1. Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
    Dismiss Notice
  2. There are no markets
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 6/24/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1256.40 Silver $16.64 Oil $43.01 USD $96.94
  4. "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"
    Dismiss Notice

Trump's Tax Plan

Discussion in 'Politics Forum (Local/National/World)' started by searcher, Sep 27, 2017.



  1. CrimsonGuardJay

    CrimsonGuardJay Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    1,195
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have to tell people on the phone to "NOT believe me..." and then direct them to numerous online sources, including insuranceinfo.org where it actually says IN BLACK AND WHITE that the penalty is optional, and the IRS does NOT have the authority to collect it unless you voluntarily pay it, etc etc.

    Believe me, my job is just one changing strategy after another.
     
    Joe King likes this.
  2. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump's support for the Republican tax plan betrays his rural voters

    The legislation could be devastating for family farmers from areas that Trump draws strong support.

    by Rudy Arredondo / Nov.29.2017 / 10:33 AM ET



    President Trump and Congressional Republicans are coming after rural America.

    That might seem like an odd statement if you look at the map of election results from 2016, but you only have to glimpse at the Republican tax plan and the budget priorities of the politicians in power to know that hardworking rural farmers are going to be losing out to large corporate polluters even more than they already do.

    "Flyover country" is more than a constituency for politicians to care about every four years or a punchline for some urbanite would-be comic's joke. Rural America is where many of us live, work and raise our children; it is where we steward the lands we farm and harvest the food we eat.

    Right now on small farms in places most of our elected officials will never visit, Latino family farmers and ranchers are doing their best to promote sensible policies that care for the fragile ecosystems on which rural farms rely. The productivity and success of small farms goes hand-in-hand with common-sense standards to protect farmworkers from pesticides and our families from contaminated water and air pollution.

    But in an effort to give massive tax breaks to large wealthy industrial corporations, Republicans would make life harder for Latino family farmers and ranchers (among many others in rural America). Current provisions in the House Republican bill — including the elimination of a program that makes it affordable to replace old, rusting equipment by allowing farmers to deduct the interest on their purchases — would hurt a range of farmers who depend on the ability to deduct interest on many items to keep their agricultural business afloat.

    Estimates further show that the House and Senate tax plans would each contribute more than $1.5 trillion to the federal debt over the next decade, putting Congress and the American taxpayer on the hook to make up that revenue. That likely means that the Republican tax cuts would result in yet-to-be-determined drastic cuts to other programs — particularly ones that protect working families and our environment.

    For example, cutting the budget for the Environmental Protection Agency by nearly a third (as EPA Administration and President Trump have already vowed to do) would make it harder for scientists and environmental experts to do their jobs, like cleaning up toxic chemical and pesticides and enforcing the Clean Water Rule that protects vulnerable communities from contamination.

    And, the Trump administration has already begun work to repeal vital public health standards that keep our drinking water safe if it comes from sources fed by wetlands and seasonal streams. More than one-third the U.S population gets at least some of its drinking water from small streams and no community, including farmers trying to grow their small businesses, can function if local water infrastructure is at risk. Future cuts to public health protections like these in order to offset tax cuts for billionaires and dirty corporations would weaken small farms in this country — and that’s not something rural America can afford.

    The cost of the Republican tax plan could also make less revenue available to support conservation programs in the 2018 Farm Bill. That piece of the broader agricultural legislation is something on which farmers and ranchers rely to reduce nutrient pollution in their lands and keep watersheds clean.

    We need tax policies that will not threaten the health of our rural residents (and their economies in the process). Those of us who represent rural economies are living proof that we do not have to accept the false choice between a healthy environment and a thriving economy. Politicians can, and must, choose both.

    But they don't, and that's why we are troubled by the ongoing assaults on the health of our families and our communities just to benefit wealthy corporations and special interests.

    The agriculture industry is large and complex. Small and medium-sized business owners’ voices are often drowned out by the big polluters — represented by organizations like the Farm Bureau, which does not speak for all farmers and ranchers — whose drive for profit often results in weakened health regulations. We urge leaders in Congress to support tax reforms and budget policies that protect the health and safety of our communities in rural America, and to reject anything that sells us out and guts commonsense health protections.

    Rudy Arredondo is the founder and president of the National Latino Farmers & Ranchers Trade Association. He has spent his lifetime defending the rights of Latinos around the United States.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opini...-tax-plan-betrays-his-rural-voters-ncna824291
     
  3. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    " eliminate....allowing farmers to deduct the interest on their purchases" has me lost. Interest is a cost of doing business and, as such, reduces the gross income derived from farming.
    Unless I am all wet somehow, this is just another slam by one of the usual leftists that don't know what they are talking about when it comes to taxes. Costs of doing business are always taken into account unless they are illegal or against public policy.
     
    Ensoniq likes this.
  4. CrimsonGuardJay

    CrimsonGuardJay Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    1,195
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Whenever a liberal tries to talk about taxes I pretty much stop listening. They either are completely clueless or are trying to strawman or vilify someone for no other reason than their own purposes.

    Probably the most glaring example of this would be campaign 2016... donald trump suffered a $950 million LOSS in 1995, and thus, was able to mitigate this loss for 10 years and not pay taxes, but throughout the entire campaign it was "HE DOESNT PAY TAXES RRREEEEEEEEEEE!!!!"


    .... how the fuck does one pay taxes on losses? More importantly, why arent you asking "why do any of us pay taxes?"
     
  5. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    La Colombe founder: What every CEO knows but won't tell you about the proposed tax bill | Opinion
    Updated: November 28, 2017 — 5:32 AM EST
    by Todd Carmichael, For Philly.com


    Sen. Bob Casey (D., Pa.) is right about the tax bill currently working its way through Congress when he says, “Congressional Republicans have taken great pains to spin their tax scheme as great for the middle class, but a few marginal changes don’t change the fact that their plan is fundamentally a massive giveaway to the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.” And every CEO knows he’s right.

    How do I know what CEOs are thinking? I’m one of them.

    I’ve grown a Philadelphia-based small business into a business with cafes and industrial facilities in six states and the District of Columbia. I’ve placed canned draft lattes on market shelves in every corner of the country. And I employ hundreds of people in almost every income tax bracket. Along the way, I’ve learned a thing or two about how to grow a profitable business that values the people at its core and the communities where we do business.

    And I can tell you what no other CEO wants to tell you: Casey is right when he says that a half-trillion dollars of corporate tax giveaways proposed by the GOP aren’t going to do a thing for the middle class, or create a single job.

    Because what every CEO knows but won’t tell you is this: A tax break for their company simply means a fatter bottom line.

    Not jobs. Not investment. Just more money in the pockets of the folks like me.

    That’s bad policy, and it’s time to set the record straight.

    Congress is working on a bill with the goal of “tax reform” and “stimulating the economy,” with the half-trillion in corporate tax giveaways, most of which is shouldered on the middle class, whose taxes will go up. The wealthy and corporations that will benefit most from this “reform” neither need nor require it.

    This “stimulus” clearly falls within the sort of cuts one might expect when the economy needs to be goosed — typically when investment cash supply is low, when interest rates are high, or the stock market is slumping or even tumbling.

    But what every CEO knows but will not tell you is that the reverse conditions are actually true — this is not an economy to goose. If anything, the present business landscape is red hot and over-stimulated. Cash and capital are flowing heavily with unprecedented amounts of money looking for a home for investment, interest rates are extraordinarily low, and the stock market is at top-row, nosebleed heights.

    A CEO has a powerful fiduciary duty to return all profits to shareholders — not to the employees, or the suppliers, or the community and certainly not to the unemployed or left behind. Let me say that again: Profit goes to shareholders (and the CEO) and not to the employees.

    A tax code designed to increase corporate profits will benefit a single group — investors. The same investors already bathing in an unprecedented investment cash inventory and who are proportionally the most wealthy among us.

    The result for the employees, the small-business supplier, or any other member of the working or middle class is that they will see the same flat-line growth that they have for decades. By increasing the wealth at the top and ignoring the rest of America, Congress will further increase the cavernous gap between the wealthy and the working class.

    Congress is missing the majority of Americans who need a stimulus. It’s clear where the highest “Return on Investment” is, and it’s just screaming to be invested directly into the working and middle classes. Invest in people, where there is no fiduciary duty to push the stimulus to the investment class. The extra income will go toward everyday purchases, which help businesses; it goes to education, which gives us a more skilled workforce; and it gets invested in family, the true backbone of our country.

    And finally, what every CEO should tell you but won’t is that if your business is teetering on the edge of solvency and the only thing that is holding you together is the rewriting of tax code, you’re probably going to go out of business anyway. Sure, we all believe in the American Dream, but you’ve got to have a quality product, quality employees, and a business system that works to succeed. Don’t wait on Congress to destroy the middle class in tax cuts to give another fat-cat executive a bigger bottom line. I’m a CEO who knows firsthand that this won’t work.

    Casey is right to push back against giving corporations a tax break. We don’t need it. Invest where the good investments are, our people.

    Todd Carmichael is the co-founder and CEO of La Colombe Coffee Roasters. @toddcarmichael

    http://www.philly.com/philly/opinio...bill-la-colombe-todd-carmichael-20171128.html
     
  6. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    >>>>what every CEO should tell you but won’t is that if your business is teetering on the edge of solvency and the only thing that is holding you together is the rewriting of tax code, you’re probably going to go out of business anyway<<<<
    If a business is at the edge of solvency it isn't hard to see that it it probably is not paying income taxes so, to me, that comment makes no sense whatsoever...another leftest comment to be ignored in my book
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
    Ensoniq likes this.
  7. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One thing that I've been wondering is why would a billionaire businessman who has screwed over working people in his business deals, who has business ties in countries that are not too friendly to America and who owes loyalty to big business interests that helped him run for and reach the highest office in the land give 2 shits about the American taxpayer?
     
    gnome likes this.
  8. Ensoniq

    Ensoniq Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    Messages:
    6,299
    Likes Received:
    9,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Free Marketeer
    Location:
    North Carolina
    But "voluntarily paying it" includes being due a tax refund

    They were applying the refund to,the penalty without consent and that ain't voluntary in my book
     
    searcher likes this.
  9. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    4,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Just like we've recently learned with bitcoin exchanges, if you wanna keep your chit safe, don't allow unscrupulous 3rd parties to hold it for you.
     
    edsl48 likes this.
  10. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As is so often repeated here by some very experienced and intelligent individuals...if you don't hold it you don't own it .
    All in all, isn't that why many of us invest in PMs not as an investment vehicle but rather as an insurance plan for the possibility that we may see TSHTF?
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2017
  11. hammerhead

    hammerhead Not just a screen name Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,117
    Likes Received:
    2,474
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    On a speck of dust
    Read his books and you will find the answer. Unlike most politicians, DJT actually took risks with his money. Most times he won but not always. Of course the real problem is taxes and they are not going away.
     
  12. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do see a lot of potential abuse in the maximum tax of 25% on pass through earnings. For example a high earning individuals may decide to incorporate themselves and then skirt around the higher individual tax rates.
    Yes, this happens all the time not as a tax angle but I can see this coming right off the bat. Doctors and lawyers will jump right on this one
     
  13. CrimsonGuardJay

    CrimsonGuardJay Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    May 16, 2014
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    1,195
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, but luckily not a single one of my customers I have is ever due a refund, they all pay in at the end. Next point, the question on line 61 of the tax return is: did you have health insurance? Answer: yes. All 12 months, check box. Don’t want to do that? Allow one utility bill to go late ... or produce a funeral card from one relative that died that year. Even claim you had two bad months in a row and had difficulty paying household expenses. Instant exemption. Which means, no penalty. Good luck getting it.
     
    Ensoniq likes this.
  14. Ensoniq

    Ensoniq Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    Messages:
    6,299
    Likes Received:
    9,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Free Marketeer
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Good. Point.

    Also, I thought the bill had accelarated depreciation in it. If you can deduct the entire purchase rather than depreciate on an amortization schedule that's far more valuable than interest deduction

    if they start twiddling with which hard costs can be treated as costs it will make an impossibly complicated system even more insane
     
  15. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump Sells Tax Plan With False Claims
    [​IMG]
    The New York Times

    By LINDA QIU
    10 hrs ago

    WASHINGTON — At a Wednesday afternoon rally in Missouri, President Trump played up what he called the “biggest tax cuts in history” and boasted about economic growth “in a nonbraggadocious way.”

    “In fact, they’re going to say Trump is the opposite of an exaggerator,” he said of his rosy projections, in a speech full of exaggerations and falsehoods. Here’s an assessment.

    He is wrong that “for years, they haven’t been able to get tax cuts, many, many years since Reagan.”

    President Ronald Reagan, who enacted a major tax cut in 1981 and lowered tax rates again in 1986, was hardly the last president to have done so. President Bill Clinton signed the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. President George W. Bush enacted two major tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. The stimulus passed under President Barack Obama included hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts, and Mr. Obama later extended the Bush tax cuts with the American Tax Payer Relief Act of 2012.

    He inaccurately suggested the plan wouldn’t help the wealthy.

    Mr. Trump insisted that the tax bill is “not good for me” or the wealthy. Referring to Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, the president said: “I keep hearing Schumer, ‘This is for the wealthy!’ If it is, my friends don’t know about it.”

    That is not supported by most analyses of the tax plans being considered in Congress.

    Under the Senate plan, every income level would receive a tax cut in 2019, but people earning $20,000 to $30,000 annually would face a tax increase the next year, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. By 2027, most people making under $75,000 each year would see a tax increase, while those making more would continue to receive a tax cut.

    Under the House plan, every income group would see tax cuts through 2027, but the richest one-fifth of Americans would receive 56 percent to almost 75 percent of the cuts, according to the Tax Policy Center.

    Based on his 2005 tax return, Mr. Trump himself could save more than $1.1 billion under the White House tax framework, according to an analysis by The New York Times, and the same amount under the House plan, a tax expert at Marcum L.L.P. told NBC.


    He falsely called the current plan as the “biggest tax cut in the history of our country, bigger than Reagan.”

    Mr. Trump has repeated this claim at least a dozen times since October, but it has not been true of any of the tax plans released in Congress or outlined by his administration.

    A 2013 Treasury Department report assessed the size of major tax bills either as a percentage of the economy, by the reduction in federal revenue or in inflation-adjusted dollars. The 1981 Reagan tax cut is the largest under the first two metrics. It was equivalent to 2.9 percent of gross domestic product and reduced federal revenue by 13.3 percent. The 2012 Obama tax cut amounted to the largest cut in inflation-adjusted dollars: $321 billion a year.

    For Mr. Trump’s tax cut to exceed the Reagan cuts as a share of G.D.P., the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates it would need to cost roughly $6.8 trillion over 10 years. To have a larger effect on revenue, it would need to cost $5.7 trillion. No version of the current tax cut plan meets those benchmarks.

    The budget blueprint that Republicans released in mid-October, the bill passed in the House in November and the bill currently being considered in the Senate all amount to a tax cut of about $1.5 trillion over 10 years. This would place as the 12th-largest as a share of the economy.

    He falsely suggested that the stock market was previously flat.

    Mr. Trump spoke of tepid growth before he took office. “In all fairness, the stock market was going this way,” he added, drawing a flat line with his hand. The stock market has hit record highs under Mr. Trump, but the uptick began after the financial crisis in 2008.

    The link he drew between market performance and G.D.P. growth also contradicts his own comments. On Wednesday, Mr. Trump said the economy was “doing terribly” at 1.2 percent G.D.P. growth, which occurred in the first quarter of this year. But during that quarter, he jubilantly posted on Twitter about the stock market’s “longest winning streak in decades.”

    He exaggerated when he said a 3.3 percent growth was the “largest increase in many years.”

    The Commerce Department adjusted its estimate of G.D.P. growth to 3.3 percent in the third quarter of 2017 from a previous estimate of 3 percent. This is the largest increase in about three years, according to data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The economy grew at 3.2 percent in the first quarter of 2015 and at 5.2 percent in the third quarter of 2014, and the increase was larger than 3.3 percent in five other quarters under Mr. Obama.

    Hear a suspicious claim from a politician or public official? Email factcheck@nytimes.com. Get politics and Washington news updates via Facebook, Twitter and in the Morning Briefing newsletter.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factc...-false-claims/ar-BBFWCM2?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
     
    Mujahideen likes this.
  16. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It Started as a Tax Cut. Now It Could Change American Life. 11 / 29
    [​IMG]
    The New York Times

    By PETER S. GOODMAN and PATRICIA COHEN
    10 hrs ago


    The tax plan has been marketed by President Trump and Republican leaders as a straightforward if enormous rebate for the masses, a $1.5 trillion package of cuts to spur hiring and economic growth. But as the bill has been rushed through Congress with scant debate, its far broader ramifications have come into focus, revealing a catchall legislative creation that could reshape major areas of American life, from education to health care.

    Some of this re-engineering is straight out of the traditional Republican playbook. Corporate taxes, along with those on wealthy Americans, would be slashed on the presumption that when people in penthouses get relief, the benefits flow down to basement tenements.

    Some measures are barely connected to the realm of taxation, such as the lifting of a 1954 ban on political activism by churches and the conferring of a new legal right for fetuses in the House bill — both on the wish list of the evangelical right.

    With a potentially far-reaching dimension, elements in both the House and Senate bills could constrain the ability of states and local governments to levy their own taxes, pressuring them to limit spending on health care, education, public transportation and social services. In their longstanding battle to shrink government, Republicans have found in the tax bill a vehicle to broaden the fight beyond Washington.

    The result is a behemoth piece of legislation that could widen American economic inequality while diminishing the power of local communities to marshal relief for vulnerable people — especially in high-tax states like California and New York, which, not coincidentally, tend to vote Democratic.

    All of this is taking shape at such extraordinary velocity, absent the usual analyses and hearings, that even the most savvy Washington lobbyist cannot be fully certain of the implications.

    Mr. Trump and the Republican leadership in Congress — stymied in their efforts to repeal Obamacare, and short of legislative achievements — have signaled absolute resolve to get a tax bill passed by the end of the year. As the sense has taken hold that Washington is now a trading floor where any deal is worth entertaining so long as it brings votes, interest groups have fixed on the tax bill as a unique opportunity to further their agendas.

    “There’s a Christmas-tree aspect to the bill,” said C. Eugene Steuerle, a Treasury official during the Reagan administration and now a senior fellow at the Urban Institute. As an example, he cited the provisions in the House bill designed to appeal to the religious right.

    “People want to add certain things, and if they don’t cost a lot, it’s a way to buy in agreement,” Mr. Steuerle said.

    Economists and tax experts are overwhelmingly skeptical that the bills in the House and Senate can generate meaningful job growth and economic expansion. Many view the legislation not as a product of genuine deliberation, but as a transfer of wealth to corporations and affluent individuals — both generous purveyors of campaign contributions. By 2027, people making $40,000 to $50,000 would pay a combined $5.3 billion more in taxes, while the group earning $1 million or more would get a $5.8 billion cut, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation and the Congressional Budget Office.

    “When you put all these pieces together, what you’re left with is we are squandering a giant sum of money,” said Edward D. Kleinbard, a former chief of staff at the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation who teaches law at the University of Southern California. “It’s not aimed at growth. It is not aimed at the middle class. It is at every turn carefully engineered to deliver a kiss to the donor class.”

    In a recent University of Chicago survey of 38 prominent economists across the ideological spectrum, only one said the proposed tax cuts would yield substantial economic growth. Unanimously, the economists said the tax cuts would add to the long-term federal debt burden, now estimated at more than $20 trillion.

    If the package does have a guiding philosophy, it is a return to trickle-down economics, an enduring story line in which the wealthy are supposed to spend and invest their tax breaks, creating jobs and commercial opportunities for everyone else.

    As President Ronald Reagan slashed taxes in the 1980s, he argued that citizens, not bureaucrats, should decide how to spend their money. President George W. Bush bestowed enormous tax cuts on the affluent.

    But the trickle-down story has yet to achieve its promised happy ending. Only the beginning reliably transpires, the part where wealthy people get relief. The spoils of resulting economic growth have largely been monopolized by those with the highest incomes. Pay for most American workers has been stagnant since the mid-1970s, after the rising costs of housing, health care and other basics are factored in.

    Nonetheless, Republicans are staging a trickle-down revival.

    “Either it’s a religious belief, a belief where no amount of evidence would change that, or they are using the argument cynically and they just want more money for themselves,” the economist Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate, said.

    Mr. Stiglitz has long warned of the perils of growing inequality while deriding tax-cutting inclinations. Yet even those who have favored lighter tax burdens are critical of the current proposals.

    In the late 1970s, Bruce Bartlett developed what would become the locus of the Reagan tax cuts while working for Representative Jack Kemp, a conservative Republican from New York. Those cuts helped cushion the pain from sharp increases in interest rates by the Federal Reserve, Mr. Bartlett maintains. But Reagan was lowering the highest tax rate on individuals from 70 percent down to 28 percent by 1986.

    “What they have here is a big tax cut for the rich paid for with random increases in taxes for various constituencies,” Mr. Bartlett said. “It’s ridiculous. And it’s telling that they are ramming this through without any debate. All of the empirical evidence goes against the tax cut.”

    The meat of the package is a permanent lowering of the corporate tax rate, to 20 percent from 35 percent, which business leaders have long wanted. Proponents assert that this would prompt multinational companies to expand operations in the United States.

    “We’ve been bleeding corporate headquarters and production for a long time,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office and now president of the American Action Forum, a nonprofit that promotes smaller government.

    But recent history suggests that when corporations get tax relief, they find abundant uses for money that do not involve paying higher wages. They give dividends to shareholders and stock options to executives. They stash earnings in tax havens.

    In 2004, Congress invited American corporations to bring home overseas earnings at a sharply reduced rate, pitching it as a means of bolstering investment. But the corporations spent as much as 90 percent of their windfall buying back their shares, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis research.

    If Congress bestows fresh relief on major businesses, signs suggest a similar result. Many companies are enjoying record profits. Those in the Fortune 500 had $2.6 trillion salted away overseas as of last year.

    “In our boardroom, the number-one thing we’re talking about is not taxes,” said Jeremy Stoppelman, chief executive of Yelp, the online review platform. “Having a strong middle class out there spending money is what’s most important for our business.”

    If the tax bill widens inequality, local communities will likely find themselves with fewer resources to aim at helping struggling people.

    A key feature of the Senate bill is the elimination of a federal deduction for state and local taxes. Conservative groups like the Heritage Foundation and American Legislative Exchange Council have sought to end the deduction as a means of reining in government spending.

    In high-tax states like California, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut — where electorates have historically shown a willingness to finance ample safety-net programs — the measure could change the political calculus. It would magnify the costs to taxpayers, pressuring states to stay lean or risk the wrath of voters.

    Some see in this tilt a reworking of basic principles that have prevailed in American life for generations.

    Since the 1930s, when President Franklin D. Roosevelt created Social Security, unemployment benefits and other pillars of the safety net to combat the Great Depression, crises have been tempered by some measure of government support. Recent decades have brought cuts to social services, but the impact of the current bill could be especially consequential.

    “This is a repudiation of the social contract that Franklin Roosevelt announced at the New Deal,” Joseph J. Ellis, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American historian, said of trimming benefits for lower- and middle-income families to finance bigger rewards for the wealthy. Health coverage would shrink under the Republican plan while multimillion-dollar estates would not have to pay a penny in taxes.

    The tax cut package, for instance, could trigger rules mandating cuts to Medicare, the government health care program for seniors, the Congressional Budget Office warned. Some 13 million people could lose health care via the elimination of a key plank of Obamacare. Insurance premiums are also expected to rise by 10 percent.

    “This tax bill is a grand deception,” said Arnold Hiatt, the former chief executive of Stride Rite, which makes children’s shoes. “It hurts the most vulnerable, and hurts health care and education, which are essential for a healthy economy.”

    The proposals break from seven decades’ worth of federal efforts to broaden access to higher education.

    Since World War II, the guiding sense has been that “it is government’s responsibility to provide higher education for all those who can benefit from it,” said David Nasaw, a historian at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. That idea was behind the G.I. Bill, which helped generations of veterans pay for college and training.

    The House or Senate bill includes provisions ending the deductibility of tuition waivers for graduate students, repealing the deduction for interest paid on student loans and taxing university endowments.

    The endowment tax, in particular, threatens the ability of low-income students to pursue college and graduate studies, said Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Proceeds from endowments subsidize students from lower-income families, while allowing students across the board to graduate with less debt.

    “When the time of reckoning comes to fix huge deficits, social safety-net programs will be first on the chopping block,” Julian E. Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, said.

    “It’s very far-reaching,” he added, “but there hasn’t been much of a debate.”

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...american-life/ar-BBFWo5K?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
     
  17. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    All insurance is a scam like credit it drives prices higher for all.

    Government involved in health care is beyond stupid.

    It is unconstitutional minus the commerce clause.

    Really government never wants to shrink and just because the IRS isn't going after anyone now does not bar them from doing it once Trump is gone.

    Seems to me a champion for the people would want to follow the founders intent.
     
  18. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sen. John McCain will support tax bill, boosting its chances of passing
    • Sen. John McCain will back the Senate Republican tax bill.
    • McCain was one of the last remaining GOP holdouts on the bill.
    • His stance boost the Senate's chances of approving the legislation by Friday.
    Jacob Pramuk | @jacobpramuk



    Sen. John McCain will back the Senate GOP's tax bill, increasing the plan's chances of clearing the Senate by Friday.

    McCain was one of the last GOP senators who had not committed to supporting the proposal.

    "After careful thought and consideration, I have decided to support the Senate tax reform bill," McCain said in a statement Thursday. "I believe this legislation, though far from perfect, would enhance American competitiveness, boost the economy, and provide long overdue tax relief for middle class families."

    McCain's stance, as well as an expected "yes" vote from Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, leaves few GOP senators undecided. Republican leaders are tweaking the bill to ease concerns by other skeptical senators, including Sens. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., James Lankford, R-Okla., Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., Susan Collins, R-Maine, Ron Johnson, R-Wis., and Steve Daines, R-Mont.

    All Republican senators voted Wednesday to start debate on the bill.

    Republicans can lose two votes and still pass the tax plan under special budget rules if all Democrats and independents oppose it. Vice President Mike Pence can cast a tie-breaking vote for a simple majority.

    McCain, 81, of Arizona, bucked his party and drew venom from President Donald Trump when he opposed a Senate Obamacare repeal plan in September. Returning to the Senate that week following a brain cancer procedure, he criticized the Senate GOP's rushed process and called for a return to regular procedural order.

    McCain said his concerns about regular order were satisfied during the tax process.

    The senator also addressed the tax bill's repeal of the Obamacare individual mandate, which requires most Americans to have health insurance or pay a penalty. Scrapping the measure would lead to about 13 million more people uninsured, with average Obamacare premiums rising 10 percent, according to nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates.

    McCain called the individual mandate "an onerous tax that especially harms those from low-income brackets."

    Most lower and middle-income groups will eventually see a tax increase under the Senate plan, according to Joint Committee on Taxation estimates. Wealthier Americans will broadly get tax relief from the bill.

    The Senate legislation only temporarily changes individual income tax rates but permanently cuts the corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 percent.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/30/mccain-will-support-senate-tax-bill-boosting-chances-of-passage.html
     
    Po'boy likes this.
  19. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I would not be too concerned about the tax rates being temporary or permanent. Come next election time the tax code will be modified again if history is any guide. The sad thing is most people do not understand the tax code and instead listen to the usual media pumpers from BOTH sides of the aisle rather than researching the actual bill and determining their own taxable situation. The people have elected the individuals that have made the tax code the mess that it is so perhaps it is what we, the people deserve.
     
  20. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Going bankrupt is risking your own money?
     
    Mujahideen likes this.
  21. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    4,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Even with the Commerce Clause it's unConstitutional.


    It's not because of Trump, but because the law was originally written that way.
     
  22. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If he is for freedom then he should but out of health care and push a repeal not continue a bs scheme.
     
    Mujahideen likes this.
  23. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    4,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    If all it took was one person to do it, I'm sure he would have.
    ...but too many in his own party are obstructing him.
     
  24. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He pushed for replace not repeal only.

    That shows intent.

    Not quite the founders ideals.
     
    Weatherman and Mujahideen like this.
  25. hammerhead

    hammerhead Not just a screen name Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,117
    Likes Received:
    2,474
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    On a speck of dust
    I get your point. Define money.
     
  26. platinumdude

    platinumdude Gold Chaser Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,443
    Likes Received:
    2,286
    Trophy Points:
    113
    searcher likes this.
  27. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump tells confidants that a government shutdown might be good for him

    [​IMG]
    The Washington Post
    Josh Dawsey, Sean Sullivan, Ed O'Keefe
    6 hrs ago


    President Trump has told confidants that a government shutdown could be good for him politically and is focusing on his hard-line immigration stance as a way to win back supporters unhappy with his outreach to Democrats this fall, according to people who have spoken with him recently.

    Over the past 10 days, the president has also told advisers that it is important that he is seen as tough on immigration and getting money for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, according to two people who have spoken with him. He has asked friends about how a shutdown would affect him politically and has told several people he would put the blame on Democrats.

    Trump's mixed messages on a partial government shutdown could hamper the ability of congressional Republicans to negotiate with Democrats, whose support they need to pass spending legislation in coming weeks. Many Republicans said this week that a shutdown is a possibility they hope to avoid. Even inside the White House, aides fret about the possibility, saying it would not poll well.

    White House Legislative Affairs Director Marc Short and other aides said the president did not want a shutdown.

    "He's not advocating for a shutdown in any way. We want to make sure our military is funded. We want to make sure our priorities are funded. That's why we invited [Democrats] over to have a conversation about a deal," Short told reporters at the U.S. Capitol late Thursday.

    Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the second-ranking Republican senator, said that "when you run for office and you get elected and you are given the opportunity to govern, it strikes me as a bad idea to shut the government down. That seems like an abdication of responsibility."

    Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) added that any business that shut down abruptly "would go bankrupt. Actually, by definition they would be bankrupt. So, I think you have to avoid shutdowns at all costs."

    Up against a Dec. 8 spending deadline, House Republican leaders on Friday are expected to unveil a measure to extend current funding until Dec. 22, said multiple aides, who were granted anonymity to describe private deliberations. If talks on a longer-term deal to fund the government are not resolved by that time, GOP leaders are prepared to pursue another stopgap plan that would kick the talks into January, the aides said.

    GOP leaders know they will probably need Democrats to help pass any spending bill because of potential opposition from House conservatives and because Senate Democrats can filibuster spending legislation.

    House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) said Thursday that Congress will pass a short-term bill "to keep talks going. Hopefully, people will decide to participate in these talks."

    Trump has waffled on the idea of a shutdown in the past. In the spring, he tweeted that he would like a "good" government shutdown and thought it would be useful to him. This fall, he mused to others in a White House meeting that he thought the debt ceiling — often used as a negotiating point in complex spending talks — should be ended for good and has told advisers that a shutdown could make the administration look impotent.

    Initially, Trump loved news media coverage of his deal this fall with Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that extended government spending and increased the debt limit for three months. The move was heralded by Democrats as a significant victory, while also allowing Republicans to jump-start their debate over tax cuts. In the wake of the deal, Trump even called Schumer and Pelosi to rave about their agreement.

    But the more Trump talked to advisers, read polls and watched developments on Capitol Hill, the more he became frustrated that he was "looking like the chump in the deal," according to one person who spoke to him about the issue, who along with others insisted on anonymity to speak candidly. This time, Trump wants his political base to see him as winning the contest, two advisers said.

    Trump's sudden shift is jeopardizing talks over exactly how much money should be spent by the federal government in the coming years and whether the new agreement might settle long-simmering immigration issues, lawmakers and aides said.

    Trump announced in September that he will end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, an Obama-era program that provides temporary legal protection to hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the United States as children. If Congress fails to act, those immigrants, commonly known as "dreamers," face the risk of deportation starting on March 5.

    After Trump's decision, Democrats warned that any support for a new spending plan would rest on whether Republicans agreed to enact permanent protections for dreamers, among other issues. The two parties began talks on a potential compromise that has since stalled.

    But Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), a lead negotiator for Democrats, complained this week that Republicans have backed off their initial pledge to broker a compromise. Durbin said he now doubts what he said Trump told him privately on Inauguration Day: "We're going to take care of those kids."

    "For months, almost a year, he was consistent when it came to this topic. Lately, not so much," Durbin said in an interview. "But he has a tendency to move back and forth. We hope we catch him at a good moment."

    Durbin, Cornyn, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) and others have been speaking for weeks about a potential deal. Republicans presented Durbin with plans drafted mostly by Cornyn that would make changes to border security, bolster immigration enforcement, revamp the E-Verify employment verification program and put limits on some forms of chain migration.

    Durbin called the GOP proposal "a disappointment," noting that the more than 400 pages of proposals included a new definition of an asylum seeker — a legal issue settled by an international treaty.

    "That's way beyond border security that they're talking about," he said.

    Multiple GOP aides confirmed the details of the talks but said Democrats have yet to present a counteroffer.

    "By threatening to shut down the government and refusing to negotiate, Senator Durbin is jeopardizing the fate of DACA recipients," said a senior GOP aide, insisting on anonymity to speak frankly about the talks.

    Inside the White House, Trump's aides are trying to schedule a bipartisan meeting for next week with Ryan, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Schumer and Pelosi, according to a White House official with knowledge of the effort. Democrats backed out of a Tuesday meeting with Trump hours after he tweeted that he doubted he would be able to reach a spending deal with Democrats in part because of their position on immigration.

    Part of the delay is driven by a focus at the White House and in GOP congressional leadership offices on the party's tax plans. Several GOP congressional aides said in recent days that the contours of a spending deal probably won't come together until the Senate has cleared a tax bill and negotiations begin with the House on a final compromise.

    Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who has golfed with Trump in recent weeks, said he believes Trump is committed to averting a shutdown.

    "North Korea is looming large," Graham said. "We'd look like crazy people to shut down the government in light of all of our problems."

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-good-for-him/ar-BBFYZnO?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
     
  28. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "A Potential Nightmare Scenario For The GOP": Tax Vote Delayed To Friday; May Include $350BN In New Tax Hikes

    [​IMG]
    by Tyler Durden
    Nov 30, 2017 6:45 PM


    Update: The Senate tax plan roll vall vote which was widely expected to take place on Thursday evening, has been pushed back to 11am on Friday following the collapse of the "Trigger" compromise (discussed below) to win a majority for a Senate tax overhaul left Republicans scrambling to salvage the legislation, Bloomberg reports. While debate over the bill may continue into the evening, McConnell said. It’s unclear when the unlimited amendment vote series known as “vote-a-rama” would begin.

    "For the information of all senators, the Senate will continue to debate the bill tonight. The next roll call votes will be at 11 a.m tomorrow morning," Mitch McConnell announced Thursday night. The decision to skip a late-night session came as deficit hawks, led by Bob Corker pushed for a guarantee that the Senate tax legislation won't increase the deficit. In its current format an analysis released late on Thursday found tax reform would cost $1 trillion.

    As Bloomberg explains:

    "the day’s events left GOP leaders contemplating a variety of potentially unpalatable measures -- including making some tax cuts on the individual and corporate side end within six or seven years. The current version of the Senate bill would sunset individual breaks in 2026."

    And the punchline: "It’s a potential nightmare scenario for Republicans, who have been counting on a tax overhaul to be their first major legislative accomplishment of the year. The party is under enormous pressure to complete the tax measure with less than a year to go before the mid-term elections and with wealthy donors and large corporations demanding tax rate cuts."

    Following a report from the Joint Committee on Taxation, which unveiled late on Thursday afternoon that the Senate Tax bill would generate enough economic growth to lower its $1.4 trillion revenue cost by only about $458 billion over a decade - in other words it would still boost the deficit by roughly $1 trillion - in a dramatic showdown on the Senate floor, GOP leaders agreed to effectively increase taxes by $350 billion in response to a procedural ambush by deficit hawks led by Sen. Bob Corker that nearly killed the GOP tax reform bill.

    According to Bloomberg, Senator David Perdue, a Georgia Republican, said that GOP Senators are "discussing a new compromise for their planned tax overhaul that would increase taxes in future years."

    Quoted by The Hill, Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn told reporters after a round of intense discussions on the floor, “we have an alternative, frankly, tax increase we don’t want to do to try to address Sen. Corker’s concerns.” Cornyn said the details of the proposal are being worked out.

    Corker had insisted on a "trigger" proposal that would have rolled back tax relief in case economic projections fell short of expectations; the flipside is that it would have also made any recession in the near future far worse by staggering tax increases just as the economy slowed down, in the process sending the deficit soaring and accelerating the economic contraction.

    And in an unexpected, 11th hour reversal, the Senate parliamentarian ruled Tuesday afternoon that the trigger would not pass procedural muster. “It doesn’t look like the trigger’s going to work according to the parliamentarian,” Cornyn said. Cornyn’s remarks came after an hourlong standoff on the Senate floor in which three Republicans - Corker, Ron Johnson and Jeff Flake - held up a procedural vote that would have sent the measure back to the Senate Finance Committee.

    At least two of those members, senators Bob Corker of Tennessee and Jeff Flake of Arizona, had backed the trigger concept in recent days. Corker The deficit hawks threatened to vote for a motion to recommit the tax bill back to the Finance Committee. That move would have put the legislation in limbo for the foreseeable future and scuttled an all-night voting session on tax relief.

    As The Hill adds, Republican leaders appeared extremely frustrated with Corker, Flake and Johnson during their intense discussions on Thursday night while the fate of the bill teetered in the balance.

    McConnell’s face grew flushed as he huddled with Corker and Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), one of the main architects of the tax reform bill, while GOP colleagues crowded around them to listen in. Johnson said he joined Corker’s rebellion so he could win an assurance from GOP leaders about getting a vote on setting the corporate tax rate above the 20-percent level favored by President Trump.

    Ultimately the hawks allowed the floor debate to continue, but it’s unclear whether or how their demands might be met. Meanwhile, Senator David Perdue said the estimated tax increase would be $350 billion over a decade. Cornyn told reporters that the size could be even larger. Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin said he held out as well, to ensure he can offer amendments, including one to raise the pass-through deduction to about 25%, paid for by eliminating the corporate deduction for state and local taxes.

    Quoted by Bloomberg, Johnson said he doesn’t know if senators will finish the bill Thursday night. “We just saw a kink in the time plan right there so who knows what other cogs might be put in this wheel,” he said.

    Republican Senator Lindsey Graham added: “I think you’re going to see a lot of these scrums, and here’s the way they’ll end: We’ll pass the bill sometime tomorrow.”

    For the sake of the parabolic market, he better be right.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-...-hawks-will-include-350-billion-new-tax-hikes
     
  29. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Senate GOP tax plan hits deficit snag, leaving leaders scrambling

    [​IMG]
    The Washington Post
    Erica Werner, Mike DeBonis, Damian Paletta
    1 hr ago

    A fast-moving Senate Republican effort to overhaul the tax code unexpectedly stalled Thursday evening over concerns about the federal deficit, leaving the GOP without a clear plan to pass the legislation.

    Senate leadership, who had hoped to vote to pass the $1.5 trillion tax bill by late Thursday night, instead sent lawmakers home and began to search for a new way to offset the cost of the legislation. They are looking to win the support of several senators, including Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has led a small group of colleagues in demanding that the bill not drive up the nation's debt.

    Now, Republican leaders may have to brace for an intraparty battle over how far to go to accommodate deficit concerns. Other Republicans are arguing strongly against reducing the size of the bill's tax cut, as may now be necessary to satisfy the deficit hawks.

    The new tension threatens to undercut what had been an unusual degree of unity within the GOP, with even Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who has repeatedly defied his party, announcing support for the bill Thursday.

    Republicans are scrambling for a path forward as the result of two successive setbacks suffered Thursday as they moved toward a vote. First, the Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress's nonpartisan scorekeeper, reported that the tax bill would not generate nearly as much economic growth over the next 10 years as Republicans had expected. As a result, the nation's deficit would be $1 trillion higher.

    Then, the Senate parliamentarian ruled that a Corker-backed proposal to automatically raise taxes in the future if Republican expectations of higher growth did not materialize was not consistent with Senate rules.

    Although most of the Republicans would have been happy to move on and pass the bill, Corker stood his ground and demanded a solution. He is joined by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) in insisting the bill not drive up the deficit. Meanwhile, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) appears to be a holdout out of concern that the bill does not do enough for businesses that pay their taxes through the individual income tax code.

    Republicans have a small margin for error as they control just 52 of the 50 votes needed to pass legislation.

    Thursday evening, senators were eyeing a wide range of options to move legislation forward. They are discussing adding higher taxes on upper-income Americans and modestly rolling back the bill's large corporate tax cut. But they did not have an obvious solution, given the need to add hundreds of billions of revenue back into the bill.

    "Honestly, a lot of things are being discussed," said Sen. John Cornyn (Tex.), the Senate's second-ranking Republican.

    Lawmakers plan to resume efforts to pass the bill Friday morning, but the debate within the party could easily turn testy. Some within the caucus fumed at the holdouts, particularly Corker, who was surrounded by colleagues for a protracted period Thursday afternoon as they discussed next steps.

    "Essentially he decided to hold court with the rest of the people who are not going to be here, before the gallery. It was quite a show. Sort of a CinemaScope kind of effect," said Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.). "So I don't know. I have no idea what they want. I do not want a tax increase and I don't want a trigger. I don't think it's necessary."

    Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) said late Thursday that he was "absolutely" opposed to adding new taxes to replace Corker's proposed trigger.

    The party had been within grasp of their biggest legislative victory during the Trump administration, and they were trying to prevent the effort from unraveling.

    The debate is now expected to spill into Friday night. Corker and Flake are both retiring from the Senate and are not up for reelection, giving Republican leaders little leverage over them. And Johnson has pushed his challenge of GOP leaders, some of whom he believes abandoned him during his reelection effort last year.

    Democrats unanimously oppose the measure and ripped it Thursday.

    Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), the top Democrat on the tax-writing Senate Finance Committee, said that the late-breaking analysis of the bill's economic effects — which Republicans have been touting for months — illustrates a mistaken approach.

    "This isn't tax reform at all," Wyden said. "This is now just a grab bag full of goodies for multinationals and donors and special interests."

    The U.S. government has more than $20 trillion in debt, accumulated from decades of spending more money than it brought in through revenue. As the debt grows, budget analysts have warned that it could become increasingly difficult for the U.S. government to respond to a financial crisis or an economic downturn.

    It also means that the government must spend hundreds of billions of dollars more on interest payments, costs that go up if interest rates rise.

    But Congress and the White House have had a hard time containing the budget deficits, in part because of costly entitlement programs that account for a growing part of the budget. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the gap between revenue and spending this year will be more than $600 billion and will continue to grow unless changes are made. The tax bill, budget experts have found, will increase the deficit even more.

    Many Republicans believe the economic growth that will be unleashed by the tax cuts will be worth it, potentially creating such an economic boom that new revenue will come in from job creation and corporate investment. But these forecasts are often controversial because it is difficult to predict how tax cuts will affect behavior and how quickly the economy will respond.

    GOP leaders, though, have brushed off the criticism for weeks. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters Thursday: "We're certainly optimistic. As you know we had everybody on board to take the bill up. I think everyone is trying to get to yes."

    Of the 52 Republican senators, there were a handful whose stances remained uncertain or undeclared as of early afternoon Thursday, most prominently Corker, Flake, Johnson and Susan Collins (Maine).

    Beyond the deficit demands, GOP leaders face a growing split over how large of a tax break the bill should give to corporations. In current form, the bill would drop the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent starting in 2019, but multiple Republicans are pushing for changes.

    Johnson wanted the rate to be lowered to 22 percent, rather than 20 percent, but he wanted it to take effect immediately. Johnson still has also not said whether changes made by leadership were enough to satisfy his concerns about the treatment of so-called pass-through businesses, whose owners pay taxes through the individual code rather than at corporate rates. Johnson retains partial ownership of one such business and wants better treatment for them.

    Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) have proposed a 22 percent corporate rate, but they want to use that revenue to expand tax credits for low-income working parents. Their amendment is slated for a vote Friday.

    Collins also supports bumping up the rate, saying she would back the Rubio-Lee plan and other attempts to move more of the tax cuts to the middle class. (She was also seeking the partial restoration of the ability of taxpayers to deduct state and local taxes from their federal tax bill.)

    House conservatives were drawing a hard line on the issue of the corporate tax . "We have consistently said as low as possible but no higher than 20 percent," said Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), chairman of the House Freedom Caucus.

    As debate on the tax bill dragged into another day, lobbyists were frantically scurrying to try to continue shaping it. Wall Street executives were pressing hard for Senate Republicans to scale back proposed changes that banks believed could throw the international derivatives business into disarray.

    Overall, the legislation represents a massive change for the tax code that delivers huge cuts for corporate America and the wealthy, while the benefits for individuals are mixed or in some cases nonexistent, according to multiple nonpartisan analyses.

    The Senate GOP tax bill would slash the corporate tax rate to 20 percent starting in 2019. It would also create incentives for multinational companies to bring foreign earnings back to the United States. And it encourages businesses to invest more, allowing them to immediately expense the cost of things such as new equipment and machinery.

    The bill would temporarily cut taxes on families and individuals, lowering tax rates and expanding the amount of income that isn't subject to taxation. It would also, temporarily, expand the child tax credit for families earning less than $1 million. But it would also cut back on many tax breaks, prohibiting people from deducting the taxes they pay to states and localities.

    Importantly, the bill would also repeal a central element of the Affordable Care Act, which creates penalties for Americans who don't have health insurance coverage. This is a major plank in President Barack Obama's signature legislative achievement, and the Senate language, if signed into law, would mark the biggest GOP legislative success so far.

    This change would create more than $300 billion in budget space because of the money that would be saved in Medicaid spending and other programs, but it would also lead health insurance premiums to increase and more than 13 million fewer people to have health insurance in several years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...rs-scrambling/ar-BBFYr64?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
     
  30. EO 11110

    EO 11110 He Hate Me Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    12,027
    Likes Received:
    7,946
    Trophy Points:
    113
    love how they never EVER talk about the 150 trillion in assets on the dc balance sheet. a lot of the money (including social security funds) has been spent buying and maintaining these assets. they could EASILY sell some of that sh-t and fund social security as far as the eye can see.

    instead, they hide the balance sheet data to continue their lies about being broke, means-testing social security, etc
     
  31. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well real money is precious metals, in today's times most consider it credit and frn.
     
    hammerhead likes this.
  32. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Make-or-break Senate tax bill stalls after two deficit hawks belittled by Trump in the past demand changes to roll back $1 TRILLION in added debt
    • Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell sent senators home Thursday night without hoped-for vote on $1.4 trillion tax cut
    • Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker tried to add a 'trigger' that limited tax cuts if economic growth doesn't pan out
    • But the Senate rules-keeper ruled it out of order.
    • A nonpartisan Joint Tax Committee analysis showed the bill would add $1 trillion to the nation's debt over 10 years, even with 'dynamic scoring'
    • Lawmakers scrambling to slash billions in cuts, raise corporate rates from what they are in the bill, or make some cuts temporary
    • Republicans need to get 50 votes from their 52-vote majority to pass it
    • Trump blames 'obstructionist' Democrats
    • Joining the fight is Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake
    • Trump has called Flake 'Flake(y)' as well as 'toast' and called Corker 'lightweight'
    • Senate Finance leader: 'It´s been pretty hard to make them happy so far'
    • Sen. Johnson has been pushing to boost cuts for small businesses
    • Pressure to get it done before Alabama's Dec. 12 election, when GOP could possibly lose a seat
    • President Trump wants a tax cut by Christmas
    • Trump: 'The Bill is getting better and better'
    • CNN reported that Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Steve Daines of Montana are now 'yes' votes


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5133965/McCain-backs-U-S-Senate-tax-bill-boosting-chances-approval.html#ixzz501gytHzh
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
     
  33. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Introduce competition via allowing various forms of legal tender while restoring the right to labor as non taxable property and watch government shrink drastically while ending all manner of corporate subsidies and personhood.
     
  34. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    4,435
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    I could get behind that.
    ....and btc should be one of the competing legal tenders.
     
  35. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    1,961
    Trophy Points:
    113
    While we are at it phase out social welfare aka socialist in security.
     
    Joe King likes this.
  36. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IF that provision goes through I might just buy a new truck for the instant write off. We can be sure Ford, General Motors and Chrysler will be lobbying hard for it too.
     
  37. gnome

    gnome Platinum Bling Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    2,494
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He took risks with other people's money. Anytime he found himself in a hole, he defaulted and left his creditors holding the bag. Let's not even get into Trump University fraud.
     
    searcher likes this.
  38. Ensoniq

    Ensoniq Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2013
    Messages:
    6,299
    Likes Received:
    9,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Free Marketeer
    Location:
    North Carolina
    With Investing sometimes you make money and sometimes you lose it

    gov handouts have little risk and much stability - people sit back and collect in perpetuity

    When the latter becomes the norm the former tends to become an alien concept
     
    Joe King likes this.
  39. hammerhead

    hammerhead Not just a screen name Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,117
    Likes Received:
    2,474
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    On a speck of dust
    When a person loses other peoples money, it makes it more difficult for that person to obtain credit again. So to me, it is a personal loss.
     
  40. Krag

    Krag Planet earth Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    4,057
    Likes Received:
    2,834
    Trophy Points:
    113
    searcher and gnome like this.

Share This Page