Tax Cut Evangelist Warns This GOP Tax Plan Doesn’t Really Cut Taxes

The current GOP tax plan sitting in front of Congress has problems. If a true-blue lifelong conservative tax cut evangelist like me is not sold 110 percent, something is very wrong.

I’m a Ronald Reagan-Barry Goldwater-Jack Kemp conservative. I’ve been preaching tax cuts since third grade. Until now, I’ve never in my life met a tax cut I didn’t support!

My goals are simple- more power and money to the people that earned it (taxpayers and business owners) and less money for the greedy, wasteful government.

That’s why it pains me to say the current GOP tax plan is not what politicians and tax experts claim it is.

This doesn’t mean I won’t support it. I can still be convinced if several changes take place in the negotiations between the GOP House and Senate. But it means I’m disappointed because this could have been great. This could have been Reagan- Part Deux. This could have really saved small business and the middle class.

The problem is Congress ruins everything it touches. Just like the repeal of Obamacare. They could have simply voted to kill Obamacare. Instead, they made the repeal a trillion-dollar mess no one understood. So, it failed. Well don’t look now, but the stupid GOP Congress has done it again.

A) Make the economy explode upward by allowing people to keep more of their own money.

B) Win elections, because voters are so thankful for the extra money and the prosperous economy.

All the GOP had to do was cut taxes across the board by 10 percent this year, 10 percent next year (2018), 10 percent in the third year (2019). Give the tax cut to everyone. Keep it simple. Make everyone jump for joy. Do that, and Americans would be walking into voting booths with more money in their hands for the next two elections. The GOP would win in landslides in both 2018 and 2020.

The most important rule of business is: “KISS- Keep It Simple Stupid.” Instead, the stupid GOP Congress made this tax plan so complicated; even I have no idea what’s in it, or what the effect will be on my taxes.

First, GOP politicians are trying to convince us this is a huge tax cut. Reagan cut taxes dramatically from 70 percent to 28 percent. He didn’t cut them from 39 percent to a lousy 35 percent.

Secondly, this tax plan barely cuts tax rates for individuals, but in return, it cuts a ton of deductions. Important deductions. Mortgage interest. State income taxes. Property taxes. Medical expenses. Student loan interest. And how about this doozy- it dramatically changes the way alimony is counted towards taxes.

So, is this really a “tax cut?” If I save $5000 a year in taxes based on lower rates, but pay $10,000 a year more based on reduced deductions, how is that a “tax cut?” Sounds like a tax raise to me. And when people figure this out a year from now, they aren’t going to vote Republican.

*If a 35 percent corporate tax rate is far too high for big business, so high that companies are moving out of America, why is a 35 percent tax rate just fine and dandy for individuals?

*If you lower our taxes a little, but take away most of our deductions, how is that a “tax cut” at all? Sounds to me like this is “revenue neutral," which means you’re not actually cutting our taxes.

*If you’re giving a 20 percent tax rate to big business to encourage economic growth, spending and job creation, why not for small business, or individuals?

*Why are you making the gigantic tax cut for corporations permanent, while the tiny tax cut for individuals is temporary? Does anyone notice this?

*If eliminating the deduction for state and local taxes is such a fantastic idea for individuals, why are you leaving that exact deduction in for corporations?

*If a homeowner has a $20,000 property tax bill, but can’t deduct it anymore, you’re asking them to pay taxes on money they don’t have. How is that helping the economy?

*Why is the cut for individuals so small? Why are you only cutting the top rate from 39 percent to 35 percent (and making that tiny cut temporary)? Is this because you’re giving away 75 percent of the money to a gigantic permanent cut to big business, and leaving crumbs for the rest of us?

*Why are you making this so darn complicated? Why don’t you just cut everyone’s taxes across the board?

*I’ve saved the most important for last. The claim is there’s a fantastic new special 25 percent tax rate for small businessmen like me. Great! This is what President Trump wanted from day one. This is the main reason I’d support this new tax plan. Except I’ve come to find out the new lower tax rate only applies to 30 percent of a small businessman’s income. The other 70 percent gets taxed at the highest personal rate. Really?

That’s your “big idea” to save small business? Small business creates 2/3rds of all new private sector jobs. How is giving us a special 25 percent tax rate on only 30 percent of our income putting small business on an equal footing with big business, who gets a permanent 20 percent tax rate on 100 percent of their income?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m looking for reasons to support this GOP tax plan. I’m looking for reasons to sell it to the millions of conservatives who listen to my national radio show on USA Radio and my national TV show on Newsmax TV.

If changes are made to lower tax rates for individuals; to apply the special tax rate for small business to 100 percent of their income; to restore crucial tax deductions like the mortgage interest deduction, property tax deduction and medical expenses deduction; I could be persuaded to give my full support to this GOP tax plan.

But if someone like me, who has never before in his life questioned a tax cut plan, has significant issues and concerns, it’s a safe bet that I speak for millions of conservatives. This bill has huge problems.

Let’s make it more conservative. Let’s aim it at small business and individuals, not just big business. Let’s make it more Goldwater/Reagan/Kemp.

Because until you do that, this tax cut evangelist warns this GOP tax plan doesn’t really cut taxes. At least not for the people that matter- GOP voters.

Everyone who makes any recommendations on taxation has to acknowledge that it will be a moving of who pays what.

For it to be a net reduction in all taxation, spending would have to actually also be decreased, and there is only one way that will ever happen:

By getting government out of specific things completely.

> But then we itemizers who get a tax increase? Well its our own damn fault for living in a “ blue” state and being “ subsidized” by red staters - right?

Right! :-) Perhaps it will give incentive for those who pass high taxes in their state, where they can write them off on the fed, will promote and support lower state taxes to change blue to red.

Trump genuinely wants the MAGA agenda implemented, but allows Congress too much leeway, resulting in Congress leaving only a pretense of the MAGA agenda on top of their usual uniparty crony corporatism garbage.

How will it increase wages?

Increased capital expenditures will result in improved labor productivity. Competition in the labor market will then force employers to pay out most of the increase to their employees.

Source

Increased capital expenditures will result in improved labor productivity. Competition in the labor market will then force employers to pay out most of the increase to their employees.

Of course it will. But what's going to drive capital expenditures? Companies don't invest unless there is a reason to. And if you really thing companies will increase pay for their employees out of the goodness of their heart then you're kidding yourself.

Companies don't do anything out of the goodness of their heart.

But they do invest to make money, and competition in the labor market compels them to pay out a good chunk of that money to their employees.

Companies don't really pay taxes. Individuals do. Thus, the question arises, who really pays the corporate tax? Shareholders, via reduced dividends? Customers, via higher prices? Or employees, via lower wages?

Economists estimate 70% of the corporate tax falls on employees. Shareholders can shift their investments abroad. Customers can buy foreign goods. But employees are stuck. Thus, reducing the corporate tax can be expected to further boost wages.

Sure, thats real easy
/sarc

I’m fairly certain that federal tax deductibility has little to do with state legislatures and local govt decisions on tax policy. This new “ reform” by Congress is just a way to stick it to the middle class and impoverish us little by little every year until we all move to FL or Texas which are turning purple btw

In case you havent looked around , people in the US who actually pay federal tax are a shrinking minority no matter what state you live in

Perhaps it will give incentive for those who pass high taxes in their state, where they can write them off on the fed, will promote and support lower state taxes to change blue to red.

And what should my response be to those who raised my federal taxes?

"Because they double the standard deduction."

take $8000 and that leaves $16000....

not even close to what we could deduct last year and a couple thousand below what we could deduct this coming year if this passes...

oh, so they might lower the tax rate...

and they can simply raise it at a whim....

THIS IS A TOTAL CROCK.....

But they do invest to make money...

But won't invest unless they are sure they will get a return on their investment. Cutting corporate taxes doesn't do that in and of itself.

...and competition in the labor market compels them to pay out a good chunk of that money to their employees.

We're are close to zero statistical unemployment now and salaries are not skyrocketing.

Eliminate the taxes and what do you think will happen? Lower costs? Higher wages? Complete nonsense.

> And what should my response be to those who raised my federal taxes?

Don’t vote for them. But the other party would be worse.

If your state didn’t have high state taxes, your federal taxes, would likely be lower unless you’re in the top bracket.

Federal statute can.

Nope.

In order for the Byrd rule to bind the current congress, it would have to be a constitutional amendment, not a mere federal statute, much less a Senate rule (Senate rules can be changed by a majority, even Senate rules requiring a supermajority — thank you, Dingy Harry!).

Congress makes the law by majority, with the approval of the President, unless two thirds of both houses vote to override his veto. New law supersedes old law (provided it's constitutional).

Thus, if the Senate were to pass a law in violation of the Byrd Rule, and the House passed it, and the President signed it, it is the law, Exalted Democrat Cyclops Byrd be damned!

If your state didn’t have high state taxes, your federal taxes, would likely be lower unless you’re in the top bracket.

My state taxes are neither here nor there. I want to know why the Republican Congress is raising my federal taxes. I thought that the Republicans were supposed to be opposed to that?

> ... if the House and DJT agree, it’s the law. Byrd Rule or not.

Late reply, but I wanted to say, I agree with you. So many bills were passed that were unconstitutional, so if one doesn’t fit the “Byrd Rule” so be it :-)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.