to be fair, that person isn't paying a lot of tax to start with

percentages would be a better number to compare

Getting rid of SALT deductions will never happen, so this is DOA as written. No one will vote for that--it's political suicide.

SSI and Medicare taxes aren't effected by raising the standard deduction, right? Poors getting hosed bigly my friends, bigly

1. Reducing the number of tax brackets is trivially stupid, with no real effect on anyone's effort. Taxes are not hard to do because we have to integrate under a curve of continuously-increasing rates.

2. This is actually a case where the Democrats have an easy message to make, and the Republicans have to argue nuance:
Democrats: They are literally increasing the tax rate on the poorest and lowering the tax rate on the richest!
Republicans: Actually, when you consider the increase in the standard deduction, the net effect on the average taxpayer earning (whatever) is that their taxes will go down!

I actually think that second message is a totally reasonable point, but the public at large has shown they don't give a **** about Vox-type explanations. So here's a case where the Democratic message is really easy. (I'm sure they'll still screw it up.)

3. No more state and local tax deduction is a LOL middle finger at blue states and large cities. I don't think there's any way that that sticks.

4. Estate tax repeal because of course. This of course means that they should end the step up of cost basis on assets transferred at death, but of course they won't.

5. As mentioned above, eliminating refundable tax credits (e.g., EITC) is a huge **** you to people.

Paul Ryan policy genius, though.

Edit: A legitimately good idea, based on the Vox summary:

[Obviously it should say "how much interest they can deduct" not "how much debt they can deduct".] No way that actually happens, though. LOL at banks saying yes to not being able to deduct interest.

This is a pretty good read about the potential impacts of this plan.

https://politicsofpoverty.oxfamameri...-for-the-poor/

The biggest takeaway for me is that this will contribute to income inequality by giving corporations a massive windfall and effectively rewarding them for tax evasion.

The nice thing about this group (Oxfam) is that it looks at stuff like this from a global perspective, which is an important part of the discussion.

Payroll taxes are a separate tax.

The only deduction from gross pay to FICA-taxable are employer based health care/dental plan contributions.

6.2% for SS on earned incomes up to $127,200
1.45% for Medicare on all earned income
Total 7.65% for the employee.

The employer matches an additional 7.65% for a total 15.3%.

To be fair these aren't really taxes, but an earned benefit.

(There is a small ACA/Obamacare Medicare tax on capital gains, on incomes >$250k, it's not worth mentioning).

It does away with the Alternative Minimum Tax, naturally.

Someone please post a link where the earned income tax credit being rescinded.

It's just not true.

It wasn't in the 2016 GOP House Congressional plan. I don't see it being reported today. This plan is nearly the same as Ryan's A Better Way plan. Even he didn't cut the EITC.

The alternative minimum tax disproportionally effects taxpayers in high taxed blue states with large mortgages and large state-local tax deductions.

Like the Trump family?

Some context for any new tax plan

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/27/the-...he-wealth.html

This is fair. I'm basing my comment on this Washington Post story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.e572f4a56435

But you're right in that I haven't seen an explicit commitment to end the EITC. I do, however, think it's infinitely more likely the EITC gets cut than interest expense becomes non-deductible.

I didn't see the EIC on the tax document i read, i stated that pretty clearly that I don't know that its gone, but what i do know is they didn't specifically state is isn't gone (like they did with Mort Int), and later they said we are getting rid of other credits.

I'm using the track record of the R's + logic to determine the EIC is part of the group thats getting cut.

Anything wrong with this analysis?

No one has seen Trump's taxes.

In general, the alternative minimum tax liability is gone once the taxpayer hits the 35% and the 39.6% tax bracket because the AMT is 26%/28% and eventually the "regular" tax brackets have higher taxes than the parallel AMT tax brackets.

I do believe there a leaked Trump tax return where he paid AMT. But I believe that was due to large "reportable losses". Business AMT tax is so far out of my knowledge base it's something I cannot reasonably discuss. For an owned business like Trump's you'd have to see both his Personal and Business tax records to really get a good pictures on the tax strategies.

And obviously, we aren't going to see them.

It could actually be worse the other way. If they cut credits like EIC and other poor people subsidies

heres some logic


TrumpS tax plan eliminates AMT

therefore, Trump pays AMT

It's mathematically correct, but we don't yet know the tax brackets so it's not giving the full picture.

But that person with $19k in income doesn't really pay much individual income taxes to begin with. They pay FICA taxes. They additionally receive the earned income tax credit. Which is really a "credit" for working. It's a refundable credit that goes above an beyond what that person paid in income taxes. They would have a "negative" tax liability.

Under current 2017 law it would be hard to believe that the President pays AMT.

http://amtadvisor.com/AMT_Exemption.html

Haven't looked at this much at all, I'm going to go with that it's horrible based solely on the fact that Trump and the GOP are the ones proposing it.

Well, they will pass some sort of tax bill.

It again, will all depend on the Senate.

They probably will start with a hard right Paul Ryan-esq plan with all of the goodies (repealing the Estate Tax, 35% top marginal rate, et al). It may fail with some of the moderate GOPs voting no, or even the deficit hawks voting no.

But eventually they will pass something.

Even if it's just moar child tax credits, cutting the 15% bracket down to 10% and leaving all the hodgepodge of deductions the same.

Cutting taxes before an election year is like Politics 101.

It would be astonishing if they fail at this.

YEAH MAYBE IF THE PRESIDENT WASNT MAKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF THE PRESIDENCY

COME ON MAN

I favor a plan where everyone get s a 5% across the board cut, but you can risk it all for a spin at the "Big Wheel."

Yeah, if the bottom bracket jumps up from 10 to 12% you'll save $198 in that scenario.

Of course you'll also end up paying an extra ~$160 in taxes on the remaining $8k so...

this is even more true this year with their large donors threatening to pull fundraising money from them, coupled with their failure to repeal the ACA. something will pass.