Posted on 12/27/2017 10:11:07 AM PST by Kaslin
We've been having some fun at the expense of Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party's literally apocalyptic hyperbole and rhetorical overreach about the new tax reform law, showcasing examples of businesses -- large and small -- that are celebrating passage of the landmark legislation by paying out employee bonuses, raising wages, expanding, and making charitable investments. For what it's worth, here are a few additional examples that have cropped up since our last pre-Christmas post on the matter. As we await more announcements from corporations and small businesses across the country in the new year, I'd like to go back and underscore two significant developments that Matt covered over the holidays -- they're both really important.
First, in a video I flagged as "must watch" on Twitter, CBS News delved into the personal finances of three families across the country to determine how the new tax law will impact them. Each household cut distinct profiles; a low-income single mother in North Carolina, a pair of middle-income married educators in Rhode Island, and married small business owners with three kids in California. One thing that all three families had in common: Anxiety about the GOP plan. None of them were optimistic about how the new system will affect their pocketbooks, with two families explicitly anticipating a tax hike. This reflects widespread public opposition to the bill, driven by aggressive misinformation from the Left. When an accountant ran the actual numbers, however, all three households discovered that their tax burden was going down. Watch the entire thing:
Breaking news: @CBSThisMorning asked three families for their tax returns and found that all three would receive tax cuts next year because of the #TaxCutsAndJobsAct. pic.twitter.com/xnGvTgV3bJ— Senate Republicans (@SenateGOP) December 22, 2017
This really should not be a surprising outcome in the least, given that 80 percent of filers will see tax reductions under the bill -- yet this number cruncher's mathematical verdicts came as happy relief to these taxpayers, who'd succumbed to relentless propaganda and media malpractice. But reality did not comport with Democratic talking points. National Review's David French analyzes the importance of the CBS news segment:
Please watch this. The surprise and relief on these taxpayers’ faces is palpable. I wonder why they’re so surprised that their taxes are going down? https://t.co/23GR6auqWj— David French (@DavidAFrench) December 22, 2017
This is exactly the dynamic Republicans are hoping for in 2018. Democrats and many members of the media relentlessly claimed the bill would hurt the middle class. They called it a “giveaway” to corporate America and to the very rich. Polls indicated that large numbers of Americans actually thought their taxes would increase. In other words, the public debate served mainly to obscure the truth and conceal the benefits to working families. So what happens when reality intervenes and Americans by the millions see their take-home pay increase? The GOP’s hope is that it will lead to a public reconsideration and a rebound in Republican fortunes at the polls. And that’s certainly possible. There has been an enormous amount of doom-mongering in the media and online, and if Republicans can keep America safe and prosperous in the coming year, and if family fortunes continue to improve, then some of the hysteria may lose its bite. Eventually people tune out Chicken Little.
Click through to read his alternate scenario, which should concern a party that already trails heavily on the generic Congressional ballot. Meanwhile, Vermont Socialist Bernie Sanders -- who falsely described the Republican tax bill as a "massive attack" on the middle class -- was forced to admit that actually, 91 percent of middle class earners will receive a tax cut under this "massive attack," calling it a "very good thing." What a rhetorical shift:
.@jaketapper: “Next year, 91% of middle income Americans will receive a tax cut. Isn’t that a good thing?”@BernieSanders: “Yeah, it is a very good thing. And that’s why we should’ve made the tax cuts for the middle class permanent” #CNNSOTU https://t.co/ei8xTHGo1E— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) December 24, 2017
Ninety-one percent. Bernie's complaint about the law is that the individual rate cuts were not made permanent. Republicans built in a "sunset" date for the tax cuts (a point we've addressed multiple times) so that they would hit certain revenue and budgetary targets in order to comply with reconciliation rules. Permanent tax cuts would have shown up as more lost revenue, thus growing deficits larger than their budget rules would allow. Senate Democrats, well aware of this dynamic, offered an amendment to make the cuts permanent, which would have blown up the bill (yes, Republicans could have radically altered the bill, trading away other measures they believe will spur economic growth to make the individual rate cuts permanent). Republicans voted it down. But remember: The only reason that the GOP was forced to play these numbers games was because they needed to pass the bill with a simple majority. Why? Zero Democrats in either chamber were willing to go along with their plan. Now that the bill has been passed and signed into law, and considering that Democrats got a lot of mileage out of the "corporate cuts are permanent, but individual cuts expire" attack, Rich Lowry has a good idea:
First thing Republicans should do when they are back is make Democrats vote on extending all the middle-class tax cuts https://t.co/YVSd9q8XLy— Rich Lowry (@RichLowry) December 24, 2017
We've been arguing all along that the "expiration date" exploited by liberals to advance deeply misleading and cherry-picked claims about the legislation was always a fiction. Recent experience and strong political incentives each dictate that middle class tax cuts will not be allowed to disappear eight years down the line. Sanders just confirmed that on CNN. If one of the most liberal members of the Senate wants those cuts to be permanent, Republicans should oblige him with a vote. Tailor a new bill very narrowly to permanently extend the new law's tax cuts that benefit working class and middle income Americans. Bring it up as a stand-alone bill, "fill the tree" on Senate amendments, then let the Democrats vote on it. If they vote yes, they'll explode one of their only reasonably-defensible arguments against the bill (their alleged concerns about deficits -- a serious issue, I might add -- are laughable) while essentially conceding how helpful the law really is to middle income Americans (contra their entire mendacious messaging strategy). If they vote no, they'll be opposing their own idea, confirming that they cynically offered it just a few weeks ago solely as a means to derail the legislative process; they'd also highlight how the Democratic Party is the only party standing in the way of avoiding the future middle class tax hike about which Congressional Democrats say they're so terribly worried. Jam 'em, Paul and Mitch.
I'll leave you with a few additional examples of the misperceptions and lies that have taken root, which bear no resemblance to reality. First, I had a liberal relative in California inform me over the holidays that the majority of Californians will see tax increases because of the Republican law. In fact, 87 percent of Californians will receive a tax cut in 2019, with a vast majority (67 percent) still in the "winner" column even in 2027 -- after the unlikely "expiration" of cuts. The story I linked cites a poll showing a majority of California voters opposing a law that will directly benefit nearly nine in ten taxpayers. And then there's this bonkers column, which attempts to recast a sweeping tax cut -- benefiting 80 percent of households, and reducing taxes on average across every income group -- as "by far" the "largest tax increase" in American history. This is upside-down, pants-on-fire, utterly false, propaganda:
Criticisms of the tax bill are growing increasingly unhinged and bizarre.
Apparently the bill's legitimate criticisms (of which there are several) are not sufficiently apocalyptic.https://t.co/8dNxZZCXcC— Brian Riedl (@Brian_Riedl) December 23, 2017
The column's author and his editors should be embarrassed to have run these lies. And then there's this:
Two viral #taxreform tweets -- one from a celebrity, one from a random dude -- have been shared & liked hundreds of thousands of times. They're both factually false. Tax law maintained teacher/supply deduction, and SS/Medicaid sent no such letters based on invented claim: pic.twitter.com/HJfRGMFKnL— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) December 24, 2017
The sheer volume of lies and misinformation flying around about this law is frustrating and very telling.
Good thinking, but I do question giving the Democrats a chance to hog credit for the tax cuts. Which you know they would do, before the election, with big MSM support. So the timing should perhaps be after the November election. With the planned vote on the matter announced in late October, perhaps. Why give the Dems any chance to put their fingerprints on a good Republican law???
Good thinking, but I do question giving the Democrats a chance to hog credit for the tax cuts. Which you know they would do, before the election, with big MSM support. So the timing should perhaps be after the November election. With the planned vote on the matter announced in late October, perhaps. Why give the Dems any chance to put their fingerprints on a good Republican law???
When have tax cuts not increased revenue to the treasury?
Absolutely tax cuts always increase revenue to the treasury; the “revenue neutral” comment is strictly limited to the quid pro quos in the bill.
You and I both know that neither Democrats, nor the eGOP, EVER countenance the stimulated increases in future revenues when they argue, fret, spit, lament, scratch, kick, moan and seethe about tax reductions. The rhetoric is ALWAYS “OMG!! Flaming economic Hell is going to EAT US ALL ALIVE!!”
And, if by “US” they mean themselves, I wish it would!
The leftist-prognosticated doom never comes, but that only fuels their ambition to rewrite history in the rearview mirror for the next generation. Look at the eternal damnation they’ve been heaping upon Reaganomics for nearly 40 years, now. It’s despicable! And it is who the Dems are; all the way to the abominable, death-eating core.
“These tax cuts have to be paid for,” is The Swamp crying out for preservation of the establishment-dominated status puke, and it’s a philosophy embedded in this bill as a sop to the Democrats and the eGOP. BUT, with the full knowledge that they’re full of crap, and future revenues will far outstrip “costs” of the tax reductions the bill enacts.
Even Bernie Sanders has the wits to understand, and now openly admit, that “...we should’ve made the tax cuts for the middle class permanent.” He’s NEVER going to say that if he doesn’t already know that there’s a tidal wave of revenue coming that is being stimulated by private-sector growth driven by tax cuts in this bill.
So, EXCLUSIVE of burgeoning future growth-based revenues, this bill is revenue neutral.
In Realville; it’s a boon to the Treasury and the citizenry alike.
And The Swamp already has big plans to squander it, and then paint the negative FedGov balance sheet economics of that as a failure of this in hopes of never seeing any more of this sort of bill, ever again.
Very good point
And yet Congress couldn’t bring itself to make the tax cuts permanent.
The truth of the wealth redistribution of the tax reform. What, nobody read the bil before going full tilt for it, huh? Lol... the billions of dollars the people who pay zero, will be much, much, much more. Read the details, instead of the spin version.
There are some great things in it, but it has too much redistribution of middle class money for me. Did you really think Dems voted for something less than their dream tax scheme?
The devil is in the details. And I haven’t even looked at it’s 2027 timeline.
Now just a cotton pickin’ minit here. Let’s be fair. Sure, the poor and the middle class got a few crumbs from the table. But the bottom line is, THE RICH HAVEN’T BEEN BROUGHT LOW! yet. This is unacceptable. What’s good for General Motors is bad for America, because it means capitalism is alive and well and the means of production are out of the hands of the proletariat. How much longer can we all suffer? When will we have a worker’s paradise like Cuba and Venezuela do. Your Joe six pack goes on his vacation to his in-laws, or buys a new laptop and says to Fuhrer Trump, “thank you, milord, for your generosity this year.” And THAT is the real disaster that Nancy Pelosi is warning us of. Unfortunately, Joe six pack’s vote is not canceled out by the votes of all the dead and fictitious people that the DNC in its wisdom knows absolutely nothing about. And if things keep going this way, Fuhrer Trump will win a second term. None of the slanders have stuck. And now it’s the economy, stupid. Where are the four horsemen when we need them to win an election? Why hasn’t Beelzebub rewarded our sacrifices of crack babies and aborted fetuses? Why won’t any TEA partiers go postal?
Caveat: All “just a cotton pickin’ minit” posts are intrinsically sarcastic in nature. No sarc tab should be necessary, and if I were to put one at the bottom of the post, the dramatic effect for which I’m striving would be marred. This caveat will be repeated as needed; i.e., whenever a post is so over the top that it might get me zotted if taken seriously.
Thanks for the reply. Reaganomics was called the completely made-up term “trickle-down economics.” The size of the economy tripled and the started calling the 80’s the “decade of greed.” The stupidity of their voters is shocking. Without misplaced envy they have no argument.
BOOM shaka laka laka BOOM
The media deliberately and intentionally ginned up anxiety over this. They never explained how this was going to put pressure on high tax states to stop raising taxes so much.
Currently, high tax states are forcing the entire country to lighten the load on their taxpayers. This will make it harder for the states to keep raising taxes and pushing the tax burden onto unsuspecting residents of other states. I wonder if the public is able to understand this. Afer all, it’s a two part idea and that seems to be too hard for the folks to understand.
Also, the media deliberately and intentionally refused to say that this feature of the new tax law would make high-earners pay more. They couldn’t reveal this truth because they have been saying “tax cuts for the rich.” Filthy liars.
This is a fallacy. The Federal burden on individual taxpayers has nothing to do with local and state taxes. The person in Texas will pay their taxes to the Federal and the amount will not be determine by what someone in New Jersey pays in state/local income taxes.
That "point" you refer to has name, it is called the Laffer Curve inflection point which the we are to the extreme right of at the present . There is no danger of passing to the left of that point in out lifetimes. Point "B" is the inflection point where revenues would decrease. No danger of that happeneing!
“Only in Washington DC could they brag about a tax cut that wouldn’t even cover a dinner out for the pol and his wife.”
Say what? You consider peoples’ tax break should be used to fund a politician’s dinner?
I ran a new tax law calculator on my income and I’m saving $4,643 in taxes next year. IOW, I’m getting a $4,643 pay raise starting in February solely due to this tax law.
Forty-six hundred. This pays for our seven day Eastern Caribbean Daddy-Daughter cruise on Harmony of the Seas next June.
Pretty safe to say my tax law benefit beats the c@#$ out of your imaginary dinner benefit for a politician.
(see what ya get for pimping BS on FR?)
Two enemies of free people, Bernie and CBS, forced to state the obvious.
I am repeatedly shocked at how ignorant some people are on basic economic principles.
The statement you took exception with “This will make it harder for the states to keep raising taxes and pushing the tax burden onto unsuspecting residents of other states.” refers to elimination of the state and local tax payment deduction for federal tax calculation. IOW, the MA taxpayer with $25k in state and local taxes can no longer deduct that $25K from their ITEMIZED federal tax return. This places their federal taxes in a +25K bracket. However, since that bracket’s rate was cut it it’s not a full bracket increase.
The itemized deduction for state and local taxes applies to high tax states. Low tax states do not see a benefit in this deduction and in effect are subsidizing high tax states as they’re paying full tax.
The poster is absolutely correct. This strips wealthy residents of liberal blue states (huge dem donor base) of a substantial itemized tax benefit. In doing so it lays bare the exorbitant- state and local taxes required to support Leftist governments and policies. At the inevitable next tax hike those blue states might see some of their wealthier Dems bolting the state and even the party. In effect defunding leftist governments.
Lemme break it down further.
If I lived in MA at my income level I would file an itemized federal return, adding in as many expenses as I could to work down my taxable income prior to federal tax calculation. In high tax states the itemized deductions, such as state and local taxes, are much more than the standard deduction of non-itemized federal returns. So high-tax states compensate their taxpayers by providing them a means of writing down their federal tax bill.
But since a live in FL, a no-income tax state, the itemized deductions for state and local taxes (SALT) is less than potential itemized deductions so I file a non-itemized return.
The overall effect of not itemizing or having high taxes which I could deduct is that I am careful to keep an eye on my local and state spending because it’s a direct charge placed upon me. I receive no benefit from them raising taxes unlike blue states. So I make sure our government spending is kept in check in FL. So across the country the elimination of the SALT itemized deduction makes it hard for American Leftists to raise state and local taxes to fund their political initiatives while also making their existing spending and taxes subject to greater public review and accountability.
Armageddon (for the American Left) indeed!
Don’t listen to her. She’s a bitter never-Trumper who can’t get over the primaries.
I am defined as an upper income earner in a blue state that will be hit hard... and I am as conservative as they come...
Regardless, I don’t give a freaking rats a$$ about the “supply” of the mostly illegal government. I care about the American People keeping most of their hard-earned money - THEIR supply. You dismantle the unconstitutional 80% of the feds and have flat tax of 10%-15%, and we’d be well on our way to what should be the goal of the Right: the restoration of our Free Constitutional Republic.
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.