CEOExpress Blogger Private Label
 CEOExpress Home

 Total visits to this poll: 36900

This icon appears on your homepage
when there are new posts.

      Search Messages:           
AllThis Forum

Do you think that the Trump Tax plan will help the middle class?

I have no idea

Forum View Preference: Basic | AdvancedOpen Forums/Previous Polls | Suggest a Poll
See All Messages

1-8 of 8

1. Patricia Pomerleau CEOExpressSelect Member
     Forum Moderator
     (11/21/2017 8:47:42 AM)
     Message ID #294035

Back To All Messages

This organization states it is non partisan (although the Brookings institute leans right) and is the best, fairest analysis I have seen.

PLEASE take a minute to read and see all sides--not just the one you have decided on already. : )

The Tax Policy Center has released distributional estimates of the Senate version of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as passed by the Senate Finance Committee on November 16, 2017. We find the bill would reduce taxes on average for all income groups in both 2019 and 2025. In general, higher income households receive larger average tax cuts as a percentage of after-tax income, with the largest cuts as a share of income going to taxpayers in the 95th to 99th percentiles of the income distribution. On average in 2027, taxes would rise modestly for the lowest-income group, change little for middle- income groups, and decrease for higher-income groups. Compared to current law, 9 percent of taxpayers would pay more in 2019, 12 percent in 2025, and 50 percent in 2027.

2. Thomas C CEOExpressSelect Member
     (12/6/2017 1:11:46 PM)
     Message ID #294039

This message is in response to Patricia Pomerleau ( message id #294035 )  Back To All Messages

These are the highlights of HR1

Read it for yourself, download the PDF

It would help if you are a Tax Attorney, as the language is complex

Mr. Bathurst can interpret any of your questions

Most of the comments I have read, including the former Economist known as Krugman, are simply not true.

Subtitle A—Simplification and reform of rates, standard deduction, and exemptions

Sec. 1001. Reduction and simplification of individual income tax rates.
Sec. 1002. Enhancement of standard deduction.
Sec. 1003. Repeal of deduction for personal exemptions.
Sec. 1004. Maximum rate on business income of individuals.
Sec. 1005. Conforming amendments related to simplification of individual income tax rates.

Subtitle B—Simplification and reform of family and individual tax credits

Sec. 1101. Enhancement of child tax credit and new family tax credit.
Sec. 1102. Repeal of nonrefundable credits.
Sec. 1103. Refundable credit program integrity.
Sec. 1104. Procedures to reduce improper claims of earned income credit.
Sec. 1105. Certain income disallowed for purposes of the earned income tax credit.

Subtitle C—Simplification and reform of education incentives

Sec. 1201. American opportunity tax credit.
Sec. 1202. Consolidation of education savings rules.
Sec. 1203. Reforms to discharge of certain student loan indebtedness.
Sec. 1204. Repeal of other provisions relating to education.
Sec. 1205. Rollovers between qualified tuition programs and qualified ABLE programs.
Subtitle D—Simplification and reform of deductions

Sec. 1301. Repeal of overall limitation on itemized deductions.
Sec. 1302. Mortgage interest.
Sec. 1303. Repeal of deduction for certain taxes not paid or accrued in a trade or business.
Sec. 1304. Repeal of deduction for personal casualty losses.
Sec. 1305. Limitation on wagering losses.
Sec. 1306. Charitable contributions.
Sec. 1307. Repeal of deduction for tax preparation expenses.
Sec. 1308. Repeal of medical expense deduction.
Sec. 1309. Repeal of deduction for alimony payments.
Sec. 1310. Repeal of deduction for moving expenses.
Sec. 1311. Termination of deduction and exclusions for contributions to medical savings accounts.
Sec. 1312. Denial of deduction for expenses attributable to the trade or business of being an employee

Subtitle E—Simplification and reform of exclusions and taxable compensation

Sec. 1401. Limitation on exclusion for employer-provided housing.
Sec. 1402. Exclusion of gain from sale of a principal residence.
Sec. 1403. Repeal of exclusion, etc., for employee achievement awards.
Sec. 1404. Sunset of exclusion for dependent care assistance programs.
Sec. 1405. Repeal of exclusion for qualified moving expense reimbursement.
Sec. 1406. Repeal of exclusion for adoption assistance programs.

3. Patricia Pomerleau CEOExpressSelect Member
     Forum Moderator
     (11/21/2017 9:38:03 AM)
     Message ID #294041

This message is in response to Thomas C ( message id #294039 )  Back To All Messages

The only thing that matters is the IMPACT, not a laundry list of "aren't we fabulous"

A list says noting.

Analysis says everything. A review of multiple analyses will give you and others a better understanding.

Again, a list does nothing. Only analysis provides light.

4. Thomas C CEOExpressSelect Member
     (11/22/2017 12:56:41 PM)
     Message ID #294062

This message is in response to Patricia Pomerleau ( message id #294041 )  Back To All Messages

The only thing that matters the crap out of the other guy.

Nobody thinks strategically when it comes to paying taxes.

Do we want a tax code for the next generation? One that better fits a global economy? Or better yet, a tax code that is more appropriate for the high tech-internet based companies that now dominate the US economy?

Depends upon your viewpoint, Macro vs. supply side. Does the government create jobs and capital, or is it private enterprise that creates capital.

5. D Robb
     (11/21/2017 9:44:46 AM)
     Message ID #294063

This message is in response to Thomas C ( message id #294062 )  Back To All Messages

I am open to listen to anything that doesn't balloon the deficit. However, since trickle down has never worked I am not going to believe anyone that tells me that it will this time.

6. M Bathurst
     (11/22/2017 2:51:57 PM)
     Message ID #294110

This message is in response to Thomas C ( message id #294039 )  Back To All Messages

Mr. C - thanks for the compliment. However, I am not interested in interpreting any questions from the knuckleheads regarding taxation (this comment is not aimed at you). They would be unable to locate their arses with both hands on a map.

On numerous occasions, I have attempted to explain the impact of the territorial taxation of US corporations. When BMW can make money anywhere in the world and pay taxes where earned; then be free to reinvest those earnings anywhere in the world that is advantageous to the company, even Germany without an additional layer of taxation on the investment - they win. When Ford is not free to do the same; the Left is up in arms about all the jobs gone overseas. The real problem is not that jobs are overseas (that was always going to happen - the global markets the Left loves); but, rather US investment of foreign earnings back in the US is going to be hit by a "surcharge". So, Ford makes the decision, all things considered equal, build a new plant in Mexico at x-cost or Texas at x-cost PLUS 35% tax hit - what would you do?

As for individual taxes - the Bush tax cuts actually moved more taxpayers off the tax rolls and increased the amount of taxes taken from the high-earners. Today, roughly 47-50% of the public pay zero income taxes; and, many get refundable tax credits; so in essence they are at a negative rate (not a bad deal). While, the top 1% pay almost 50% of all incomes taxes. Prior to the Bush cuts, that number was closer to 20%. So, you would think the Left would love the vastly increase progressive impact of the Bush tax cuts.

So, if you are going to provide a tax cut to individuals; of course those paying the most will benefit the most. After all, how can someone paying zero income taxes benefit; they already are at zero tax cost.

When tax policy gets reformed, there are losers and winners. The key here for me is the corporate reform - I would like to see 15% rather than 20%. Corporations in essence do not pay taxes, the consumer pays them. So, this is a consumer pricing win. Plus, by making the US a "tax haven" for corporations will likely goose the economy big time (the US is the largest market in the world - if foreign entities can come here an pay 15% - they will come). And, the repatriation of foreign earnings will be a non inflationary (no new money is being printed - it is already in the system) injection of capital into the US. Even, if the FE are used in a share back program, it will generate revenues for the Treasury in the terms of capital gains income on taxable shareholders.

Mr. C - much of what you read here is what I call financial/monetary pen!s envy; nothing more, nothing less; coupled with a profound lack of financial / tax policy and the economic impact on the economy.

Have a great Thanksgiving.

Message edited by user at 11/22/2017 2:58:08 PM

7. Thomas C CEOExpressSelect Member
     (11/21/2017 1:47:57 PM)
     Message ID #294119

This message is in response to M Bathurst ( message id #294110 )  Back To All Messages

All great points. Mr.B!

Long ago the tax code became way too complex for the average taxpayer. It was built gradually via donors, and is not anything similar to 1986.

Business wise 1986 was the era when we switched to an IBM double floppy, from an NCR bookkeeping machine. We had certified financials. with an audit. Our CPA was mainly an advisor with a pile of "work papers".

Fast forward to 2017, like most small business we use Sage, a sophisticated version of Quick Books. Where you can move back and forth correcting entries, no more green bar and reversing entries, and an audit trail.

Our bank doesn't require Certified Statements. A first year accounting student can do our closing entries. Very efficient. But our accounting fees have soared due to tax forms. Combined with reporting to Commerce, Labor and State, has created a nightmare for small business.

If these Bills alter the compliance, I'm all in. No offense to the tax-prep world but it's an expense we can no longer afford in today's marketplace. Given the fact that my competitors are teenagers who live in a factory that operates 24/6 in mainland China.

I read all the pundits, including Krugman. all people who have never had to sweat out a payroll. They are clueless.

8. Thomas C CEOExpressSelect Member
     (11/21/2017 1:56:22 PM)
     Message ID #294833

This message is in response to Patricia Pomerleau ( message id #294035 )  Back To All Messages


Beautiful tables, nice charts. No backup on how they got to those numbers.

Unless I missed it. I need to see the equations, not the answers
  1-8 of 8