Posted on 12/19/2017 6:52:36 AM PST by GonzoII
Thanks. So it has to do with deficit projections into the future.
I’ve not heard anyone in the media explain this simple fact. They report that the tax cuts expire years from.now, and that a future Congress and president will deal with it then. But they didn’t say why the bill was written that way in the first place.
So I feel this is an example of the media not doing their job of explaining some of the nuts and bolts of the legislative process.
Honestly, I dont think they should be doing anything with the tax rates until we get the deficit back to a reasonable rate.
If they dont want to do that, we should reduce the corporate tax rate to just about half of the international average. That way it would be beneficial to bring the money home.
Anyway, most people dont pay income taxes...and the corporations will plow the money into stock buy backs.
Nothing is going to stimulate this economy. We are running on high octane right now. Add in a little interest rate expansion and this is going to choke out pretty quickly.
The wild card is a war. Somewhere.
U.S. middle class constitutes around 45% of the population. What does this say about the Republican tax bill?
So what. The middle class doesn't pay 23% of the taxes. I believe the top 20% pay 95% of the taxes.
You make a good point!
#2 I think you found their secret.
Raise taxes and no deductions for you!
Next the gov’ts will charge you per mile of road driven and you will get to pay gas taxes. Gotta pay for them pensions.
“Why did they write the law so that the tax cuts expire?”
My guess is you can blame the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, which officially “scores” tax cuts.
The problem is that tax cut proponents can never convince the committee’s “nonpartisan” analysts to include enough economic growth in their projections to avoid projected deficits in the out years.
The only solution is to agree to sunset provisions in order to limit the scope of the committees’ dire predictions, and thus make the tax cut politically palatable.
The good news is that a temporary vs. permanent distinction is somewhat spurious, since all legislation can be reversed by future legislation.
The anti tax cut bias on the joint committee is a real problem though, because their low growth assumptions torpedo the very tax cuts that would provide the growth, and thus become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I hope GOP leadership has a plan for stacking the committee with more analysts who support the belief that tax cuts unleash economic growth.
“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.”
You’re the one that needs to look: https://www.statista.com/statistics/203183/percentage-distribution-of-household-income-in-the-us/
You’ll see that 27.7 percent of households earn more than $100,000.
ONE-TERM DONNY
So desperate to sign a Bill he gave up the WH and the GOP majority, will never get to sign another one.
Sad!!!!
.
You’re having a tantrum over fake news.
By whose analysis does the middle class get 23% ???
This is RINO propaganda!
Most of the corporations are owned by the middle class.
.
I saw a list last night that place it at 17%.
I wonder where these folks get their figures, because Just about every list was different.
About three years ago I looked into this. Have we done a lot better since then or did I tap into a bad source.
.
We also need to note that those that pay no tax can’t expect a tax cut, and that is close to half of the families in the US.
.
I dismissed that 23%, because the top taxpayers pay so much of the total percentage.
Of course it looks like they’re getting more of a break, but it’s because they pay so much.
They we’re forced to write a tax bill that was temporary in order to get it passed with a simple majority.
Anything permanent would have required 60 votes in Senate.
If we can hold a majority they will be renewed.
“you’ll find that people making $100k per year are in the top 1-2% of the income households in the U.S.”
No, you won’t find that.
The top 5% of households is $214,000.
The top 2% is $360,000.
The top 1% is $440,000.
Well,... with the earned income tax credit, those who paid no taxes at all can expect refunds. I think Rubio was trying to make them larger too.
.
>> “Well,... with the earned income tax credit, those who paid no taxes at all can expect refunds.” <<
And that’s a fact that they’ll be taking to the bank!
.
You both are right to call me on my claim. And Norwaypinesavage, you were right to turn my admonition back on me also.
I did a workup on this a few years back. My recollection of my findings were as stated. Sadly, my claim here was off base. It wasn’t intentional, but it wound up that way.
When I did the workup on this I was studying a hypothetical family both earning around $100k. This would result in a $200k family income. It had been my take that the $99k figure came in in the low 1 or 2% top category. Well,... wrong!
I try to make accurate claims on the forum. When I’m off, I appreciate when folks point me toward the truth.
Yes, it’s a pain, but I’d rather the truth prevail.
Take care.
Exactly!
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.