Posted on 02/09/2025 10:21:17 AM PST by CFW
President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans are negotiating a tax package that a budget watchdog group estimated could cost anywhere from $5 trillion to $11.2 trillion over the next decade.
A series of tax policy changes that Trump supports appear to have broad support among Republicans in Congress. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has released a study that projects the cost of each item over a 10-year period. The possible tax changes are expected to be included in a budget reconciliation package, which allows the GOP to bypass the filibuster in the Senate, where they lack a 60-vote threshold. It is unclear at this time if the tax provisions will be passed in one large reconciliation bill or as part of a two-bill approach.
By the numbers According to the CRFB, extending the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Trump's 2017 tax reform package, would cost between $3.9 trillion and $4.8 trillion.
Under the CRFB study, expanding the State and Local Tax deduction (SALT) would cost from $200 billion to $1.2 trillion.
Eliminating taxes on tips, which Trump campaigned heavily on enacting, would result in a $100 billion to $550 billion reduction in federal tax revenue, according to the study;
Exempting overtime pay from federal taxes would cost $250 billion up to $3.0 trillion;
Exempting Social Security benefits from federal taxes would cost between $550 billion and $1.5 trillion;
Lowering taxes for U.S. production of certain goods would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion;
Reducing tax benefits for stadium owners and ending the carried interest loophole would save about $100 billion, according to the group.
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
I hope they continue on and will document all this waste fraud. To the extent there is fraud they definitely should claw back that money.
After all the fraud that’s been exposed recently, it’s going to be a laugher when the Democrats tell us that we can’t afford the tax cuts. And of course they will continue to scold us and tell us we have to pay our fair share.
You got it! Coming right up. I'm refunding all your wasted tax money right now ... (click, click, click) ... "SYSTEM CODE J20955511067: YOU ARE LOCKED OUT OF SYSTEM!"
Whoops! Looks like the Oblamea-appointed Judge blocked my access to the government payment records system too. Sorry. I tried. ;)
Ah yes, it begins. The “over ten years” crap.
Let’s interpret:
////////////////////////////////////
Eliminating taxes on tips, which Trump campaigned heavily on enacting, would result in a $100 billion to $550 billion reduction in federal tax revenue, according to the study
///////////////////////////////////
That will, in year 1, reduce tax revenue $10-55Billion. No, don’t stomp your feet about tax rate cuts raising revenue because the economy booms. If that’s true at all, it won’t be true on day 1, or month 1 or year 1 — and that $30ishB is on year 1’s tax revs reduction and increase of deficit. INCREASE.
//////////////////
Exempting overtime pay from federal taxes would cost $250 billion up to $3.0 trillion;
/////////////////
Year 1 that is $25B to $300B, added to the deficit via lower tax revs.
////////////////////
Exempting Social Security benefits from federal taxes would cost between $550 billion and $1.5 trillion;
////////////////////
That’s $55B-$150B in year 1, reduction in revenue.
Add it up, $280B ballpark year 1 decreased tax revenue.
Inflation is 3% for govt spending. Of $6.1T. That’s 180B of inflation increase in spending, before you even imagine you’re going to get cuts through Congress.
Interest on the debt, $1.1T.
This is not going to work. It is all crap. The GOP won’t get anything through the House. Total failure because there is no solution that does not include eradication of huge population %’s and confiscation of their estates.
Oh no - the costs!
Just like calling all the wasteful spending “investments”
It’s always a COST when we want to keep our money.
Why isn’t it reasonable to expect estimates of the “cost” of these provisions to be accurate within ranges of less than factors of 3 to 12 as they are?
Remember it is said and believed by many that Reagan cut government spending. He did not! He cut the growth of government spending. Meaning if a department was schedule to receive 4% growth in its budget Reagan got it cut to 3% or 2%.
That’s it, the program budget still grew!
Note: The above is not to be taken as a criticism of Reagan’s effort. It’s just an example of how the left distorts facts to suit their interests.
Do that one.
Yep, that is the definition of a “cut” in DC, a reduction in the rate of increase in spending.
The mindset in DC is that all money belongs to the government. The fact that they benevolently allow us to keep some of our own money is a blessing.
This mindset is changing. Rapidly.
I agree with all the proposed tax cuts except exempting overtime pay from federal taxes. If passed this will lead to a lot of abuse of the overtime system. It will encourage workers to be non-productive so there will be more overtime available.
Not at all in favor of reducing taxes on overtime. Cops and others are retirement banking getting rich enough on OT already and in addition to their stupid low retirement ages. At least delay their benefit start age to their 60’s.
Absolutely! Most of the abuse would be by government employees in addition to their current abuse!
Wow. The Party of the Working Man wants the Working Man to pay more taxes.
It seems to me that allowing people who live on mostly tips would improve service to better earn their tips and more people would patronize the establishment making it more profitable thereby increasing the amount of taxes derived from the business owner. They don’t take that into consideration. Also 8 months after 50000 former government employees who took the buyout might be working in jobs that are driven by tips. They take the 8 free months but they don’t realize that the Biden economy wasn’t geared towards private sector employment. 50000 former government workers without jobs working in service industries.
Regarding the OT exclusion. I can see that there are many ways to abuse that exclusion and the methods to stop it would need to be very intrusive. For example, I control my salary. What’s to stop me from working 180 hours one week and then taking off 3 weeks?
Regarding the SS exclusion, there are a number of benefits beyond income tax savings that would flow. First, the potential for taxpayers to do Roth conversions to remove future tax on IRA’s increases without SS being taxed. The extra cost of medicare for higher income taxpayers would be reduced. Some states that provide assistance to seniors for property tax, utilities etc, may qualify for programs that they couldn’t otherwise.
For me, and maybe others who have student loans from children, that are income based would be required to pay a lesser amount.
In addition, the marginal rate on SS is higher for many seniors because of the way SS is added back as other income increases.
Absolutely! we were funding these pukes and their mentally ill agenda for decades time for them to go to jail and shut it all down and redistribute the money they stole
It will encourage workers to be non-productive so there will be more overtime available.
Sounds like a managerial problem, not a taxpayer problem. My company gets bonuses for meeting certain goals, one of which is minimizing or eliminating OT (depending on the season). The bonus is distributed among the staff that were working at the time the bonus was earned.
"Oh, you pulled overtime last pay period instead of turning the work over to the oncoming shift? OK, fewer hours for you this pay period." is a good incentive to minimize OT.
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.