Post: #26

This may go through depending on how the Democratic leadership decides to spin this. They could say this helps the poor, helps the rich, is good for the economy (corporate income tax), or that it benefits "evil" corporations. They could spin it as they usually do: Republicans want xyz bad things to happen. They could on the other hand use this as a feel good bipartisan moment, saying that they're perfectly happy to work with Republicans if they put foreword "common sense solutions." They're studying preexisting political research now to make a calculated guess of what's best for them politically.

Edit: The good news is that reducing taxes tends to be popular with the public.

Post: #27

(11-02-2017 06:26 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:17 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:10 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:04 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 05:48 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  Optics on the estate tax are not great. Big picture its a small revenue number and double taxation is a bad thing.

The mortgage limitation won't hurt any blue collar types. It is a double whammy to NY/CA and places like DC though, but speaking as someone who lives in one of those places fuck them.

So estate tax is not ok but taxes on lottery or gambling winnings are? Lol please. No one needs tens of millions of dollars or more.

The government doesn't have a right to take wealth simply because you don't need it. It was all taxed at some point already as it was earned. Lottery/gambling winnings have not been taxed yet so I don't see your point there.

What are you talking about. Lottery/gambling money comes out of someones income (from a job for instance) that was previously taxed. If anything that's a better example of double taxation than estate tax.

You don't own the wealth of someone who is deceased. It's not yours. You didn't earn it. Tbh in my opinion you're not entitled to any of it unless a court or government of the country of the deceased grants it to you.

You don't understand double taxation. You only pay taxes on the gambling earnings (not the principal bet) which has not been taxed yet. That's a very socialist outlook on inheritance. If I work my ass off to better the lives of the next generation the government has absolutely no right to steal their birthright.

Where do you think the money to make the bet comes from in the first place? A job, which income from is taxed. Re-read my post I added an example after you replied.

Do you even understand what the estate tax is? This deals with something like the .000001% of households. The threshold is over 5 million. It has nothing to do with you personally, in all likelihood, no matter how hard you work. I'm not sure why you take it to heart so much. I would even be in favor of raising the threshold to something like 10 million and increasing the tax. No one needs tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars when they didn't earn it themselves. That is just pure greed.

Post: #28

The 401k limit will be $18,500 for 2018. The IRA limit will be $5500.

I wish they'd let people that don't use a 401k put that $18,500 in an IRA, in addition to the $5500.

Post: #29

(11-02-2017 06:25 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:23 PM)Repo Wrote:  Why? Workers pay income tax for money that the company already easrned and paid taxes on. But if instead of earning and contributing to society, daddy gives you millions of dollars, that should be tax free?

You guys are starting to sound foolish now. So much so it makes one wonder if Repo and Razor are the same person.

Call me foolish and jealous, and now can't believe that more than one person may disagree with you? Calm down buddy I didn't attack anyone.

If the tax were that unpopular it would have been repealed by now.

Post: #30

(11-02-2017 06:33 PM)Repo Wrote:  Call me foolish and jealous, and now can't believe that more than one person may disagree with you? Calm down buddy I didn't attack anyone.

If the tax were that unpopular it would have been repealed by now.

I am fine with disagreement. The examples you are Razor are using to disagree is ridiculous and shows you don't have much of an understanding on how this all works.

Most rich people bypass this tax with trusts.

Post: #31

can we end the "who can piss the farthest" contest and get back to discussion of the tax proposal?

Post: #32

I'm actually fine with you disagreeing with me as long as you admit your personal net worth is over that number or you personally received an inheritance over the estate tax threshold amount.

Post: #33

(11-02-2017 06:32 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:26 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:17 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:10 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:04 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  So estate tax is not ok but taxes on lottery or gambling winnings are? Lol please. No one needs tens of millions of dollars or more.

The government doesn't have a right to take wealth simply because you don't need it. It was all taxed at some point already as it was earned. Lottery/gambling winnings have not been taxed yet so I don't see your point there.

What are you talking about. Lottery/gambling money comes out of someones income (from a job for instance) that was previously taxed. If anything that's a better example of double taxation than estate tax.

You don't own the wealth of someone who is deceased. It's not yours. You didn't earn it. Tbh in my opinion you're not entitled to any of it unless a court or government of the country of the deceased grants it to you.

You don't understand double taxation. You only pay taxes on the gambling earnings (not the principal bet) which has not been taxed yet. That's a very socialist outlook on inheritance. If I work my ass off to better the lives of the next generation the government has absolutely no right to steal their birthright.

Where do you think the money to make the bet comes from in the first place? A job, which income from is taxed. Re-read my post I added an example after you replied.

Do you even understand what the estate tax is? This deals with something like the .000001% of households. The threshold is over 5 million. It has nothing to do with you personally, in all likelihood, no matter how hard you work. I'm not sure why you take it to heart so much. I would even be in favor of raising the threshold to something like 10 million and increasing the tax. No one needs tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars when they didn't earn it themselves. That is just pure greed.

Don't want to derail the thread debating this issue ad nauseam. But neither of those are examples of double taxation. Of course your salary is taxed, but any winnings have not been thus are taxed after you win.

I'm arguing the principal of the estate tax. You are correct amassing 5mm at the time of death is unlikely for most of us. I'm a CPA though so I am somewhat close to this stuff (i dont practice tax however).

Post: #34

(11-02-2017 06:41 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:32 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:26 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:17 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  

(11-02-2017 06:10 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  The government doesn't have a right to take wealth simply because you don't need it. It was all taxed at some point already as it was earned. Lottery/gambling winnings have not been taxed yet so I don't see your point there.

What are you talking about. Lottery/gambling money comes out of someones income (from a job for instance) that was previously taxed. If anything that's a better example of double taxation than estate tax.

You don't own the wealth of someone who is deceased. It's not yours. You didn't earn it. Tbh in my opinion you're not entitled to any of it unless a court or government of the country of the deceased grants it to you.

You don't understand double taxation. You only pay taxes on the gambling earnings (not the principal bet) which has not been taxed yet. That's a very socialist outlook on inheritance. If I work my ass off to better the lives of the next generation the government has absolutely no right to steal their birthright.

Where do you think the money to make the bet comes from in the first place? A job, which income from is taxed. Re-read my post I added an example after you replied.

Do you even understand what the estate tax is? This deals with something like the .000001% of households. The threshold is over 5 million. It has nothing to do with you personally, in all likelihood, no matter how hard you work. I'm not sure why you take it to heart so much. I would even be in favor of raising the threshold to something like 10 million and increasing the tax. No one needs tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars when they didn't earn it themselves. That is just pure greed.

Don't want to derail the thread debating this issue ad nauseam. But neither of those are examples of double taxation. Of course your salary is taxed, but any winnings have not been thus are taxed after you win.

I'm arguing the principal of the estate tax. You are correct amassing 5mm at the time of death is unlikely for most of us. I'm a CPA though so I am somewhat close to this stuff (i dont practice tax however).

In both cases, you are taxed on money which tax was already paid on. Btw - a number of countries do not tax lottery or gambling winnings for this reason. So obviously, other countries feel it is double taxation. For example, no taxes on gambling winnings in these countries:

https://www.vegasmaster.com/gambling-tax...countries/

Post: #35

(11-02-2017 05:09 PM)Thomas Jackson Wrote:  Something that annoys me in the discussion is the fact people act like whatever tax break they are currently utilizing is some sort of right and it can never be removed. In reality you have been getting a preference for years, removing is the more "fair" option.

Part of that is the fear that taxes will be increased down the road and those breaks will still be gone.

Post: #36

At the end of the day I was expecting some next level changes to the tax code. This looks more like tinkering.

Post: #37

(11-02-2017 07:11 PM)Enoch Wrote:  At the end of the day I was expecting some next level changes to the tax code. This looks more like tinkering.

It will be quite noticeable to most if passed.

Post: #38

(11-02-2017 07:11 PM)Enoch Wrote:  At the end of the day I was expecting some next level changes to the tax code. This looks more like tinkering.

There were times post-WWII that the top rate was over 70%, but there were more deductions in those days. Reagan lowered the rates and killed most deductions, but the rates have climbed back since then.

Post: #39

I think my tax plan would be a boom to the economy.

Progressive tax rates:

0-49,999 = 0%
50,000-249,999 = 10%
250,000-1M = 20%
1M-5M = 30%
5M-15M = 40%
15M-25M = 55%
25M-100M = 70%
100M+ = 90%

- Zero corporate tax rate

- Zero deductions

- Capital Gains are taxed at same rate as income

- 10/15% Tariff on foreign-made products

Post: #40

^^all billionaires on paper don't make a "yearly" income. That's how they avoid taxes and scuttle away their income into income that's taxed by capital gains.

You'd be better off charging a "total property" tax on all of a billionaires wealth if you wished to go down that route.

My opinion? Eliminate corporate taxes and focus strictly on individual taxes while maintaining a strong protectionist immigration and foreign imports duty.

Comparative advantage is bullshit when you factor in nation state security.

Post: #41

(11-03-2017 10:59 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  ^^all billionaires on paper don't make a "yearly" income. That's how they avoid taxes and scuttle away their income into income that's taxed by capital gains.

You'd be better off charging a "total property" tax on all of a billionaires wealth if you wished to go down that route.

My opinion? Eliminate corporate taxes and focus strictly on individual taxes while maintaining a strong protectionist immigration and foreign imports duty.

Comparative advantage is bullshit when you factor in nation state security.

You must've not read my full post.

"Capital gains are taxed at the same rate that earned income is"

"10/15% tariff on all foreign goods"

Post: #42

This is an anti California/NY tax plan. couples making a combined over 200k will have a tough time trying to afford homes in "good" neighborhoods. It doesn't affect those that already have a house.

I am still confused about pass through small business LLC type. If it doesn't change then this does nothing for me however writing off equipment in the first year will be a boost.


Those that are smart enough to negotiate raises due to this will do well.

Post: #43

(11-03-2017 11:06 AM)captain_shane Wrote:  

(11-03-2017 10:59 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  ^^all billionaires on paper don't make a "yearly" income. That's how they avoid taxes and scuttle away their income into income that's taxed by capital gains.

You'd be better off charging a "total property" tax on all of a billionaires wealth if you wished to go down that route.

My opinion? Eliminate corporate taxes and focus strictly on individual taxes while maintaining a strong protectionist immigration and foreign imports duty.

Comparative advantage is bullshit when you factor in nation state security.

You must've not read my full post.

"Capital gains are taxed at the same rate that earned income is"

"10/15% tariff on all foreign goods"

Yeah totally missed that, thanks for the mention!

Post: #44

(11-02-2017 06:32 PM)Razor Beast Wrote:  Do you even understand what the estate tax is? This deals with something like the .000001% of households. The threshold is over 5 million. It has nothing to do with you personally, in all likelihood, no matter how hard you work. I'm not sure why you take it to heart so much. I would even be in favor of raising the threshold to something like 10 million and increasing the tax. No one needs tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars when they didn't earn it themselves. That is just pure greed.

You are the one who clearly doesn't understand the estate tax.

Saying that nobody needs tens or even hundreds of millions (but that the government and in some part YOU need it) is pure, unadulterated soycialism.

Get the hell out of here with that nonsense.

That's not even beginning to get into how some families end up losing their land or working as indentured servants to the state when their large plots of land are assessed at current values despite them not actually wanting to sell the land and having nowhere near enough means to pay the ridiculous tax assessment.

Post: #45

Quote:"10/15% tariff on all foreign goods"

Should be higher than income taxes for the rich. The USA should give exclusive rights and benefits for those who produce here and keeps people employed.

35-55% tariffs sound better to me.

Post: #46

(11-03-2017 02:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:"10/15% tariff on all foreign goods"

Should be higher than income taxes for the rich. The USA should give exclusive rights and benefits for those who produce here and keeps people employed.

35-55% tariffs sound better to me.

Tariffs hurt the economy. You'll notice that the wealthiest countries have very free trade: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co...per_capita
The problem is we're not as productive as we need to be to stay competitive.

Really, these tax matters should be thought of mostly in terms of how it affects ourselves. Taxes don't affect economies as much as people think. Monetary, regulatory, fiscal, and international trade policies all have a greater impact.

America should be following economists when it comes to economic policy, instead of continuing to ignore them.

Post: #47

^ The economists are the ones who've sold us down the river. A country is nothing without tariffs. There is zero benefit to controlling a large territory without regulating the goods that enter or leave it.

Free trade only benefits the mega wealthy who are able to fly around the world in search of slave labor. Free trade is destructive and a proven failure for the middle class. The logical end game of free trade is the return of slavery.

The GDP numbers you posted mean little. GDP is just a measure of billionaires. Look at per capita; the USA does a decent job but should easily be top 5. Given the trillions here, it's excusable that average GDP per capita isn't over 100K. Easily attainable with strong tariffs, which is what the USA was built on.

Lower domestic taxes, raise international taxes. Cheap to produce here, expensive to trade with. America first.

Right now we have the opposite, and it's crushed our economy to the point where the middle class is broke, lives paycheck to paycheck, and barely spends.

M2 Money Velocity at all time lows: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2V

78% Of US Workers Are Living 'Paycheck-To-Paycheck' & 71% Of Them Are In Debt: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-02...m-are-debt

Tariffs must happen or else the USA will die in the long run.

Post: #48

^^M2 money supply velocity going down merely indicates lower inflation. The reason most US workers are bad financial straits is because they're very bad with handling money, and that's a separate issue. GDP is an attempt at estimating production of goods and services on a yearly basis, and has nothing to do with billionares. If you're concerned with the super rich skewing figures, how about another standard measurement, median income by purchasing power parity? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_inc...US_economy
It's an extremely similar list, because more production (GDP) causes higher demand for labor.

America has been following very little economic advice from economists speaking within their specialty. Free trade is a blessed exception.

Edit: I had to look this up to verify the details, because its been awhile, but M2 consists of cash, cash equivalents, and time matched deposits.

Post: #49

This tax bill will make divorce rape even more painful. Currently, alimony payments are deductible and the recipient pays taxes on alimony received. According to the draft, alimony payments won't be deductible anymore and the recipient will be able to keep alimony income tax free.

This is the most anti-male piece of legislation I have seen in a long time. Fuck Trump if he was aware of this crap and let it pass through into the final draft. However, I think it's the GOP cucks who are trying to sabotage Trump's support withing the male population.

http://nypost.com/2017/11/03/gop-tax-pla...even-more/

Post: #50

(11-04-2017 02:28 PM)speculator Wrote:  This tax bill will make divorce rape even more painful. Currently, alimony payments are deductible and the recipient pays taxes on alimony received. According to the draft, alimony payments won't be deductible anymore and the recipient will be able to keep alimony income tax free.

This is the most anti-male piece of legislation I have seen in a long time. Fuck Trump if he was aware of this crap and let it pass through into the final draft. However, I think it's the GOP cucks who are trying to sabotage Trump's support withing the male population.

http://nypost.com/2017/11/03/gop-tax-pla...even-more/

Trump can't veto an entire bill because the cucks changed an alimony line.

Alimony isn't as big a deal as child support anyways. Alimony isn't awarded in many states, alimony can be safeguarded against with pre-nups. Child support is what crushes poor men to the point of suicide, child support cannot be deductable is rarely protected by pre-nups.

The most noticeable effect of this tax bill will be to make blue states pay more. All of the supposed cuts for the middle class are offset by stuff like this alimony change (even though smart men can get around this easily).