[Discussion] The tax tax tax thread

The state of US tax code and upcoming proposed changes.

Okay, so now we go back to discrediting, badmouthing, or just ignoring the CBO, right?

Don't forget defunding too.

Chaz wrote:

Okay, so now we go back to discrediting, badmouthing, or just ignoring the CBO, right?

OHMERGERD!

FERK NERRRSSS!!!

Chaz wrote:

Okay, so now we go back to discrediting, badmouthing, or just ignoring the CBO, right?

Queue Republicans and conservative wonks going on about how the CBO's static scoring--that purely looks at how new laws will impact the government's finances without considering broader economic effects--is bad and that they should be doing "dynamic" scoring, which supposedly accounts for those economic effects.

Of course the reality is that dynamic scoring just lets lawmakers make assumptions like "tax cuts will stimulate the economy and cause it to grow by X%," thereby offsetting the deficits the CBO says the law will cause.

You know. Just like Kansas's tax cuts caused their economy to boom and flooded state coffers with tax dollars. Oh, wait. That didn't happen. The tax cuts caused their economy to stumble, growing less than surrounding states and the nation as a whole. All while leaving ever-increasing holes in their budget that forced massive cuts in basic state services, like education, healthcare, and infrastructure.

I didn't hear any of that stuff on Fox. Sounds like fake news Soros propaganda to me.

They cannot pass the tax reforms as is because of the Byrd rule. They're going to either have to work with Democrats or pare it down. And that's just going to make it harder for them.

They absolutely cannot do anything. They're so friggin' unable to govern. Even with all the cards in their hands, they somehow manage to screw it up.

I think that liberals are a bit too optimistic/certain that the Freedom Caucus will never play ball and pass a continuing budget resolution. I don't know what the odds are that they will go back on their word to avoid fixing the Obamacare subsidy funding typo, or save the Dreamers, but its not zero. We need to keep up pressure to convince the Republican moderates they will be punished for that, because I think that that's a safer avenue. "I had to vote for the government spending to continue at previous levels, otherwise Paul Ryan and McConnel would have betrayed us to the Democrats" is a message I think most of them will sell just fine.

The Freedom Caucus crowd can't sell

BoogtehWoog wrote:

They absolutely cannot do anything. They're so friggin' unable to govern. Even with all the cards in their hands, they somehow manage to screw it up.

It's almost as if the system was designed to force people with differing political beliefs to work together if they actually want to get something done.

OG_slinger wrote:

The Freedom Caucus crowd can't sell

BoogtehWoog wrote:

They absolutely cannot do anything. They're so friggin' unable to govern. Even with all the cards in their hands, they somehow manage to screw it up.

It's almost as if the system was designed to force people with differing political beliefs to work together if they actually want to get something done.

And they are working as hard as they can to change that system.

Red state lawmakers find blue state piggy bank

Article basically boils down to, hey, we'll make blue states (California, New York, etc...) pay more taxes by removing some of the deductions most used there to fund further tax cuts for red states!

Article acts like this is anything new when most blue states have given more to the federal government than they've gotten back while most of the states that receive far more than they give are red states. Been like that a while.

“I think it’s too extreme to say that the policy proposals are specifically designed to basically be like Robin Hood, taking from blue states and giving to red states,” said American University professor Capri Cafaro.

I feel like THAT has a lot to unpack though... given it's suggesting Blue states are the rich and greedy.

“It just looks like the Republicans are taking the money from the Democrat states and giving it to the Republican states,” GOP Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) said in September, adding that it’s a “game of Republicans sticking it to Democrats.”

Good look for the party of limited and responsible government. Use the government to punish those who didn't vote for your party. *headdesk*

Handy chart of key differences between House and Senate tax bills
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/UtopmiY.jpg)

Nice summary. The Senate plan seems more reasonable, but both are a hand out to the wealthy at the cost of the rest.

Senate also entirely gets rid of SALT deductions, which is the big one for a lot of blue states. House version retains it up to $10,000, which isn't great, but is better.

Not to give them too much credit, but all the disappearing credits and deductions should get measured against the increased standard deductions when we're looking at how folks will feel the pinch.

(Bloomberg) -- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says “we have the votes.”

Chaz wrote:

Senate also entirely gets rid of SALT deductions, which is the big one for a lot of blue states. House version retains it up to $10,000, which isn't great, but is better.

This will be a disaster in my area where property taxes are through the roof. There's nothing here except money savings for big business. Can't wait until my company starts handing out all that extra tax savings to us cogs.

Shifter wrote:
Chaz wrote:

Senate also entirely gets rid of SALT deductions, which is the big one for a lot of blue states. House version retains it up to $10,000, which isn't great, but is better.

This will be a disaster in my area where property taxes are through the roof. There's nothing here except money savings for big business. Can't wait until my company starts handing out all that extra tax savings to us cogs.

Except, womp womp, pretty much every CEO asked has already said that any savings from this bill will go directly to shareholder dividends or buying back stock. It's funny how already profitable companies who aren't hiring more or increasing wages don't suddenly start doing that when you hand them more money. It's almost like extra money on the supply side doesn't spur hiring or more competitive salaries, but it's something weird like demand increasing.

Yes, I know you were being sarcastic, I just want to rant.

So the senate rammed it through at 2am. 479 pages with hand-scribbled notes on it, and all 52 Rs voted not to delay until Monday so anyone could read the f*cking thing. Even Bob Corker, the only no R vote on the actual bill, still voted not to wait and read the thing.

What a joke.

Nothing like jamming in language that grants fetuses legal personhood in a tax bill...

Next is reconciliation, which will be a garbage fire of a process even if the House just rubber stamps the Senate version.

Bleh.

It would not surprise me in the least if a large majority of Trump supporters/voters have no idea this is going on.

Edit - thought about it more. It actually would not surprise me if a large majority of voters - period - don't know this is going on. On both sides. A large part of the country probably doesn't know what the Republicans are doing to their taxes. Things will get worse, and whichever Dems/Reps they support to will tell them it was the other side's fault, and they will believe it.

Trump has said this is a massive tax cut for the poor and middle class. That's all that matters to a lot of people. If ABC, CNN and the NYT published actual pictures of the bill that shows everyone under 250k a year gets screwed, most of those supporters would still say they were just making it up or misinterpreting it. Fake news, after all. Only what Trump says is true.

Chuck Grassley’s rationale for the estate tax.

“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies,” Grassley told the Register in a story posted yesterday.

It’s comic book levels of evil and out of touch.

DSGamer wrote:

Chuck Grassley’s rationale for the estate tax.

“I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies,” Grassley told the Register in a story posted yesterday.

It’s comic book levels of evil and out of touch.

If I spent $11,000,000 on movies, I could make my own damn movie.

I mean, he's right. People who are thinking "Do I spend this paycheck on food, rent, heat, or investing" and then decide on something besides investing, they're just short sighted. If they'd just invest instead of spending it on those things, in a few hundred years, they'd be rich too.

Grassley's quote illustrates the level of disconnect that people who have plenty of money have from people who have very little. When you have a lot of money, you don't even stop to think about the basics. You know you can afford a place to live, food to eat, a vehicle to get around, medical insurance, etc. All the basics are assumed to be taken care of. You don't devote brain cycles to it. Instead, you think about how to spend the extra. That's when you make the decision between living more extravagantly or saving and investing more. The fact that he assumes that they're spending every penny on booze, women, or movies means he's extrapolating his thinking onto those with less.

The sad part is that the GOP is somehow riding this populist wave, when they constantly make it clear that they have no idea how the poor actually live.

Chaz wrote:

The sad part is that the GOP is somehow riding this populist wave, when they constantly make it clear that they have no idea how the poor actually live.

Because it's a new thing Tim Snyder is calling sadopopulism, and they are very, very good at it.

Mixolyde wrote:
Chaz wrote:

The sad part is that the GOP is somehow riding this populist wave, when they constantly make it clear that they have no idea how the poor actually live.

Because it's a new thing Tim Snyder is calling sadopopulism, and they are very, very good at it.

Thanks for sharing this, it's amazing.

Timothy Snyder is one of the most lucid people right now in explaining our current situation.

Holy crap. That was spot on.