• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

H.R. 1, “Tax cuts and jobs act”

I

I'm Supposn

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
1,819
Reaction score
281
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
H.R. 1, “Tax cuts and jobs act”:

Within the proposed “Tax Cuts & Jobs Act”, the populist proposal doubling the standard deduction is of conspicuous merit, and eliminating the alternative minimum tax would be contemptible.
(Increasing the standard deduction would be further improved if it were subject to annual cost of living adjustments).

[Consider the alleged pages of Donald Trump's 1040 tax return for 2005 published by the NY Times.
It was conceivable for his effective tax rate upon a $49, 592, 825 adjusted gross income to be less than $5, 310, 616. (Trump then instead had to pay the alternative minimum tax).
The working-poors' wages do not contribute income tax revenues and cannot fund or their dependents' medical insurance, but they contribute 7.65% FICA taxes upon their entire wages. It should be conceivable that some millionaires will be obliged to pay an effective income tax rate of less than 11%, (i.e. 10.7%)?]

Elimination of the alternative minimum tax would effectively reduce our tax revenues and act as a tax boon for only the financially favored. Accusations that FDR was “a traitor to his class” served to enhance his reputation. Elimination of the AMT would enhance president Trump's and Republicans' reputations among the wealthy.

If sufficient numbers of Republicans do not oppose eliminating the AMT, Democrats should be able to hang it, (as the “albatross”), around president Trump's and all Republican candidates' necks.
But there's a difference between “should be” and “will be”. The incompetent Democratic National Committee couldn't defend the reputation of a presidential candidate. John Kerry served in the military with distinction that went beyond simply honorable.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
H.R. 1, “Tax cuts and jobs act”:

Within the proposed “Tax Cuts & Jobs Act”, the populist proposal doubling the standard deduction is of conspicuous merit, and eliminating the alternative minimum tax would be contemptible.
(Increasing the standard deduction would be further improved if it were subject to annual cost of living adjustments).

[Consider the alleged pages of Donald Trump's 1040 tax return for 2005 published by the NY Times.
It was conceivable for his effective tax rate upon a $49, 592, 825 adjusted gross income to be less than $5, 310, 616. (Trump then instead had to pay the alternative minimum tax).
The working-poors' wages do not contribute income tax revenues and cannot fund or their dependents' medical insurance, but they contribute 7.65% FICA taxes upon their entire wages. It should be conceivable that some millionaires will be obliged to pay an effective income tax rate of less than 11%, (i.e. 10.7%)?]

Elimination of the alternative minimum tax would effectively reduce our tax revenues and act as a tax boon for only the financially favored. Accusations that FDR was “a traitor to his class” served to enhance his reputation. Elimination of the AMT would enhance president Trump's and Republicans' reputations among the wealthy.

If sufficient numbers of Republicans do not oppose eliminating the AMT, Democrats should be able to hang it, (as the “albatross”), around president Trump's and all Republican candidates' necks.
But there's a difference between “should be” and “will be”. The incompetent Democratic National Committee couldn't defend the reputation of a presidential candidate. John Kerry served in the military with distinction that went beyond simply honorable.

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

They should restore the AMT and eliminate the Carried Interest Deduction instead.

It will be difficult for the Democrats to hang this around the Republicans' neck. Tax deductions and alternative minimum taxes are arcane and boring. All the Republicans have to do is make doubling the standard deduction the bright shiny object they can point to.
 
bearpoker said:
They should restore the AMT and eliminate the Carried Interest Deduction instead.

It will be difficult for the Democrats to hang this around the Republicans' neck. Tax deductions and alternative minimum taxes are arcane and boring. All the Republicans have to do is make doubling the standard deduction the bright shiny object they can point to.
Click to expand...
BearPoker, I'm ashamed to admit that I haven't yet searched and found an explanation or good discussion of the “carried interest” provisions. I don't recall having not found it, or if I didn't understand whatever I did find. I'm of course somewhat of a genius but even we geniuses are fallible.

If you have a good link,please pass it on.

We haven't yet lost the “Alternative Minimum Tax”, but I'm afraid we will lose it. President Trump's 2005 Income taxes makes the alternative minimum tax shine a bit more brightly.
I'm Supposn said:
...It should be conceivable that some millionaires will be obliged to pay an effective income tax rate of less than 11%, (i.e. 10.7%)? ...
Click to expand...
If opponents of its elimination continue pounding upon this, Democrats have a political issue they can campaign on.

I'm also opposed to unjustifiable losses of tax revenues plus inequitable treatment of those who are may only get a once in a lifetime financial boon. Ther'll be no mention of this in Congress.
Refer to
https://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/301215-capital-gains-tax-and-tax-averaging.html

Respectfully, Supposn
 
bearpoker said:
They should restore the AMT and eliminate the Carried Interest Deduction instead.

It will be difficult for the Democrats to hang this around the Republicans' neck. Tax deductions and alternative minimum taxes are arcane and boring. All the Republicans have to do is make doubling the standard deduction the bright shiny object they can point to.
Click to expand...

Maybe there should be a mandatory minimum tax from gross earnings, allowing deductions to only reduce taxation so much.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Maybe there should be a mandatory minimum tax from gross earnings, allowing deductions to only reduce taxation so much.
Click to expand...
Lord of Planar, isn't that what the alternative minimum tax effectively now does?

In 2005 it prevented Trump from paying an effective federal income tax rate that was less than 11% of his gross adjusted income.
That's why president Trump so strongly wants to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
I'm Supposn said:
BearPoker, I'm ashamed to admit that I haven't yet searched and found an explanation or good discussion of the “carried interest” provisions. I don't recall having not found it, or if I didn't understand whatever I did find. I'm of course somewhat of a genius but even we geniuses are fallible.

If you have a good link,please pass it on.

We haven't yet lost the “Alternative Minimum Tax”, but I'm afraid we will lose it. President Trump's 2005 Income taxes makes the alternative minimum tax shine a bit more brightly.

If opponents of its elimination continue pounding upon this, Democrats have a political issue they can campaign on.

I'm also opposed to unjustifiable losses of tax revenues plus inequitable treatment of those who are may only get a once in a lifetime financial boon. Ther'll be no mention of this in Congress.
Refer to
https://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/301215-capital-gains-tax-and-tax-averaging.html

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...

I think this is a good explanation. Anything longer puts me to sleep.
What is carried interest, and how should it be taxed? | Tax Policy Center
 
bearpoker said:
I think this is a good explanation. Anything longer puts me to sleep.
What is carried interest, and how should it be taxed? | Tax Policy Center
Click to expand...
BearPoker, The tax averaging provision within IRS regulations applied to almost any taxpayers' “jumps” of annual incomes. It was no less applicable to significant lottery winners, or increases of incomes derived from wages, investments, gambling, or commercial sex. It would be applicable to “recipients of “carried interest” incomes.
Refer to the initial post within the thread, https://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/301215-capital-gains-tax-and-tax-averaging.html .

Thanks for the link. I don't remember reading it before you mentioned ”carried interest deduction”, so I suppose I never googled the topic.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Last edited:
I'm Supposn said:
Lord of Planar, isn't that what the alternative minimum tax effectively now does?

In 2005 it prevented Trump from paying an effective federal income tax rate that was less than 11% of his gross adjusted income.
That's why president Trump so strongly wants to eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax.

Respectfully, Supposn
Click to expand...
I don't know how taxation exemptions work at that level of incomes. I meant it as a "mandatory" minimum, not an "alternate" minimum. I have seen before, where the alterternative minum allows less taxes to be paid, rather than a fair portion. Am I wrong?
 
Lord of Planar said:
I don't know how taxation exemptions work at that level of incomes. I meant it as a "mandatory" minimum, not an "alternate" minimum. I have seen before, where the alterternative minum allows less taxes to be paid, rather than a fair portion. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
Lord of Planar, the alternative minimum tax is not a matter for choice.

Tax preparers uncertain of the AMT is applicable in their cases, are advised to use the work sheet for the AMT, (i.e. form #6251). AMT is obviously not applicable to the vast plurality of taxpayers.
Tax preparers are presumed to understand if IRS regulations require their clients' to pay the AMT.

If the calculation of AMT is less than the regular calculating method, they may and should ignore their AMT calculations; otherwise the AMT calculation is the tax they're required to pay.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
The AMT should be eliminated or actually redone it was a stupid implementation to begin with.

So far what i have seen is that they are going to double the standard deduction. They will get rid of the personal exception but then up the child credit from 1000 to 1,600.
(that could go higher but it is 1,600 for now).

also the lowest tax bracket is 12%. this will lower taxes on some people by 3% and while some will see a 2% increase that will be negated by the standard deduction and the tax credit.

under just a really really basic plan if you pay 0 taxes all year a 4 person family making 55k would pay 0 in taxes.

we know this isn't the case and people pay payroll tax. however the tax liability for that family would be 3,672 dollars.
 
Even a blind hog finds an acorn every now and then.




The original Trump campaign tax plan is the right one

  • By Stephen Moore

Democrats attacking the Trump tax cut have primarily voiced two objections: first, that it is a tax cut for the rich. And second, that it will blow a hole in the deficit.

If Republicans get smart, they can squash both of these arguments — and strike a blow for a much more ambitious, once-in-a-generation tax reform than the plans now on the table in the House and Senate.
To do so, they should revisit an idea that was central to the original Trump campaign plan that Larry Kudlow and I helped to craft. In every meeting, Donald Trump told us he didn’t want a tax cut “for rich people like me.” So we solved this problem by putting a global cap of $150,000 on all deductions and credits. . . .


















 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom