Support NeoGAF

[Tovarisc]

Republican Tax Cut Would Benefit Wealthy and Corporations Most, Report Finds

The report, which is the first detailed assessment of the plan’s financial impact, found that the average tax bill for all income groups would decline by $1,600, or 2.1 percent, in 2018. The biggest decrease would go to those with incomes above $730,000, who would see their after-tax incomes rise by an average of 8.5 percent, or about $129,000.

Those in the middle quintile — with incomes averaging $66,960 — would see their after-tax income rise by 1.2 percent or about $660.

The breakdown is based on the framework released by the “Big Six” group of Republican lawmakers and administration officials this week, which did not include many details that could change the distributional impact. For instance, the plan called for an increase in the child tax credit but did not specify how much it would rise and whether it would be across income groups. The plan also opened the door for adding a fourth, higher tax bracket for the richest Americans, which would also change the distributional impact if enacted.

Still, even with those changes, the report makes clear that the plan may not be the salve for the middle class that Mr. Trump has been pitching.

The plan would provide enormous benefits to corporate America, with a $2.6 billion cut in business taxes. Individual income tax revenue would actually increase by $470 billion, largely as a result of changes in personal deductions and exemptions as well as an increase in the bottom tax rate to 12 percent from 10 percent.

“Tax collections would shift dramatically from businesses to individuals,” said Eric Toder, co-director of the Tax Policy Center.

The loss of deductions would hit the upper middle class the most, and more than a third of the taxpayers who earn $150,000 to $300,000 could see their taxes go up next year, the report found. They would be hit particularly hard by the repeal of the state and local tax deduction.

The Tax Policy Center estimates the plan will cost $2.4 trillion over a decade. Republicans are counting on a surge of economic growth to pay for their tax plan and the Tax Policy Center analysis does not account for those “dynamic” effects. However, the group’s analysts said that its previous studies of recent Republican tax plans showed little impact from growth on revenues, largely because of the likelihood that deficits would lead to higher interest rates.

Many aspects of the Republican plan are being left to Congress to decide. Thus far the proposal would slash the corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 percent, and create a new 25 percent tax rate for “pass through” businesses such as partnerships, sole proprietorships and family farms.

It would also lower the top individual tax rate to 35 percent from 39.6 percent, while raising the bottom rate to 12 percent from 10 percent as it also doubles the standard deduction. The plan would eliminate many corporate “loopholes” and deductions, such as the state and local tax deduction. But it would also get rid of many provisions that are currently costly to the rich, like the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/...t-report-finds.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

 

[Apath]

Is this one?

Oh my God. How is this not from The Onion?

This picture makes me so angry. The casual $180k in investment income that we all know and love...

That article is not about the average American. It's about those who had benefited from the Bush tax cuts, which lowered the highest tax rate from 39.6% to 35% and affected only those in the highest tax bracket:

Before the tax cuts, the highest marginal income tax rate was 39.6 percent. After the cuts, the highest rate was 35 percent. Once the cuts were eliminated for high income levels (single people making $400,000+ per year and couples making $450,000+ per year), the top income tax rate returned to 39.6 percent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts

 

[dr3upmushroom]

I wish I was making $230k a year.

Become a single mother.

 

[Ottaro]

I have a six figure household (my husband makes 85k and I make 55k) and I don't even have a car. My husband owes like half of our household income in student loan debt. I think if we didn't have the debt we would be able to afford a car at least.

That's why I qualified everything with 'might' because I acknowledge people's circumstances are different. But everyone making six figures is undoubtedly able to afford some luxuries that they might not see as luxuries.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Here’s an idea: Increase the tax rate on the 1% to 90%. Just like that America-hating commie Eisenhower did. Call it the patriot tax.

Protip:

The 1% don't work for a paycheck and so income tax is largely irrelevant to them.

You want to tax the 1%, you need to impose a wealth tax.

 

[Random Painted HIghway]

I have a six figure household (my husband makes 85k and I make 55k) and I don't even have a car. My husband owes like half of our household income in student loan debt. I think if we didn't have the debt we would be able to afford a car at least.

If you didn’t have that debt, you likely wouldn’t have that income, hopefully, right? No one frankly care about folks like yourselves (on either end of you comparatively) and frankly who make that amount on the back of student loans that reduces useable income considerably, they just see the high figures and think whatever they think. Between student loans and day care expenses, folks like you are better off than people making less but it sure doesn’t feel like it at times. At least you have earning potential and will pay off the loans at some point, which is small consolation.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

If you didn’t have that debt, you likely wouldn’t have that income, hopefully, right? No one frankly care about folks like yourselves (on either end of you comparatively) and frankly who make that amount on the back of student loans that reduces useable income considerably, they just see the high figures and think whatever they think. Between student loans and day care expenses, folks like you are better off than people making less but it sure doesn’t feel like it at times. At least you have earning potential and will pay off the loans at some point, which is small consolation.

Preach. No one gives a shit for folks making money but dumping it into student loans and daycare and transportation costs.

 

[Alienfan]

We have the same problem in New Zealand, people think they're going to get rich someday, so any increase in tax for the rich is seen as a tax on their future wealth. The truth is, they'll be lucky to be on minimum wage in the future with automation taking off, that job they think they're going to get for working hard isn't going to happen for the vast majority of people.

 

[kaching]

You missed the best part of that briefing, where Cohn talks about what you can do with $1000 extra a year, like remodel your kitchen or buy a new car.

https://youtu.be/cLkwPkncnRE

What, nothing about paying for iPhones? That $1000 is like a perfect fit for the new model!

 

[Inuhanyou]

The right wing are evil. There is no pretense about it.

I heard ryan mention "entitlement reform" as something they were discussing for later. We all know what that means. Pass these tax cuts and then crow about how the feds dont have money to support social programs

The GOP are doing leftists a favor they dont even realize if only they could make a concerted effort to blair that narrative 247, whatever chance they get

 

[Chumly]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/...t-report-finds.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

I would have to imagine that the upper middle class is a core republican base. I can't imagine they are going to like getting socked so the super rich can get a massive tax break

 

[travisbickle]

Preach. No one gives a shit for folks making money but dumping it into student loans and daycare and transportation costs.

Occupy Wallstreet was about you guys, you just didn’t want to rock the boat.

Occupy Wallstreet was about the new middle class. You had a whole movement that was formed to highlight the failure of capitalism to reward the people who were commited to it. But you all listened to the wealthy media who tried to twist it into an anarchist revolution.

 

[Foffy]

We have the same problem in New Zealand, people think they're going to get rich someday, so any increase in tax for the rich is seen as a tax on their future wealth. The truth is, they'll be lucky to be on minimum wage in the future with automation taking off, that job they think they're going to get for working hard isn't going to happen for the vast majority of people.

It also doesn't help that we're not having a talk about the dissection of human capital from labor via technology.

People literally think this can't happen in ways to pull people downwards.

These people are fuckin' dangerous. Like pulling the pin of a grenade and thinking that grenades have expiration dates like a milk container or some shit.

 

[necrosis]

There is nothing "typical" about a family earning $100,000 per year. They just don't get it.

they get it

poor, racist rural voters are still going to eat their shit up so they don't care

 

[Jenov]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/...t-report-finds.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

Gross.

 

[Velocity:Design:Comfort]

Occupy Wallstreet was about you guys, you just didn’t want to rock the boat.

Occupy Wallstreet was about the new middle class. You had a whole movement that was formed to highlight the failure of capitalism to reward the people who were commited to it. But you all listened to the wealthy media who tried to twist it into an anarchist revolution.

Preach.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Occupy Wallstreet was about you guys, you just didn’t want to rock the boat.

Occupy Wallstreet was about the new middle class. You had a whole movement that was formed to highlight the failure of capitalism to reward the people who were commited to it. But you all listened to the wealthy media who tried to twist it into an anarchist revolution.

I agree but at the same time let's not portray OWS with rose tinted glasses. That movement's messaging was scattered and not focused. They had press coverage but a combination of press bias against their group and horrible messaging to begin with it lead to a lot of people having no idea wtf they stood for. They just appeared to be a bunch of hippies bitching about college loans.

 

[Steel]

I agree but at the same time let's not portray OWS with rose tinted glasses. That movement's messaging was scattered and not focused. They had press coverage but a combination of press bias against their group and horrible messaging to begin with it lead to a lot of people having no idea wtf they stood for. They just appeared to be a bunch of hippies bitching about college loans.

OWS had absolutely no leaders, so of course it got nothing done. Movements without clear leaders that are involved in politics are meaningless.

 

[Plywood]

The attack on the typical American can not stand

Barely scraping by!!!

 

[travisbickle]

I agree but at the same time let's not portray OWS with rose tinted glasses. That movement's messaging was scattered and not focused. They had press coverage but a combination of press bias against their group and horrible messaging to begin with it lead to a lot of people having no idea wtf they stood for. They just appeared to be a bunch of hippies bitching about college loans.

No rose-tinted glasses here. I'm just saying that was the social movement for the recently graduated but fucked by debt and lack of affordable housing/child care. Can't expect people to constantly rally behind the idiots that are just realizing the economy is still stacked against them even though they did what they were supposed to.

 

[Steeped in a Sea of Games]

I've never understood why taxes bother people in low-income brackets so much. Always willing to give away millions to the rich to save like 1k a year. Pretty ridiculous on the face of it all. $80 bucks a month extra will do jack shit for most people.

 

[Kthulhu]

The attack on the typical American can not stand

What is this from?

 

[travisbickle]

What is this from?

I think it's the NYTimes? The illustrator did not know the context his work was for.

 

[SapientWolf]

I've never understood why taxes bother people in low-income brackets so much. Always willing to give away millions to the rich to save like 1k a year. Pretty ridiculous on the face of it all. $80 bucks a month extra will do jack shit for most people.

Because they're poor, and money in their pockets is concrete while millions of dollars of lost tax revenue is abstract?

At this point it's pretty obvious why they're trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act.

 

[XMonkey]

What is this from?

WSJ article back when the Bush tax cuts were expiring when Obama was President IIRC.