BigRedBuster
Well-known member
Man, I wish Republicans were able to learn from mistakes or science.
But.....my faith in that happening is very slim.
But.....my faith in that happening is very slim.
Trump's Tax Plan
- Thread starter sho
- Start date
Danny Bateman
Donor
This is breathtakingly wrong, even if you're against the estate tax. Selling an estate tax repeal as some kind of populism for the working class is laughable.
BigRedBuster
Well-known member
Correct. I'm not a fan of the estate tax, But, convincing this audience that somehow it's good for them is baffling. But....it works. These truck drivers I'm sure left this event so pumped up because he "told it like it is". They probably all wore their cute little red MAGA hats home and slept in them.
TGHusker
Well-known member
However, when I think of farmers who want to pass their farms on to family members or who sell it, doesn't the estate tax come into play? So, this is where it might help the 'common man'.
TGHusker
Well-known member
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/donald-trump-middle-class-tax/2017/10/11/id/819132/
According to this article - the $4k middle class tax cut benefit is figured over 8 years and has a lot to do wt companies reinvesting in the USA and passing their tax breaks on to their workers in the form of higher wages. Kind of a long, winding road to getting to that point. Yet is shows a tax increase for those earning $50k to $150k - which is perhaps most of us live.
If my taxes go up after this - I'll be so mad and work to defeat any Republican running in Okla who supported it.
Quotes:
n independent analysis found that the plan may actually raise taxes on nearly a third of middle-class families, criticism that is weighing on Trump’s plan. A study by the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which used details from previous Republican plans to fill in gaps in the president’s framework, found the Trump plan would raise taxes for almost 30 percent of filers making $50,000 to $150,000 per year.
The president pushed back in Harrisburg, arguing that the tax cuts for corporations that are a centerpiece of his plan ultimately would help middle-class families. Trump said as corporations get to keep more of their profits, they will use some of the added income to pay workers higher wages. That shift along with bringing offshore earnings back to the U.S. would translate into a $4,000 pay raise for an ordinary worker, Trump said.
“We can breathe new life into struggling industries and forgotten towns,” Trump said.
Economists disagree on just how much individuals benefit from corporate tax breaks, but even Trump’s own economic advisers have said that the $4,000 benefit would only materialize over eight years. On an annual basis, it’s closer to $500.
According to this article - the $4k middle class tax cut benefit is figured over 8 years and has a lot to do wt companies reinvesting in the USA and passing their tax breaks on to their workers in the form of higher wages. Kind of a long, winding road to getting to that point. Yet is shows a tax increase for those earning $50k to $150k - which is perhaps most of us live.
If my taxes go up after this - I'll be so mad and work to defeat any Republican running in Okla who supported it.
Quotes:
n independent analysis found that the plan may actually raise taxes on nearly a third of middle-class families, criticism that is weighing on Trump’s plan. A study by the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, which used details from previous Republican plans to fill in gaps in the president’s framework, found the Trump plan would raise taxes for almost 30 percent of filers making $50,000 to $150,000 per year.
The president pushed back in Harrisburg, arguing that the tax cuts for corporations that are a centerpiece of his plan ultimately would help middle-class families. Trump said as corporations get to keep more of their profits, they will use some of the added income to pay workers higher wages. That shift along with bringing offshore earnings back to the U.S. would translate into a $4,000 pay raise for an ordinary worker, Trump said.
“We can breathe new life into struggling industries and forgotten towns,” Trump said.
Economists disagree on just how much individuals benefit from corporate tax breaks, but even Trump’s own economic advisers have said that the $4,000 benefit would only materialize over eight years. On an annual basis, it’s closer to $500.
QMany
New member
The first $5.49M is exempt, so it isn't coming into play for most. And if you are fortunate enough to inherit a farm/business valued over $5.49M, provisions allow you to spread the tax payments out over 15 years at low interest rates.
QMany
New member
Yes, that is the aim. But they are using this "small business/farm" ruse to try to fleece Americans.
If someone wants to talk about raising the exemption slightly because of inflation or allowing deferred payments, I'm all ears for debate.
Do know, the exemption has raised from $650,000 in 2001. The estate tax raises revenues and puts a small dent in few families/individuals controlling immense amounts of wealth.
TGHusker
Well-known member
Now there can be trickle down - large cuts to large corporations with the hope that they pass on to workers via higher wages (we all know large corporations always do the right thing- stop holding your breath. :sarcasm )
Or there can be 'trickle up' - in which consumers are given larger tax breaks so that they spend money in our consumer focused economy. Consumers (think middle class) buying more and more products, driving higher demand for products and services, and thus creating jobs to fulfill that greater demand. We are a consumer driven economy and not a savings driven economy. So much of any tax break given to the middle class will be converted into the demand for 'stuff'. The money won't be stored away in savings as we've seen corporations do after 2008 - in which corporations' cash on hand grew greatly but did not translate into corresponding investments that created new jobs.
Trickle down can be a helpful thing but not if it isn't coupled with trickled up. Otherwise trickle down leads to fatter bank accounts by corporations. There needs to be a corresponding demand for the goods and services corporations provide to draw that trickle down to the consumer's level. Tax breaks for the consumer 'class' will provide that trickle up spark.
Or there can be 'trickle up' - in which consumers are given larger tax breaks so that they spend money in our consumer focused economy. Consumers (think middle class) buying more and more products, driving higher demand for products and services, and thus creating jobs to fulfill that greater demand. We are a consumer driven economy and not a savings driven economy. So much of any tax break given to the middle class will be converted into the demand for 'stuff'. The money won't be stored away in savings as we've seen corporations do after 2008 - in which corporations' cash on hand grew greatly but did not translate into corresponding investments that created new jobs.
Trickle down can be a helpful thing but not if it isn't coupled with trickled up. Otherwise trickle down leads to fatter bank accounts by corporations. There needs to be a corresponding demand for the goods and services corporations provide to draw that trickle down to the consumer's level. Tax breaks for the consumer 'class' will provide that trickle up spark.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster
Well-known member
The first $5.49M is exempt, so it isn't coming into play for most. And if you are fortunate enough to inherit a farm/business valued over $5.49M, provisions allow you to spread the tax payments out over 15 years at low interest rates.
I have a really hard time believing that only 50 farms or businesses in the US are valued at over 5.49 million. There are multiple non-public companies (not even counting farms) within the state of Nebraska that I would think are valued over that amount and Nebraska is a small state. Then, you take states like Texas, California, New York....they have to have quite a few.
QMany
New member
BigRedBuster
Well-known member
deedsker
New member
Just rinse and repeat every year...
50 "small" farms a year out of 2,700,000 total estate events are effected which is a .00185% rate of all estates. Which means 1 in 54,000 estate events is causing a small farm issue described.
Kiyoat Husker
New member
Agree. They should be more transparent with that statistic. It looks like they are saying "There are 2.7 million estates in the USA".
Really they are saying there are 2.7 million deaths each year, and of that, 0.2% are subject to the estate tax. Some of those "estates" might be zero real estate, just a collection of vinyl records and a cat-stained couch.
The 1% is the more relevant number, and still makes the point without trying to be misleading.