Posted on 12/19/2017 6:52:36 AM PST by GonzoII
Middle-income households will get $61 billion in tax cuts in 2019 under the Republican tax plan poised for passage this week, according to an analysis released late Monday by Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation.
That amounts to 23% of the tax cuts that go directly to individuals. By 2027, however, these households would get a net tax increase, because tax cuts are set to expire under the proposed law.
The calculations are based on JCT estimates of cuts going to households that earn $20,000 to $100,000 a year in wages, dividends and benefits. Those households account for about half of all U.S. tax filers, with nearly a quarter making more and a quarter making less.
(Excerpt) Read more at wsj.com ...
As soon as they raise the taxes back, we get our deductions back right?
Ha-ha
Last I heard, no.
Build the wall and pass the Raise Act to cut all illegal and legal and temp immigration. That would effectively give all of us a bigger tax cut and save our legacy culture without bringing dependency or going deeper into debt.
Ah, you remember what happened to us after the Reagan tax cuts, too! Revenue to the fed government went up, Congress spent it all and more, lied saying the tax cuts caused the shortfall, so, of course, they had to raise the rates to save the budget. But... the deductions that we lost were never restored. Funny how the taxpayers always get hosed.
“Funny how the taxpayers always get hosed.”
More specifically, employees and all with ordinary income get hosed, unless they make so little that the feds take our income and pay them for being poor.
Elect a Republican and the tax cuts will be renewed or made permanent. Elect a Democrat and the tax cuts will expire and you will get a big tax increase.
The WSJ thinks that middle class is a household earning between 20K and 100K. I guess that means that any family earning above 100K is rich, and a family earning 21K is middle class. Boy do they need a recalibration.
Why did they write the law so that the tax cuts expire? Why aren’t they permanent to start with? I recall something similar happened with Bush era tax cuts, that they expired after a number of years.
Because the Ruling Class of uniparty swampocrats thinks that we exist to serve them. They will bend you over a barrel and XXXX you in the XXX every chance they can.
Yeah, I’m always surprised to learn that we are rich pulling in a little over $100k. But that’s where we’ve been for awhile and our tax burden is big. We’re in that category that did everything the way we were supposed to.....and now we’re paying for it.
The vast majority of people pay no Income Tax until they cross the $50k threshold.
If there are kids, the level is higher.
Once your economic and trade policies have hollowed out the real middle class, you have to define it downward so you can say that you still have a big middle class.
The expiring individual tax cuts were included in the bill so it complies with Senate rules that legislation can only be passed with a simple majority if it doesn’t drive up the deficit 10 years after passage. Of course, that could have spread the pain out to Corporations too, but they know who they serve.
Take a good look at an income chart sometime.
When yo do, you’ll find that people making $100k per year are in the top 1-2% of the income households in the U.S.
That’s why it’s difficult to classify folks making over that amount as middle class.
I do believe that $20k should be moved up to at least $40k.
U.S. middle class constitutes around 45% of the population. What does this say about the Republican tax bill?
Worrying about something that will expire in 8 years is a little nuts. A lot of things can happen between now and then. In particular, if the tax cuts work as proposed they could be extended.
Would you complain about a pension that would take care of you for 8 years but after that you would have to do something else? Alimony works like that and millions of people accept the terms in a divorce settlement with the idea that a “bird in the hand” is better than nothing. Makes sense does it not?
It says it’s not what they have purported it to be. As usual. That they’re just rearranging the deck chairs. Why we expected anything else from Republicans is the question. They don’t have the stones the Dems have. Either that or they’re perfectly happy raising taxes on middle income people to pay for more givemethats.
A lot of numbers here:
This a couple of years old, but I believe that 20% of the _households_ have income above $100K.
The majority of those are in the high state income tax/high real estate cost states like CA and NY, so their money does not go far.
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.