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. hernancortes

    hernancortes Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,206
    Likes Received:
    1,088
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The senate version Trump tax plan should also benefit most PM holders who sell for a capital gain.
     
  2. 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
    Then maybe the answer is for the situation we've had, to be reversed?
    Do fed taxes first, then pay State and local income tax on amount of net income?

    Ie: taxes paid to the fed gov should be deductible from State/local income tax.
     
    hammerhead and Ensoniq like this.
  3. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We get double taxed all the time. For example wages are taxed at their gross amount with no allowance for the Social Security Tax that one pays out of their wages.
     
    Ensoniq likes this.
  4. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Republicans Reverse, May Allow State Income Tax Deduction

    [​IMG]
    by Tyler Durden
    Dec 6, 2017 6:15 PM

    One day after the top Senate Republicans realized they probably should have read the tax bill they voted for in the deep of the night on Saturday morning, and announced they are seeking to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax they passed just days earlier, realizing it could punish growing companies, they now also appear to be reversing on the controversial repeal of State and Local Tax Deductions, and as Bloomberg reports, Republican lawmakers "are discussing a compromise on state and local tax deductions that would allow taxpayers to deduct state income tax, House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady said."

    According to one proposal being discussed, taxpayers could deduct both their state income tax and state and local property taxes up to a combined limit of $10,000. This differs from the currently circulating bills which preserve the individual deduction for state and local property taxes - capped at $10,000 - but not for income taxes. The push to include income taxes could help those in high-tax states who don’t own property.

    Mitch McConnell confirmed he’s open to tweaking final tax legislation to appease lawmakers who want to let constituents deduct state income taxes: "There’s some in the House who would like to see that applied not just to property, but to income tax, you know, where you can sort of pick which state and local tax you want to deduct,” the Kentucky Republican said on conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt’s show. “That sounds like a kind of reasonable idea.”

    Summarizing the conference process, McConnell said "There are a lot of these things that are floating back and forth,” adding that he cannot predict “exactly how the final product turns out” once the House and Senate complete their conference negotiations.

    Indicating that SALT repeal was conceived as an entirely political move meant to punish "rich", predominantly blue states, House Republican leaders - hearing significant pushback from their own constituents - signaled openness to "relieving the burden for residents of high-tax states."

    Plans for the so-called SALT deduction have prompted more tension in the House than in the Senate, because there aren’t any Republican senators from states with the highest taxes. Twelve out of the 13 GOP House lawmakers who voted against the bill last month were from high-tax states. Still, including the property tax deduction in the Senate bill was a last-minute change to help get the support of Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine.

    Two House members from New Jersey -- Leonard Lance, a Republican, and Josh Gottheimer, a Democrat -- plan to submit a joint proposal to the conference committee that would maintain SALT in its entirety.

    The lawmakers said repealing the break will lead to "double taxation" and "pay for reform on the backs of just a few states that already pay significantly more than other states in federal taxes." One of those net donor states, they note, is New Jersey.

    Brady, who’s overseeing the House-Senate conference committee for tax negotiations, said Wednesday that allowing income tax deductions is one of five options on the table. Others include potential adjustments to rates, brackets, the individual alternative minimum tax and the family tax credit.

    There is just one problem with the bill which is already cutting it dangerously close to the $1.5Tn extra deficit limit: where does the money come from?

    As Bloomberg writes, it's unclear how lawmakers would pay for any such modifications to the state and local tax break. Preserving the property tax deduction up to $10,000 would cost about $148 billion over a decade, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. McConnell has been said to want any proposed changes presented with ways to pay for them.

    Among the proposed revenue offset include changing estate tax rules about stepped-up basis and closing what they call a loophole for charitable donations to private foundations as ways to offset some of the lost revenue that would result from keeping SALT.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-06/republicans-reverse-may-allow-state-income-tax-deduction
     
  5. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fake Tax Reform
    December 7, 2017 - 8:26am — europac admin

    Our weekly commentaries provide Euro Pacific Capital's latest thinking on developments in the global marketplace. Opinions expressed are those of the writer, and may or may not reflect those held by Euro Pacific Capital.

    By:
    Peter Schiff
    Thursday, December 7, 2017


    After supposedly chomping on the bit for years to pass meaningful tax reform, Republicans are now set to blow an historic opportunity. Whatever version of the Bill that emerges from the House and Senate Conference Committee (which will be signed by President Trump faster than he can down a Filet o’Fish), will be far less than the Republicans envisioned when they finally captured the White House and both Congressional Chambers in 2016. But from what I have seen of the particulars, the revisions to the tax code will offer a marginal, although temporary, win for low income individuals, a major slap for moderately successful wage earners and home owners, (especially in the high tax Blue States) and a huge victory for the extremely wealthy and certain categories of business owners. While it is certain that the plan will add to the growing deficit, its immediate economic and political impact is hard to predict.

    For generations, taxpayers and politicians alike lambasted our overly complex tax code for its myriad of economic distorting loopholes that seemed to produce nothing except employment for legions of accountants and tax lawyers adept at gaming the system. As a result, talk about tax reform has always included proposals to make the system simpler, fairer, and more transparent. But on that front, the Republican proposals fail miserably. Trump and Congress will hail this achievement as being a major victory for the American people. But the true winner will be the swamp that Trump promised to drain.

    Unlike Ronald Reagan, who passed tax reform in 1986 by striking a deal with Democrat House Speaker Tip O'Neill, Trump and Congressional Republicans faced no particular need to compromise. If Reagan had the benefits enjoyed by Trump, Ryan and McConnell, his tax cuts would have been paired with significant spending cuts and perhaps a balanced budget. But to get O’Neill (and his whopping 71 seat House majority) to go along, Reagan's ideals of fiscal prudence and smaller government had to be set aside. But Trump is no Reagan, and today’s Republican Party has about as much commitment to shrinking the size of government as did the Democrats in the 1980s.

    Taxes are the price we pay for government. If Republicans want to reduce the tax burden, they need to make government less expensive. Tax cuts without spending cuts is the Republican version of a free lunch. But if government spending is not paid for with tax revenue, alternate sources must be found that will ultimately prove more costly than the forgone tax revenue.

    Despite endless campaign rhetoric to the contrary, the Republican Party is no longer the party of limited government, fiscal responsibility, Federalism, the Constitution, sound money, or any of the principals that they typically espouse while stumping for office or raising money. Instead of reducing the size of government, thereby lightening the burden on taxpayers and limiting the economic drag caused by government, Republicans have chosen the easy course of tax cuts, replete with overly optimistic assumptions and gimmicks meant to disguise their true impact on future deficits. Adding insult to injury, they leave in place an even more complex tax code, replete with even more loopholes, that limits individual freedom and undermines economic growth.

    True reform would have eliminated the income tax completely, or at a minimum, replaced it with a flat tax. It would have abolished the corporate income tax, payroll taxes, and the estate and gift taxes, and replaced them with a tax system based on consumption rather than production. Such a system would encourage savings rather than debt accumulation, and would restore some semblance of sanity to a system increasingly dependent on borrowing. Real reform would have included entitlement reform, as well as across the board reductions in government spending. Entire agencies and departments would have been eliminated, making government smaller and less expensive. These are the types of changes that are needed to head off a possible looming debt crisis and put the country back on a path to achieve real economic growth, not the phony financial gains we have seen in the past generation.

    But instead, Republicans crafted a plan that would cut taxes for some while raising taxes for others. The political genius of the plan can be found in the elimination of state and local tax deductions that will raise taxes predominantly on higher wage earners in Democrat controlled states with high taxes. This move was a political freebie for Republicans, as it largely spares their constituents from tax hikes, but prevents Democrats from protecting theirs because to do so would require them to argue against raising taxes on the "wealthy." It may also trigger a fiscal crisis in largely Democrat states as high earners, who provide an outsize share of state tax revenue, consider pulling up stakes for lower tax jurisdictions. But Republicans did not leave well enough alone. The taxes raised on rich Democrats will not nearly be enough to pay for the cuts they offer business owners, passive investors, and corporations. The balance will be "paid for" by borrowing. In addition, high tax states may be forced to scramble to adjust their tax policies in an attempt to forestall defections of the wealthy. To do so, they may shift taxes to businesses (for which state taxes will still be deductible from federal taxes). The businesses in turn, can pass these costs onto their employees in the form of lower wages and their customers in the form of higher prices.

    Republicans, of course, argue that the economic growth that will be generated by lowering the corporate tax rate from 35% to 20% will generate enough new tax revenue to offset what is lost. While that idea is sound in theory, nothing about our current situation would suggest that a growth surge is around the corner, with or without corporate tax cuts.

    We are already in the ninth year of a supposed economic expansion. Over the last century, these expansions (the time between recessions) have lasted, on average, about five and a quarter years. So, already our current “expansion” has lasted nearly twice the average. Also, this expansion has been extraordinarily weak, with growth averaging around 2% since 2009. This is far below the 3% to 4% rate seen in prior recoveries. (data from the National Bureau of Economic Research and Bureau of Labor Statistics) It is also clear that this tepid number has relied heavily on surging asset prices in stocks, real estate, and bonds. But all three of those markets could easily reverse course.

    The stock market has surged to all-time highs based on the expected likelihood that tax reform would be passed early in the Trump Administration. When this hope becomes reality, it may be that we will get a “buy the rumor, sell the fact” decline, especially if the final package is not all that investors hoped it would be. The real estate market may actually suffer under the new rules as high-end properties become more expensive to own and less attractive to buy given the limits on property tax and mortgage deductions. On the lower end of the market, the expansion of the standard deduction could mean far fewer will receive a tax benefit from buying modestly priced homes, thereby mitigating the advantages of buying over renting. (It is no accident that some of the biggest objections to the new proposals have come from real estate industry groups). And lastly, the bond market faces no shortage of headwinds. With the Fed threatening to sell much of its $4.5 Trillion holdings of Treasury and Mortgage bonds, the likelihood of falling bond prices and rising yields looms large. (In the past three months, 10-year Treasury yields have increased 30 basis points). Even the tax bill’s supporters acknowledge that it will increase the deficit significantly in the near term, thereby requiring the Treasury to sell more bonds to fill the gap. The extra supply could put downward pressure on bond prices and raise yields on the long end, creating losses in the bond market and raising borrowing costs for government, businesses and consumers.

    For these reasons, it is logical to assume that the current tax proposals will have a more modest economic impact than the Tax Cuts of 1986 or even the Bush tax cuts of 2001. It is important to note that the Bush tax cuts occurred while the economy was already in recession, a time where economists could at least plausibly argue that fiscal stimulus was needed. But by putting these cuts through now, while the economy is still expanding (at least on paper), by the time the next recession arrives, the fiscal bullets will have already been fired.

    Assuming that the hoped for economic growth does not materialize, the money borrowed now must eventually be repaid. Deficit spending means that today’s tax cuts merely sow the seeds for tomorrow’s tax hikes. But since taxpayers will not only be on the hook for the money borrowed, but the added interest associated with that debt, the future tax hikes could be larger than today’s cuts.

    Of course, instead of raising future taxes to repay the money borrowed to fund today’s cuts, a cooperative Federal Reserve could simply print the money needed to buy the additional Treasury debt. But this does not mean we get all this government for free. The cost will come in the form of higher consumer prices as a new round of monetary expansion could cause a continuing drop in the dollar. So Americans may end up with more after tax dollars in their paychecks, but the reduced value of those dollars means they will actually be able to afford to buy less stuff. Just because it appears consumers dodged this bullet during the first three phases of Quantitative Easing does not mean that we will be as lucky with additional rounds.

    Subscribe to Euro Pacific's Weekly Digest: Receive all commentaries by Peter Schiff, John Browne, and other Euro Pacific commentators delivered to your inbox every Monday!

    To order your copy of Peter Schiff's latest book, The Real Crash (Fully Revised and Updated): America's Coming Bankruptcy - How to Save Yourself and Your Country, click here.

    For in-depth analysis of this and other investment topics, subscribe to Peter Schiff's Global Investor newsletter. CLICK HERE for your free subscription.


    [​IMG]This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. Please feel free to repost with proper attribution and all links included.

    http://www.europac.com/commentaries/fake_tax_reform
     
    edsl48 and Scorpio like this.
  6. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once again Congress gets involved and destroys another attempt at fixing something that is out of control. . . <sigh>
     
    searcher likes this.
  7. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    1,440
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump’s Middle-Class Tax Pledges Go Unfulfilled in Senate Bill
    By
    Toluse Olorunnipa
    December 7, 2017, 3:00 AM CST
    • An estimated $1 trillion revenue loss also counters promises
    • President says ‘this is going to cost me,’ but doesn’t say how
    • President Donald Trump and Republican congressional leaders are on the brink of achieving their top priority, centerpiece tax legislation, but only after a series of inaccurate claims and broken promises.


      Lawmakers have made -- and then retracted -- pledges that their planned overhaul bill wouldn’t raise taxes on any middle-class families. Trump and his top aides have said the changes won’t cut taxes for the highest earners, statements that are demonstrably false.


      And all of them argue that the proposed tax cuts, estimated to reduce federal revenue by more than $1.4 trillion, won’t increase federal deficits, an assertion that’s been contradicted by Congress’s official tax scorekeeper.


      “The challenge is that there were a lot of promises made that can’t live comfortably with each other,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “The biggest loser in all this was their commitment to fiscal discipline, which went away as fast as you can blink.”


      The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment for this story.

      House and Senate GOP leaders are trying to hammer out compromise legislation for Trump to sign before the end of the year. If they succeed, their tax overhaul will immediately become the top policy issue in the 2018 congressional elections. Here are a few statements they might expect to see in opponents’ campaign ads:

      No Tax Cuts for the Rich
      WHAT THEY SAID: “Wealthy Americans are not getting a tax cut,’’ Gary Cohn, Trump’s top economic adviser, said Sept. 28 on ABC’s “Good Morning America.’’

      “Any reductions we have in upper-income taxes will be offset by less deductions so that there will be no absolute tax cut for the upper class,” Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Nov. 30, 2016, in an interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.’’

      WHAT THEY DID: While the Senate bill would cut tax rates for all income groups, on average, higher earners would receive the largest benefits, according to the Tax Policy Center, an independent Washington Policy group.

      The top 5 percent of taxpayers -- roughly, those who make more than $215,000 a year, based on recent U.S. Census data -- would do well, the analysis shows. In 2019, those who rank in the 95th through 99th percentiles would see their after-tax incomes rise by more than 3 percent after receiving “the largest cuts as a share of income,” according to the study. By comparison, the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers would see after-tax income growth of roughly 1.5 percent or less, according to the study.

      Over time, benefits for the highest earners would outstrip others’. By 2027, after a menu of temporary individual tax cuts would expire, the top 0.1 percent of earners -- those who make far in excess of $1 million a year -- would still see after-tax income growth of about 1.5 percent, dwarfing that for any other group.

      The House bill would reduce taxes for taxpayers making $1 million and more by roughly 6.7 percent in 2019, according to Congress’s official scorekeeper, the Joint Committee on Taxation. By 2027, that group would still be getting a 4.3 percent tax cut, JCT found.

      Trump Won’t Benefit
      WHAT THEY SAID: “This is going to cost me a fortune, this thing,” Trump said last week during a speech in St. Charles, Missouri. “Believe me.”

      WHAT THEY DID: Both bills include provisions that would have the potential to cut Trump’s taxes. The House bill lowers the rate for pass-through income, which could cut taxes on Trump’s real-estate and other businesses. The Senate bill provides a new deduction for such income. Both measures contain language that would limit the use of those benefits, however.

      The Senate bill would cut the top individual income tax rate to 38.5 percent -- a measure that would benefit Trump, who has disclosed multimillion-dollar annual earnings.

      The House bill would repeal a tax that has cost Trump in the past: the individual alternative minimum tax, which operates as a kind of parallel tax calculation that originally designed as a way to prevent high earners from using too many deductions or other breaks to zero out their tax bills.

      A copy of Trump’s 2005 tax return that was leaked earlier this year showed that he had to pay $31 million in AMT that year, accounting for about 80 percent of his total tax bill. Beyond that instance, it’s difficult to assess the impact of any tax changes on Trump’s personal taxes: He has not followed his predecessors’ precedent by releasing any tax returns.

      Asked to name which proposed tax provisions would cause the president to pay more, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders wouldn’t offer any specifics. She said only that “a lot of the deductions” that would be eliminated might affect Trump.

      No Middle Class Tax Increase
      WHAT THEY SAID: “Nobody in the middle class is going to get a tax increase,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on MSNBC on Nov. 4. McConnell later retracted his statement, acknowledging it wasn’t correct.

      Describing the bill to conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh on Nov. 7, House Speaker Paul Ryan called it “a tax cut for everybody” and said “every single person” would see a reduction in tax rates. He dismissed claims that the bill would raise taxes on millions of Americans as misinformation “from the left.” He later corrected himself as well.

      Vice President Mike Pence championed the proposal as an “across-the-board tax cut.” Trump said the middle class would be “the biggest beneficiary” in the tax overhaul.

      WHAT THEY DID: While most income groups would see cuts on average, studies have shown that many individuals would not, depending on their specific situations.

      In fact, millions of people stand to see higher tax bills because of the elimination or curtailment of deductions such as one for state and local taxes, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the nonpartisan official scorekeeper for Congress.

      And because most of the Senate bill’s individual tax breaks expire by 2027, more than 20 million households with income below $200,000 would face tax increases by then.

      “We’ve said all along that our tax reform bill would create more jobs, fairer taxes, and bigger paychecks for the American people,” said Doug Andres, a spokesman for Ryan, said this week.

      No New Deficits
      WHAT THEY SAID: “It will have to be revenue-neutral,” McConnell told Bloomberg News about any tax overhaul in May.

      “It will be revenue-neutral when you add growth,” Trump echoed in September.

      WHAT THEY DID: An earlier version of the Senate plan would increase deficits by roughly $1 trillion over 10 years, even when taking into account additional economic growth forecast with the tax cuts, the Joint Committee on Taxation said last week. Since then, senators revised the bill in ways that would only add to its cost, according to the JCT. Moreover, those changes would stymie some of the bill’s economic-growth provisions, business groups said.

      Republican senators who had previously assailed the nation’s debt burden -- including Senators Jeff Flake of Arizona and James Lankford of Oklahoma -- eventually fell in line to support the bill after efforts to include a backstop against growing deficits failed.

      In the end, Bob Corker of Tennessee was on the only Republican senator to oppose the Senate measure due to his concerns about the debt. Asked if his stand against adding to budget shortfalls made him feel like one of a dying breed, Corker answered: “I do.”

      — With assistance by Laura Litvan, Anna Edgerton, and Steven T. Dennis
     
    searcher likes this.
  8. 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 richest friends are asking for changes to the GOP tax plan, and he’s listening

    [​IMG]
    The Washington Post
    Damian Paletta, Josh Dawsey
    12 hrs ago

    Bill signed to avoid shutdown for now



    Some of President Trump's wealthiest New York friends have launched a last-minute campaign to pressure him for changes to the GOP tax bill, telling the president personally that the current plan would drive up their taxes and hurt his home state.

    Trump on Saturday attended a fundraiser at the home of Stephen Schwarzman, chief executive of the Blackstone Group and the former leader of Trump's now-disbanded White House Strategy and Policy Forum. Longtime Trump friend Richard LeFrak, a New York real estate magnate who Trump has said would play a lead role in his infrastructure push, also attended.

    At the fundraiser, LeFrak asked Trump about making changes in the tax bill, people familiar with the exchange said. LeFrak had previously expressed to the White House concerns that the tax bill could hurt New York, and particularly its wealthy business class, people familiar with his thinking said. At least one other donor jumped in to echo LeFrak, the people said.

    At the fundraiser, LeFrak asked Trump about changes in the tax bill that could help wealthier New Yorkers, people familiar with the exchange said. At least one other donor jumped in to echo the concerns, the people said.

    In response, Trump told the group he was aware of the concerns among his old friends and business associates — and that he understood them.

    "The president was a little vague in his response on that," an attendee at the fundraiser said, saying Trump said, "Well, we've got to see what happens. Maybe there are ways to try to be helpful."

    Many of Trump's friends have complained that a proposal in the House and Senate tax bills limiting the tax breaks people can claim would drive up taxes on people in New York. Specifically, they have raised concerns about new limitations on their ability to deduct state and local taxes.

    A White House official said Trump has not asked Congress to make specific changes to the bill relating to the issue that came up in New York, but the president has signaled publicly that he is open to making adjustments.

    "There are very, very few people that aren't benefiting by [the tax package], but there's that tiny little sliver, and we're going to try to take care of even that very small group of people that just through circumstances maybe don't get the full benefit of what we're doing," Trump said Wednesday at the White House.

    Trump did not offer details about whom he considers to be a part of that "very small group of people."

    LeFrak is part of a small but influential cadre of New Yorkers who are trying to press Republicans in Washington to make these last-minute changes. Paul Singer, founder of the hedge fund Elliott Associates, has also made his views known to Republicans, although not directly to the White House.

    Kathy Wylde — who leads the Partnership for New York City, a major business advocacy group — has called executives and others to build momentum for the changes. A number of business executives in New York have called Trump and his Cabinet, White House advisers say.

    "They're killing the goose that lays the golden egg," Wylde said, adding that the tax changes are hardest on "high earners" and "global commercial centers" that the economy needs to be successful.

    The people describing the conversations spoke on the condition of anonymity to share details from the private event.

    Schwarzman has been a longtime friend of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, and Mnuchin was at the Saturday fundraiser. Mnuchin, a top Trump adviser on taxes, attended Schwarzman's birthday party in Florida this year, along with other senior Trump aides.

    LeFrak and Trump have been friends for decades, with LeFrak at one point serving as a judge in the Miss Universe pageant that Trump ran and also making an appearance on Trump's television program "The Apprentice."

    Republicans are trying to balance several demands as they work to complete discussions between the House and Senate and agree on a single tax bill that they can pass and send to the White House for enactment. Trump wants to sign the bill into law before Christmas, but there are still several issues to iron out.

    Trump had for weeks tried to couch the tax bill as a big boon for the middle class and one that would provide little benefit to the wealthiest people in the country.

    But numerous tax analysts expressed skepticism that this would be true and several have said Trump probably would be a big beneficiary because of the way the Trump Organization is structured.

    The House and Senate bills would lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 20 percent and lower taxes that partnerships and sole proprietors pay on their earnings. The bills would also lower the tax rates that many Americans pay on their earnings, although the rates would fall little or be unchanged on large amounts of income.

    Still, the bills were designed in a way that provided many benefits to the wealthy, scaling back the alternative minimum tax and the estate tax, and lowering taxes on business income.

    To offset some of these costs, the tax bills would make several changes that could limit tax breaks on the wealthiest Americans.

    For example, the House and Senate tax bills would allow Americans to deduct only $10,000 in local property taxes from their federal taxable income. That is enough to cover the taxes that most Americans pay, but not the wealthiest. It also would not allow Americans to deduct state income taxes, a change that could hit people in high-tax states such as New York, New Jersey and Connecticut particularly hard.

    There are also growing complaints about potential changes to accounting rules in the tax bills that could require investors to follow a process called "first in, first out," which could force them to sell investments in a way that drives up their tax liability.

    To address some of the concerns raised by wealthy New Yorkers, Republicans have looked at lowering the tax rate on the top income bracket, but no decisions have been made.

    The complaints offer a much different perspective from wealthy New Yorkers than the one Trump has described during his push for changes. In October, Trump said his rich friends were praising the tax package, not complaining about it.

    "It's a middle-class bill," Trump said at the time. "That's what we're thinking of. That's what I want. I've had rich friends of mine come up to me and say, 'Donald, you're doing this tax plan — we don't want anything. We don't.' "

    House and Senate lawmakers have formed a conference committee to try to resolve differences between the tax bills and hope to reach a resolution by next week.

    They are looking at moving the corporate tax rate up to 22 percent to free up revenue to cover changes, including some that could potentially ameliorate the concerns of wealthy Americans in New York.

    But there is tremendous pressure within the Senate to keep the corporate rate at 20 percent, in part because of fears that allowing it to rise would prompt a flood of lawmakers demanding additional changes.

    And if changes are made that would benefit wealthy New Yorkers, it could further fuel criticism of the bill that it is tilted too much toward corporations and the wealthy and offers only short-term benefits for the middle class.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...e’s-listening/ar-BBGngg6?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
     
  9. searcher

    searcher Mother Lode Found Site Supporter ++ Mother Lode

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    133,910
    Likes Received:
    38,495
    Trophy Points:
    113
    'You can save my life - remember this conversation': Father with ALS confronts Senator Jeff Flake on flight from DC to Arizona over tax bill which he fears will wipe out disability payments and leave him unable to pay his medical bills
    • A father suffering Lou Gehrig's disease shared his story with Sen. Jeff Flake
    • Ady Barkan, 33, approached the Republican lawmaker on a flight to Arizona
    • Barkan said in the exchange: 'What should I tell my son if you pass this bill and he cuts funding for disability and I can't get a ventilator?'
    • He was diagnosed with ALS last year and requires constant medical treatments
    • Barkan told him: 'You can save my life ... Please remember this conversation'


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5163841/Father-ALS-confronts-Senator-tax-bill-flight.html#ixzz50rHt2auu
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
     

Share This Page