Trump's tax proposal is 'nothing radical' – and the richest get the biggest cuts

[umbertino]

Republican candidate promised to eliminate income tax on those earning less than $25,000 a year, but that group already pays no such tax, experts say

 

 

Jana Kasperkevic in New York

 

Tuesday 29 September 2015 17.26 BST

 

 

When he introduced his tax plan on Monday, Donald Trump came off as an Oprah equivalent, of sorts, only on tax reform: You get a tax cut! YOU get a tax cut! And you get a tax cut, too!

 

 

The Republican presidential frontrunner promised to eliminate taxes for the poorest Americans, close loopholes for the rich and simplify the US tax code by reducing the number of income brackets by more than half.

 

The poor wouldn’t pay income tax. The rich wouldn’t pay estate tax. And all of this would be paid for by hedge funds, which Trump previously said had been “getting away with murder”.

 

It all sounded so exciting. Yet according to tax experts across the political spectrum, Trump’s policy proposal is nothing new, “not a radical plan” so much as Republican orthodoxy including tax cuts for the poorest Americans that already exist.

 

“It reduces or eliminates most of the deductions and loopholes available to special interests and to the very rich,” Trump said of his plan. “In other words, it’s going to cost me a fortune.”

 

Closer inspection of Trump’s proposal, however, reveals that even the rich would be getting a tax cut – in fact, the most generous one.

 

As it stands now, under Trump’s plan, more people would not be paying taxes than actually paying taxes, according to Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute.

 

“I don’t think that’s healthy,” he said. “I think taxes ought to be low and flat across the board and simple. Taking people off the tax roll on the bottom is dangerous for democracy.”

 

In the presentation accompanying Trump’s announcement, the campaign stated that by eliminating income tax for single Americans earning less than $25,000 or married Americans jointly earning less than $50,000, the candidate’s policy would remove “nearly 75 million households – over 50% – from the income tax rolls”.

 

Americans earning less than $25,000 already do not pay any income taxes, said Josh Bivens, of the leftwing Economic Policy Institute. According to the Tax Policy Center, about 45% of taxpayers – equivalent to 76.5m households – do not pay income tax. That’s mostly because of the earned income tax credits and the child tax credits where applicable.

 

“They usually get a refund,” said Bivens. “This idea that taxes are what is dragging down living standards is just not true. It’s a distraction from real issues.”

 

Voters tend to find any mention of tax reductions appealing, but, Bivens said: “The act is getting old.”

 

The only people who would not get a tax cut in Trump’s America – but would instead be paying for it – are hedge-funders and other “speculative partnerships that do not grow businesses or create jobs and are not risking their own capital”. Additionally, companies that hold cash overseas will be subject to a one-time repatriation fee “at a significantly discounted 10% tax rate”.

 

Trump said that these proposals would make his plan revenue-neutral, but experts remain unconvinced. According to the Tax Foundation, a libertarian group, Trump’s plan would reduce US tax revenue by $10.14tn over the next decade.

 

Furthermore, closing the carried interest loophole, many experts argued, would affect more than just hedge funds and is likely to also affect private equity and venture capital.

 

Yet for most Americans, hedge funds remain shrouded in mystery and as such have become an easy target.

 

“The word ‘hedge fund’ has become a bad word,” said Mitch Ackles, president of the Hedge Fund Association. “Think about what your first instinctual response is to the term hedge fund. People in my family cringe.”

 

It’s too early to determine what impact Trump’s proposal will have, says Ackles, but he expects to hear more about hedge funds in the coming weeks.

 

“Anything that Mr Trump is bringing up – whether it’s immigration or this specific issue of carried interest – is getting greater scrutiny, greater attention from candidates on both sides of the aisle,” Ackles said.

 

Former Florida governor Jeb Bush has also called for closing the loophole on carried interest.

 

Edwards, of the Cato Institute, described the carried interest proposal as “sort of a sideshow” that has long stagnated on Washington’s agenda.

 

“Trump is trying to generally paint himself as an outsider and make a case that he is radically different than other Republican candidates, but the fact is, his tax plan is orthodox among Republican candidates,” said Edwards.

 

“He heavily criticizes Jeb Bush, but actually his tax plan is in some ways similar to Jeb Bush’s. It’s pretty orthodox. It’s not a radical plan.”

 

Bush, for his part, said he “finally” got around to reading Trump’s tax plan. “Looks familiar!” he tweeted on Tuesday. “I’m flattered. But he should’ve stuck with growth & fiscal responsibility.”

 

 

A supporter of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump reacts to a joke.

Photograph: Julie Jacobson/AP

 

 

Impact of individual tax changes proposed by Jeb Bush & Donald Trump. Chart  in link

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/29/donald-trump-tax-plan-analysis-nothing-new

 

 

[RV ME]

Misleading headline.  Of course “the rich” get the biggest cuts, they are paying the most by far.  Hard to cut taxes for someone who pays no taxes.

 

As stated in the article, 45% of taxpayers now pay no taxes, they get a refund.  They only get a refund because of the earned income tax credit.  The EITC is basically applying the taxes paid by someone else to the EITC filiers account.  Their refund is actually someone else’s tax dollars.

 

I do agree with what Chris Edwards stated.  Currently 45% of “taxpayers” pay no taxes (how are they considered taxpayers?!?!?  But I digress).  That number would go up to 50% under Trumps plan.  When 50% of the people pay no taxes, many will then be against any tax cuts (because it would not help them personally) and for raising taxes on  “the rich”. 

 

I believe everyone should have some skin in the game.  Close all loopholes, exempt the first $25000 - $30000 of income and pay 10% tax on what you have left.  I know it won’t happen because the professional politicians would not be able to play favorites and buy people’s votes with other people's money via the tax code.

[divemaster5734]

Misleading headline.

 

I believe everyone should have some skin in the game.

 

Correct on the misleading part.

The poster loves to drop fake bombs.

 

The Trump proposal is almost identical to Ron Paul's plan when he was still in.

It is called a form of "Flat Tax".

Almost anything would be better than what we have now.

Where there is offset  in the corporate rates, reducing or eliminating tax exempt raw materials and tax base determinations, and finally getting rid of the "favored nation" non tariff status.

This alone would generate billions or trillions.

The application would be sensitive.

Paying a greatly reduced tax on wholesale, (yes, you actually get taxed for no tax), is sometimes the determining factor that will separate losing from a break even.

When you are dealing with profit margins that are at times a fraction of a percent, the difference between paying for the privilege to provide a service, and actually making a dollar, can be a very fine line.

[umbertino]

Robert Reich: Donald Trump & Jeb Bush Plans Would Slash Taxes for the 1 Percent

 

 

Wednesday, September 30, 2015

 

 

 

http://www.democracynow.org/2015/9/30/robert_reich_donald_trump_jeb_bush

[jg1]

Haven't changed my mind yet.

[markb57]

eliminate that earned income tax credit....immediately!

eliminate all loopholes and credits

 

everyone pay a flat tax of 15% whether you make $1 or unlimited.

 

                                              or

 

The Fair Tax, which would be fairest of all. Tax a man on what he spends, not what he makes!

[jg1]

eliminate that earned income tax credit....immediately!

eliminate all loopholes and credits

 

everyone pay a flat tax of 15% whether you make $1 or unlimited.

 

                                              or

 

The Fair Tax, which would be fairest of all. Tax a man on what he spends, not what he makes!

Nice.Sounds good to me. Consumption Tax. 

[yota691]

Hillarious Supporters Like Trump's Tax Plan

Published on Sep 30, 2015

Donald Trump recently came out with his proposal for a new tax plan. Every politician comes out with his own plans and proposals, but Jimmy wondered if voters pay any attention to the specifics. So we went out on the street and found people who claimed to support Hillarious Clinton and asked those people about her tax plan. What they didn’t know is that the tax plan we presented them with was not Hillarious Clinton’s. It was Donald Trump’s. 

[dog53]

Jobs are fleeing this country faster then a rabbit fleeing a beagle umbert.

Why?

The highest corporate business tax in the world.

They who PROVIDE the jobs are being taxed to death already.

The middle class who`s barley keeping his status as middle class

Is being taxed to death.

The min wage earners who are at least making a attempt to work and contributing to society 

is being taxed to death.

tax on food

tax on gas

tax on alcohol

tax on SS

tax on tobbaco

tax on property all ready paid for

 

Even in death our children are taxed on what we leave them.

 

Screw govt taxes period.  !!!!!

What right do they have to take what I have earned.  !!!!!!

[Whatshername]

Ben Carson attacks Donald Trump's tax plan

 

By Mike VanOuse

 

Yesterday, Ben Carson criticized Donald Trump’s tax plan.  He was right, but for the wrong reasons.

 

According to CNN, Carson said:

 

"I also strongly believe that every American should pay something according to their means.  We are all Americans and we all have the same rights and responsibilities."

 

Under Trump's plan, which the businessman unveiled Monday, individuals who make less than $25,000 (and $50,000 for married couples) would pay no income taxes.

 

Carson has previously said that he supports taxing everyone at 10% based on the biblical principle of tithing.

 

Carson says, “[A]ll Americans … have the same rights and responsibilities.”  So, does he consider the ability to pay taxes a right or a responsibility?  His use of the word “should” implies that he considers it a responsibility.  That implies condoning coercion to exact it. 

 

But being a contributing, functioning member of society suggests that it’s a right, or more appropriately, a privilege.

 

For example, this writer is familiar with a local church that was experiencing dramatic growth some years back.  They had a fundraising drive to buy a pipe organ, asking members to pledge a given amount over a period of time.  Before that period ended, they had another drive to build a ministry center, soliciting separate pledges.  And before either period expired, they had grown to the point that they needed a larger sanctuary, prompting yet another pledge drive.

 

At the third solicitation, a woman in the congregation looked at her pledge card and said, “I don’t know how much to write down.  To fund the pipe organ, I sacrificed my budget for eating out.  I gave up my monthly visit to the hair dresser for the ministry center.  I want to donate toward the new sanctuary, but I’m not sure what I can give up.”

 

“That’s all right, Mary,” the pastor replied, “Everyone is aware that you’ve been on a fixed income since your husband died.  You don’t need to give any more.”

 

She was incensed.

 

“Don’t tell me I can’t participate, Reverend!  I’m as much a part of this ministry as you are.  I'm just not sure how much to write down.”

 

Echoes of Jesus’s commendation of the widow’s mite reverberated.

 

Trump’s efforts to demonstrate empathy on those of lower estate by excusing them from contributing to ownership of the nation’s affairs relegates millions of Americans to parasite status without their consent.  It’s only the players who get the honor, not those who merely warm the bench.  Sideliners know that.  Everyone does.

 

As many a comedian has pointed out, if 10% is enough for God, it should be good enough for the government.  Carson’s allusion to the “biblical principle of tithing” is apropos.  When Moses gave the Law to the Israelites, the priesthood was the civil government.  So the tithe was the equivalent of our income tax.  Malachi said that it puts food in the storehouse – relief of the poor – and Paul said that tribute is a righteous requirement to pay the salaries of those who institute the government.

 

The exorbitant tax rates currently leveled on the producers are more extortion than participation. 

 

Everyone who is aware of the great fortune of dwelling in the most abundant society recorded in history should have a modicum of gratitude.  We should all desire to have some skin in the game, to be participants rather than spectators. 

 

Trump’s “zero tax rates” deny many that honor.

[divemaster5734]

 

 

"I also strongly believe that every American should pay something according to their means.  We are all Americans and we all have the same rights and responsibilities."

 

Under Trump's plan, which the businessman unveiled Monday, individuals who make less than $25,000 (and $50,000 for married couples) would pay no income taxes.

 

Carson has previously said that he supports taxing everyone at 10% based on the biblical principle of tithing.

 

 

 

 

One thing to consider with a flat tax.

 

People spend proportionally to their financial status.

 

So lower income people wont be buying much beyond absolute needs, middle income will have more disposable income to pamper themselves, and high bracket are compelled to maintain their "empire", and will make purchases accordingly.

 

End result, a low annual will pay around $3,750 in taxes  without a tax discount, a middle bracket will pay around $18,000, and average upper earner will pay around $225,000 yearly.

Then, corps, many of the giants pay little or no tax for many millions or billions of income would wind up paying up to 15% for their raw materials.

 

How is that not paying your fair share?

It would result in an epic windfall.

Especially if 50% of redundant and/or unnecessary government were eliminated as well.

 

Most of our "debt" is in interest for the "loan", and servicing pensions.

Eliminate the wast there and we will balance the budget almost immediately.

[Jaxinjersey]

Paying taxes is already immorally corrupted, especially as a "participant" in the scheme(s).  What if I don't want to "participate" based on my personal "conditions"?  What if I do desire to just be a spectator?

 

The Fair Tax (Consumption Tax) is actually the only answer to a "fair participation".  EVERYONE pays based on their voluntary and selective participation... and personal condition (which changes often for everyone).

 

- You buy something... you pay.  Your personal budgeting determines your participation. Buy a lot, pay a lot.  Buy little, pay less.

 

- Pay as you go!  No forms.  No documentation.  No expense in personal time and money to "be an accountant" or pay for one!

 

- No class warfare.  No collections and ruined lives.  No (or little) resentment toward the Tax Concept.  

 

- Keep what you earn!

 

- The list, based on Freedom and Liberty.... goes on.  Find your own beach in that!  Many to choose from!

 

It doesn't get much FAIRER than that! 

[millionaire in training]

GO Trumpy GO......

 

We'll all be in that tax bracket soon too.