Posted on 11/02/2017 1:09:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The long-awaited Ways and Means version of the Republican tax-reform bill has finally emerged from its back-room efforts to stave off any defections in the House and Senate. House GOP leadership launched the bill with a cheery press conference, with members clearly relieved at having a bill to move forward. It includes parts of several trial balloons, and excludes one in particular that backfired badly enough to earn a rebuke from Donald Trump.
As part of that reform package, the GOP aims to permanently lower the corporate tax rate to 20 percent.
The House bill would also slash the number of income tax brackets from seven to four: 12 percent, 25 percent, 35 percent and 39.6 percent.
The bill is also expected to raise the child tax credit to $1,600 from its current maximum of $1,000. It’s also expected to preserve popular retirement savings plans like 401(k)s and Individual Retirement Accounts.
That will cause some problems in the Senate, where reconciliation only requires a simple majority vote — but also a net reduction in deficit spending. The GOP floated the trial balloon on much lower 401(k)/IRA caps as a means to boost tax revenues overall, in order to allow Senate Republicans to pass the bill unilaterally. Sponsors of the bill will claim enough growth from the supply-side cuts to overcome the deficit-reduction hurdle, but it’s the CBO score that counts. If it comes up short, the Senate may well reopen the retirement-contribution caps and that entire can of political worms.
Two other components are clearly compromises from earlier proposals that got mixed receptions:
The GOP bill would also allow taxpayers to write off up to $10,000 in state and local property taxes.
But the plan would cut a popular mortgage interest deduction in half. While it would maintain the current deduction of $1 million in mortgage debt for current homeowners, that cap would be slashed to $500,000 for newly purchased homes.
Homebuilders won’t like that change; CNBC reported that stocks fell in that sector by two percent shortly after the announcement. It will allow middle-class earners to keep the deduction, assuming they have enough deductions to get past the expanded standard deduction, but will put higher-income earners more on the spot. Both of these are potential pay-fors for Senate reconciliation, but it’s questionable at the very least whether it will be enough. Republicans wanted to eliminate the state and local tax deduction (SALT) entirely, but that would have cost them a number of votes in the House from blue-state Republicans in places like New York and California.
Two more changes seem likely to complicate matters even further in the Senate, both for reconciliation and for class-warfare politics:
Lawmakers are also expected to move forward in repealing the alternative minimum tax, an extra tax that some have to pay on top of their regular income tax.
The Republican tax plan seeks to immediately double the estate tax exemption and repeal the tax in six years. The estate tax, also known as the death tax, is currently a 40 percent levy on estates greater than $5.49 million for individual filers or about $11 million for married couples.
There are good arguments to be made for these, especially the AMT, which has long been a problem for businesses filing under the individual tax code and for upper-middle-class earners. However, both will have the effect of lowering the tax burden primarily for higher earners, and also create more red ink that will impact the reconciliation process.
At some point, Senate Republicans will have to either attach deep spending cuts to this bill to qualify for reconciliation — cuts that pointedly did not get included in the budget resolution that enabled reconciliation — or raise revenues elsewhere to push the bill out of the red. When that happens, it’s going to reopen some of the same schisms that erupted during the futile attempts to repeal ObamaCare, and it’s going to get very tough to find a simple majority in either chamber to back the package.
One key Senate Republican has already sounded a skeptical note:
Corker says his staff is still going through House tax bill, but he’s looking for “permanence” of changes and $4 trillion loophole closing
— Liz Goodwin (@lizcgoodwin) November 2, 2017
That’s why one reporter asked Paul Ryan about Republican claims to effective governance if this bill fails to pass, just like ObamaCare repeal. And it’s also the reason why Ryan’s not taking the bait.
Reporter: "If Republicans can't get this done, do you deserve to control the Congress?"
Speaker Ryan: "What's your second question?" pic.twitter.com/jIL9wf1uGc
— NBC News (@NBCNews) November 2, 2017
There is always going to be division. No one can submit any legislation that does not have division. Especially true nowadays in this country.
My taxes will be divided?
Our economy needs strong medicine. And strong medicine will only be prescribed by our congress at the cost of many of their seats. i.e.
1. The problem is the people, not the congress.
2. This will not be resolved. We are in this thing all the way down to the rocky depths below. This is all theater.
but it’s the CBO score that counts.
Fk them Kommie bass tarde.
Lying sacks of Shiite.
Move on with it already.
Simple majority and it’s done...
Then we can hammer the dems for being self serving maniacs next year who do not care if Americans have more money to spend, better job opportunities and an economy that is amazing for the first time in 20 years....
I support this tax plan as announced, as I suspect many others will also. The economy will absolutely boom. Awaiting the imminent arrival of those FReepers who will denounce those of us who support it as Social Justice Warriors.
Go figure! ;-)
“...This is all theater....”
I would certainly agree, for the most part. At best, it is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Redistribution of taxation. At least, there will be a BIG fight over this and MAYBE some taxation will be reduced. After all, that is what Trump was elected to do and his promise. Get the popcorn ready.
If they don’t keep some level of deductibility for State taxes, the exodus from NY, NJ, and California to Texas and Florida might become a stampede. Here in NJ, a couple earning a combined $100,000 will pay about $5000 to the State, but the IRS would still tax you on the full $100k, even though you really only took home $95k.
A booming economy increases federal revenue. This “revenue neutral” plan won’t stimulate anything.
Poorly written, the cap is halved, not the deduction.
I thought no deduction for state taxes?
Corker should have ZERO to do with this bill. He is leaving-— not running for reelection......
ALSO—CORKER was caught CHEATING on HIS INCOME TAXES for over 10 years.
He has a build in animus & bias.....
I think the hope is for repatriation of corporate money and forcing states to lower taxes.
Me too. It's not perfect but it's much better than I feared. Get this done Mitch...you too Ryan!
Tell me, where does a manufacturing company spends it’s “repatriated” money if all of their production factories are in Mexico or China?
Big savings (not) my tax bill will be 365 dollars less under the new plan. Can get one months supply of medicine with that saving and scrap for the rest of the year.
I recalculated my 2016 federal taxes and I would have had to pay $1,000 more in taxes under this plan.
What they need to start doing a rather quickly in my belief, is start cutting the size of the Federal Government, so that before President Trump leaves office a healthy tax cut can be enacted. One that is easier to complete & file as well.
That's what Rush has been saying all afternoon but on FBN this morning they said that the first $10,000 in SALT will be deductible.
That’s a good thing. To me, whether or not it’s perfect isn’t really the point. Creating new facts on the ground is the important thing. That being the case I wouldn’t mind blowing a hole in the budget with tax cuts and then come back in 6 months or so and complain about how big the debt it. With the new facts on the ground the question will be put the taxes back to where they were (i.e., raise taxes) or cut spending. That’s a MUCH easier argument to win than trying to cut spending now. Repukes aren’t much for strategy though.
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.