Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Pitcher

Trump administration to propose a ten percent tax cut for the middle class before the election |

Recommended Posts

Trump administration to propose a ten percent tax cut for the middle class before the election in November

  • Trump administration is considering a 10% tax cut for middle-class Americans
  • Other tax reductions would be made permanent as part of a package the administration intends to propose before the November election
  • National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow said: 'It'll probably come out some time in September'
  • Trump's signature legislative achievement was a tax overhaul in 2017
  • The $1.5 trillion legislation reduced tax rates for corporations and individuals
  • But Democrats said it favored business and the wealthy over average Americans

 

PUBLISHED: 16:57 EST, 14 February 2020 | UPDATED: 10:11 EST, 15 February 2020 

 

The Trump administration is considering a 10% tax cut for middle-class Americans and making some other tax reductions permanent as part of a package it intends to propose before the November election, a top White House adviser said on Friday.

'We'd love to have a 10% middle-class tax cut, and we would love to strengthen and make permanent some of the other tax cuts,' National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow said in an interview with Fox Business Network, according to excerpts released by the network.

'It'll probably come out some time in September,' he added.

The Trump administration's signature legislative achievement was a tax overhaul in 2017. The massive $1.5 trillion legislation reduced tax rates for corporations and individuals, but the personal income tax cuts were set to expire after 2025.

The tax cuts have been criticized by Democrats for favoring businesses and the wealthy over average Americans. Rolling out a proposal in September could strengthen Trump's hand ahead of the Nov. 3 presidential election.

 

  • Thanks 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah he has been talking about a tax cut by the end of this year about 18 months ago. The real problem is that the last tax cut the repubes in Congress didn't make it permanent and it goes up every year until it is back where it was before the cuts. Thanks repubes and former speaker Paul Ryan for that!

  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Berlusconi did same thing right before a Nat'l election...He had a live broadcast  TV debate ( the very last before the election) with the head of opposition ( Romano Prodi) and all of a sudden one second before the  ending  he shouted: " I'm gonna cut taxes on  this ( can't even remember what that was....doesn't matter really as he'd very very rarely honor his promises anyway)" ...That was done at the time when the counterpart could not reply anymore...Which was of course something extremely unfair and unethical ( an euphemism when talking about the Berl man).....

Edited by umbertino
  • Thanks 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bostonangler said:

Timing is everything.

 

B/A

 

 

Especially when it comes to RV!!!!!!  16 years and waiting......

 

But Led Zeppelin sing   "Your Time is Gonna come".......

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will take it also. It is my money anyway and yes, I was going to vote for him anyway.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White House considering tax incentive for more Americans to buy stocks, sources say

  • The White House is considering ways to incentivize U.S. households to invest in the stock market.
  • Under the proposal, a portion of income would become tax-free for investment purposes.
  • The Trump administration is considering several proposals as part of a forthcoming economic stimulus package.

WASHINGTON — As part of a forthcoming package of proposed tax cuts, the White House is considering ways to incentivize U.S. households to invest in the stock market, according to four senior administration officials familiar with the discussions.

The proposal, one of many new tax cuts under consideration, would see a portion of household income treated as tax-free for the purposes of investing outside a traditional 401(k). Under one hypothetical scenario described by multiple officials, a household earning up to $200,000 could invest $10,000 of that income on a tax-free basis, although officials noted these numbers are fluid.

 

“Nothing’s ruled out,” said one senior administration official. “Nothing’s been ruled in, either.”

Larry Kudlow, director of the National Economic Council, told CNBC the approach looked at most closely centers on creating universal savings accounts, which would combine retirement, education and health care savings into one vehicle.

Money put into the account would be done so on an after-tax basis, and taxed when withdrawn as well; but any accumulation of profits during the investment timeframe, known as capital gains, would not be taxed. Kudlow told CNBC this policy, if pursued, may extend to bonds as well as stocks.

Kudlow noted that this and other ideas have yet to be fleshed out, and no decisions have been made.

The development comes as President Donald Trump seeks reelection this fall. He has sought to distinguish himself from his potential Democratic rivals by accusing of them of pursuing “socialist” policies while he has touted tax cuts and deregulation under his administration.

 

After the Great Recession, the percentage of American households owning stocks fell to 52% from 62% before the crisis, according to Gallup. That percentage reached 55% in 2019, a year when the stock market hit record highs.

The tax break, if enacted, would represent “a pretty substantial amount of money for people” to have for retirement, according to Stephen Moore, economist at the conservative Heritage Foundation and close confidante of the White House.

“That’s the type of thing that would expand ownership,” Moore tells CNBC.

The stock market’s rise under Trump’s tenure is a well-documented point of pride for the president and his top economic officials, who have called the Dow Jones Industrial Average a “barometer” and a “mark-to-market indicator” of the administration’s performance. The S&P 500, seen as the broadest index of corporate performance, has risen 49% since Trump took office.

The White House publicly has been pointing to the package as a new shot of adrenaline in an economy whose growth shows signs of slowing 10 years into an expansion. A payroll tax cut would become an option only if the economy experienced significant decline, according to two senior administration officials. Separately, Kudlow has suggested cutting the tax rate to 15% for middle-class earners.

Kudlow and Vice President Mike Pence have suggested that the package could be unveiled in early fall, as voters are deliberating whether to elect Trump to a second term.

New tax cuts are “one of the reasons why we’re going to focus so much energy on making sure that not only do we get President Donald Trump four more years in this White House,” Pence said in a recent interview on the Fox Business Network. “But we’re going to make sure that we reelect a Republican Senate and elect a Republican House of Representatives.”

Any tax cuts would need congressional approval to take effect, a tall order while Democrats have the majority in the House of Representatives. For that reason, officials described the proposal that would be made public as “conceptual in nature.”

“It’s sort of an idealistic document,” said a senior official involved in discussions. “Sort of, ‘If you reelect this administration, this is what you’re going to get.’”

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/14/white-house-considering-tax-incentive-for-more-americans-to-buy-stocks.html

 

 

 

Awesome.... Put that tax cut in the casino market to keep it running.... Wouldn't it be better to just give it to the people to spend on trinkets? Consumer spending is 2/3's of our economy. Playing the roulette wheel of Wall Street will cost people their future. JMHO

 

B/A

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, nstoolman1 said:

I will take it also. It is my money anyway and yes, I was going to vote for him anyway.

 

Less money for the wall, you know.  :shrug:

 

GO RV, then BV

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Less money for the wall, you know.  :shrug:

 

GO RV, then BV

 

BWahaha! You thinking it is your money! Didn't someone tell everyone that "You didn't build that" He might have also said "If you like your health plan, you can keep it. Period". And you still think it is your money. No one in government thinks any penny you make is yours. Bernie wants it all and if elected you will feel the real Bern! How else is he going to pay for all that you are wanting him or any other demonrat candidate going to pay for it? Their solution is to increase taxes, thus taking more of THEIR money out of YOUR  pockets. And you think its your money, what a laugh. IT will be really funny when after the RV the lefttards gain power and say to pay off government debt and pay for those free entitlements, the government is going to confiscate all your money. It has already happened but not in America. Wealth redistribution is already in America. 

Edited by Theseus
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Theseus said:

BWahaha! You thinking it is your money! Didn't someone tell everyone that "You didn't build that" He might have also said "If you like your health plan, you can keep it. Period". And you still think it is your money. No one in government thinks any penny you make is yours. Bernie wants it all and if elected you will feel the real Bern! How else is he going to pay for all that you are wanting him or any other demonrat candidate going to pay for it? Their solution is to increase taxes, thus taking more of THEIR money out of YOUR  pockets. And you think its your money, what a laugh. IT will be really funny when after the RV the lefttards gain power and say to pay off government debt and pay for those free entitlements, the government is going to confiscate all your money. It has already happened but not in America. Wealth redistribution is already in America. 

 

I'd really like a shot at my social security entitlement I've paid into most of my life before the Repubs give it all to corporate America.....I've earned it after all.

 

GO RV, then BV

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is an entitlement if you pay into it. I am drawing it now and I feel I have earned every bit of it. 

  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nstoolman1 said:

I don't think it is an entitlement if you pay into it. I am drawing it now and I feel I have earned every bit of it. 

 

You did earn every bit of it.....just as I will have when the time comes.  I paid it, therefore I'm "entitled" to it.  

 

GO RV, then BV

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a few little things that could be adjusted within the SS program that could make it more sustainable.....an example... the cap on anyone earning over $117,000 per year.....at least one candidate has this one her radar......stating much of what I just read above.....

 

CL 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

Quite a few little things that could be adjusted within the SS program that could make it more sustainable.....an example... the cap on anyone earning over $117,000 per year.....at least one candidate has this one her radar......stating much of what I just read above.....

 

CL 

 

Shhh. Don't say this out loud because of this mentality:

 

2 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

You did earn every bit of it.....just as I will have when the time comes.  I paid it, therefore I'm "entitled" to it.  

 

GO RV, then BV

I pay taxes therefore I am entitled to it being free. Yes Social Security is a tax. And second Social Security was not meant to be a replacement for income earned during retirement. People really should read the New Deal and the actual documents from what was said before the New Deal was passed. The New Deal, the deal that brought Socialism to the USA.

Edited by Theseus
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Theseus said:

Shhh. Don't say this out loud because of this mentality:

 

I pay taxes therefore I am entitled to it being free. Yes Social Security is a tax. And second Social Security was not meant to be a replacement for income earned during retirement. People really should read the New Deal and the actual documents from what was said before the New Deal was passed. The New Deal, the deal that brought Socialism to the USA.

 

Just want back what I put in, plus a hefty raise, such as the older generation is enjoying......easy peazy.   You should talk to some of the older members who are actually drawing social security.....sounds like they feel the same way as me.  Other than they look at it as earned as opposed to entitled because they paid in, just like me......semantics, really.

 

GO RV, then BV

Edited by Shabibilicious
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

Quite a few little things that could be adjusted within the SS program that could make it more sustainable.....an example... the cap on anyone earning over $117,000 per year.....at least one candidate has this one her radar......stating much of what I just read above.....

 

CL 

 

What will really go much further than a cap earned on income is that politicians stop treating the Social Security fund as their personal slush fund. Case in point, William Jefferson Clinton used the SS Fund and Enron accounting techniques to claim a government surplus of cash. 6 months into the next Presidency and 1 year into the Recession of 1999 (Think Y2k non-event and Tech bubble bursting) Clinton's funky accounting and stealing from Social Security "slush" fund was actually discovered but the leftards do not want to admit to this as they would do anything for the pedo forrmer Impeached President but not removed from office. I am all for the politicians keeping their grubby hands off of the Social Security Fund versus placing an income/wealth cap onto Social Security.     

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

Just want back what I put in, plus a hefty raise, such as the older generation is enjoying......easy peazy.   You should talk to some of the older members who are actually drawing social security.....sounds like they feel the same way as me.  Other than they look at it as earned as opposed to entitled because they paid in, just like me......semantics, really.

 

GO RV, then BV

You clearly do not understand Social Security. Depending on when you take it voluntarily or mandatory (those on SSD are required to take SSD as soon as they are eligible for SS). you will never get back what you put into it. You night be lucky to get 70% back at most. Oh and forget about any hefty raise. 

Edited by Theseus
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Theseus said:

You clearly do not understand Social Security. Depending on when you take it voluntarily or mandatory (those on SSD are required to take SSD as soon as they are eligible for SS). you will never get back what you out into it. You night be lucky to get 70% back at most. Oh and forget about any hefty raise. 

 

Of course I know this.....but the older folks don't seem to understand it.  At this point I simply want to enjoy some of it before it evaporates completely, thanks to all politicians, not just the Left as you would have people believe.....All are equal opportunity offenders.  I'm simply aware and honest enough to admit it.  ;)

 

GO RV, then BV

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The cap I referred to was on income of the individual....if you are making $117,000 per year you are contributing the same as someone making any amount more.......say equal so someone making twice as much......or 10 times as much....dozens of little examples where SS could be adjusted or improved......

 

btw...looked it up....$117,000 was 2014.......today close to $140,000......    CL

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Shabs it WAS the Rats with Al Gore casting the deciding vote (I believe) that opened the SS fund to regular spending and allowed the politicians to use that fund to offset their runaway spending so it would look better to us the unwashed. And the under Clinton Gore they started to tax up to 85% of your SSN benefit if you earned too much $$ in retirement. And the Rats screamed when Bush proposed that 2% of everyone's SSN account be put into investment opportunities to help preserve the system. And let us not forget the number of people who've NOT PAID A DIME into the system who are drawing benefits. Many ways to save and make solvent SSN system, but it takes Marbles and NONE of our politicians have any. That is the holy grail of politics and the vehicle either party will use to beat the other over the head with come election time. Remember Bush pushing granny over the cliff during he campaign? 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Theseus said:

You clearly do not understand Social Security. Depending on when you take it voluntarily or mandatory (those on SSD are required to take SSD as soon as they are eligible for SS). you will never get back what you put into it. You night be lucky to get 70% back at most. Oh and forget about any hefty raise. 

 

Sorry Theseus, but you are NOT required to take SSN until 70 if you choose. You can take take as early as 62 (with reduced benefit for life) or 66 the mandatory age (unless you opt for waiting until you are 70, if you can wait that long and get 32% more than at 66). And if you live long enough you will back much more than you put in. JMHO.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather enjoy my take at 62 (which I am) than take the chance I live to see 70. My paperwork shows more like 50% if I drew at 70 it would be $2100. 

 I started taking it at 62 so my wife will get the difference between hers and mine when I go. My dad had a saying. " Take the money and run" TMAR. 

If they cleaned the rolls of the dead beats and liars they would free up millions from fraud.

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, md11fr8dawg said:

 

Sorry Theseus, but you are NOT required to take SSN until 70 if you choose. You can take take as early as 62 (with reduced benefit for life) or 66 the mandatory age (unless you opt for waiting until you are 70, if you can wait that long and get 32% more than at 66). And if you live long enough you will back much more than you put in. JMHO.

Not if you are SSD. You are transitioned from SSD to SS as soon as you are eligible for SS. And you can see when you are eligible below: Notice I said when you are eligible, I did not specify an age.

 

The Benefits Do Convert

The first thing you need to understand when receiving SSDI benefits is that the benefits do convert from Social Security Disability benefits to Social Security Retirement benefits once you reach retirement age. Nothing will change. You will continue to receive a monthly check and you do not need to do anything in order to receive your benefits. The SSA will simply change your disability benefit to a retirement benefit once you have reached full retirement age. When you reach that age, however, can vary depending on which year you were born in.

It’s Not Automatically 65

Many people think that their SSDI benefits will automatically change to retirement benefits when they reach age 65. Some of these people are correct, but only those who were born before 1937. Anyone born after 1937 does not reach full retirement age at exactly 65 years of age so their SSDI benefits will not change to retirement benefits as soon as they turn 65 years old. When will these benefits convert? It depends on the year you were born. The following outline will help you understand at what age your SSDI benefits will convert to retirement benefits:

  • 1938 – 65 years and 2 months
  • 1939 – 65 years and 4 months
  • 1940 – 65 years and 6 months
  • 1941 – 65 years and 8 months
  • 1942 – 65 years and 10 months
  • 1943 through 1954 – 66 years
  • 1955 – 66 years and 2 months
  • 1956 – 66 years and 4 months
  • 1957 – 66 years and 6 months
  • 1958 – 66 years and 8 months
  • 1959 – 66 years and 10 months
  • 1960 and later – 67 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, md11fr8dawg said:

 

Sorry Theseus, but you are NOT required to take SSN until 70 if you choose. You can take take as early as 62 (with reduced benefit for life) or 66 the mandatory age (unless you opt for waiting until you are 70, if you can wait that long and get 32% more than at 66). And if you live long enough you will back much more than you put in. JMHO.

This is only true if you are not on Social Security Disability Income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.