« First « Previous Comments 18 - 57 of 75 Next » Last » Search these comments
I like this change, since I pay very little for property taxes ($1500) and a shitload of state income taxes (>10K). A $10,000 combined limit for the two is fairer and doesn't favor real estate like the previous version did.
The people hit the hardest aren't going to fight the Federal government on this. They're going to ask why the fuck are my property taxes so high? Why the fuck does Florida have 0 income taxes and I'm getting fucked in IL, NY, CA, etc? It's almost certain if people fight for these cuts on the state level or county level, they're going to get more money back in their pockets versus the Federal government removing the $10k cap.
I think it's a good overall play for CA, because a lot of taxpayer money goes to lefty lunatic causes and voter purchases through illegal immigrant amnesty and ghetto pimping.
That has to stop to make CA a viable place for the middle class again. My plan is to become way more involved in the state's budget.
Not an accountant, but if I understand things correctly, the $10k cap doesn't even come into play until you itemize. So if you haven't itemized over $24k in the past, this really doesn't matter. But let's say you itemize $24k in other things, you'll still get the $10k on the state income/property taxes, $34k essentially. But if you only itemize say $14k in mortgage interest and other stuff, but have $20k in state property/income taxes, then the $10k above will be taxable income. Which depending on bracket isn't all that much in the grand scheme of these peoples earnings.
It sucks for a certain segment of the population for sure. Mainly high income, W-2 earners with with big or highly taxed houses. From an economic standpoint, I don't like it because it takes money out of the hands of people that are likely to spend the money in the economy and not hoard it. So this is a negative in the tax plan in my opinion. Kind of a big one for domestic tourism, auto industry, etc. ...
Reminder: home ownership is one of the largest drivers of the US economy. Furniture, construction, repairs, maintenance, hardware, tools, landscaping, service workers, technology, entertainment, automobiles, toys for the young and old alike, and so on.
The days of just passing a tax increase statewide probably just got a lot tougher.
Why is it so important for money to trickle down from the rich instead of just letting the poor keep it in the first place?
WorkInProgress saysWhy is it so important for money to trickle down from the rich instead of just letting the poor keep it in the first place?
Define poor. And what does "letting them keep it" mean for somebody who's not paying any FIT in a context for FIT reform?
Satoshi_Nakamoto saysWorkInProgress saysWhy is it so important for money to trickle down from the rich instead of just letting the poor keep it in the first place?
Define poor. And what does "letting them keep it" mean for somebody who's not paying any FIT in a context for FIT reform?
That's exactly it, almost half of the population pay ZERO in Federal taxes, are these the poor he speaks about? What should congress do, lower their taxes even more? Is there such thing as a negative tax rate on the IRS charts?
ZERO in Federal taxes
WorkInProgress saysWhy is it so important for money to trickle down from the rich instead of just letting the poor keep it in the first place?
Define poor. And what does "letting them keep it" mean for somebody who's not paying any FIT in a context of FIT reform?
Satoshi_Nakamoto saysWorkInProgress saysWhy is it so important for money to trickle down from the rich instead of just letting the poor keep it in the first place?
Define poor. And what does "letting them keep it" mean for somebody who's not paying any FIT in a context for FIT reform?
That's exactly it, almost half of the population pay ZERO in Federal taxes, are these the poor he speaks about? What should congress do, lower their taxes even more? Is there such thing as a negative tax rate on the IRS charts?
Work in Progress - owning a house is not an entitlement. Hence, the lower the income, the less likely it will be to own a house especially in highly desirable locations. There are absolutely no issues with this. That is a market.
The point that is missed, is that homeowners pay way more tax than non-owners. They are literally floating the cost of shared services already, so when asked to "help the poor" even further it really is fucking annoying to listen to.
The point that is missed, is that homeowners pay way more tax than non-owners. They are literally floating the cost of shared services already, so when asked to "help the poor" even further it really is fucking annoying to listen to.
Mortgage interest write-offs up to $750,000 mortgages
anon_945c8 saysSatoshi_Nakamoto saysWorkInProgress saysWhy is it so important for money to trickle down from the rich instead of just letting the poor keep it in the first place?
Define poor. And what does "letting them keep it" mean for somebody who's not paying any FIT in a context for FIT reform?
That's exactly it, almost half of the population pay ZERO in Federal taxes, are these the poor he speaks about? What should congress do, lower their taxes even more? Is there such thing as a negative tax rate on the IRS charts?
Good point. But, I would counter with...If you need more taxes, where are you going to get it from, the people who have money or those who don't?
anon_945c8 saysZERO in Federal taxesThose same people you refer to pay plenty in social security and medicare, which certainly counts.
It's subsidizing the tax cuts for the rich.
That's exactly it, almost half of the population pay ZERO in Federal taxes, are these the poor he speaks about? What should congress do, lower their taxes even more? Is there such thing as a negative tax rate on the IRS charts?
Good point. But, I would counter with...If you need more taxes, where are you going to get it from, the people who have money or those who don't?
The point that is missed, is that homeowners pay way more tax than non-owners. They are literally floating the cost of shared services already, so when asked to "help the poor" even further it really is fucking annoying to listen to.
You believe that somehow rental properties don't pay property taxes? Where do you live that they don't.
WorkInProgress saysThat's exactly it, almost half of the population pay ZERO in Federal taxes, are these the poor he speaks about? What should congress do, lower their taxes even more? Is there such thing as a negative tax rate on the IRS charts?
Good point. But, I would counter with...If you need more taxes, where are you going to get it from, the people who have money or those who don't?
How about REDUCING spending to the amount of taxes collected? How's that for a novel idea?
Do you keep writing checks out of your checkbook when the available balance gets to zero? Do you keep ordering products and services knowing you don't have the income to support it?
Are these tough questions?
anon_fb813 saysThe point that is missed, is that homeowners pay way more tax than non-owners. They are literally floating the cost of shared services already, so when asked to "help the poor" even further it really is fucking annoying to listen to.
Geez.... scary...
bob2356 saysYou believe that somehow rental properties don't pay property taxes? Where do you live that they don't.
and these renters vote.... we're screwed...
That wasn't the topic of the OP, stop with the straw man, the OP was about FEDERAL taxes. But since you brought it up, how much medicare/S.S taxes does someone making $20K a year pay versus someone making $100K?
How about REDUCING spending to the amount of taxes collected? How's that for a novel idea?
Those on the left with only academic experience but little market experience seem to think someone 1000x richer means he eats 3000 hamburgs a day instead of your own 3 hamburgs a day (and all those hamburgs fall from the sky, so if he eats more, you eat less)
hose on the left with only academic experience but little market experience seem to think someone 1000x richer means he eats 3000 hamburgs a day instead of your own 3 hamburgs a day (and all those hamburgs fall from the sky, so if he eats more, you eat less).
anon_fb813 saysReminder: home ownership is one of the largest drivers of the US economy. Furniture, construction, repairs, maintenance, hardware, tools, landscaping, service workers, technology, entertainment, automobiles, toys for the young and old alike, and so on.
I agree. Now how do we get more people with lower incomes into houses? Wouldn't that be better then giving it back to those who already own homes?
Quigley saysMortgage interest write-offs up to $750,000 mortgages
I feel this one needs to be scaled down a lot. That's like paying wealthy people to buy expensive houses, not right.
FortWayne saysQuigley saysMortgage interest write-offs up to $750,000 mortgages
I feel this one needs to be scaled down a lot. That's like paying wealthy people to buy expensive houses, not right.
Absolutely! Very disappointing that such a high limit is getting included in that bill.
Joking aside, what the smart academics realize is that someone 1000x richer eats 3 hamburgers a day and hoards the rest of the cash, whereas if that 1000X wealth were spread over the entire population, there would actually be 3000 hamburgers or more eaten leading to more demand for beef and more jobs in the restaurant, more jobs on the farm, more jobs at the beef processers, etc. That's why high inequality is bad and leads to job losses and a crappy economy.
There is some small chance for the political pendulum to swing meaningfully to the left.
four years of escalating economic gains
In a late stage business cycle? Dram on. At best a blow off top stock market.
Bob, renters never pay property taxes. Those are the taxes that pay for county services, like schools and roads.
This has been beaten to death in another thread. Landlord pays the prop taxes. Never the renter. Renter pays to use the space to live. Landlord's balance sheet is irrelevant.
Landlord pays the prop taxes. Never the renter. Renter pays to use the space to live.
I would strongly suggest you stay out of rental real estate if you believe otherwise.
FP says
In a late stage business cycle? Dram on. At best a blow off top stock market.
I guess I’m not educated enough about economics to understand your point.
« First « Previous Comments 18 - 57 of 75 Next » Last » Search these comments
$10,000 in state income tax eligible for write-off so no double taxation for most people.
Mortgage interest write-offs up to $750,000 mortgages.
Property tax deduction.
Possibly child tax credit even higher than the previously proposed $2000
The corporate tax rate may be greater than 20% to compensate.
Oh and Murkowski got them to open ANWR to oil development as a requirement for her vote.
Let’s just hope McCain doesn’t resurrect himself to fuck this one up!
https://www.npr.org/2017/12/13/570509509/gop-lawmakers-agree-on-final-tax-package-hatch-says
#politics