***Official Tax Reform Thread*** If it is good for Trump, it is good for America! (2 Viewers)

[MarvinTScamper]

how about you guys focus on the ACTUAL problem.  Spending less than the tax rolls bring in.  You ##### about the rich guys, but you're happy to spend like you are one.  Guys with no money always have the best methods for spending the other guy's money.

For the record, find a post by me saying "lower tax rates" or "I like Trump" or "I like the govt" and I'll give you my money.

F'n dildos.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

how about you guys focus on the ACTUAL problem.  Spending less than the tax rolls bring in.  You ##### about the rich guys, but you're happy to spend like you are one.  Guys with no money always have the best methods for spending the other guy's money.

For the record, find a post by me saying "lower tax rates" or "I like Trump" or "I like the govt" and I'll give you my money.

F'n dildos.

What do you mean by "we're happy to spend" like we are rich?

 

[elbowrm]

how about you guys focus on the ACTUAL problem.  Spending less than the tax rolls bring in.  You ##### about the rich guys, but you're happy to spend like you are one.  Guys with no money always have the best methods for spending the other guy's money.

For the record, find a post by me saying "lower tax rates" or "I like Trump" or "I like the govt" and I'll give you my money.

F'n dildos.

I'm curious what you think about the supposed plan to be unveiled by the White House tomorrow, which appears to consist of nothing more than a cut to the corporate tax rate to 15%, the $2.4 trillion revenue shortfall from which would be paid for by higher future growth.

IF this is indeed the plan, will this:

A) shrink the deficit

or 

B) increase the deficit 

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Bump top rate back to 50% plus, phase out housing interest exemption as you climb the ladder, punish companies who offshore jobs and earnings.

The Trump people will never admit it, but the situation they're in started with Reagan (see Chart 7), and their decision they'd rather vote with the rich than the brown.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

What do you mean by "we're happy to spend" like we are rich?

so many on the left decide where to spend more, rather than decide where to spend less.   You tend to be a little more thoughtful, fgilc, so not necessarily direct at you.  I think tax rates are ####### high enough as it is.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

I'm curious what you think about the supposed plan to be unveiled by the White House tomorrow, which appears to consist of nothing more than a cut to the corporate tax rate to 15%, the $2.4 trillion revenue shortfall from which would be paid for by higher future growth.

IF this is indeed the plan, will this:

A) shrink the deficit

or 

B) increase the deficit 

I tend to think that given we have some of the highest corporate tax rates in the modern world, and that companies are finding ways to keep TRILLIONS of dollars ex-USA because of it, that it could improve.

The execution of the plan is too important...you don't just get to pin me (or anyone) to A or B just so you can look back and say "see?"

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

For the record, find a post by me saying "lower tax rates" or "I like Trump" or "I like the govt" and I'll give you my money.

I think tax rates are ####### high enough as it is.

This seems close enough so I should get at least half your money.

 

[Juxtatarot]

how about you guys focus on the ACTUAL problem.  Spending less than the tax rolls bring in.  You ##### about the rich guys, but you're happy to spend like you are one.  Guys with no money always have the best methods for spending the other guy's money.

For the record, find a post by me saying "lower tax rates" or "I like Trump" or "I like the govt" and I'll give you my money.

F'n dildos.

The problem with focusing on spending is to make a huge difference, you have to cut military spending, social security and/or Medicare.

 

[elbowrm]

I tend to think that given we have some of the highest corporate tax rates in the modern world, and that companies are finding ways to keep TRILLIONS of dollars ex-USA because of it, that it could improve.

The execution of the plan is too important...you don't just get to pin me (or anyone) to A or B just so you can look back and say "see?"

Execution has nothing to do with it.  The corporate rate goes to 15% with no other changes.  

If the deficit and US debt are your main priorities, this administration is set to leave you sorely disappointed, just like every other GOP administration since Ronald Reagan.

 

[Ned]

This seems close enough so I should get at least half your money.

It took 21 minutes  

 

[MarvinTScamper]

The problem with focusing on spending is to make a huge difference, you have to cut military spending, social security and/or Medicare.

Maybe we don't need to make a huge difference.   And I don't think you're including the financial impact from firing all the federal employees that might go along with lowered spending.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

The problem with focusing on spending is to make a huge difference, you have to cut military spending, social security and/or Medicare.

and if we HAVE to, go ahead and tighten them up.  They could use a little less waste.   Just think, finding 10% efficiency here is $260billion a year.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Maybe we don't need to make a huge difference.   

We do if we want to provide large tax cuts without ballooning the deficit.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

We do if we want to provide large tax cuts without ballooning the deficit.

who's advocating large tax cuts?

 

[Juxtatarot]

who's advocating large tax cuts?

Apparently Trump and Mnuchin tomorrow, at least.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Apparently Trump and Mnuchin tomorrow, at least.

but now we're back to corporate tax cuts.  That's different.

 

[GamerBoy61]

Just found this stat: The Tax Policy Center estimates that 45.3% of U.S. Households pay no Federal tax Forbes Link.  (not saying they don't pay any Social Security or Medicare payroll taxes) 

I'm not sure how this fits into the discussion but I thought it was interesting. 

 

[Slapdash]

Just found this stat: The Tax Policy Center estimates that 45.3% of U.S. Households pay no Federal tax Forbes Link.  (not saying they don't pay any Social Security or Medicare payroll taxes) 

I'm not sure how this fits into the discussion but I thought it was interesting. 

We run most welfare/subsidies through the tax code, like the EITC, instead of via spending

 

[eoMMan]

We run most welfare/subsidies through the tax code, like the EITC, instead of via spending

But if we start taxing spending instead of income, the poorest people will get hit the hardest, correct? They would go from paying no tax to "some" tax on their spending (which is mostly essential items).

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

But if we start taxing spending instead of income, the poorest people will get hit the hardest, correct? They would go from paying no tax to "some" tax on their spending (which is mostly essential items).

It depends on the details.  The Fair Tax promoted by some folks on this board gives every citizen a "prebate" that is intended to cover for the cost of sales taxes on essential items.

 

[fantasycurse42]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/corporate-taxes-lawmakers-assail-white-house-plan-for-15-percent-rate.html

President Donald Trump is scheduled to unveil his broad principles for tax reform on Wednesday. According to the Wall Street Journal, the announcement is expected to include the 15 percent corporate rate that Trump proposed during the campaign. The Tax Policy Center estimates the move would reduce federal revenues by more than $2.4 trillion.

Shocked, how could this be?

 

[Slapdash]

Yes.  I'm a fan of using the tax code to incentize behavior.  

The road to hell is paved with good intentions

 

[Juxtatarot]

From the article FC42 posted:

To comply with the rules around reconciliation, the White House could make the tax cuts temporary, letting them expire after 10 years in order to avoid increasing the deficit in the long term. However, House Speaker Paul Ryan's office threw cold water on that idea. A senior aide pointed out that simply cutting the corporate rate without changing other parts of the tax code would allow businesses to carry forward tax credits that could be used a decade later — ultimately adding to the deficit anyway.

In remarks at the Institute for International Finance last week, one of Ryan's senior tax writers called the prospect of a temporary business tax cut a "magic unicorn running around."

So, if this is true, Trump is going to propose something that has no chance at passing.  Insane.

 

[Slapdash]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/corporate-taxes-lawmakers-assail-white-house-plan-for-15-percent-rate.html

Shocked, how could this be?

They're ignoring that tax cuts pay for themselves....like always.  SAD

 

[MarvinTScamper]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/corporate-taxes-lawmakers-assail-white-house-plan-for-15-percent-rate.html

Shocked, how could this be?

math

I wonder where the Tax Policy Center thinks the 2.4 trillion would be spent, and how it would impact the country.

 

[Slapdash]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/corporate-taxes-lawmakers-assail-white-house-plan-for-15-percent-rate.html

Shocked, how could this be?

They're ignoring that tax cuts pay for themselves....like always.  SAD

 

[jonessed]

From the article FC42 posted:

So, if this is true, Trump is going to propose something that has no chance at passing.  Insane.

Isn't that how these things normally go?  Each side puts a stake in the ground and then starts to negotiate?  I expect this process to play out over months.

 

[Slapdash]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/25/corporate-taxes-lawmakers-assail-white-house-plan-for-15-percent-rate.html

Shocked, how could this be?

They're ignoring that tax cuts pay for themselves....like always.  SAD

 

[fantasycurse42]

If these ridiculous tax reforms don't make it through, the market unwind will be pretty epic - could possibly be what kills the bull.

 

[The Z Machine]

Article has been updated with some quotes.  Oh, good, it's going to pay for itself with economic growth.  The Laffer Curve is due to be right with a tax cut one of these times!

I heard that they are premising the tax rate reductions / tax simplification on something like 8-9% economic growth.

I'll give anyone 10:1 odds that annual GDP growth doesn't hit 9% in the next 4 years.

 

[Tau837]

I wonder where the Tax Policy Center thinks the 2.4 trillion would be spent, and how it would impact the country.

This is the crux of how good or bad this proposal would turn out to be. What will those businesses do with that money and what are the long term effects that result from that? If it results in GDP growth, where is the break even point where the combination of the tax cut and the growth is a net positive? Even if it turns out to be a net negative on the deficit, are there second order effects that provide other benefits that offset?

 

[MarvinTScamper]

This is the crux of how good or bad this proposal would turn out to be. What will those businesses do with that money and what are the long term effects that result from that? If it results in GDP growth, where is the break even point where the combination of the tax cut and the growth is a net positive? Even if it turns out to be a net negative on the deficit, are there second order effects that provide other benefits that offset?

yeah.  Seems like the only 2 outcomes people are willing to discuss is 1) the rich will just soak up the money and screw the poor or 2) the benefits won't equal the cuts.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

yeah.  Seems like the only 2 outcomes people are willing to discuss is 1) the rich will just soak up the money and screw the poor or 2) the benefits won't equal the cuts.

Those are the most likely assumptions based on prior experiences.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Those are the most likely assumptions based on prior experiences.

maybe the 2nd one.  The first is complete hyperbole from the left and the stupid.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

maybe the 2nd one.  The first is complete hyperbole from the left and the stupid.

Really?  The economy has grown a lot in the last 50 years or so but the benefits have almost all gone to the richest people.  Why do you think growing the economy even more would be a boon for the non-wealthy?

 

[tommyGunZ]

and if we HAVE to, go ahead and tighten them up.  They could use a little less waste.   Just think, finding 10% efficiency here is $260billion a year.

I can't believe no one has ever thought of this!  Hey guys, MTS has figured it out, let's just find the "waste" line items, and cut them from the budget.

Rainbows, unicorns, and skittles for everyone!  

 

[fantasycurse42]

 the benefits won't equal the cuts.

We know exactly what the corporations will do with the extra money, none of it helps mainstream America:

1) The lion's share will go to buybacks

2) Assume the remainder would go into increasing efficiencies, investing in technology, and figuring out how to automate #### (which will lead to job losses over the next decade, and speed the process up in the name of corporate profits). 

& I'm not someone complaining of the "rich," my effective federal tax rate was over 28%, between NYC and NY state that was almost another 10% and then an additional 6.2% on the first $117k.

I just don't enjoy my future as someone in their early-mid 30's being mortgaged so people in their mid 40's-50's get one last boost in their accounts before going conservative in 5-10 years. 

Between trillions being printed and pumped into the system over the last decade and now a huge tax cut to balloon the debt, it'll be established millennials that bear the brunt of this #### in 5-10 years, #### that and #### these people. Older millennials need a voice and to take a stand so that we don't get the #### end of this stick that is being formed. 

 

[MarvinTScamper]

I can't believe no one has ever thought of this!  Hey guys, MTS has figured it out, let's just find the "waste" line items, and cut them from the budget.

Rainbows, unicorns, and skittles for everyone!  

LOL    F u.  You're gonna tell me raising taxes and the minimum wage will help?   Talk about ####### rainbows and skittles.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

We know exactly what the corporations will do with the extra money, none of it helps mainstream America:

1) The lion's share will go to buybacks

2) Assume the remainder would go into increasing efficiencies, investing in technology, and figuring out how to automate #### (which will lead to job losses over the next decade, and speed the process up in the name of corporate profits). 

& I'm not someone complaining of the "rich," my effective federal tax rate was over 28%, between NYC and NY state that was almost another 10% and then an additional 6.2% on the first $117k.

I just don't enjoy my future as someone in their early-mid 30's being mortgaged so people in their mid 40's-50's get one last boost in their accounts before going conservative in 5-10 years. 

Between trillions being printed and pumped into the system over the last decade and now a huge tax cut to balloon the debt, it'll be established millennials that bear the brunt of this #### in 5-10 years, #### that and #### these people. Older millennials need a voice and to take a stand so that we don't get the #### end of this stick that is being formed. 

ahh, no job creation whatsoever.   Ok.   Why is that people think lower corporate income tax works in EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD?  Why do liberals want healthcare like they have it in Sweden, but not Swedish corp tax rate?  Sweden also has MINIMUM income tax...

 

[fantasycurse42]

ahh, no job creation whatsoever.   Ok.   Why is that people think lower corporate income tax works in EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD?  Why do liberals want healthcare like they have it in Sweden, but not Swedish corp tax rate?  Sweden also has MINIMUM income tax...

Ask a liberal, I'm an Independent.

Some job creation? Sure. Enough to justify this? Not even close.

 

[joffer]

Weird.  I remember Scupper being a pretty reasonable guy.

 

[RUSF18]

From the article FC42 posted:

So, if this is true, Trump is going to propose something that has no chance at passing.  Insane.

Or it will be paid for through removing the ability to fund a 401k with pre-tax money, and/or tax unrealized gains in your 401k annually.

#### him,

 

[MarvinTScamper]

Weird.  I remember Scupper being a pretty reasonable guy.

lol - you must have missed most of my stuff.   

I pay my taxes, and give to charity.  I get a little pissy when those who pay less and give less tell me I don't give enough.  Or tell me "I can afford it"

 

[fantasycurse42]

I get a little pissy when those who pay less and give less tell me I don't give enough. 

That's a pretty strong assumption

 

[MarvinTScamper]

That's a pretty strong assumption

for whom?  DId I name you, or did you just infer I meant you?

 

[fantasycurse42]

for whom?  DId I name you, or did you just infer I meant you?

ahh, no job creation whatsoever.   Ok.   Why is that people think lower corporate income tax works in EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD?  Why do liberals want healthcare like they have it in Sweden, but not Swedish corp tax rate?  Sweden also has MINIMUM income tax...

I get a little pissy when those who pay less and give less tell me I don't give enough.  

I think the 2nd response above could be considered pissy?

I'm just sick of the ####### government mortgaging my future, and these super tax reforms do just that, just like the endless money printing. 

Currently, per dollar (not GDP) we have the most debt by 2x over the 2nd leading nation, over 3x the countries that rank 3-5 on that list, and between 6-9x the countries that are 6-10 on the list. 

I want the ####### can to stop being kicked, we'll end up at a quadrillion in debt by the time I'm ready to retire at this pace. I don't want some super mega-crisis that trumps 2007-2009 taking shape when I'm in my 40's or 50's, and I see a really nice one in the works.

 

[MarvinTScamper]

I think the 2nd response above could be considered pissy?

I'm just sick of the ####### government mortgaging my future, and these super tax reforms do just that, just like the endless money printing. 

Currently, per dollar (not GDP) we have the most debt by 2x over the 2nd leading nation, over 3x the countries that rank 3-5 on that list, and between 6-9x the countries that are 6-10 on the list. 

I want the ####### can to stop being kicked, we'll end up at a quadrillion in debt by the time I'm ready to retire at this pace. I don't want some super mega-crisis that trumps 2007-2009 taking shape when I'm in my 40's or 50's, and I see a really nice one in the works.

Yes, the 2nd response was pissy...but in general.  Not at you.

as for the rest of this, I'm aware of it.  I hate the tax/spend problems this country has, and generally, we lie on the same side of the fence.  I ####### hate Trump, and wish he would stick to government reform.   

 

[joffer]

https://youtu.be/ggd2HgS13j4

 

[jonessed]

Really?  The economy has grown a lot in the last 50 years or so but the benefits have almost all gone to the richest people.  Why do you think growing the economy even more would be a boon for the non-wealthy?

That's really been more in the last 20 years.

Given globalization I don't think the link between corporate tax cuts and domestic job/wage growth is anything like it used to be.  The goal may be to get companies to repatriate money sitting overseas and expand more domestically, but I'm not convinced it will happen.

I would like to see reform though.  The corporate tax code needs to be much more equitable.  A lower rate and fewer giveaways/loopholes would be good.

 

[Steve Tasker]

I tend to think that given we have some of the highest corporate tax rates in the modern world, and that companies are finding ways to keep TRILLIONS of dollars ex-USA because of it, that it could improve.

The execution of the plan is too important...you don't just get to pin me (or anyone) to A or B just so you can look back and say "see?"

It is undoubtedly true that firms have plenty of funds offshore to defer tax.  Lowering the tax rate would surely cause firms to repatriate more rapidly.  The question is what happens to the funds when repatriated?

The 2004 repatriation holiday was shown to have led to more distribution to shareholders rather than job creation or business reinvestment.  From this research paper, quote, "Repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, employment or R&D—even for the firms that lobbied for the tax holiday stating these intentions and for firms that appeared to be financially constrained. Instead, a $1 increase in repatriations was associated with an increase of almost $1 in payouts to shareholders. These results suggest that the domestic operations of U.S. multinationals were not financially constrained and that these firms were reasonably well-governed."

It's a game of tax arbitrage.  Anyone who has done any tax planning on even mildly-complex structures will tell you that the #1 question is "how can I get my money out of the structure while paying as little tax as possible?"  I'm not going to pretend to be an economist, but if Trump slashes corporate rates - especially with a sunset provision - you're sure to see repatriation in the near term....but would firms reinvest that in domestic employment or dividend it out?  Even if employment doesn't increase, it's probably better for the domestic economy to have those funds in the hands of US shareholders on a micro level, people could have more disposable income to spur the economy....but at a macro level, how much of that just ends up getting socked away and not spent in the near term anyway?  I guess that's why I'm not an economist.