. A lot of that money is overseas but invested in US Treasuries and other US government issued bonds. It would in fact be very damaging to the US if all those trillions were cashed in over a short time.
As the corporations told Roy Cohn, no plans to up pay for employees, invest in manufacturing here, etc. Focus is to be stock buybacks to up EPS statistics to get bigger bonuses. Bigger executive bonuses. Maybe a dividend bonus or two. Invest in the companies future - not likely.
2
That always was the question and never was within any politicians privilege to promise it expecting immediate support from it. Its always been payroll departments and who tells them how to slice and dice the revenue, since salaries and cost are taken out even before profits are calculated. So, profit is just icing on the cake left for shareholders who make bets on labor and leave once they cash in. Not only that, its all about the proportion of windfall that trickles down that legitimizes any tax breaks. I don't want to hear anecdotal evidence that a few random companies bestowed increases in wages to their rank and file but the national average and what fraction of the windfall gives the tax break credibility as advertised. Afterall many of us are aware of the decades long drought labor has undergone to share in the rewards of success in proportion to the overall payroll hierarchy -- that too had been imbalanced for decades and still has a long way to go. Its become that labor exists to make administrations rich. We think not.
To bad the tax bill did not eliminate deductibility of direct & indirect expenses of off shoring jobs.
Or limit deduction of Corp. HQ expenses to that % of total revenue taxed here - 20% taxed here then only 20% deductible here.
Or limit deductibility of Corp. Executive total compensation to say 20x compensation of average individual employee/contractors/subcontractors. If that average individual has total compensation of $100K than no executive compensation above $2Million this deductible.
Or limit deductibility of bonuses in any year that employee pensions are not fully funded.
Or, treat any borrowing of cash, sale of assets like business divisions, issue more stock, etc. as a proxy for stashed cash and tax it as such. Remember this repatriation is a one time deal. Oh, and they can still deduct the corporate income taxes they paid to other countries as income tax credits here. So if at 20% here company A owes $5 Billion, the $6 Billion paid to say France is deductible as that just referenced credit.
So no taxes paid here at all, and taxes owed on domestic revenues reduced by $1 Billion. Less revenue in. Tiny bonuses to some, no wide spread bonuses except to executives.
This will all end badly.
1
Oh, yes.... spending 2 trillion dollars takes some time...
How much time?
Let's put it in "seconds", say, one second = one dollar.
So, it would take 17 minutes to pass out $1,000 (got it?)
It would take 12 days to pass out ONE MILLION $$$.
It would take 31.7 YEARS to pass out ONE BILLION $$$.
And, if you are passing out ONE TRILLION $$$ it would take you 31,707.8 YEARS.
So, for $1.5 TRILLION it would take 47,561.7 YEARS.
So, you see why it would take so long for all that moola to be passed out.
In fact, I'm 70 so I'll never live long enough to see even the ONE BILLION part passed out.
Oh, those clever One Percenters!
How to make people think they're really getting something with their $1,000 bonuses! Ha!
Suckers.
3
Please, you have to be kidding, right? You actually think a corporation hands out checks one at time? For one dollar at a time?
1
One of the more pathetic and actually pretty annoying headlines I’ve seen in the Times of late. You’re naively giving credibility to the scam of trickle down economics.
3
"...it is still the case that more voters oppose the tax bill than favor it."
Prove it! The only people who are opposed to cutting taxes are the beneficiaries of OPM. (re., OPM, sounds like opium, is equally addicting, stands for Other People's Money--forcible extorted.) The OPM eaters include the pols and 'crats, the pols' cronies, socialists like Sanders and Warren, and all those who slurp their meals from the government troogh (oink, oink.) This piece is patently Dem Party propaganda designed to assuage Dems' guilt for having opposed a measure the American public has embraced with the enthusiasm with which all but the OPM eaters greet tax cuts.
But don't take this as flaking for Dishonest Donald. It really isn't a tax cut at all, unless government spending is curtailed sufficiently to offset any reduction in government revenues brought about by the cut. Financing a tax cut by borrowing to continuing spending as before is the ultimate sleight of hand. Deficits are ini fact taxes on the installment plan, and a lot more expensive than straight-up taxes because of the interest requirement. If and when government spending is reduced in line with the cut can it truly be called a tax cut.
1
Yet another screed by the NYT about how government should really have more of your money.
Why don't you rewrite your masthead with "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"? Because that's all you believe in.
6
The only workers that will benefit from this tax law are the workers in the executive wing. Rank and file workers will still be told there isn't money for raises. The wealthy will keep this windfall for themselves as they always do while telling the rest of us to eat cake. We must vote every last republican cretin out of office come November.
RESISTANCE IS NOT FUTILE!
3
I live in King Cpunty, Washington State, home to literally the richest men on earth. I have not seen Amazon or Microsoft or Boeing employees running through the streets with their raises.
However, I did see Jeff Bezos open a new store downtown that eliminated checkout clerks all together. He doesnt have enough money and keeps looking for more ways to squeeze it out the rest of the working force.
4
Bezos is the model of GREED. And how many millions has he spent to provide free housing for all of his underpaid, over-worked employees? And how many millions has he spent to provide housing for the homeless?
1
Where was the mention of some of the companies handing out a pittance for bonuses turning around and laying off workers. Thus recouping the cost of the bonuses....
2
You democrats who STILL bemoan the Trump tax cuts are just embarrassing yourselves by showing it DOESN’T MATTER what the GOP does, you’ll hate it. The list of companies now raising wages, giving employee bonuses, setting up education funds for its workers (WalMart announce today an $88M fund for its employees) all announcing these as a result of the tax plan is now so long the limit on characters allowed in these posts doesn’t allow me to list them all. And the economy is growing faster then in 20 years, the stock market is setting records (this affects teacher union pension accounts too folks), and consumer confidence is way up. Go ahead and continue to bad mouth Trump and the GOP: you are isolating yourselves, as well as calling attention to your inability to step out of the angry liberal echo chamber.
5
As opposed to all the support the Republicans gave Obama? The day after he took office the GOP made it their mission to make sure they failed. Then there's those who couldn't accept him as president simply because of his race.
2
I'd really want to see the list (even a sample) of the companies increasing *salaries* in the amounts promised by the GOP and POTUS ($4,000 per person?).
According to the reports, only 1 in 5 companies are giving bonuses, so the list of companies NOT giving bonuses is four times bigger than your list of companies giving bonuses.
I do appreciate the growth of the economy and the stock market, which is a continuation of Obama's economy. Alas, sooner or later the market will crash, and I'm worried that the incompetence of the POTUS, just like George W. Bush, will sink us in a crisis similar to the Great Recession of 2008.
I sincerely hope to be wrong, and that Trump will be great to the Country, but so far he has given evidence to be even worse than W. Bush, and I'm setting my expectations accordingly.
2
Only I in 5 companies giving bonuses...how many gave bonuses under Mr. Obama? I doubt the people getting the $1,000 are nearly as angry as you are at Mr. Trump.
2
We all know the bonuses are going to the executives, rather than to those who actually sell the products or manufacture them. I cannot imagine any executive dividing up his/her bonus to distribute to line workers where the profits originate.
There is absolutely no reason the top executives should earn more than six times the line workers earn. Anything more is greed at its worst.
3
There will be plenty of bonuses and pay raises for the top 10% of these corporate management. I doubt that the janitors will ever get a raise.
3
It is all window dressing. By this time next year few if any will get "bonusez" other than the traditional upper management plans that have been in existence for the last forty years. They will be around long enough to get Republicans through the mid-terms and then bye-bye!
2
Is this ‘the Onion’?
As soon as pigs fly tax cuts will lead to increased wages.
4
My son does payroll at his bourbon distillery in Brooklyn. He reported an increase of 67 cents in his paycheck. He promised to invest it wisely. PB
6
Maybe one measure is to see if, after he pockets all the extra tax savings (maybe there would be none because he, unlike the little people, doesn't pay income tax any way) the liar-in-chief starts paying back his subcontractors in his bankrupted enterprises including his gambling joints.
1
Business owners do not raise wages out of the goodness of their hearts, or some feel-good sense of communal “fairness.” Nor should they. This is business. They raises the wages of employees who prove themselves valuable to the company and not easily replaceable.
You want a raise? Learn well, work hard...then ask for it. If they refuse, take your valuable skills and strong work ethic elsewhere, where many companies will be eager to hire you. Don’t have valuable skills or a strong work ethic? Then you have serious challenges to tackle — and neither your employer nor your elected officials can or will fix that for you.
2
Not always possible to ask for a raise when there is a set salary schedule, published for all to see and know they are "on schedule" up the ladder of longevity increments. I never worked anywhere where it was customary or possible to ask for a raise. It simply isn't done in some occupations.
1
Had the Republicans devised a tax plan that doubled, or tripled the crumbs, as Nancy Pelosi put it, The mainstream media, and the New York times especially, would still characterize the plan as a boon for corporations and the rich, and a penalty on everyone else. The bias is so obvious even after already $1 trillion has been generated in the form of bonuses, lay raises, and transferred offshore money. And this is only the beginning. You are rapidly losing credibility when the hunt for bad news in anything Trump accomplishes turns into hysterical reporting, especially while completely ignoring scandalous revelations about the previous administration. We have eyes through which we can see.
2
These businesses are giving out bonuses to try to encourage workers to stay in a tightening job market. If politicians are lucky, changing laws and policies can result in tweaking the economy a tiny fraction of a percentage point. President Clinton got credit for the economy during his administration, but Bill Gates had more to do with that than Bill Clinton. Presidents ride the world economic wave; they don't drive it. And time and time again the American people learn NOTHING. What they know is "Ya don't change horses in da middle of da stream". Well the horse is drowning and it's gonna pull you down with it; Find Another Horse!
1
"Bonuses Aside,..." Why?
"Well, if you ignore the beneficial impact of the Trump tax bill, it's hard to see any beneficial impact at all."
2
Pay raises will come as a byproduct of increased economic activity and greater competition for workers. That is how markets work. They do a much better job at it than government rules. If you have marketable skills, you can expect a pay raise. You may have to change firms, but you will get that opportunity.
J.P. Morgan announced today it was raising wages by 10% and investing $20 billion over the next five years, all the result of tax reform. That enough proof or you still going to cast doubt? Keep in mind that the more Americans prosper, the more they'll look at stories like this and the newspapers that print them as completely out of touch.
4
Of course not. A handful of examples is not an adequate sample size on which to base a $1.5 trillion generalization
1
I suspect it's likely that some trickle down will occur for individuals lucky enough to be working in competitive fields. The reason being simply that they're more likely to be poached by a competitor if said competitor has funds available. In practice, that means we'll see a small bump in tech, finance, and senior management.
Blue collar labour will only see an increase in either one of two situations. Labor Unions press for an increased share. Or the political ads we've seen recently where a company raises wages a small amount while at the same time doing a massive downsize in staff size.
But generally speaking, no. Companies are not going to pay labor more than the minimum that labor will work for.
1
Actually, there are considerable shortages in blue collar workers right now. Skilled welders, carpenters, drywall installers, plumbers, and electricians are all needed. If more money becomes available, competition for these workers will heat up, and wages will have to rise.
A $1000 bonus is equivalent to a 50 cent raise for only a year then gone. Wal-Mart bonus if less than 15 years was maxed at 400. Wal-Mart raised starting pay to $11 because Target previously did. All temporarily nice things but don't act like this is corporations being great citizens.
1
Forget about temporary bonuses and even wage hikes, consumers should demand product price cuts! After all, the conservative argument against corporate tax hikes has always been "it will only result in higher prices."
Shouldn't that work in reverse too?
The law's impact is "not yet clear" because this article mischaracterizes the law entirely. The law's primary purpose is to make US corporate income tax rates comparable to nations we compete against in world trade, instead of penalizing US based operations with the world's highest tax rates and most intrusive tax regime. Over the next decade and beyond, this tax realignment, along with reduction in the federally mandated $2 Trillion regulatory burden borne by US producers, is reasonably expected to enable companies to reshore some US jobs lost to lower cost offshore producers over the past 20 years.
Many middle class workers understand competitive global economics, having seen our steel, textile, and electronics industries move offshore to lower cost venues over the past twenty years. Progressives can't cope with cost competitiveness because their Utopian dreamscape requires unlimited cost-free capital to support costly, idealized production schemes. That's why the middle classes have suffered so many "unintended consequences" of progressive policymaking.
The US middle class needs more wealth-building US producers who can profitably employ them in high value US jobs. They don't need more US headquartered firms producing with a lower cost foreign supply chain. US national economic policy should attempt to reduce the cost of US production, reducing taxes, streamlining regulations, removing trade barriers. And guess who's doing that...the unmentionable one.
1
As Congress shifts more and more costs of government (infrastructure, education, etc.) to states and cities, I expect that my pay will stay the same or decrease, as it has for years. I'm paid by the state, which is already strapped for cash.
I think most local, state, and federal government employees could say the same.
It does tell us something. The tax rate for a bonus is 25%. So, on a $1,000 bonus, that employee must pay $250.
On the otherhand, the business giving the bonus can deduct that as a business expense.
1
Basic tenet of business: If an employee is willing to work for less, why pay more?
It's never going to improve until business realizes that workers are assets and not liabilities.
Let's see - Trickle down economics has never worked once since it came onto the scene half century ago.
Will it work now, during an age of unprecedented wealth inequality that is only accelerating?
Is this actually the question being posed in this article?
I am completely baffled by trickle down theories that I thought were long debunked. Businesses, like all of us have income and expenses. The labor force is an expense to a company and it's a company's fiduciary duty to minimize it. Their stockholders demand no less.
When our salary goes up, we don't tack an extra ten bucks to our telco bill just because we want to share the wealth.
A company with extra money will always invest in more automation, stock buybacks, and acquiring competitors.
Salaries only go up when skilled workers are scarce, or demand for your product increases beyond current capacity. To increase demand for products, increase the buying power of the consumer - not the producer.
1
The spoils will go to the shareholders. And, granted, I am a shareholder in various companies. But I am a wage earner, too. A ONE-TIME bonus of $1,000 or whatever - where are you going with that ? After taxes ? It is almost laughable. While the corporations enjoy a substantial cut in their tax rate going forward. They are licking their chops and throwing a ONE-TIME bonus to select employees. There will not be trickle down to the average middle-class worker. It's so transparent.
1
Do people not get that the tax cuts basically handed businesses billions upon billions of lost tax revenues to give probably measly wage and bonus gifts to workers and likely much more substantial dividend payouts, stock buybacks and executive pay perks? We the average people are the ones who will pay for all this through $1.5 trillion deficit creation, not the corporations themselves. And yet they get to brag about it as if the money was coming out of their pockets and profits?! Only if there is real growth in an already decent economy with already historically low unemployment (give some credit to President Obama) will we the people see the benefit of our investment. I'm not optimistic. More likely we've been had again.
3
The real experts, people like me who've been in the workforce for a long time can tell you exactly how this will shake out:
1) Companies that pay bonuses are doing so as a one-time PR stunt. This will not continue into future years.
2) At the same time bonuses are announced, these companies will continue with their carefuly managed continuous layoff strategies, conversions to contractors, and automation efforts to reduce headcount and maximize the compensation packages for senior management.
3) Returns to shareholders will jack up stock prices for public companies, creating ever greater risks of a significant market contraction and recession.
Private companies simply won't tell anyone, particularly their employees, how their windfalls are being allocated.
4) Said companies will spend lots of those dollars to lobby and buy Congress.
5) Said companies may engage in useless, empty employee "engagement" activities, to distract from the fact they're not getting raises, are expected to work longer hours, will have their benefits and/or subsidy for benefits reduced, and are exected to stay chained to the company 24/7.
Not all that difficult to predict, if you've been paying attention for the last 20 years.
2
Either the people posting comments are quite young or have short memories. It seems to me that we had a little problem with the economy about 10 years ago.
I remember what it was like work for a large corporation back in the early 60’s. What food and clothes cost. Why you had multiple roommates. There were 4 of us in a studio apt. What it took to buy a house with the down payment and rather high interest rates. Most of us did not take big vacations, many families spent it visiting relatives.
I also remember Love Canal, and when the water company where we lived had close their wells because of contamination. Still remember the dead fish floating in the river. And the little matter of the company where I worked owned a chemical plant that released chemical into the river and distroyed the farm down steam, working in the legal department we heard all about it.And let us not forget GE and the Hudson. The list could go on, just be thankful that now you have some or rather had some regulation.
1
The article quotes a report "that banks will return 75% of their [tax] windfall to shareholders." The article would have been better balanced and more complete if it had added that among the major shareholders of US banks, and of US companies in general, are the pension, IRA and 401(k) plans of American workers. Thus, in their role as shareholders, workers will benefit in a significant way from the "tax bonanzas."
Wal-Mart raised their minimum wage to $11/hour and attributed it to the tax cut. In reality, they did it for the only reason employers ever increase wages: to compete for workers in the labor market. How can one tell? In competitive labor markets, Target and even McDonald’s are offering an $11/hour starting wage and neither of them said a peep about the tax cut.
The assertion that tax cuts will increase investment, increase wages, or increase hiring is the same old tired discredited supply side economics Republicans have been peddling since the Reagan era. The only difference between now and then is Republicans have learned not to call it “trickle down” anymore – because that sounds unpleasant.
The idea that tax cuts stimulate growth is not a sound economic theory. It doesn’t work and we know because it has been tried – no fewer than three times. It never delivers the promised results but Republicans keep repeating it. It’s an ideological article of faith.
Businesses start and grow when there is demand from paying customers. Businesses do not build a new office or hire more workers just because they have extra cash. They only do that when there is unmet demand to serve. What do you call it when you have extra cash and no additional demand? Profit!
15
A tighter job market gives employees more bargaining power in the workplace and is key to enabling lower wage and unskilled workers greater opportunities to improve their living standards. And it won't happen if the U.S. government brings in millions more workers to flood the job market which will swing the pendulum back towards the employers.
America should ease up on its immigration influx for a few years to give the country's most vulnerable a fighting chance at a better life.
Wages will increase only if while having a better economy businesses need to pay more to get the quality and quantity of employees that they need or desire. Almost no corporate board member can just pay more without a good reason to do so, they have a fiduciary duty to their owners.
1
Democratic policies forced tens of thousands into insurance plans they couldn't afford, into tax brackets that punished thrift and hard work, and they even attempted to tax our 529s, so middle class parents who were saving for state school would be forced to into a "great" community college education for free instead. Everyone loved that one so much, that even Pelosi and Reid had to intervene and ask Obama to pull it back.
A year later, and the Republicans have taken steps that amount to a 2% pay raise by reducing the bracket thresholds and rates at the brackets, a pretty big lump some raise for us by doubling the standard deduction and allowing upper middle class families to claim it, they've expanded the child tax credit and opened it to more upper middle class people, and now their corporate rate cuts are resulting in actual bonuses for ten of thousands of workers.
Odd that the progressive press had nothing to say about the Democrats' cost of living increases, while they either belittle or question the absolute increase in earnings that Republican policies are creating, right now.
These raises might be considered "crumbs" by the likes of plutocrat nepotists like Nancy Pelosi and other trust-fund progressives, but we're going to remember this come November. One party was clearly waging economic warfare against us, while the other has our back. We won't forget.
5
Actually, they are crumbs by my standards. And I'm nowhere near the plutocracy. This will go along like the Bush cuts. There will be a sugar high in the economy, the wealthy will consolidate their hold on he nations wealth, and when the economy blows up, the little guy will be worse off then before. And, now that we're getting rid of financial regulation, the next time is going to make 2008 look like good times.
2
Unless your family is a special case, the fact that you are getting so much of a reduction in your taxes almost certainly means that the "we" in "We won't forget" is about 2% of the voting population. Since the party that has "your" back is putting most of the burden for payment of all this on the backs of the other 98%, you can be certain that we won't forget either.
1
I remember when Reps policies ushered in the Great recession when the big private enterprises turned to the Government to help them to stay afloat. Hmm.. Don't blame me if I am a little bit skeptical about Reps ability to deliver.
2
Any extra amount of money Americans can get from their places of employment is, of course, welcomed. But as we read, there are a lot of questions. First and importantly, will hiring and wages increase? How much of the profits will go into the pockets of shareholders and CEOs? Bonuses are just that..bonuses, not salaries. And for those working at, say, Walmart, it will be pennies if spread over a 12 month period.
Perhaps, things will change. But recent history tells us that large profits are not equally spread among our every day workers...the people who are trying to provide just the basics for themselves and their families. It is a ploy and ruse that both Trump and his Congress have exercised, a teaser to deceive and distract the public. And I hope this very public, you and me, realize soon that this tax law has absolutely nothing to do with our welfare, but everything to do with those "Fat Cats" on Wall Street.
6
Will tax cuts cause pay raises?
Pay raises may occur but it seems unlikely that pay raises are the predominant effect of tax cuts.
The corporate tax rate has been cut from 35 per cent to 21 per cent. The predominant effect is raise the profits of many corporations, depending upon their tax situation. Many corporations have deferred taxes and some will be able to write down the liabilities for those deferred taxes, but this varies from corporation to corporation.
The soaring stock market, making new records each week, is one consequence of the new tax law.
Some stocks will likely double in value. Many stockholders with new wealth will want to spend some of that new wealth, and that will contribute to inflation.
The latest CPI figure is 2.1 percent. I believe that understates the true level of inflation as experienced by many consumers.
Indeed, the Boskin Commission changed the mechanism for measuring inflation in 1995-6 to give allowances for improvements in quality of technological goods and allow for greater product substitution. At the time the Commission suggested that this would lower CPI by about 1 percent per year. The Commission bragged that this would save social security.
If the true inflation rate is actually 3.1 percent than the government can lend money in 30-year treasuries at negative real rates.
Trump-induced inflation will be offset to some extent by higher Fed rates.
But it will be able to borrow at even more negative real rates.
anyone remember Obama's big #40dollars campaign in 2012? asking people to tweet about their extra $40 dollars? funny how the same people that gushed about $40 are dumping on thousands of dollars in bonuses. #hypocrisy
4
Shhh!! ONLY so many bubbles to burst in a week, Shumer on Monday and that was yesterday...
The issue is that business has delinked hourly pay to productivity.
Hourly wages are no longer based on productivity, but on job level, not skill or educations, and whether you are single or married and how many children one has.
It is no longer productivity, but a chart employers use to keep the employee sustained.
.
4
Before I retired I worked for a large manufacturing facility. When times were good, the company would give us bonuses rather than raises. The obvious reason is that bonuses can be one time or multiple times, depending on many variables. Bonuses don't count toward sick pay, vacation pay or retirement, so they save the companies a lot of money.
30
How about $0.00 ? That would be the amount transferred. Not because corporates are evil or anything. It’s because the tax cuts exactly does not pan out to huge savings. Plus most of them are piling cash for weathering another downturn.
2
It seems the tax cuts were still not enough. Kimberley-Clark, of course, makers of Kleenex, Huggies and other well-known consumer paper products, just announced that that while thanking President Trump and the Republicans(and the American taxpayer) for their massive tax giveaway, they are closing TEN plants and eliminating up to 5500 manufacturing jobs.
9
The analysis is quite remarkable in terms of the ignorance of the reporter regarding his comment about Apple bringing money back to the US and benefiting by the new tax law by paying a lower rate on the formerly off shore money. Lets make this simple... Do you know why Movie houses sell cheap tickets during the day? Cause people show up for a discounted rate otherwise you would get no sales at full price. IE the money was never going to come back to the US unless we lowered corporate tax rates similar to the rest of the world. Half a loaf is better than none. Get It!
4
I haven't heard one single American worker complain about the bonus he/she has received. So, why would the NYT question this? Political agenda?
American workers are happy to see any type of relief from this tax cut.
2
Really ? The little crumb of a ONE-TIME small bonus is going to change your world ?
1
I’m not an economist or a fortune teller (same thing?), but I predict little worker gains. I do predict a surge in mergers, acquisitions and stock buybacks.
13
I believe the impact of the Trump tax reform will be significant and everyone will reap from it benefits never before reaped in history. During the previous administration, companies held on to cash because of unfavorable business climate and punitive regulations, now under a president who appreciates business, companies are breaking out. Under President Trump, capitalism has once again triumphed! I support the President. I support Trump. Thank you.
8
Companies have been clear - increasing pay is not on the list for most. One time bonus - meaningless incldg Apple's $2000.00 one time stock bonus - at what ~ 180.00/shr now 10-11 shares. Money will go into stock buybacks, dividend bonuses, executive bonuses
What is needed is domestic demand - that means more people with more money in pockets esp. at lower income levels. All that happened when Reagan cut taxes and regulations was national debt up 340% and S&L industry meltdown - 1/3 bankrupt and wound down at taxpayer expense. Millions of less affluent lost big time. Bush43 cut taxes, unneeded off books war incompetently managed, financial industry deregulated and economic meltdown nearing depression level damage. 10's of millions lose everything.
Yes, republican ideologues keep doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome. Very definition of crazy.
10
If the business climate was so unfavorable why were profits so high. And regulations aren't about punishment they are about protecting workers, customers, and society from long term hard of short term business interests. Besides regulation actually create jobs.
12
"Besides regulation actually create jobs." Right. Lots of new regulators to do the regulating. That works until the folks being regulated pick up and move to some place with a more favorable business climate...
2
Businesses don’t like uncertainty. If it looks like a Democratic tsunami in 2018, and maybe 2020 as well, what happens then? If the Dems resume the “simple majority” game in their favor, how would tax, regulation, and trade policy change? Only about 52% of Americans own any stocks at all and only about 63% own real estate. The fortunes of many Americans aren’t directly rising with the stock market and will be dependent on the ancillary activity the tax cut produces. 70% of GDP is consumer spending so the middle and lower middle classes somehow have to get significantly more money to discretionarily spend beyond just paying down debt. (I imagine one time bonuses will mostly be used to pay down the credit card.) If economic activity doesn’t pan out, and the $1.5 trillion cost of the tax cut is added to the national debt, the chorus from the GOP to cut Soc Sec and Medicare will get even louder. Millennials must factor that in to future expectations and saving. Meanwhile, stock buybacks, corp debt reduction, and dividend increases will be in full swing.
7
Will the pay raises be enough to compensate for the loss of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security that will be necessary because of the tax cuts?
12
Great question. I think one thing is missing is the fact that the majority of Americans who don't own stock and who don't have significant savings are also in the income bracket where they take care of elderly parents and grandparents. My husband and I both help my grandmother and his mother financially. My uncle also helps my grandmother with money and taking her to doctors visits, while trying to earn a living. My grandmother's Medicare premium has just been increased again. Even if my taxes don't go up, our income isn't increasing, and the cost of living is.
11
@wcdessertgirl-
From my inbox this afternoon: 'Your Lost Savings on Social Security'
https://www.fedsmith.com/2018/01/23/lost-savings-social-security/
2
On CNBC Today. Of course companies are raising wages. The republicans always show how things get done.
JP Morgan Chase to build 400 new branches, raise wages because of the tax cut
3
What COULD be an economic tsunami for companies both repatriating monies overseas to invest and expand in the U.S. there WOULD also be more lending for start-up entrepreneurs; all hiring more benefitting from the economic activity – the ripple effect.
3
Not gonna happen.
Check your facts on 400 new JP Morgan Chase branches. The trend is closing branches, not opening. People are increasingly transacting on-line.
What people forget in all this is that corporations don't pay taxes. Well, they do, but they don't pay them in the same way as an individual. Virtually all of the corporate tax talk and government debt is explained as though the entities were individuals using credit cards and working on fixed wages. This is fallicious and misleading.
How it works for individuals: I earn $X and I pay Y% of it. Any money I have left over goes to paying all my living expenses and such. I decided how much I can afford based on how much money I make.
How it works for corporations: They determine all their costs. This includes wages paid to employees, overhead, production, and taxes. Then they determine what they have to charge to make a profit. It's the opposite of individuals, which makes a big difference.
It's fallacious to assume that just because the immediate effect isn't going to be an immediate raise for all workers the tax cut is ineffective. It may result in lower prices because the costs are lower. It may result in an expansion of the business because lowering the price won't increase sales to compensate for lower per unit profit; this may mean more hires. It may also result in more stable employment for those working there, as the business has more capital to weather a storm. In likelihood, it will be some combination of all these and each business will do it differently.
4
or it may result just in reward of shareholders. Last tax cut brought a great recession with more instability and expanded gig economy that is unstable by nature.
1
If corporations and the Republican Party were so adamant that these policies would work, why have they implemented "right to work" laws in several states which have proven to do nothing more than dismantle unions and drive down wages? One could easily assume they are doing this so they can tell their supporters that since the wage levels are now "competitive" with Mexico and China they can now bring all those manufacturing jobs back to America!
OXFAM reported that in 2017, 82% of all the additional wealth created in the world went to the top 1%. This is just another example and they are doing it on the backs of workers whom have gained little in the process.
9
The big corporations want to keep Republicans in power, so they had to act to increase the popularity of the tax law. A few limited bonuses, at a select few companies, grab favorable headlines while costing a tiny fraction of the total tax savings - or no cost at all for the majority of companies that didn't pay bonuses. And like the middle-class tax reductions, the bonuses are temporary, offering no long-term benefit.
There's really no debate about the effect of Republican economics. We tested it with Reagan and again with Bush II, and both times there was a brief flurry of prosperity mostly for the very rich, followed by spiraling govt debt, severe recession, and great increase in inequality.
"Trickle down" has already concentrated staggering wealth in the hands of a tiny minority of Americans, so much so that they can now virtually buy our elections. This new law will exacerbate that. We can either have democracy or we can have Republicanism, but we can't have both. They are incompatible.
12
Don't believe this is done. Companies are trying to make some political points by passing some portion of their gains to workers and they are specifically engineering it to be a one-time deal by making it a bonus and not a wage increase. They don't have confidence it will last as the bill was highly unpopular. Also, they can't afford to build a long term higher cost into their budget if it is reversed - after all, businesses can't go back and reduce wages if the tax cut is repealed.
I would expect once the press has died down that this will be a one-time benefit for workers with businesses continuing to reward their shareholders at the expense of their workers. It is highly ironic given the decade long move to try to coopt workers into being "partners" of the business and sharing the difficulties (without the benefits).
This just marks another milepost in the long degradation of extreme capitalism as uniquely practiced in the US where the relationship between owners and workers has been going in the favor of business since the 1970s. The net result is a country that does not provide basic services like fair & cheap quality education and universal healthcare to its citizens like every other developed country and that is segregating people into wealthy and subsistent classes with no middle class.
8
Just a thought. Could the real intention, of these large corporations announcing bonuses, is to boost Republicans change in the middle term elections? Of course Republicans will use it as propaganda. Since the tax cut is permanent, why not giving their employees permanent salary raises too? It would give some credibility.
5
This is all borrowed money: 1.3 or so trillion added to the deficit by tax cuts. More intergenerational theft, and the coming cuts to Medicare and Social Security will add to it.
5
Unemployment is at absurdly low levels, companies are still hiring. Pay increases do not always come from staying at the same job and hoping. The best thing workers can do is shop around for a new company, and use the shortage of unemployed workers to negotiate a higher salary. If companies start losing workers, they'll hire replacements and also need to pay more to get them.
The one thing companies love is not having to give many raises to complacent workers.
6
Where is the story about Walmart closing bricks in order to retool them into internet facilities that compete with Amazon? This also begs the question of tax revenue being collected from internet sales.
2
The paltry tax cut of $1200 for the lower brackets will be quickly eaten up by the upward creep of gas prices and the 30% tariff Trump is just starting to slap on imported goods.
While the huge tax cuts for the richest corporations are allowing them to use saved tax money, once allocated to helping the lower classes, to give 'raises' while boosting their profits even higher.
Meanwhile the jobs moving back to the U.S. will never create enough to replace the millions lost over 30 years, as technology is rapidly advancing automation which further boosts corporations' profits. It would've been far smarter to have invested in preparing our work force for the age of robots through upper education and tech schools! Companies would pay a premium to people skilled in the field automation, computer programming, etc.. a
23
So that wonderful engine of educational productivity - the U.S. system of primary, secondary and higher education - is going to do a better job of preparing people for the future of work than the COMPANIES that will be hiring them? Yea.
Of course the tax cuts will mean pay raises and bonuses, but not for the employees, only for the bosses. The Republicans would not have cut business taxes if they thought the average worker would get more money in his or her paycheck.
9
Bonuses are a one-off, wage increases last forever. And take note of what David in Baltimore said. As owner of a corporation, the lower tax rate gives him even less incentive to raise wages because they cut deeper into his profit margin. Trump's promise to remember the forgotten man appears to have made him even more forgotten.
9
Not worth talking about. None of the Republic’s big problems on the radar, nevermind addressed. And the tax bill adds to them by making funding of solutions impossible.
3
Pro tip: the answer is "no".
Corporations are like living cells in multicellular organisms. Without checks and balances instructing them not to grow as viciously as they can, they devolve, metastasize, and destroy, consuming and corrupting everything in their paths.
Without regulation -- whether in biology or economics -- any organism/organization acts as a self-optimizing operation whose objective is growth or profit, respectively. There is no incentive to do anything but maximize profits; why would you expect anything otherwise?
7
Corporate tax reduction should have been incrementally, annually-tied to proven job creation/retention. Otherwise, corporations will "ultimately" skim the profit for their owners, executives and stock holders and ship their production to relatively slave wage nations.
4
None of these tax cuts benefits or even the one-time bonuses are going to the 45 million people who work as freelance contractors or in the so-called gig economy. According to the Freelancers Union, independent contractors are the fastest-growing segment of the labor market -- frequently made up of older workers over 45 who have been downsized by their companies and find themselves unemployable at their "advanced" age -- normally the decades when a person should be at their peak earnings capacity.
Layoffs are coming and more people will swell the freelancing ranks. These people are entirely responsible for maintaining their own health insurance, have now lost many of their tax breaks thanks to the new law, and must also pay all of their payroll taxes themselves.
This tax bill is just more Reagan trickle-down greed. The Republican tax cuts are what decimated the middle and working classes, gave us 45 million "freelancers," and brought the economy to its knees several times over the past thirty years. Every time there is a crash caused by an overheated market boosted by tax cut fever, fewer and fewer people recover.
This tax cut is baloney, and we Americans are still waiting for truly meaningful tax reform, of the kind that will tax the wealthy at the high rates necessary to fuel a healthy economy and spread money generously throughout every layer of society.
42
"...spread money generously throughout every layer of society." Ah, the Obama "spread the wealth around" approach. That worked. Not a single calendar year of real GDP growth greater than 3%. Sorry.
1
Was the growth of 2017 3% or more?
1
Feel free to call it "money laundering " .... A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet" !
So where's all that "trickle down" wealth?
$1.5 Trillion wasted in another failing supply side Republican tax giveaway. Lost tax revenue did not make fair wage jobs under Reagan, Bush 41 or Bush 43.
Einstein's definition of (political) insanity clearly applies - "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
2
Tax cuts are the last thing America needs. The alleged trickle-down effects will not reap any significant positive benefits without sufficient laws and regulations to restore the rights for common workers.
If anything, America should be increasing its tax revenues to pay for universal medicare and infra-structure renewal. It should also stop wasting so much money on military spending.
The U.S. middle class is disappearing and is transforming the country into a network of gated communities with everyone else fighting for the scraps.
3
Waste taxpayer money on Military/Defense spending? You mean roll over and adopt a “rub-your-tummy” foreign policy and lead from behind like the last Administration?
Air Canada: the airline of choice when war breaks out.
I never said anything about cancelling "all" military spending.
But there's a difference between defending your country and spending 100's of billions of taxpayer dollars for regime change and nation building in countries where U.S. interventions end up creating more problems than they solve.
4
Should the US nation build? No. Neither should the most generous country in the world be sending endless sums of taxpayer money to corrupt governments (El Salvador) to aid in disaster recovery yet, 17-years later the country STILL relies on the monies sent “back home” by those guest-workers in the U.S. on the TWP.
Do these Latin American countries, for example, assist or drain the resources the U.S. spends on Defense dollars combating drug cartels in Central and South American trafficking drugs through Mexico to the border?
In the same way Obama failed to leverage the financial crisis bailout to insist on better corporate/banking practices, Trump is allowing corporations to repatriate their tax-dodging off-site holdings without insisting they actually create new businesses and jobs with that money, or be taxed at a higher rate!
2
Supply-side economics never made fair wage American jobs equal or greater than the tax revenue given away under Reagan, Bush 41 or Bush 43.
Giving away revenue without requirements for re-investment into making American jobs is money given to those who least need it. Billionaires are rarely altruistic.
So Sad!
4
Are any of the raises that Walmart is giving due to the minimum wage being raised in the area where some of the Walmart stores are located?
4
It burns me to no end that Obama was offering to drop corporate tax rates to near the same level and do it without giving away $1.5 trillion yet the Republicans refused to give Obama any wins. Now the GOP is doing victory laps on early results from an inferior tax reform bill.
43
"...without giving away $1.5 trillion..." Oh, you mean Obama wanted to "take back" the tax cuts somewhere else, so they weren't really tax cuts. No wonder he never got anywhere.
Self-employed here-- so nobody is giving me any bonuses. At this moment, it is impossible to tell what effect these new laws have on my after-tax income. However, to be prudent, I am not planning any new spending in 2018, and in fact I am cutting expenses to make sure I get no more ugly surprises from a tax law that nobody including my tax accountant seems to understand. I was not born yesterday, and the last few bogus trickle-down tax laws did not help me or anybody I know in any way.
27
Yet again, to no one's surprise....
...little or nothing "trickles down".
Not surprising because when tax revenue is given to corporations and the 1% without requirement to make more fair wage jobs for Americans, they keep the cash for themselves.
2
This is rocket science, it's basic economics. Companies pay bonuses which they can deduct from gross income. Pay raises would be an ongoing expense and would raise the threshold for incoming employees. Do you really think Wal-Mart is signing up for that?
6
They really think we're dumb, don't they ? Oh wait - maybe they don't think we're dumb; maybe they just don't care. They have all the power. Thank you, Citizens United.
Tax rates meant to capture the largest fish end up hurting the smaller ones in terms of bonuses, which are taxed at different rates than income. Uncle Sam will be getting a big cut of these 'bonuses' which are being paid out to take advantage of tax law changes and not because they appreciate their workers that much more.
1
Any time you encounter a Trump voter, politely ask him or her if they have received a raise or bonus? The fact is, very few have, or will.
26
Retired here so no raise or bonus, and no decrease in taxes either. I still support the president since these policies are good for our country.
Holy Fat Cat, Batman, it's not even February!
"Bonus"? Who gets a "bonus" other than an executive? I have worked in many different fields over the course of several decades, and never once have I or a co-worker even heard the word "bonus." Most of us get "wages." Management gets bonuses. Why are we not hearing that the tax law is translating into a significant rise in wages (and I don't mean from $8 a hour to $10, or something equally, pathetically inadequate)?
Gosh, I wonder if the "certain workers at Walmart" who are getting "up to $1,000" are the poor people stocking the shelves, or whether those lucky few with a few hundred extra bucks in their pockets are the managers?
How rich do the rich need to be, exactly? I'm all for people making money when they can, and understand that we are always going to have rich and poor, but the economic inequality in America today is obscene. If the Walmart family (which, I think I read recently, owns more wealth than the bottom 40% of Americans combined) were to raise starting wages to $30 per hour, what would it cost them, in real terms? How would their lives be any poorer? Would the quality of the food they eat go down? Would they only be able to have, say, 20 houses each, rather than 30? What is it that makes the very rich hold on to their dollars with such grubby tenacity?
6
A (f/t) 40hr/week per year = 2080 hrs. So working f/t at $10/hr = $20,800, at $15/hr = $31,200, etc. (all GROSS/PRE-TAX). After the ACA went into effect, the 40-hour OVERTIME rule STILL applies BUT employees working more than 29 hours are now considered f/t (lowered from 32 hours) and the employer must provide insurance coverage.
Yes. There IS income inequality; there are givers and takers; an ebb and flow; a positive and negative; an action/reaction. What each have in common, ALL have a point where there stasis.
It should be pondered why these companies are all coordinating on handing out bonuses, rather than immediately handing out raises.
4
When the article says "Economists across the political spectrum agree it’s simply too soon to tell whether — and to what degree — that will happen," and then you quote economists from AEI and the White House Council of Economic Advisers, you should quote an economist from the Economic Policy Institute (in addition to a liberal communications specialist).
http://www.epi.org/publication/cutting-corporate-taxes-will-not-boost-am...
1
Yeah, classic moves. You see this all the time in union negotiations: the boss gets a ton of new money, and tries to pay off workers with one-time, off-schedule bonuses or whatever.
It may work politically, too, because it's always hard to get people to see that $2000 right now is far worse than $5000 in real salary increases over the next couple years.
Pont is, as this excellent article shows--it looks like a lot of money, but compared to what the boss got or what real wage increases would cost, it's chump change.
6
Lower taxes with a foundation of higher debt, unknown pay raises, higher tariffs on imported goods for your household and family. #Losing
3
oh, phooey!
throw a thin, little bone to some of the workers, just enough to buy some ink, reserve much of the windfall for shareholders, especially shareholding top execs, buy back debt, and invest in automation that will displace wokers at an even faster pace than before.
and this sham is supposed to be great for Trump's blue collar supporters.
5
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh wait - you posed that as a serious question? Really?
Trickle down NEVER works. The ONLY things that leads to increased wages are unions and a tight labor market. Otherwise employers have zero incentive to give their workers a thin dime. They do not give money away just because they have it to give. Never.
7
Paul Ryan got a raise after he got the House to pass the tax scam bill.
$494K from the Koch family https://projects.propublica.org/itemizer/filing/1198231/schedule/sa
Anyone wondering if the Trump Tariff on solar panels has anything to do with them too? http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Billionaire-Koch-wife-gave-Ryan-5...
7
Ridiculous...wages going up for the American worker...that will never happen...unless it's a buck or so if that. Tax cuts for the 1% never has meant or was meant to be about helping the American worker.
3
Let's just say that there are no winners with this so-called "tax reform" but those in the very upper crust of corporate organizations. Living here in the USA for individuals and small businesses is becoming harder and harder to do. Know the term "squeezed out"? Yeah. It's that.
Well educated people, people who know a lot about a lot, the quiet ones, the hard working people out there who work two jobs, who voted Republican, guess what? You have been totally manipulated, exploited, and betrayed - you'll find out very soon how little you have gained and how much you will be losing in the future.
Unless you are a big dog corporate executive, you will have nothing with this - whack-a-mole.
Congratulations! We now live in a country where corporations are booming, there is no healthcare that is reasonable for the little guys and gals, the education system is degrading, and the government is sputtering, led by a crazy man (kind words) or an extreme manipulator extraordinaire (more like the truth) who hires people to do unlawful things and lie to keep 'em guessing. Clever? Maybe. Good for governing a predominant country? Definitely not.
Republicans in Congress? Weak people who are in it for themselves. Democrats? Obvious. Leadership? What leadership? Do these people truly lead the "land of the free and the home of the brave" - that answer is as obvious as the nose on your face.
We have more at stake now than at any other time in history. 'Nuff said.
3
We all know that this trickle down talk was just GOP lies.
3
"Economists across the political spectrum agree it's simply too soon to tell......"
"rigorous academic study....takes years to complete"
Nevertheless, The Times has to spin everything in the direction of income inequality. Its prescient prognosticators always know what the future holds. Just like their pre-tax law predictions that many corporations would quickly give bonuses to gullible employees.
Gloom and Doom. Sad, Times.
ALL of these PARTISAN DOLTS are whining because the tax cut was not Clintonesque of the 90s; CA wants businesses give half their tax-cut saving to the state (http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/California-democrats-want-business... in an effort to offset the “state and local tax cap with a voluntary donation to a charitable fund created by the state of any amount of owed taxes above $10,000…”.
The same thing lower city/county/state taxes would do.
Used to be that companies did not announce bonuses, they were just paid. Quietly, since not all employees got a bonus or even the same size bonus. Also, these measly bonuses are going to be included in paychecks and taxed. You might see 700 of that 1000.
6
But if you give a bonus or stock options to every employee in a particular category, and the amount is the same, then you do announce it. As I understand it, besides raising wages, JP Morgan is going to give a $750 bonus to all hourly-wage employees. Of course they're going to announce that.
My son is a skilled construction worker. His boss, who owns the company, has told him the new tax laws mean an additional million dollars in his pocket this year. At the same time the 1% is doing its best to do away with prevailing wage laws, which means the 'job creators' will likely do their best to bid down wages. Unless voters (once again, though it's been awhile in Missouri) defy them and vote down 'right to work' it's unlikely that the majority of the people actually doing the work will benefit at all.
61
Vanessa, if your sons employer is following the law and other employers do too, they will naturally increase the size of their construction projects, and inevitably hire more legal American workers like your son, at higher wages. That is IF they are law abiding. If they are not following the law, then you can make a few phone calls and your sons wages will go up as his coworkers are processed by the authorities.
Can't increase the size of projects when they're already booked up and can't hire people who will stay around, even with prevailing wage. Unemployment is already low, and it's hard, physical labor, much of it outdoors in all kinds of weather.
2
So perhaps he needs to take his skills and start his own company.
Bonuses are one time charges, and cheaper, than a pay raise.
Pay raises means increasing contributions fro $01ks and other benefits tied to one's salary (life disability, AD&D insurance, etc.). Also, they are permanent, and increase the bottom line cost of staffing. One of the reasons why raises have been in the 0% - 3% range since the Great Recession.
I do not expect to see major increases, in salaries, unless inflation takes hold and employers are forced to keep pace. The new tax law makes it difficult for employees to relocate, because of loss of that deduction. So, employers can keep salaries low, because employees are less apt to move.
Thus, expect wage disparity, and the wealth gap to continue to widen. The last round of corporate and 1% tax cuts being the blame.
19
I didn’t know about the moving cost deduction being dropped. Hey, Trumpers, stop telling low pay workers to “just move,” okay?
According to an article in Bloomberg this morning, The Con Don's giveaway-to-the-rich tax cuts has helped his main men - the swamp dwellers who have taken over OUR U.S. government, agencies, court system - especially OUR U.S. supreme court - and regulatory systems.
Goldman Sachs is losing money and upping their own pay like good little mafia boys. It's beyond corrupt and sickening.
https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2018-01-23/the-fix-for-goldman...
21
The stock market of the wealthy is up, employment is ok and pay increases are light. Demand is soft. Without demand, there are no pay increases of note. The Tax bill will not increase anything but income inequality.
31
Is the stock market of 401(k)s and pension plans not also up?
1
And the debt.
History also shows, they will go down.
2
Very smalls $1000 bonuses are just a method of keeping peoples' base salary and associated benefits down...such as any 401K or pension contributions. With full employment now, the announced wage increases are needed to recruit as job markets tighten. They can be withdrawn as quickly when a recession hits--which will be a doozy when it comes to debts and deficits since there will be no corrective measures available.
17
The company I work for has announced that the raises for this year will average ~3% and that 20% of the work force will not get a raise. This is the same as the past several years, and no, no one has received any bonuses - at least among the 'worker bees' - I cannot speak for the corporate execs. So, no change.
72
You can check the annual report and the SEC site for info about executive compensation. It will be interesting reading this year.
2
Consider the issue of bonuses versus pay raises from a CEO perspective.
A bonus represents a "one-time" cost.
A pay raise represents adding to the "fixed and on-going" cost of the employer.
If you are a CEO the last thing you want to do is embed fixed costs.
There is NO surprise that the focus has been on one-time bonuses. The question will be what will the business do a year or two down the road? Will they continue with the $1,000 bonus? Probably not.
People who make the argument that these savings will be translated into wage increases simply do not understand the dynamics of business. Look at the opposition to increasing the minimum wage. This has been a contentious issue for decades. Another reason why the bonus strategy: companies do not want to reignite a wage war as we witnessed in the past - - remember the "war for talent"?
42
Well a lot of repubs made that argument to the general populace so I guess that means a lot of repubs including Mr. Big Shot in the Oval Office don't know much about business dynamics. However they do know a whole lot about pulling the wool over the eyes of the sheeple.
4
Good analysis. Just one thing missing: the Republic party's mantra: "the big ones for me, the little ones for me, everything's for me. "
9
As an owner of a corporation, the tax law LOWERED my incentive to pay wages. With corporate taxes at 39.6%, if I paid a dollar in wages it only cost $0.60 in lost profit because I can deduct the cost. Now with the 21% rate, it costs me a full $0.79 in lost profit.
Wages are paid with pretax dollars, and it just got more expensive to pay them!
114
Could you do an op-ed in the Baltimore Sun about that?! A dose of reality would help!
3
Right, because employees just cost you money, they don't help you make more profit. SMH...
3
Thanks, David because you analysis is exactly why the high rates on the wealthy worked during and after WW II. Only a fool would pay taxes on their profits rather than reinvest their profits into the company and improve our economy while giving some away to charity.
2
The law took effect on Jan. 1. Of course the impact is still too early to detect.
8
People here have the wrong idea. There is no reason for companies to -give- people anything at all. That is a language of totalitarianism. Instead, workers -earn- compensation from other citizens for a job well done. The only way to increase wages is to increase demand - which we have done - and to decrease oversupply, by cracking down on criminal illegal immigration, criminal employment fraud, and criminal H1-B visa fraud. If we only jail a few recruiters and technology managers who are guilty of H1-B fraud, it would end a message as their families - like those of abused workers - are temporarily broken up while they receive the rehabilitation they desperately require. Then perhaps these HR and technology executives can re-enter society. The same goes for landscapers, roofers, unlicensed electricians and so on. Wages will skyrocket, to the detriment of the 1 percent and the profit of the middle class.
4
Neither my husband or I are seeing pay raises but we are seeing out taxes go up by multiple thousands of dollars.
62
That's odd, living in FL. Are you guys high paid earners?
Bonuses are not available to 99% of workers. And further, hey are a cheap way out for corporations to look generous. We need a livable minimal income with benefits for all — period. Anything short of that is unacceptable.
30
A $1000 one-time bonus comes to $19.23 per week before taxes. How generous! I wonder what type bonus the big boys are getting.
6
These bonuses are typical of the cynicism and economic inequality of this new Gilded Age.
Throw your workers a few crumbs with huge publicity and fanfare. The corporations, wealthiest employees and stockholders will meanwhile pocket hundreds of times the amount of these paltry one-time bonuses. At the same time, the social safety net that underlies our working world will continue to be destroyed as tax breaks are diverted to the top and the deficit explodes.
Another way of saying it: a few hundred dollars for the average Wal-Mart employee, a billion dollars for the Trump family.
Corporate revenue increases have not been flowing to workers for a generation. This tax "reform" is going to make that trend much worse, not better. Anyone who believes otherwise has not been paying attention.
46
Just a marketing ploy by oligarchs who know too many Americans are waiting for crumbs the wealthy toss their way. These companies could have given bonuses and raises before and written them off as a business expense. The fleecing of America continues, as though an extra $80 per month in middle class tax savings does anything more than purchase another family night out.
17
The workers benefiting most from this tax heist are the 'workers' sitting in the boardrooms, trading rooms, and smoking rooms.
13
How does the article manage the ignore the layoffs made in some cases by the very same companies that announced bonuses? AT&T, Wal-Mart (via Sam's Club) and Comcast come immediately to mind as examples that gained headlines recently.
The lack of thoroughness impacts the messaging yet again.
30
If anyone listens to these politicians or on-air ‘personalities’ the American taxpayer is either climbing a staircase or looking for a seat in the handbasket.
It’s not even been a month. Get some quarters and do some laundry.
1/23/18, 10:05A ET
These bonuses are a great marketing ploy, but they will not benefit workers in the long run. Why not pay workers a decent wage in the first place?
14
"Why not pay workers a decent wage in the first place?" That's an easy one! Because paying rank and file workers reduces the money available for the executives and shareholders. You know, the people that really matter to a company not the people that actually design, make and sell the products. Those of us that do the real work are a disposable commodity.
3
Maybe if the Trump-hating NY Times gave YOU a bonus you'd understand that it is real. Remember that the bonuses, are coming out of money that the corporations haven't seen yet. You actually are ready to dis this change in the first month of it's implementation in spite of the obvious positive effects. Too bad they don't teach American economics in school any more. You'd understand that all these workers that you think aren't benefiting from the investment growth are also investors... their insurance companies, their pension funds. And nobody is stopping them from investing individually.
2
Can I assume you dissed Obamacare BEFORE its first month of implementation, in spite of the obvious positive effects. As did the Obama-hating Fox TV network.
1
$1000 one time bonus. $19.23 per week before taxes, which for many of these people will increase. How much are he execs raking in? Since you are so versed in American economics, please tell me how to invest my less than $20 per week and make a killing.
2
I'd take a $1,000 raise over a $1,000 bonus any day.
4
TRICKLE DOWN Economics is the biggest hoax perpetrated on the American people since 1980 and the era of Ronnie Ray Gun. If anything has flowed anywhere, it's the torrent of new wealth pouring into the financial holdings of the 1% paid for by the 99% Don't look for any way that trickle down helps the 99%. That's the USA BIG LIE. It ain't no trickle down--that's all tricked up!
25
This is a classic example of FAKE news. The article should state SOME companies may give out bonuses! SOME companies may give out pay raises and SOME companies may hire additional people.
It boils down to one thing -- A LOT OF PEOPLE will be helped with a little extra money.
8
Republican, the fiscal Conservative party, is adding to our deficit. We will pay for it down the line bigly. Also the tax cuts will end for individuals not the corporations.
2
Really? A lot of people will be helped with a tiny bit of extra money?
2
corporations provide jobs! In case you did not know that.
1
Now tell me, what kind of bonus or raise did you get under Obama and/or Democrat platform policies? Don't go getting so high on your horse that you can't see the reality of the situation. More money now in bonuses, more money in 2018 with withholding reforms and more money at 2018 tax time with new rates. Ask Schumer if he ever gave anything to the Taxpayers in this country.
3
I got both bonuses and raises under Obama, but like most commenters on the right you're ignoring that Obama not only inherited an economic catastrophe from his Republican predecessor, but also had to address it with a Congress that openly stated that damaging the President was a higher priority than repairing the economy. You're also ignoring that these minimal benefits are deficit-funded, meaning today's adults are stealing from their kids and grandkids. Try to see the big picture.
3
The last balanced budget was under Clinton. The deficit under Bush jr grew constantly and was 8%of GDP by the time he left office. Obama had to recover from the deep recession, but still reduced the deficit to 3% of GDP and added jobs whereas Bush essentially lost jobs.
Good luck when all the increased debt comes due.
1
Only Democrats, liberals and progressives look a gift horse in the mouth and complain. It's just how they roll.
5
Yea, Paul. We should be happy with the few breadcrumbs tossed our way. How inconsiderate are we ?
Alternative headline:
75% of Corporate Tax Savings Earmarked for Stockholders
Quit giving legitimacy and ink to Republican lies.
15
Around 100 million Americans own either 401Ks and or IRAs, including retired folks. Increased dividends benefits them and their spending does trickle down through the economy. However, cognitive science tells us that pre-suppositions produce cognitive dissonance and no amount of positive news about the economy will sway those who carry pre-suppositions that Trump and the Republicans are in essence bad people (fascists even!). Of course, the same principle holds for conservatives in their pre-suppositions about liberals. Hopefully the center can hold.
1
Polls show....
What they really show is how lemming like the American electorate is in fawning over the latest shiny object the reality tv driven GOP Congress and Trumpo have dangled in front of us.
The inflation adjusted minimum wage should be around $20 right now.
Walmart and Target are at 11. Whoopee!
The middle class will see a couple thousand dollars a year in tax savings for a while. Whoopee!
The companies that are dangling one time bonuses and bird crumb raises in front of their workers and the guileless media, while busily buying back stock (as predicted by all objective economists) are simply shills for the GOP tried and disproven tricke down “voo doo” economics.
“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
The Who
1971
13
Bonuses aside? Rising wages aside? Low unemployment aside? Record stock market aside? Expanding economy aside?
The NYT’s relentless pursuit of the negative is quickly veering from healthy skeptic to malignant malcontent.
2
What they said is that unemployment was already low and stock prices were already at record highs, so it will be hard to know what part of any improvement is due to the tax law and what part would have happened anyway.
1
How big is your "Trump Tax Cut Bonus"?
There's the story about George Bernard Shaw propositioning a married woman, offering her 1,000 pounds (a lot of money at the time) to have sex with him. She shyly agreed. He then offered 10 pounds, and she angrily exploded. "What do you think I am, a prostitute?
"We've already established that, madam - now we're just haggling price."
If you're willing to accept money to ignore the shame and disfunction Trump causes, we're just haggling price with you, and you're a prostitute.
11
Dumb article, the cuts haven't even appeared in the withholding tables yet but the Times is trying to lay the groundwork for a claim that they did not succeed, so typical. No one should ever listen to the Times on economics, it takes months for a tax reduction to start to benefit and already they are trying to imply it';s a failure.
3
Ha ha ha! Who is dumb enough to think anything will trickle down accept venom? The banks and Wall Street hoarded all of the filthy lucre they stole from tax payers in 2009, enriching themselves tenfold while the other 99% of Americans stagnated, and they will do it again without question. Apple, Walmart and Bank of America have already started.
2
Leave it to the NYT to denigrate this tax cut. Any $$$ in the pocket of American workers is a positive. Didn’t happen under Barry’s regime! Why? Because his motto was “Keep America Mediocre!”
2
"Barely one in five said firms would pass even some of the tax gains on to workers."
Yes, workers probably are benefiting from the tax cuts. But this sure is a clunky, inefficient way of "putting more money in the pockets of middle class workers." If you advertise your tax cut as helping "the struggling middle and working classes", why not give the tax relief directly to them rather than this round about, mountain road kind of way? But then, we know why; it's in the party's name; Greedy Oligarchs Party.
35
Wages have been stagnant for years, YEARS! But now all of a sudden a corporation gets a nice tax break and can “give back” to its employees? I still don’t understand it.
14
If Bob Barker gave me a $25,000 car and made me to promise that I take my old car, sell it, then use the money to start a business and hire a few people, would I be likely to do it? A promise is immediate, but the follow-through is not.
Giving away borrowed money to the richest few does not incentivise anyone.
52
The effects of major economic and tax policy changes are complex for sure. There is no real proof of a 'cause and effect' relationship however. Yet, Individuals and corporations are already feeling the benefits from the potential perceived future effects of the changes to the tax code through increases in the stock market, higher bonuses and in the promise of jobs returning to the USA from oversees (e.g. Apple). To try to measure such a relationship is naive at best. More important, we are years away from any 'proof'. It would be more productive at this point to concede a win for the GOP and move on to the next big challenges..... IMHO.
1
Completely agree. Dissing bonus amounts makes the journo/NYT appear petty and churlish. It is clear to anyone (who's awake) that the prior US corporate regime at 35% was outdated and noncompetitive.
1
“If companies announce new projects, initiatives or capital investments — anything that might boost worker productivity — wage increases could follow.
Not because companies are dying to share their tax spoils with workers. But because they have to, or those workers will take a job with another company that will.”
This PR move is the equivalent of giving your hairdresser a big tip before Christmas. Kids will get more gifts, Mom will still be paycheck to paycheck by February. Sadly, most voters will be hoodwinked by what amounts to a bribe to ignore where most of the $ is going.
28
We gave 1-4 dollar an hour raises and most were already at 14.00 plus an hour. we also added medical insurance. The tax cuts enabled this to happen.
12
Please name the company.
12
Thank you.
I don't believe you.
Ha! Just got my compensation notice from one of the financial institutions mentioned in this article. Yes, I did receive the immediate one-time 1k bonus. Based on all the hoopla that the average worker (me) will be seeing a $3k to $7k average hike in their yearly salary as a result of companies lower tax rate which is supposed to trickle down to their employees. Well my euphoria didn’t last long — I didn’t get a raise. So, one full year with the same compensation which hasn’t kept up with inflation, and living in a high tax state. Someone lied to me.
115
I would be grateful for the $1k. Try that approach.
1
@chouchou14 - And without it would '18 be more or less economically painful?
2
Nobody lied to you, you just think a raise is automatic, it is not. If you are really worth more get a different job.
1
The announced bonuses and pay increase are, as indicated in the article, good public relations. However, If this apperant differential continues then the real impact will be further wealth inequality, ~5% of bonuses going to perhaps ~90% of the individuals, with 95% of the bonuses returned to the 10%.
6
A common confusion that is hard to understand - Businesses are owned by shareholders not employees.
Shareholders carry the risk not employees.
Businesses have a legal obligation regarding their profitability to shareholders not employees.
Why is it so consistently puzzling that cost savings and increased profitability belong to shareholders and not employees?
4
Businesses can't operate without employees, a living wage in exchange for working to build and maintain the business is not only fair and humane, it's smart, people who are well compensated will work harder and be more loyal.
It's also important to remember that employees are also customers. If your employees don't have disposable income, they can't spend it buying the products you make.
7
@SteveRR: Employees spend each and every day of their working lives going to a place of business and laboring to garner those profits that shareholders, sitting on their behinds in one of their many homes, salivate over.
Employees give the most precious thing on earth to their jobs: their time. Time that is swallowed up by working is time that could have been spent with family, friends, on hobbies, on personal enrichment, improving one's education, or perhaps on developing a business of one's own that could free the worker from being an employee and allow her to become an owner and employer herself.
When employees are expected to work late and come in early, when they have to spend two or three hours per day commuting to work, when their jobs take every ounce of their energy, but do not compensate them adequately for the loss of their energy or the loss of every other aspect of life that makes life worth living -- just to live from paycheck to paycheck, struggling to pay rent and bills every month, going into debt to buy food when their salaries are insufficient -- that's when fat cat shareholders with their gold-plated toilets and golf carts need to give way. They don't need the extra profits, but the workers who actually make profits possible do.
The workers who actually do the work deserve better compensation in recognition of the value of their time.
And don't try to tell us that a rich man's time is not as valuable as a poor woman's time.
2
Paul Ryan, “Workers are coming home and telling their families they got a bonus, or they got a raise, or they got better benefits.”. Better benefits Paul? Really, the shallowness of this guy is as frightening as irrational behavior of POTUS. Show us some examples Paul on significant investment in US Workers benefits and healthcare. Let's see what these companies do long term for their workforce. Not going to happen.
70
Had republicans designed this tax break with an emphasis on Demand side, it would have been the Truth and not the money laundering scheme it was to their donors.
Complaining about a gift horse? What else must Congress and the President do?
1
Stop acting like this wasn't class warfare disguised as a gift to the middle class
7
How about give back the billions of tax payer dollars they allocated for THEMSELVES?
9
This is not a gift - this is distribution of our money that we are consistently pouring into the government.
6
The only things that trickle down are blood, sweat and tears. American feudalism moves on.
40
I got one of those nifty $1000 bonuses and yesterday ten coworkers called to tell me they are at risk. Another layoff is coming and it is going to be huge.
61
I hope an NYT reporter or editor is reading this and follows up to find out if the layoff happens.
Although the political angle is not lost on me, it seems a bit cynical on the part of the Times to categorize this as political reporting. And to go further, it feels more like an opinion piece than straight reporting. The opinion is negative, pre-decided, telling me this is all PR, a chump change deal if other portions of the tax cut windfall go to other shareholders or get directed to buying back debt.
I'm not a Trump voter. But I find something to be encouraged by in the bonuses and increased wages that we are seeing after passage of the corporate tax cuts. Lets watch this and see how if shakes out before making cynical conclusions.
3
Those Walmart bonuses for some workers were followed by closures of some stores and resulting lay-offs. I live in NY. I cannot sleep at night worrying how "tax reform" is going to affect my paycheck.
5
@E: Exactly. The bonuses were a convenient smokescreen to hide the news Wal-Mart is closing 63 Sam's Club stores.
You can say this about the Reagan trickle-down - still waiting to see a benefit.
17
If Trickle down economics works, it’s been over 30 years since Reagan promised it would. Reagan was a liar. The only trickling is going up.
52
Over 130 indictments and convictions in the Reagan administration. I don't know how much more proof they need Reagan was dishonest. And he even invited Pinochet and Mobutu to the White House. Head spinning?
It’s almost comical the level to which the Times will go to avoid making any positive comment on Trump policy, even when the positive effects are staring us in the face.
Mr. Strain is right, investment is how workers ultimately reap benefits from the reform. The immediate bonuses are just a nice little extra.
Regarding the criticism that most of the benefit goes to shareholders......well duh, that’s what always happens with dividend payments, that’s not unique to Trump-era or the tax rate. It happened under Obama and everyone else.
This has had an immediate effect, and will have a longer term one as well. And it’s not riding an incidental tech boom either like in the 90’s, it’s just normal response to taxation changes.
But we’re not really living in an objective world. The Tims can’t speak positively about this, they simply can’t. Too much humility required. Let’s say none of it happened, we all know in that case we’d be reading about how it’s bad because it had no effect. So no matter what, it would be bad, because it’s Trump. Conversely it would be good no matter the result, if it were a democrat. All partisan, all the time.
7
It gets harder and harder to read this paper. I'd love a one-time $1K bonus!
One-time bonuses are a way to avoid raising pay on a permanent basis, because pay raises compound over time. All the rest is simply hype.
97
Meet the new trickle-down. Same as the old trickle-down.
37
Big deal, a single year bonus. How about, instead, these companies raise wages across the board plus benefits, invest in training opportunities, and invest in onshore production over the long term, so that workers and their communities and the US economy can benefit in the long run and spread any benefits from the new tax law more widely.
39
Too late to attach requirements: that ship has sailed.
No expectations ever attached to R handouts. Regulations are evil, haven’t you heard?
The announcement of bonuses by some big businesses is nothing more than a scheme to make the tax cuts for businesses (permanent) and for wealthy individuals more appealing to an uninformed public. White conservatives and businesses have now received a large tax cut. My question is what's next? Over the past decades Republicans have consistently supported tax cuts and deregulation, mostly to our detriment. What is next? Will it be cutting SS, Medicare, Medicaid, environmental protection, food safety, etc. The Republicans wish to dismantle the government to the point where will have an autocrat running the government, something like we already have with the Trump administration. Vote the Republicans out in 2018 and restore democracy for all, not just the few, to our nation.
10
American business has enjoyed record profits over recent years. The surge in profits did not result in significant pay raises for their workers. Why should even more cash flow, that results from lower taxes on the already exorbitant profits, be expected to result in pay raises? If American business was concerned with paying lower taxes they could have lowered the taxes they pay by increasing the pay of their workers a long time ago. Articles like this imply that taxes divert money from employees; but the reality is that taxes are paid on the net after employees are paid. Please stop suggesting that taxes are an obstacle to pay increases. Americans are ignorant enough without being mislead.
12
The reduction in the corporate tax rate will do nothing for public employees, military personnel, nonprofit organization employees, and religious organizations. If the taxes aren't paid in the first place then a reduction will not help.
5
It stands to reason that, in a heated labor market, some portion of newly-found money will flow to workers, either to increase retention or increase hiring appeal. The fact that this comes in the form of bonuses instead of raises is a red flag, however; we should not expect much of this benefit to continue once the labor market relaxes.
5
Trickle down impact such as Amazon opening a "cashierless" store with fanfare yesterday? that's job creation for you ! An investor entrepreneur with funds to invest will be drawn like a magnet to profit, which means lower labor costs by sourcing overseas or by automation. None of which generates jobs in the USA to the extent promised by legislators or visualized by the masses. And in addition, automation will sap tax revenues for states and localities in the long term.
7
The added pay coming as bonuses instead of salary increases reflects a corporate distrust of the Senate Democrats and the expectation of tax increases and collapsing profit after the midterm elections. Smart business owners are assuming tax hikes in 2 years, and buying down debt to survive the pending reversal instead of raising wages.
2
As a CFO for six different companies over 30 years, I can say not once was the question of tax rates ever considered during an annual wage and salary increase management discussion. Companies set the price of labor in a competitive market. They benchmark what the competition is paying and decide if they should be at the middle of a competitive range or elsewhere and adjust accordingly. Overall financial performance, change management and balancing base versus incentive compensation are other important considerations.
When Gary Cohen asked a group of CEO's if they would give employees a raise if their tax rates were cut, he was chagrined to find that very few raised their hands. Shame on him. As President of Goldman Sachs he new very well that tax rates are never considered and other factors drive the decision making.
The companies that have made one time payments and link them to the tax legislation are simply playing the game and working to get positive PR. Being one-time, the costs are not permanently built into their cost base and although a "smart maneuver", it is only a temporary sugar high for employees.
25
Really? Most people believe it to resemble hostage taking extortion and bad faith. Its the position that deserves to share in the rewards of success not the individual that you can toss out. But anything so the cabal fat cats can keep it all for themselves.
Bonuses are a short-term gain. What people really need is long term, stable employment with decent (health) benefits and the ability to advance. $1000 will help meet the mortgage this month but it isn't doing much 6 months later.
2
There is no evidence that tax cuts lead to investment. Investment is based on demand. If your warehouse is full and workers do not have more disposable income, the warehouse will stay full and the business will see no reason to invest.
If on the other hand, you raise the minimum wage, those who spend most of their paycheck every week will increase demand and drive down inventory. Increased demand is what causes a business to invest, not post sales tax cuts.
You might assume that shareholders getting money from stock buybacks will increase investment in new equipment, but why would you assume that they would invest it in the U.S., or that they will not be betting on the global derivatives market, or speculatively bidding up the price of commodities, like oil, wheat, corn, etc, raising the cost of doing business.
And since this whole thing is being financed by deficits, it will also likely raise interest rates, which will work against the tax cuts they financed.
Meanwhile, after the bait and switch tax cuts for workers expire, their taxes will be higher than they would have been without the cut. This is because Republicans changed how inflation is calculated, so that bracket creep will move people into higher brackets even as inflation eats their real income.
This tax cut was a blatant looting of the Treasury for the rich, and any article that doesn't point that out is pro corporate propaganda.
Throw out the Republicans and the centrists and take back the country!
6
The impact is plenty clear for those who made sure that provisions favoring their particular interests were included when this bill was rammed through.
2
"They may well be evidence for these gains, but just as well may be an example of savvy public relations.”
No kidding. Step 1: reap huge windfall from tax cuts. Step 2: toss bread crumbs at employees. Step 3: tell employees that bread crumbs were disbursed because of tax cuts, when in reality, company would have been easily able to disburse bread crumbs otherwise. Now, your employees are happy because they've received a $1,000 bonus (lol) and they believe that the tax cuts (ie, Republicans) were responsible. So now the employees will continue to vote for Republicans and perpetuate their nonsense myths. Company will continue to reap huge benefits from tax cuts. Beautiful.
7
The taxi cut cost estimates are 1.5 trillion added to the Nation's debt over the next10 years. This on top of the 20 trillion we now owe and the trillions of dollars of underfunding for future social security and Medicare benefits. And our debt to GDP ratio grows every year. We are certainly acting as the "me first and only" people we have become. Unfortunately, this self centered narcissism will redact on our children, who will suffer the consequences of our indulgences.
5
The bonuses are a nice PR thank you to Trump. If they turn into long turn pay raises that make up for loses over the last decade, trickle down may for the first time show signs of working.
1
There is no evidence to suggest that pay raises will be happening.
2
Been there, done that.
Corporations have a fiduciary obligation to make money and share it with whoever owns the stocks, NOT to create jobs or pay better. Historically, in the United States, we know that companies prioritize paying dividends even to the exclusion at times of routine maintenance (which means something different in different industries).
Anecdotal bonuses are great for a few workers but for the vast majority of workers trickle down means nothing.
A reduction of corporate taxes does seem to make sense. But without some kind of incentive to create permanent jobs most private employers will continue to hire temp workers at as low wage as possible. After all, that is capitalism.
1
Trickle-Down = crumbs for the masses, gobs of loot for the top 5-10%...the question is: will the 90% be happy with the crumbs, and even notice the fortune accruing to the already wealthy??...I think not...
5
The idea that tax cuts could motivate companies to pay their employees more out of the goodness of their hearts is patently ridiculous. Compensation is mostly dependent on supply and demand. If customer demand exceeds a company's capacity, they will have to hire more. The more they hire and the less supply there is, the more compensation they are forced to pay. When large companies, citing tax cuts as a reason, give a puny bonus to their workers, I smell a PR campaign, especially considering that the accelerating economy forces them to raise compensation anyway. The shareholders of these companies would easily benefit an order of magnitude or two more from these tax cuts in any case. If they can fool the naive public into believing that these tax cuts are good for workers and voting accordingly, they can hope to receive more tax cuts in the future. And we haven't even yet talked about the fact that these tax cuts will just increase public debt that will be mostly repaid by the same workers supposed to benefit. Don't fall for it!
6
I'm quite sure many folks are not getting bonuses, although I'm very happy some are. I'm pretty sure those that are have mostly enjoyed huge bonuses in the past, ie the Executive layer. At the reduced tax rate, I'm sure they would prefer bonuses to pay increases.
As for the rank and file, well there are so many of us. How can any company afford bonuses for everyone, even the little people, all of whom are so easily replaced, eh?
I'd like to think this will help, I really do. But I've never seen or experienced a positive trickle down, that was positive and welcome and that didn't end up hurting someone who was basically voiceless and defenseless.
This gift, which I consider coming from a soiled and untrustworthy leader and legislators, who either are bought and paid for or believe strongly that the government has no role other than the police and the military, looks more like a Trojan Horse to me.
2
Folks are delusional if they think the common worker is gonna see any of this. We have seen tax cuts over the years and wages have been stagnant for 30+ years. People don't want one time bonuses, they want a living wage.
4
Tax cuts sound good, because it’s low hanging fruit, no person declines it. But at what cost?
**Infrastructure
**Education
**Housing programs
**SNAP/feeding the poor
**Veterans programs
**Programs to help the elderly
After the $1,200 to $2,000.00 most families receive is spent, they’re back at square one.
47
*the $1000 Walmart bonuses are only for workers who have been there for 20 years. That comes out to a bonus $50/year for a generation of work. Enough buy college text books for your kids and movie night for the spouse.
After the GOP eliminates the ACA employer mandate, employees can put the bonus towards their insurance premiums
It is baffling that any conscientious manufacturer from a country that provides fundamental benefits (paid maternity leave, paid vacation, paid sick days, health insurance) would move to a country that vehemently opposes such work/life benefit mandates for every working citizen.
10
The impact is clear, companies are paying employees more, hiring more and even Apple is repatriating funds. When are you going to admit that Trump in one year has helped the economy more than 8 years of Obama? It is clear to me ( and my 401K)....a voter.
A bonus is a one time payment that is taxed when get it and taxed again when you file your taxes for that year. What you want is raise of at least 5 percent of your current salary. That is not going happen. I understand that the number of people who are going to get the $1000.00 bonus that Wal-Mart is going to pay is slim to none.
3
You just can't seem to bring yourself to give the president credit for anything, you just can't do it. That's OK, the American people are and that's all that matters.
1
Will you also blame him for the next recession?
5
Workers use to get raises every year. But raises grow exponentially like compound interest, because a 3% raise this year is based on your raised salary from last year.
Bonuses do not grow your salary at all, so you can get the same pay and the same bonus year after year, while inflation shrinks your real income.
Bonuses are nice but raises last. That is why employers are moving away from raises.
The mega rich have terms of lawyers, lobbyists, accountants, politicians, etc working for their interests 24/7. Workers only have each other. We need to help each other over power the influence of the mega rich in our government, because they are using it to steal our republic and ours resources.
4
Please compile a list of companies that are providing bonuses but no raises. As far as I'm concerned these companies are shameless propagandists for the tax heist and I would prefer not to do business with any of them.
14
Ridiculous headline as if the writer/reporter would expect to know all the outcomes in such a short time. More effective: "Full Impact of Tax Changes Will Only Be Evident Over the Long Term."
Got to laugh. Tax cuts never ever have worked, so why put it into article?
3
"and how much of that money that might trickle through to workers in the years to come". The answer is simple....none. I know with the current "cuts", my wife and I, (no children, we own our own home and have no medical expenses) make around 130k and will see a 2,800 increase. All thanks to the stable genius.
3
"Liberals, though, have latched on to other details in recent corporate announcements — the ones that show companies plan to pass most of their initial tax savings to shareholders"
How dare companies increase 401(k) account balances and ,,, gasp... underfunded public pension plans, by passing on the results of tax reform to shareholders.
Liberals are appalled that capitalism works.
1
Most "hard working Americans" are not shareholders and have no retirement savings.
2
"61 percent of US households (or 77 million) reported that they had employer-sponsored retirement plans, IRAs, or both in mid-2016 "
http://www.icifactbook.org/ch7/17_fb_ch7
1
My company had those as well. Only half the employees could afford to save anything in these plans. So you go figure it out.
1
Any worker in corporate America who thinks they're going to see a pay increase needs to open their own marijuana dispensary.
7
Another snow job for the masses of Trump supporters to swallow. Five percent for you, 95% for the company. That's how the great tax cut giveaway is starting out. And the crowds cheer hooray! Trump's got my back.
Then they top it off with their disclaimer that pay raises for the tax cuts will not result from direct transfer of the savings to the employees, but from increases in productivity from investment. Huh? Those savings are immediate. They are not phased in. The money is there and the corporations will use it to enrich themselves by increasing shareholder value. The tax cuts boosted profits, not pay.
Increases in productivity? That means more output from each worker. That means more automation. That means fewer workers. All companies have to compete on a global level. They must automate to do that. With this huge influx of cash, they now have the funds to buy robots and various automated systems to conduct business. Look at the new Amazon retail store. That is where we are heading.
The masses did get a tax reduction that will put $10 to $20 a week in their pockets, maybe. There will be offsets like healthcare increases and deduction losses that could easily eat that up. We will see the results in a year.
The Trump lovers just made the top 1% a whole lot richer. Trump even said so himself. But you folks are happy. The Democrats caved on DACA. You won.
Don't worry about Jose from Mexico taking your job. You will now lose it to a robot.
146
Sing it, Bruce !
2
I have no fear that Fox News will convince those Trump supporters who receive an additional, imperceptible crumb in their paychecks that they're now living like kings - and they'll believe it! If Fox was around in 1789, the peasants would be hoisting Louis XVI on their shoulders singing "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow".
No revolution in this country folks.
I don't hear anybody talking about building a wall so robots and automation won't take anyone's job. Better learn a skill quick; preferably -- HUCKSTERING, you may even be able to write book on it.
you work for the ny times. your pay is a trickledown.
7
Writing news paper articles is actual work that produces actual product. That is more than I can say for the titans of finance who "take risks" with other people's money than give themselves raises and bonuses no matter how badly they do their jobs, like when they crashed the entire economy and gave themselves bonuses anyway. They expect workers to literally live or die by the markets, but CEO pay is set by executive compensation boards, a little club of the super rich, sitting around voting each other raises, before they run out to play golf.
5
Can someone who recommended this comment explain to the rest of us what it means.
4
Added bonuses or raises are what American workers are due but at a price of sexist and racist comments and a leader who is a supporter of Neo Nazi theocracy. What has America come to?
61
They're due for a raise, not a fake bonus-for-show.
10
Most people are just trying to live their lives. Nobody cares about the comments except for those who want to be upset, and they would find something else to be upset about anyway.
We are having record growth and employment numbers. That’s what matters in everyday lives.
1