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.
No I said the politician that brags about how big the tax cut is, is a phoney.
In what world could you imagine I said we should give our tax cut to the politician for dinner?
Do you shop for groceries in your home? You may have noticed that a quality Apple can sell for a couple bucks, or that a nice steak can run you 15 to 20 dollars unless you spring for a Wagyu at $200.00 plus a pound. Even the lonely potato can cost near a dollar a pound. Hamburger goes for near $4.00.00 and you think a thousand dollars is a big cut.
I am thrilled that you are getting more than that back but you will likely not be typical. In any case the article specified a thousand dollars and that is what I addressed.
Oops $4.00.00 = $4.00
I’m glad, but disappointed also. God bless President Trump for keeping his promise to get a tax cut passed, or at least close to passed, THIS YEAR despite the resistance in both the GOP and the DNC. It is astonishing how much blood sweat and tears it takes for these corrupt politicians to make such small cuts.
However, the cuts should be MUCH greater (10-15% flat), the brackets should disappear, and the so-called “Corporate Tax” (a hidden individual tax which % should be added in calculating individuals’ tax rate) should be abolished. Launch our economy into the stratosphere and turn the IRS into a storefront.
Much more work needs to be done. This should only be the first shot over the bow.
Analysis from Forbes below...
And here are the rates for married taxpayers filing jointly:
Income Level....Current Rate….Proposed New Rate
$0 - $19,050 ..............10%...............10%
$19,050-$77,400 .......15% ..............12%
$77,400-$156,150 .....25% ..............22%
$156,150-$165,000 ...28% ..............22%
$165,000-$237,950 ...28% ..............24%
$237,950-$315,000 ...33% ..............24%
$315,000-$400,000 ...33% ..............32%
$400,000-$424,950 ...33% ..............35%
$424,950-$480,050 ...35% ..............35%
$480,050-$600,000 ...39.6%............35%
> $600,000 39.6%............................37%
“In what world could you imagine I said we should give our tax cut to the politician for dinner?”
The world of itsahoot? I lifted the example from your post where a taxpayer’s tax savings is metaphorically used to pay for a politician’s dinner. Us taxpayers already resent politicians taking our money to use on themselves and their own. I resented the metaphor and simply called you on it as any conservative should.
The thousand dollar savings from the article represents very low earnings or very high earnings in a high tax state. To get that low of a savings the participants have to be cherry-picked from low wage earners and high wage, high tax earners. I.e. democrats. IOW the author cherry-picked respondents for shock value. Many middle class conservatives already ran the numbers and are aware of our savings -as well as what variables and conditions contribute to savings.
Most middle class earners living in non-high tax states receive a much larger federal tax savings than $1,000. Percent-wise my tax savings is 34%. I’m an average middle class earner in a low-tax state. If other tax payers like a 34% fed tax bill reduction they should tell their states to cut taxes so they can use the (now doubled) standard deduction rather than itemizing for minimal benefit. No middleclass or below should be itemizing unless they’re running a business. If they are they should blame their state and local taxes.
Thankfully, all this murkiness should disappear in February.
No I metaphorically painted a picture of a politician that brags about how much he did for the little guy by pointing out the tax cut he was bragging about wouldn't cover a nice dinner out for the Congressman.
Maybe I should have included the Congressman and another crook and spouse in the deal. The point was it was very critical of the Congressman to claim that a thousand dollar cut is just not life changing money, nice but of little effect on life style.
If you don't get the difference then I can't help you.
All you want is “Free Trade” Which is destroying US industry. Sorry, but ALL of your Constitutional freedoms end at the border of the USA. This includes importation of foreign made product into the USA. It’s not a protected freedom, actually the opposite is true.
You’re cherry-picking numbers just like the author.
Your $1,000 in tax savings does not represent either the average or mean Federal tax savings of the Tax Law.
You sound like the critics of GWB’s tax refund. “Oh, it’s only a $1,300 rebate”. Do you similarly criticize Christmas gifts? “Oh, I could have gotten this on sale for much less than what you paid.
And you’re neglecting to consider the effects of the 14% reduction in corporate tax rate. That means there’s 14% more funds available to pay for salaries and expansion. IOW pay raises because of increased market competition between corporations. This was common in the 80s, 90s and early 2000s. Pay has been stagnant for 8 years. All the money went to the Sponsors of the =private corporations= DNC and RNC which fund and control politicians.
If you are speaking of the withholding of taxes from paychecks, that was instituted during WW2 to pay for the c0st of war.
Federal workers will not get 3x the private cost of living, Trump has already committed to 1.9. According to most studies on the issue, the private workforce is overpaid by 35%. The automatic increase in fedpay, by formula calls for a 25% increase this year which the President rightly says is “unwarranted.”
Ultimately pay is set by Congress and I do not believe it will oppose Trump.
I don't know how to comment on an article without quoting the article.
Please pay attention.
I was ridiculing the fat cat Congressman that thought a thousand dollars was life changing money for the little people. I merely pointed out that only a hypocrite living in DC, that would likely spend a grand on dinner out at a fine restaurant, could talk up the thousand dollars like it was life changing.
You come along claiming you are saving $4,000.00 and are insulted. Get over it and learn to read.
I am pretty sure that your $4,000.00 or even the $1,000.00 referred to in the article is considerably more than Social Security cost of living increase has been over the last 9 years. Medicare has continued to go up.
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.