re: GOP tax document reveals plan for massive tax cuts, preserves key deductions

This is a very good plan.

One key component that will kickstart investment in the USA is the expensing of capital spending. THIS WILL BE HUGE. The bill will allow it for five years. They should just allow it forever. It doesn't really reduce over all taxes it just matches the taxes with the cash flow. A business spending a million dollars on a machine can immediately expense that machine for tax purposes when it pays the money instead of expensing it over 5 or 7 years as we do now.

I think it is stupid to continue the mortgage interest deduction---lower the rates even more and eliminate this deduction. Our population is getting older and lots of people have less mortgage interest to deduct and would be better with a lower rate. I should not have to pay more taxes because my house is paid for.

quote:

---

Honest question: Would you support these tax cuts knowing that they will increase the federal deficit?

---

Sure because those changes will grow the economy and there will be more taxes paid to the government (even at the lower rate).

I expect when the GDP is over 4% that the deficits will reduce, unless the swamp dwellers (on both sides of the isle) increase spending...

quote:

---

* preserves mortgage and charitable deductions, but promises to gut many others

---

quote:

---

* the document does not mention eliminating carried interest tax benefits used by hedge fund managers

---

quote:

---

do not identify the numerous tax breaks that they say will be removed in order to offset some of the trillions of dollars in revenue lost by cutting tax rates.

---

Well until we know this, we don't really know anything.


The bullet points are dessert, we need to see the vegetables.

quote:

---

quote:
I don't give a crap about the deficit any more. Nobody else does.

i do

---

Can you point to me of some examples of how you believe it is correlated in any way to the overall tax structure?

Well you should advocate for less spending. I do care about the spending.

If the choice put to me is "lower taxes with a higher deficit" or what we have now "higher taxes with a deficit" I am going to take the lower tax choice every time.

It would not bother me not one second if this tax cut is passed and spending is reduced to balance the budget. Pick whatever spending you want to reduce and I am for it.

Given the reality that spending will not be reduced I still favor the money in my pocket instead of my money in DC.

quote:

---

Well you should advocate for less spending.

---

i do. my current method of doing so heavily includes pointing out the bullshite rhetoric that comes from many who pretend to want less spending. i also think the "starve the beast" approach is utter bullshite.

if spending won't be cut, i want the spending paid for. people actually having to feel the pain of taxes in proportion with our spending more and more seems like the only realistic long-term thing that will ever lead to a real fix

Yeah. Another example of too much House Republican influence. Carried interest is ordinary income, not a gain. It's ordinary income based on a gain, so I understand how this managed to get done, but it is distasteful that House Repubs, who are essentailly establishment liberals, watered this entire bill down.

This said, Trump will compromise on this. But I will be paying particular close attention to see if he maes an attempt to restore some of what was in the original, extremely detailed version. Not that large parts of this would ever be pubic, but we'll see I guess.

The brackets previously released are also somewhat concerneing.

But it is nice that as much detail has been released on this. Proably more so than any other recent tax legislation in my memory at least.

Somewhat confused about people talking about the brackets. They've already been relased. Frankly the brackets are meaningless. How you get to the brackets (adjusted gross, MAGI and taxable) are sigificantly more important for people that actaully pay attention to what is critical.

quote:

---

Guess the fed gov will just have to cut spending.

---

That’ll happen

quote:

---

Somewhat confused about people talking about the brackets. They've already been relased. Frankly the brackets are meaningless. How you get to the brackets (adjusted gross, MAGI and taxable) are sigificantly more important for people that actaully pay attention to what is critical.

---

Sure. I've said before that pretending the # of brackets we have is the actual source of our code's complexity is absurd spin. But clearly it's a focal point for a shitload of people. It ought to be a sideshow