The Republican tax bill got worse: now the top 1% gets 83% of the gains

[Italian_in_NYC 259]

11 hours ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

Hurrah for the top 1%, are we going to add VAT tax as an offset? Here's the deal, give the lowest 25% bracket a tax  break and it goes direct to economic stimulation, the professed claim to fame of this legislation.  Corporate tax breaks go to stock buy backs no investment, and those in my bracket and above? Screw them.

 

 

 

I don't know where you get your economic facts. First of all, the lowest 25% pay nothing in federal income tax. You can't give a break to who already has it best. Actually they did, increasing the refundable part of the child tax credit to $1,400.

They also increased the standard deduction to $24k for married couples filing jointly. That is a HUGE benefit for lower income families, not to mention the enhanced child tax credit (on which I unfortunately foresee a ton of fraud, like the EIC, just wait and see).

I don't care where corporate tax breaks go. The point is that no multinational company in its right state of mind would want to move its HQ to the US, now that will change. And I also beg to differ. 100% expensing goes a LONG way towards investments. I can't believe I'm even trying to explain why.

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, Italian_in_NYC said:

I don't know where you get your economic facts. First of all, the lowest 25% pay nothing in federal income tax. You can't give a break to who already has it best. Actually they did, increasing the refundable part of the child tax credit to $1,400.

They also increased the standard deduction to $24k for married couples filing jointly. That is a HUGE benefit for lower income families, not to mention the enhanced child tax credit (on which I unfortunately foresee a ton of fraud, like the EIC, just wait and see).

I don't care where corporate tax breaks go. The point is that no multinational company in its right state of mind would want to move its HQ to the US, now that will change. And I also beg to differ. 100% expensing goes a LONG way towards investments. I can't believe I'm even trying to explain why.

interesting. those living in poverty (with children, those cash cows) have it best..

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

i was commenting on the irony of that statement. those in poverty 'have it best'. 

 

take a seat. 

Yes, you are a master (mistress?) at twisting the meaning of others’ posts.  That has been shown time and again.

[TBoneTX 46,119]

A post has been removed for importing drama from another thread.  A quoting post is also removed.

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, IDWAF said:

Yes, you are a master (mistress?) at twisting the meaning of others’ posts.  That has been shown time and again.

i prefer master. where's my cookie?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

12 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i prefer master. where's my cookie?

I refuse to answer that on the grounds that it might incriminate me. 

 

Master.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

40 minutes ago, Italian_in_NYC said:

I don't know where you get your economic facts. First of all, the lowest 25% pay nothing in federal income tax. You can't give a break to who already has it best. Actually they did, increasing the refundable part of the child tax credit to $1,400.

They also increased the standard deduction to $24k for married couples filing jointly. That is a HUGE benefit for lower income families, not to mention the enhanced child tax credit (on which I unfortunately foresee a ton of fraud, like the EIC, just wait and see).

I don't care where corporate tax breaks go. The point is that no multinational company in its right state of mind would want to move its HQ to the US, now that will change. And I also beg to differ. 100% expensing goes a LONG way towards investments. I can't believe I'm even trying to explain why.

 

   Has it the best? Really?

 

   I tried poverty once to make it through 4 years of university without a student loan. Let me tell you, it ain't all it's cracked up to be. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Has it the best? Really?

 

   I tried poverty once to make it through 4 years of university without a student loan. Let me tell you, it ain't all it's cracked up to be. 

Here we go again...

 

I say we all get together and play TWSITER!!

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

3 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Has it the best? Really?

 

   I tried poverty once to make it through 4 years of university without a student loan. Let me tell you, it ain't all it's cracked up to be. 

Most people took a vow of poverty in college, to get to a better place. We appreciate the sacrifice 

[LionessDeon 2,060]

7 hours ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

I am picking up on the fact that a paraphrase of what I said was held up as hate speech by you.

Don't take the bait

 

56 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

interesting. those living in poverty (with children, those cash cows) have it best..

The meek shall inherit the earth.

[Italian_in_NYC 259]

52 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Has it the best? Really?

 

   I tried poverty once to make it through 4 years of university without a student loan. Let me tell you, it ain't all it's cracked up to be. 

I was poor too at one point. I could complain about many things, but the tax bill was not certainly one of those.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

2 hours ago, Italian_in_NYC said:

I don't know where you get your economic facts. First of all, the lowest 25% pay nothing in federal income tax. You can't give a break to who already has it best. Actually they did, increasing the refundable part of the child tax credit to $1,400.

They also increased the standard deduction to $24k for married couples filing jointly. That is a HUGE benefit for lower income families, not to mention the enhanced child tax credit (on which I unfortunately foresee a ton of fraud, like the EIC, just wait and see).

I don't care where corporate tax breaks go. The point is that no multinational company in its right state of mind would want to move its HQ to the US, now that will change. And I also beg to differ. 100% expensing goes a LONG way towards investments. I can't believe I'm even trying to explain why.

You are right the lowest 25% usually get more back from the IRS than they pay in.

 

This is great for Buy here pay here car dealers, Name brand clothing stores, electronic super stores,  etc.

 

Usually does very little to help the long term economic outlook and life style of that demographic. 

[Italian_in_NYC 259]

3 hours ago, smilesammich said:

interesting. those living in poverty (with children, those cash cows) have it best..

Tax-wise, no doubt.

Obviously, we all want to have too-much-tax problems to solve. 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

4 hours ago, Italian_in_NYC said:

I don't know where you get your economic facts. First of all, the lowest 25% pay nothing in federal income tax. You can't give a break to who already has it best. Actually they did, increasing the refundable part of the child tax credit to $1,400.

They also increased the standard deduction to $24k for married couples filing jointly. That is a HUGE benefit for lower income families, not to mention the enhanced child tax credit (on which I unfortunately foresee a ton of fraud, like the EIC, just wait and see).

I don't care where corporate tax breaks go. The point is that no multinational company in its right state of mind would want to move its HQ to the US, now that will change. And I also beg to differ. 100% expensing goes a LONG way towards investments. I can't believe I'm even trying to explain why.

3

 

Corporate:

The point is the comparison to the income tax rates in the US to Most of the world is not apples to apples because the VAT supplements the tax structure in most of those other countries. 

Accelerated depreciation will spur investment, but the narrative that 100 or even 80 % of a corporate tax will go into investment to improve operations is pollyannaish. What we most likely will see is higher stock values due to buybacks. 

[Italian_in_NYC 259]

12 minutes ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

 

Corporate:

The point is the comparison to the income tax rates in the US to Most of the world is not apples to apples because the VAT supplements the tax structure in most of those other countries. 

Accelerated depreciation will spur investment, but the narrative that 100 or even 80 % of a corporate tax will go into investment to improve operations is pollyannaish. What we most likely will see is higher stock values due to buybacks. 

The VAT has nothing to do. Do your homework before playing tax professor.