New Tax Bill Released today

[RiverDog]

When the alternative is putting the money back in the hands of employees and consumers, I sure as hell would.

We could do away with the corporate tax altogether, and while we're at it, do away with personal income tax as well. That would put plenty of money back into the hands of employees and consumers. But then where would the government get their money to operate?

Fundamentally, I'd rather see money in the hands of consumers and business vs. the government, too. I've always been a fiscal conservative that believes in the power of private enterprise and individual freedom vs. government spending and government regulation. I'm not a tax-and-spend liberal. But there has to be a balance in how we treat our taxation policy, and judging by the performance of the economy and the state of business in this country, I don't think we've reached the point where a significant cut in the corporate tax is justified.

[burrrton]

But then where would the government get their money to operate?

They wouldn't, but first, we're not talking about starving the Federal government of all money (and in fact if growth is spurred, revenue will go *up*, not down), and second, we're not talking about a Federal government operating at anything in the same universe as peak efficiency.

Now, we both know the demagoguery surrounding the mere suggestion of a cut makes it politically impossible (hell, even for suggesting a *modification* to keep a program solvent!), but we also both know we could list literally a million things that could, and should, be cut from the Federal budget.

I don't think we've reached the point where a significant cut in the corporate tax is justified.

That's defensible, but we desperately need growth, and I think that makes a pretty good case for juicing business.

[RiverDog]

That's defensible, but we desperately need growth, and I think that makes a pretty good case for juicing business.

We're already over 3% growth for the year, which is excellent, and unemployment is at a 16 year low, so I would argue that we do not "desperately" need economic growth. As a matter of fact, if it grows too much, we'll have to start worrying about inflation again.

[Aseahawkfan]

Consumer confidence has a lot more to do with the stock market than you are giving it credit for. The reason the stock market crashes when a significant event such as 9/11 occurs is because people get nervous about the future, lose confidence in their ability to predict it, and pull their money out by selling their stock. It can set off a chain of events where people panic and start selling, which is why they have 'circuit breakers' in place to shut down the market if a large scale sell off occurs.

I agree about lowering the corporate tax rate as being a good thing overall, but I don't see a pressing need for it at this time. I would prefer to use the lowering of the corporate tax rate a little more selectively. Right now, business is humming and they really don't need it, so I would prefer not to reduce the revenue the government is taking in from it.

You are confusing the consumer confidence index with the investor confidence index. They are two separate indexes that measures different elements of the economy. Investor confidence measures the appetite for stock purchasing and selling. There is also a volatility index that measures how large the market undulations are.

It doesn't matter if they stop a one day drop. A drop from an impeachment will occur over an extended period of time as big players pull their money from the market until they can get a hand on how the event will affect the market. The sell off will occur over several days and may put us in a short to mid-term bear market with a steady downward trending stock market. Impeaching a president is very, very bad for the stock market. But it would be a great buying opportunity for those with cash or liquid assets they can quickly convert to cash to buy the gems in the heap.

[Aseahawkfan]

We're already over 3% growth for the year, which is excellent, and unemployment is at a 16 year low, so I would argue that we do not "desperately" need economic growth. As a matter of fact, if it grows too much, we'll have to start worrying about inflation again.

He likely means to offset the accumulated debt. Unfortunately we're never going to have sufficient growth to offset the debt. Unless we print lots of money like they did during The Great Recession. That eventually stops working and makes things worse as it devalues your currency, though that does include the amount owed on debt.

[Aseahawkfan]

One step closer to passing. Sheesh. I need to get invested.

[Largent80]

This bill does exactly OPPOSITE of what this country should be doing, which is a total reflection of the jackass in charge.

[idhawkman]

This bill does exactly OPPOSITE of what this country should be doing, which is a total reflection of the jackass in charge.

Care to be more specific in your charge of "opposite of what we should be doing"? Exactly what should we be doing? Raising taxes? Shipping more jobs overseas? Leaving $T's overseas. inquiring minds want to know.

[c_hawkbob]

Giving billions more in tax breaks and incentives to corporations and billionaires (including of course himself), increasing the deficit by more than a trillion paving the road to the decimation of SS and Medicaid (just as I'm nearing retirement of course) ... sure seems like the wrong direction to me.

[Aseahawkfan]

Giving billions more in tax breaks and incentives to corporations and billionaires (including of course himself), increasing the deficit by more than a trillion paving the road to the decimation of SS and Medicaid (just as I'm nearing retirement of course) ... sure seems like the wrong direction to me.

Social security decimation will not occur. Too many people have paid too much into it for too long. Both parties know that eliminating social security would hurt their party. It's not on the table with older folks maintaining the strongest voting block. Republicans use social security too.

That being said this will definitely be a huge boon to Wall Street. Stock values will soar with the corporate tax rate that low. Whether companies expand or use the windfall for share buybacks and increasing dividends time will tell. Banks are going to love this. They'll have huge sums of extra cash flow, same with insurance companies. People better get ready to invest if they want to make money grow. Follow the money. If the millionaires and billionaires are going to make huge money from the stock market from this, best to hop on rising wave with whatever surf board, dingy, or craft you can find.

[burrrton]

Giving billions more in tax breaks and incentives to corporations and billionaires (including of course himself), increasing the deficit by more than a trillion paving the road to the decimation of SS and Medicaid (just as I'm nearing retirement of course) ... sure seems like the wrong direction to me

*sigh*

[Largent80]

This bill does exactly OPPOSITE of what this country should be doing, which is a total reflection of the jackass in charge.

Care to be more specific in your charge of "opposite of what we should be doing"? Exactly what should we be doing? Raising taxes? Shipping more jobs overseas? Leaving $T's overseas. inquiring minds want to know.[/quote]

You left out...GIVING THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS THAT TURN HUGE PROFITS (like banks) HUGE TAX BREAKS WHILE THE PEOPLE THAT NEED IT PAY MORE. Sanders had the right idea, and now everything is going the opposite direction. Also, where is the PROOF that new jobs will come????...That's right there isn't any and there never will be. Those jobs lost are not coming back and with a president that backs ridiculous things like building a wall over taking care of the people of the country that elected his sorry ass is the worst of all.

Trickle down economics has been tried before and FAILED miserably, we are going backwards. So enlighten us oh sage, about how this tax plan is going to help us middle class citizens. Can't wait to hear this gas.

There ya go.

[Sox-n-hawks]

You left out...GIVING THE RICH AND CORPORATIONS THAT TURN HUGE PROFITS (like banks) HUGE TAX BREAKS WHILE THE PEOPLE THAT NEED IT PAY MORE. Sanders had the right idea, and now everything is going the opposite direction. Also, where is the PROOF that new jobs will come????...That's right there isn't any and there never will be. Those jobs lost are not coming back and with a president that backs ridiculous things like building a wall over taking care of the people of the country that elected his sorry ass is the worst of all.

Trickle down economics has been tried before and FAILED miserably, we are going backwards. So enlighten us oh sage, about how this tax plan is going to help us middle class citizens. Can't wait to hear this gas.

There ya go.

Correct! The real answer is not in the tax code. Fixing our governments spending process is the answer. A zero based budget is stupid. Our process literally does not allow us to carry money from year to year in any agency, which in turn encourages spending every drop allocated by congress EVERY YEAR. If any business were told to operate that way they would laugh you out of the room.

[idhawkman]

I love how the people who are talking about blowing a huge whole in our budget said nothing when the last president increased our debt by $10T. Now they are so concerned over $1T to spur the economy which is already at 3.3% growth. Obama never got it over 2% if I remember correctly. Try and build your retirment plan on those returns.

Proof about the returning jobs and economic growth can be seen in both the Kennedy and Reagan aftermath's of their tax reductions. Trickle down did work but I guess if you say it enough, you'll actually believe that it didn't.

The "boon" to corporations will help your retirement CBob in a number of ways.

1. Corporations will continue to leave the U.S. if our corporate tax rate remains the highest among industrialized countries. Without the workers working in those factories, who is going to pay into the Social Security system? You can't believe that 2 working people can support 1 retired person, can you? That's where it will be if we don't correct our course. When Reagan adjusted the corporate rate, the rest of the world took note and saw what it did. So they are now undercutting us and taking those corporations away from us. Ireland's corporate rate is now at 12% but they are booming because the people working are able to pay taxes instead of accept government handouts.

2. Corporations who reinvest their boon in their factories will grow their production here in the U.S. and help balance the trade abroad while supplying their goods and services to the U.S. population. I'm failing to see the "bad" in this.

3. Corporations who buy back their stocks help the investors and IRA holders by raising the price of their stocks and dividends. Again, if you are approaching retirement, you should see this as a GREAT thing. I don't see the "bad" in this. My question is, would you rather see the corporations that pay the dividends for your retirement plan give that money to the government instead, especially with their bloated beuracracy? How does that help you in any way? Do you really need to be paying for indiscretions of our politicians in their slush fund, or finding out how fast shrimp run on a underwater treadmill?

[idhawkman]

One other thing, to raise $1T in new government revenue, the ecomony only has to graw at .4% more than what it is now. This tax bill will do that and more, wiping out any concern about the $1.5T deficit they are predicting it will cause. Unfortunately, the scoring office won't take that increased growth into account. So you may not want to believe everything you see about the tax bill, especially since the final bill has yet to be submitted to the President and is up for reconciliation.

[burrrton]

This tax bill will do that and more, wiping out any concern about the $1.5T deficit they are predicting it will cause. Unfortunately, the scoring office won't take that increased growth into account.

Exactly- static analysis is a tax bill is a really, really bad way to predict its impact.

[Aseahawkfan]

The reduction in the corporate tax rate does make us more competitive. It is not handing over billions to corporations unless they can dole out to their owners. Look up up double taxation of dividends. I already showed the math of this earlier. Dividend distributions to corporate owners is a bad way to spend any additional income gained by a lower tax rate. Any cash distributed will be taxed at the corporate tax rate and then taxed again as income for the individual. Reductions in corporate taxes generally lead to corporations having additional income to engage in expansion or other measures to increase their value. This in general leads to an overall increase in wealth including wealth for the working person.

Here is a chart of economic growth. We can reach a sustained rate of nearly 4% fairly easily. I think The Great Recession has negatively colored people's ideas of how robust our economy can be if we let it run with lower taxes. This whole wealth bias narrative sold by the left wing media is poppycock unsupported by real economic data. Wealth disparity has NEVER MATTERED in the history of economics. It's always more important to focus on standard of living and wealth creation than the red herring of wealth disparity. The day you start thinking a guy that built a company and has a billion dollars of paper wealth due to the value of his company is somehow the problem is the day you start buying into economic ideas that are going to make everyone poor as they always done throughout history whether it is socialist Europe (I mean when they were real socialists, not socio-capitalist as they are now) and communism.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543

Get with the program and read your history. We lower taxes on companies, the economy ramps up. We need to our people, especially our young people, back on the wealth building train that leads to them taking control of their financial future, personally and nationally. Get this economy going strong, maybe we can finally start talking about medical reform backed by a healthy economy.

[Largent80]

ID, I would like to hear an explanation of HOW the rich and corporations getting huge tax breaks is going to HELP ME specifically.

I'm semi-retired, just bought a new house. How is a rich man (like Rump) getting out of paying more taxes while I get fewer deductions going to help ME???

This tax plan raises the taxes each and every year after this one, especially low income people. It's a heartless plan to make the rich even richer. Let me guess, you are a 6 figure a year or above household correct?

Also, provide links to show or back up your claims that trickle down economics has worked. Because I looked and once again, it is the OPPOSITE of what you are claiming.

[idhawkman]

ID, I would like to hear an explanation of HOW the rich and corporations getting huge tax breaks is going to HELP ME specifically.

I'm semi-retired, just bought a new house. How is a rich man (like Rump) getting out of paying more taxes while I get fewer deductions going to help ME???

This tax plan raises the taxes each and every year after this one, especially low income people. It's a heartless plan to make the rich even richer. Let me guess, you are a 6 figure a year or above household correct?

Also, provide links to show or back up your claims that trickle down economics has worked. Because I looked and once again, it is the OPPOSITE of what you are claiming.

I don't know enough about you specifically but if you let me know where you get your "retirement" funds from, I can probably explain it to you. Is it an IRA, pension from a company or is it Social Security?

As asea explained above, don't get mad that someone else has more than you have. One of my early mentors in private business once told me that "never get mad at someone being rich, if you want to be rich, find a rich person to be friends with and then do what they do and you will be rich." It has been some of the best advice I ever got.

Wow, you know what the tax plan has in it already. Interesting since it is going to reconciliation just today. What are the salary levels and how many brackets are there. What's the tax rate at each level. How many deductions did they keep? Did they do away with the death tax or just put a false ceiling on it? So many questions we all want to know and it sounds like you know them all already. Let's be kind and share with us.

[idhawkman]

Oh, sorry, here's the link to show you the benefits of tax cuts on the GDP.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543

[Aseahawkfan]

ID, I would like to hear an explanation of HOW the rich and corporations getting huge tax breaks is going to HELP ME specifically.

I'm semi-retired, just bought a new house. How is a rich man (like Rump) getting out of paying more taxes while I get fewer deductions going to help ME???

This tax plan raises the taxes each and every year after this one, especially low income people. It's a heartless plan to make the rich even richer. Let me guess, you are a 6 figure a year or above household correct?

Also, provide links to show or back up your claims that trickle down economics has worked. Because I looked and once again, it is the OPPOSITE of what you are claiming.

Do you derive any of your post-retirement income from stocks, bonds, dividends, or any sort of investment that benefits from a company having increased resources to increase shareholder value? From what I read you'll be able to write off a good portion of your property tax. If you just bought a house, that could be helpful. I'm not sure how post-retirement income works, but you will have a larger standard deduction which will be lower the amount of your taxable income returning some money into your pocket. If the economy improves substantially, that will increase the government coffers taking pressure off the government to make cuts.

[RiverDog]

Do you derive any of your post-retirement income from stocks, bonds, dividends, or any sort of investment that benefits from a company having increased resources to increase shareholder value? From what I read you'll be able to write off a good portion of your property tax. If you just bought a house, that could be helpful. I'm not sure how post-retirement income works, but you will have a larger standard deduction which will be lower the amount of your taxable income returning some money into your pocket. If the economy improves substantially, that will increase the government coffers taking pressure off the government to make cuts.

I'm 4 months away from full retirement, and our income plan for the first 3-7 years will look like this:

Wife's SS: 33%
My Pension: 24%
Annuity: 10%
Bonds & Blue Chip Stocks (that yield a dividend): 33%.

That's going to be about 75% of what the two of us made when we were both working.

As far as how the new tax bill will affect us: My wife's SS, my pension, and the annuity are fixed and will be unaffected by the new tax bill. However, since we do not itemize, we will benefit from the higher standard deduction, and stocks & bonds should do better with the lower corporate tax rate.

So many people have this hyper allergic reaction the word "corporations" as if it's some sort of evil institution that Ebenezer Scrooge owns when in actuality, it's the backbone of middle class Americans like myself that depend on or will depend on 401K's and/or IRA's for their retirement income.

[Largent80]

We're both on SS. Both recently on Medicare.

Which this administration is trying to lower on both of those. While increasing defense spending, building walls, cutting health care benefits, supporting and employing people that should be in JAIL, supporting things like the NRA, failing to condemn Neo-Nazi's....giving themselves tax breaks when they make multiple millions and even billions, all the while removing things that were put in place to try and get the nation back on track after the Bush jr. disaster. I could easily go on.

Trying to convince me Rump is making my America great again is a losing proposition dude. This guy cares about one thing, and that thing isn't YOU or Me. The very states that got this clown elected will ironically and thanfully feel the pain of it all. 3 years can't come fast enough.

The good thing is we have a lot of intelligent young people entering the political arena that subscribe to neither of these shitty parties credo's. Change is coming and the status quo will and needs to change.

[RiverDog]

Which this administration is trying to lower on both of those (SS and Medicare).

How is that?

You could make an argument that Obama has done more to compromise SS benefits than any of the R POTUS's as he signed into law a provision that disallowed being able to file and defer SS benefits, which at one time was a strategy my wife and I were going to use.

[Largent80]

Last I saw OBAMA isn't in power any more and Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare.

[idhawkman]

Last I saw OBAMA isn't in power any more and Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare.

No way. You are hearing false information if you believe that. He will protect SS by making the government stable again and stop the deficit spending and medicare he's giving back to the states because the states will spend it better than funneling it through 20% of federal government overhead. See, you just earned back 20% more in medicare... You can thank the POTUS when he gets it returned to the states.

[Largent80]

Gawd dude, you are living in a dream world. I have no idea what Rump has done to you but I'm still guessing since you chose to not answer your yearly income that you are ecxstatic about your taxes based on your income. You sidestepped the question just like Huckabee-Sanders does.

That isn't good for America dude. You have a guy that skipped out on military service as your president, meanwhile, I served in Vietnam and came home alive. You elected a COWARD. Did you serve?..whats your status? I was shot at by viet kong serving my country and now I have a cowardly lion that would piss himself and is in charge of making decisions on my future. BLECH.

It's a sorry viewpoint and constant defending of this president that is just deplorable. Congrats. You got your perfect storm, enjoy it's brief tenure. And the 75,000 idiots in poor states for believing this narrcissistic jackwad and electing him. They deserve all they get, although probably NOT smart enough to know the difference.

[Largent80]

Last I saw OBAMA isn't in power any more and Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare.

IDblindedbyRump says....No way.

You are hearing false information if you believe that. He will protect SS by making the government stable again and stop the deficit spending and medicare he's giving back to the states because the states will spend it better than funneling it through 20% of federal government overhead. See, you just earned back 20% more in medicare... You can thank the POTUS when he gets it returned to the states.[/quote]

Largent80 says : Provide links to prove what you say. VIABLE links. Good luck

[RiverDog]

Last I saw OBAMA isn't in power any more and Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare.

Where are you getting your information? I have not seen any proposal from Trump regarding SS or Medicare.

[Aseahawkfan]

Last I saw OBAMA isn't in power any more and Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare.

And thus you fall for the left wing lies. If you're an old man as you claim, then you know you've heard this lie nearly every time a Republican president is in office.

The old Republicans will destroy social security and medicare myth is the same garbage the Democrats pull out to scare the old folks every time the Republicans alter taxes. Same as they pull out the racist card to maintain the black vote.

Just like the right wing pulls out the socialist title every time a Democrat wants to create a program to help some people. Or the weak on national defense every time a Democrat makes some kind of softened stance on an international agreement, even when Republicans were backing the measure as well.

Stop already, eh. You've been around too long to fall for this garbage from either side. Republicans like controlling The White House. They're not dumb enough to screw with social security when the largest voting block in the nation is old folks. Sheesh.

[burrrton]

Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare.

Where??

Or is this more "They want to throw Granny off the cliff" nonsense we saw 5 years ago when all that was proposed were incremental step(s) that would have:

1. Not affected anyone over the age of 50
2. *Saved* SS/Medicare/Medicaid (or at worst made them significantly more solvent)

Trump's opposition has to give up the typical BS thrown at literally every Republican initiative and dial it back from "UR GUTTING MEDICAID" and "THERE WILL LITERALLY BE DEAD BODIES IN THE STREETS!"

It undermines credibility in a huge way.

[RiverDog]

L80, you need to either put up or shut up about this "Rump wants to gut SS and Medicare" business. Start showing us some links, quotes, anything to validate your claims. You've been asked a number of times from multiple posters to show us what you are talking about and you continue to evade our challenge. I am beginning to think that you are simply making things up.

[c_hawkbob]

I don't know what you want for a link but Senate Republicans’ current budget proposal reduces projected spending levels for Medicare and Medicaid by hundreds of billions of dollars over 10 years. While not technically "cuts" those proposed reductions in spending have exactly the same effect do they not? If you project out the costs of the programs for ten years compared to the spending levels over the same period of time the fact that the real dollar amount after ten years is not a "cut" from the amount being spent today is really just a technicality.

[RiverDog]

I don't know what you want for a link but Senate Republicans’ current budget proposal reduces projected spending levels for Medicare and Medicaid by hundreds of billions of dollars over 10 years. While not technically "cuts" those proposed reductions in spending have exactly the same effect do they not? If you project out the costs of the programs for ten years compared to the spending levels over the same period of time the fact that the real dollar amount after ten years is not a "cut" from the amount being spent today is really just a technicality.

They talk about a lot of stuff in budget negotiations, but so far, there is no proposal to do what you are suggesting. All that has occurred is a bunch of speculation, mostly by Democrats that were against the tax bill. Let's at least wait until there's a firm proposal to debate before we start into the demagoguery.

[Largent80]

LOL, what a bunch we have here, getting all p.o'd at someones views. I don't have to provide any of you with anything, do it yourself, it's called Google.

[c_hawkbob]

They talk about a lot of stuff in budget negotiations, but so far, there is no proposal to do what you are suggesting.

Well you are wrong. That is the exact proposal that Senate Republicans put on the floor. It just hasn't been hammered out to mesh with the House proposal yet.

[Largent80]

Ryan has harped about it for years, but the ass kissing Rump won't do anything to try and piss off his "base", you know, broke non educated Christians because they like it (S.S.).

He's doing the same thing with Isreal now, kissing their asses while putting all of us in danger going forward.

[Aseahawkfan]

Well you are wrong. That is the exact proposal that Senate Republicans put on the floor. It just hasn't been hammered out to mesh with the House proposal yet.

First, the Senate bill is not necessarily going to be the final bill.

Second, this is unlikely to go through if it damages one of the Republicans larger voting blocs: old folks. Retired or soon to be retired people are a huge voting bloc with money. A large percentage of these folks vote conservatively.

Third, where are these cuts coming from? Are they reducing the Medicare tax all working folk pay? Every working person pays 2.2% every paycheck for medicare. Is the portion being cut for retirees or the portion that covers non-retirees on medicare/medicaid?

I'll wait until the final tax bill is on the table, then analyze where the cuts are coming from. If I'm paying for Medicare right now at the rate of 2.2% over my working lifetime, likely more at some point with people having fewer children later in life meaning less work time to pay for these programs, then I'd like to know what they're doing with the money. We pay for social security and medicare. Unless the intent is to give me that money back, I'm not sure how they cut the program. Would the government keep the 6.6% we pay for social security and the 2.2% we pay for medicare and just what? Screw us? What do you think would happen to the party that did that?

[burrrton]

While not technically "cuts" those proposed reductions in spending have exactly the same effect do they not?

No, they do not. When I get a 5% raise instead of an 8% raise, I didn't get a pay cut.

Further, "planned spending" in the Fed budget has little relation to necessary costs.

[c_hawkbob]

No, they do not. When I get a 5% raise instead of an 8% raise, I didn't get a pay cut.

You did if the cost of living rose by 8%.