13 ms·
Show HN: Effects of House and Senate Bill on California Residents
- habosa 9y agoCan someone help me out here? Last year I paid 5-figure state income taxes (CA) which, as far as I understand, is no longer deductible from my federal income. So if my federal income taxes are ~30% then I'd expect to have a $3000+ tax increase from the loss of that deduction. Yet this tool implies I will get a tax cut. What elements of the new bills will result in a tax cut large enough to offset the loss of the SALT deduction? I am single, living in CA, no dependents. I do not own a business.
- pkaye 9y agoYour standard deductions will double but your exemptions will be gone.
- kelnos 9y agoAs a sibling noted, your standard deduction will double. That likely isn't enough, so I would guess that juggling the income limits in the different brackets is what made up for the difference. My state income tax paid is more than even the new standard deduction amount, and it showed a tax cut for me as well, so I can only assume the bracket reorg is what did that. In the end, my income & tax situation is more complicated than the simple single slider this calculator gives, so it doesn't really tell me much that is useful.
- pkaye 9y agoThis seems to imply that families with 2 kids and a median household income of $60k will owe a extra $5k in taxes? Edit: misread it. Not $5k more but 15-20% more.
- Tempest1981 9y agoMore kids results in less "tax benefit"... is that correct/intentional?
- pkaye 9y agoI think it is because the exemptions are eliminated. Of course I don't know how accurate this calculator is but if you enter my assumptions above for a typical middle class family of 2 kids and $60k income, nearly every state has higher taxes.
- kthejoker2 9y agoThere's no way this calculator is accurate. Take A married couple with 2 kids with $60k AGI, all W2. Filing in 2017, standard deduction: 60k - 12.7k deduction - 16.2k exemption = 31.1 taxable income, with ladder rates that's $3,733 - $2,000 in child tax credits for $1,733. Filing in 2017 with a 24,000 (!! out of 60k!) itemized deduction to match the new standard deduction: 60k - 24k deduction - 16.2k exemption = 19.8k taxable income, ladder rates make it $2,038 - $2,000 in tax credits for a grand total of $38 in taxes owed. Current Senate proposal: 60k - 24k standard deduction = 36k taxable income, with proposed ladder rates that's $3,939 - $4,000 child tax credits, you owe $0. Hard to see a scenario where: a) a 60k family is itemizing that much, and b) the child tax credit doesn't significantly increase.
- aphextron 9y ago>This seems to imply that families with 2 kids and a median household income of $60k will owe a extra $5k in taxes? Yep. This plan will throw peanuts to His desperate impoverished base of low income voters, while simultaneously fleecing the middle class and enriching the .01% (Himself). Just as planned.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ebtalley 9y agomaybe it works on ie 11, not working on chrome.
- Rebelgecko 9y agoI will be itemizing this year, it would be nice if I could add some of those writroffs in with this calculator. In my case, it's the difference between my taxes going down or up
- archerface 9y agoIs the site broken for anyone else? I see {{ STATE }} when I get into the page and a bunch of template variables in the page. None of the controls work and I have disabled my adblock, https everywhere, etc. EDIT: Never mind, false alarm
- castis 9y agoIt looks like that until all the javascript loads. The site is currently being hugged to death so it takes a minute.
- ProfessorLayton 9y agoThis is interesting, but it needs more data input for a more accurate picture for those who own a house, or hope to own one soon. Particularly those in the Bay Area, where the 10k SALT cap wouldn't be too difficult to run into.
- dv_dt 9y agoIt's not a 10K SALT cap, its a 10k property tax deduction cap, the itemized deduction for state and local income taxes are eliminated in both House and Senate versions as far as I understand.
- pascalxus 9y agoThe calculator shows people who make a lot of money 1million+ and very little money < 50K will have a bigger federal tax bill. they'll only be able to deduct 10k of the prop taxes too
- poulsbohemian 9y agoBut let's be clear, US median household income is $59,039, so the $50K you cite is not actually "very little money" but rather a normal income for a household. Agreed that in reality, it is very little money when we take into account CoL, household debt, etc. This bill, combined with the ongoing burden of health care expenses, will continue to cripple the typical US household. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/business/economy/income-rebound-recession.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/12/business/economy/income-r...
- Afforess 9y agoI love calculators. What I haven't seen yet is a calculator that shows you where the money originated from. How much of my tax deduction is new debt, vs money stripped from Medicare, Social Security, College Graduate deductions, etc. It's not enough to know how much more I am getting, but where the money originated from.
- sowbug 9y agoIs that mostly a matter of curiosity? I don't understand how that would help a taxpayer make financial decisions.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- jpadkins 9y agomoney is fungible. You can't trace it to a specific origin.
- Afforess 9y agoThat's pure pessimism. You can compare the previous-year government budget and next-year government budget and work out the gaps. Sure, the money might have all sloshed together in the general fund, but the average values are all matter for analysis on an individual level.
- dv_dt 9y agoI think the best you could get is a comparison of the per-capita debt incurred under some economic models, vs tax change realized individually, and possibly who/what accrues the benefits of the difference between those numbers.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- sjg007 9y agoIt doesn't matter and for the most part will all be newly issued debt. To explain: For the first few years it will be approx 100% new debt... You can exclude college graduate deductions since that's basically a small amount compared overall spending on medicare and social security etc... THEN wait a few years for the republicans to gut SS, medicare/medicaid etc.. under the guise of shrinking the debt/deficit with maybe a balanced budget argument. At that point you could argue that they've paid for these tax cuts by making those spending cuts. However, the republicans actually really like to issue debt when it pays their backers so you won't necessarily hear the balanced budget argument unless the democrats make substantial gains (e.g. take the House or the Senate).. They may try to push spending cuts through in 2018 but they may very well wait until after the election because as an election issue it might be polarizing. 2018 will be the year of campaigns that say "hey we cut your taxes", "we stuck it to the coastal and academic liberals". We also fixed Obama care as we removed the individual mandate (which is really all that non-wealthy people hurt by the ACA care about)... so vote for us!!! And without that mandate ACA costs will rise b/c insurance co's get paid on the backend to make up the shortfalls already, so that will just increase and need to be "funded", most likely by new debt. For all of these plans, if Trump is impeached it won't matter as Pence (or Ryan if it's a 2 for 1) will continue similarly. I only see one way out of this and that's that we need to appeal to Trump to save us. Since he desperately wants to be loved and respected by the people. The only issue is that Trump has to play ball with the Republicans or else they will impeach him, at least until Russia is out of the way. The only way to prevent that is to take back seats in the 2018 election.. but this is a tough task due to all of the gerrymandering that's gone on. If Pence or Ryan are President after the 2018 election with a democratic house basically nothing will happen. If Trump is in there might be a small chance of saving democracy. He'd have to go nuclear on the remaining republicans and may convert his base over to the more liberal populist platform to get re-elected. That's a stretch but not unimaginable.
- sowbug 9y agoWould be nice to include a field for long-term capital gains. Removal of the state income-tax deduction changes the effective tax rate for those gains, which would help someone decide whether to realize those gains in the remaining weeks of 2017 or else to keep holding.
- cdurth 9y agohis github project if you want to run it locally: https://github.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/ https://github.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/
- exabrial 9y agoI was about to ask this since his site is taking a pounding ATM. EDIT ==== How in the heck do you run it?
- rileyphone 9y agonpm install && npm start
- jorblumesea 9y agoWould love to see this over time. The tax breaks fall off pretty significantly after a few years for the average person.
- monocasa 9y agoI guess this sort of misses the main point, IMO. Sure, my taxes will go down, but I have grad student friends that may have to drop out because they now have to treat waived tuition as income, and pay ~10k tax on it somehow with their 20k-30k stipend they get. And I've got friends with kids that are going to see their tax burden go up by thousands. Meanwhile with all of this 'simplification' and 'getting rid of subsidies', we're not doing the same for corporate or high income 'subsidies'.
- kthejoker2 9y agoWhat are you basing your contention that people with kids are going to see their taxes going up on? All evidence I've seen has them significantly expanding the child tax credit.
- koolba 9y agoMortgage interest, local property taxes, and state taxes deductions are the biggest high income subsidies.
- bradleyjg 9y agoThe biggest high income subsidy is the favorable treatment of investment income. That'll probably be supplanted in the new tax regime by the passthrough discount.
- xyzzyz 9y agoI have grad student friends that may have to drop out because they now have to treat waived tuition as income If this happens, this will be a huge failure on their institution part. The only reason their tax bill might be affected is due to creative accounting practices of universities, who use the tuition waiver as a way to skim more money from the grants. Universities will just start offering education for free instead of waiving the tuition, and will find a new accounting trick to take money from federal science grants in "overhead".
- learc83 9y ago
- nodesocket 9y agoWould be great if this supported my situation, single member LLC (pass-through). Though probably not popular here on HN, the bill's goal is to reduce the burden of taxes on small business and corporations to promote repatriotization of capital back to the US.
- nightski 9y agoDidn't the House version support pass through entities but the Senate version threw it out to reduce the deficit (to avoid filibuster)? Still waiting to see what the rectified version looks like.
- scarmig 9y agoWell, the rectified version will be finished at 11:30PM some long Friday night and passed at 11PM the same evening, so you really won't have much a chance to look at it beforehand.
- ryanwaggoner 9y agoNope. The House version is fairly complicated, but amounts to most non-service businesses treating 30% of the income as "capital return" and being taxed at 25%. The Senate plan started out as being a 17% deduction of pass-through income on 1040, and then got ramped up to 23% before being passed. It is limited to 50% of W2 wages paid by the pass-through and excludes a bunch of service industry categories, but both of those limitations only apply to businesses where taxable income is below $250k single / $500k married. I'm pretty aggressive on tax avoidance and even I'm surprised by how crazy this is. So in a hypothetical example, I'm married and earn $600k from a consulting business. After retirement contributions to a solo 401k, maybe some charitable / mortgage / property tax deductions, etc, I get my taxable income to $500k. Which means I get to deduct another 23% of the business income (23% x $600k = $138k), dropping my taxable income to $362. And the Federal income tax on that is $80k. Plus another $40k or so for SE tax. So $120k in Federal tax on $600k in income, or 20%. If you live in a no-tax state, then that's all you pay. That's pretty crazy.
- madamelic 9y ago
- Naaman_Fletcher 9y agoWho decided the color scale for the US map was a good idea? Holy shit it is hard to tell the difference
- joering2 9y agoVery interesting. Unsure how reliable the source is, but when you play with salary indicator.. at $250k everything slowly starts turning gray and then red. So this bill truly hits into top % of these that make more than 25k or 125k per spouse. Only question remains what will the rich do with these savings. Administration says people will hire more and buy more goods that will obviously turn into more jobs and better economy. Let's hope for that!
- rb808 9y agoMake sure you use incognito mode! I hate looking at sites like these. I'm sure this one is probably OK but most aren't to be trusted. Not only are you giving away personal financial info to an unknown site, you're pairing that with your browser so making yourself a target to every advertiser and scammer in the future.
- blahshaw 9y agoI guess just drag the bar around a lot and look at a few different states.
- teilo 9y agoThis is not accurate at all because it does not include things like the per-child tax credit which has a dramatic effect on the taxes you pay.
- ultrafilter 9y agoIndeed, the source code only considers tax brackets, the personal exemption, and the standard deduction. I've read of an increase of $650 in the per-child tax credit combined with the loss of the per-dependent personal exemption and an increase in the standard deduction. If your last $4333 of annual income is going to be taxed at rate of 15%, then a $650 credit is just as valuable as a $4333 deduction or exemption and thus slightly more valuable than the current $4050 personal exemption. Thus, contrary to this calculator, middle-class families with lots of kids will not get big tax increases.
- thinkloop 9y agoThe media has been portraying this tax bill as a major break for billionaires, but these charts don't seem to show that.
- hkmurakami 9y agoThat's because this only looks at income tax. The tax bill is a boon for billionaires because of (1) estate tax repeal (house) and (2) corporate tax cuts that will benefit the capital class that holds corporate equity.
- sureshv 9y agoDon't forget passive income via pass through and capital gains . Also deductions for private jets and golf courses.
- hkmurakami 9y agoI believe the latter 3/4 are not touched in this bill.
- icantdrive55 9y agoI'm confused too. I would like to see that data Brock Whittaker used to make this tool. It's funny how I just assume a well done app is correct. I don't have any reason to question Brock, but we need the parameters. I looked him up, and didn't see any reason to question him. And yes, it looks like those making 1-3 million will pay more. If this is the case; I'm for the bill. The only Rebublican I trust is Mccain. If he's going for it--it might be ok. (I would like to see this app with projected tax saving on corporate income. Actually, I get it now. The wealthy will set up more corporations overnight, and pay themselfs a nominal wage. All their income will be taxed at a lower rate than than the rest of us. Warren Buffet's secretary will still pay more taxes than Warren--percentage wise. CPA's will be busier than ever.)
- a_humean 9y agoTwo reasons for that: 1) These are the first year income tax cuts, but most of these income tax cuts are getting phased out over time after the first year. By 2027 some of these income groups may see tax increases, and most won't see much benefit at all. 2) The temporary income tax cuts are peanuts compared to what is happening with the corporate rate, pass-throughs, capital gains, and estate tax (all permanent), which benefit people that own companies and/or inherit wealth - which is predominately the richest people. The richest people in the country don't get their wealth from their income, but rather from returns on capital.
- scrumper 9y agoThanks for doing this. What about mortgage interest and property tax? EDIT: I'm skeptical this is right. I'm in a high tax state, with high property and mortgage interest. Yet this shows me between 1% and 12% better off despite every report I've read and www.republicantaxcalculator.com showing me much, much worse off.
- efoto 9y agoNot taking property and mortgage interest into account, this tool is misleading at best! I just did my projections. This calculator shows our family will benefit slightly, when in fact our taxes will increase approx. 25K or 40% per year.
- scrumper 9y agoThat's what I was expecting too. How did you do those calculations, if you don't mind sharing? With an accountant, the hard way with a spreadsheet, or (please!) some magical accurate online calculator with 5 fields and a big button? Thanks!
- efoto 9y agoI apologize for missing your question. Well, first I used the new brackets to calculate the tax and found us slightly in the black. Then I dug out my last year tax return, added four numbers -- income tax, property tax, mortgage and donations -- subtracted proposed 24K standard deduction and applied our new bracket (35%) to the difference. Subtracted the first number. Felt robbed. That said, I'm waiting for my CPA to get back to me with the projections for 2017 along with the tax reform impact estimate.
- javascript-this 9y agocould you NOT wreck my browser's back-button please?
- inetknght 9y agoThis website literally just loads another page, IP address, over raw HTTP. There's no way in hell I would trust it in any way, shape, or form. You really should build your website better before showing it off. Edit: It looks like the page does not just load an iframe to an IP address any more. I'll take back what I said.
- brockwhittaker 9y agoSorry, I'm doing this while the new DNS info propagates to point it to a new server. My old server was too small and got crushed immediately. :(
- joshuahutt 9y agoI'm curious as to why you even used a server at all. From the looks of it, you could have shipped the server code with the frontend and saved some bandwidth.
- scblock 9y agoThis site completely hoses the back button, and doesn't give any kind of future look, rendering it largely pointless and annoying.
- ndirish1842 9y agoGreat tool If I can feature request, would love to see city/local taxes accounted for, especially with the SALT deduction removed. Good work!!
- hkmurakami 9y agoNice UI, not very useful / actionable in terms of actual insights. We've had a couple of threads about Excel lately and the power/beauty of Excel is that it'll be butt ugly but someone with zero programming knowledge but extensive tax knowledge can build a model for you that'll give you great actionable insights with decently quick turnaround.
- jxramos 9y agoditto, it would be nice to show the intermediate calculations in MathML or something. Let us see the flow of money, that is more interesting than anything else.
- a_humean 9y agoI'm guessing this covers just 2018/19 and not the lead up to 2027. A lot of these individual income tax cuts not permanent, and are set to expire in stages towards 2027. The bill is going through reconciliation with senate rules restricting deficits increases after 10 years (the bill is deficit financed to the tune of $1.5 trillion - which is insanity). Pretty much the only permanent features of the bill are the corporate rate, the pass through shenanigans, removal of estate tax, and removal of a number of deductions such as SALT, etc... also sabotaging the ACA marketplaces by repealing the individual mandate.
- dionidium 9y agoThis is a prominent criticism, but it strikes me as fundamentally weird to say, yeah, you're right that these are tax cuts, but the cuts expire in 10 years. This is government. Who knows what the world will look like in 10 years? Would, say, 20 years be better? Sure, I guess. But 10 years is a pretty long time. It's pretty difficult to plan most personal finances out that far, anyway. Who knows what your own life will be like in 10 years? Isn't the complaint that the cuts don't last longer tacit approval of the cuts?
- Scalestein 9y agoI think the issue is that one set of tax cuts is set to expire while another is not. And it looks a lot like using these expiring cuts to distract average taxpayers from the non-expiring tax cuts for the wealthier class.
- a_humean 9y agoAs another commentator said, its not really tacit approval of the cuts. The point I and others are making is that these cuts are clearly designed to be a political smokescreen for midterm elections. These cuts are deficit financed giveaways that in most cases will disappear, and in many cases income tax payers will see tax increases on income in later years to finance the permanent cuts elsewhere. The actual goal of the bill are the changes the congress choose to be permanent, which are the cuts on corporate rates, pass-through rates, and estate tax, which benefit a very small group of tax payers.
- kxyvr 9y agoNice tool, but a lot of the market is being altered in a way that blows out these savings. For example, I run my business and my overall tax rate last year was 28%. However, when I account for healthcare premiums and hitting my out of pocket max, I was over 40%. According to the calculator, my tax burden is reduced slightly under the plan. That said, my health costs for next year went up 37% and I'm receiving worse coverage. As such, I will be at a net loss for 2018 and it looks like it will become worse in 2019 if the individual mandate is eliminated. So, no, I don't expect a calculator to be perfect, but I can't help but stress how important the changes in healthcare costs for self-employed are under this plan.
- poulsbohemian 9y agoWish I had more than one upvote for you, you perfectly summarize the situation for many of us.
- wang_li 9y agoConcern about the individual mandate's effect on the market is curious. It's was waived by Obama until 2016. Trump waived it for 2016 and now the tax plan will eliminate it permanently. Seems status quo.
- newfoundglory 9y agoNo, expected future events are part of the status quo and they have been changed. Would you expect the market not to react if the government announced social security payments would all stop in 2018?
- guelo 9y agoObama did not waive it in 2016.
- brobinson 9y agoWhat? I had to pay an individual mandate penalty on my 2015 tax return... If you're right, then the IRS owes me a refund.
- danielhughes 9y agoNice work. You should consider making the state field optional. There is a large expat community who still need to file US taxes (but not state taxes).
- hamandcheese 9y agoJust pick a state without income tax, such as Florida.
- brockwhittaker 9y agoHey, I built this in my spare time over the past few days to calculate some of the basic implications of the new House and Senate Tax Bills on personal income taxes. This is open source and available on GitHub here: https://github.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/ https://github.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/ If you have any questions or issues, you can open them on GitHub or contact me at: whittakerbrock@gmail.com
- liquidgecka 9y agoI just filed this issue: https://github.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/issues/2 https://github.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/iss... You are not properly changing the deduction for married people. You have a single static value that gets used and is the "single" setting.. That ore I read the code completely wrong (which is always a possibility) =)
- joshuahutt 9y agoHoly history, Batman! I dragged the sliders around for a minute, and my browser history was completely decimated by identically-named entries. Maybe replace the existing state rather than pushing the new one?
- dinoleif 9y agoSay what you want about the tax bill on net, the elimination of the SALT deduction is very good for the country. There is zero reason for the Feds to subsidize and distort incentivize to encourage states to increase their tax burdens. SALT has always been one of the most corrupt tax breaks (mortgage interest being another).
- dragonwriter 9y ago> Say what you want about the tax bill on net, the elimination of the SALT deduction is very good for the country. No, it's very bad. > There is zero reason for the Feds to subsidize and distort incentivize to encourage states to increase their tax burdens. That seems like a reasonable position, but SALT doesn't do that; quite the opposite, it keeps federal taxation neutral in terms of incentives for state and local taxes. Not deducting state and local taxes distorts incentives by creating a federal tax disincentive to state/local tax-funded programs that produce a net economic gain. I've written up a simplified scenario illustrating this in a recent prior discussion on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15855955 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15855955
- hirsin 9y agoCould you go into more detail here? Corrupt in what way? I haven't really heard this claim before, and the general idea that you shouldn't be taxed on non-discretionary income (e.g. buying milk, clothing, and paying taxes that make your schools and roads work) seems sound on the face of it.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- sb8244 9y agoTemplate is {{var}} on iOS Safari
- cdurth 9y agoi think his server is being hugged to death causing issues
- sb8244 9y agoFound that you can copy the source at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senate-Tax-Bills/master/static/js/main.min.js https://raw.githubusercontent.com/brockwhittaker/House-Senat... into your console if the main.js isn't loading for you.
- brockwhittaker 9y agoFixed now. Was getting hugged to death. :)
- stephengillie 9y agoSite appears to be hugged to death again.
- charter_sucks 9y agohuh. so i'm going to benefit from these tax changes. interesting.
- mrgordon 9y agoshort term = small benefit for most medium term = benefits expire, national debt is huge, "we have to cut social security and medicare that you paid into all these years" This calculator is deceptive as it shows the initial change which is everyone gets a little bit of money and rich people get huge gobs of money. After a few years it all changes and we have to make huge cutbacks since "we" were so fiscally irresponsible.
- malnourish 9y agoIndividuals can benefit from the same thing which harms the whole (and thus, the individual).
- deadmetheny 9y agoMost people will. What most people are getting mad about is that a lot of the personal deductions will expire in the future, and that the ultra-wealthy are getting a tax discount as well as the average person.
- poulsbohemian 9y agoWho is this most people? Most people on HN, being white collar professional types might benefit in the short term from this bill, but most people across the country are in that under-$30K category that is going to get screwed. I'd be interested in hearing the personal accounts of grad students about to get taxed on their tuition breaks as well. This bill is bad news all the way around.
- malnourish 9y agoIt looks like filing single with even one dependent drastically increases the tax burden in both plans. Additionally, the House plan raises the tax burden in those making less than 30k.
- kbourgoin 9y agoYou should consider showing how they change over time, since a lot of the personal deductions will be phased out.
- JBlue42 9y agoSeconded. There are some good charts out there that show the difference.
- masivemunkey 9y agoDefinitely important. A lot of people will get slight benefit that will phase out over years. Corporation tax cuts never expire though.
- pascalxus 9y agoGreat calculator! Just what i was looking for. I like the simple UI. But, you should add the state tax as well as the FICO and social security tax/ medicare tax, to show a more complete picture.
- tedajax 9y agoLooks like it got hugged to death.
- brockwhittaker 9y agoIt should be fixed now! Didn't work too well on a DigitalOcean server w/ 512mb RAM and 100 requests a minute. :)
- gizmodo59 9y agoHave you scaled the size of the server or added more servers? Would be interesting to know some stats as I'm thinking between DO vs Vultr
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- awinder 9y agoI would love this even more if you could input your itemization total. This tool is so much better than the ones I’ve seen previously, and actually it’s kind of ridiculous that congress can’t create this tool. Being educated about the personal effects of this bill is just good governance.
- perseusprime11 9y agoThese tax bills are hilarious. For the majority of us, it is like moving money from your left pocket to the right pocket. There is no savings whatsoever besides bad healthcare for all. This bill should really be called "Corporations are people too, my friends" bill as it really gives away money for rich companies who honestly do not need more money given Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google are becoming trillion dollar companies.
- propman 9y agoThis doesn't count AMT, everyone in the state who itemizes and makes more than $200k has to pay the amt essentially making deductions completely useless. A NYT article showed how elites in Cali and NY will lose money but I calculated various incomes and the only people who would lose money are the ones making $1M plus. The article completely excluded that fact. Steph curry for instance will lose over a million in this new bill because he doesn't pay AMT currently and deducts $2M stats taxes. Not being able to deduct that plus only a minor drop in income tax brackets screws him. This is not a bad bill. Very few people wil have to pay more and those that do are making $1M + and they'd slightly see a decrease while people with $5M+ will see a more significant decrease, so I'm not concerned. That being said, I think there should be even a bigger tax cut on the middle class and greater deductions for disabled seniors. Family making $50k with 2 kids barely saves more than a family $35k with 2 kids especially if they have Medicaid while the other family has insane premiums and deductibles.
- imbusy111 9y agoIf everyone pays less, where is the money coming from then?
- tasty_freeze 9y agoThey claim it will come from a huge economic boom which will be unleashed by cutting corporate tax rates. However, a proposal to automatically undo some of the changes if the "guaranteed to pay for itself" plan fails was scrapped. I'd rather have challenged those claiming the cuts would pay for themselves to put up or shut up: force retirement if the growth didn't appear.
- propman 9y agoThat was political grandstanding. Imagine if some war broke out or something like the financial crisis happened in 3 years. Already poor economic growth, 401k crashing, job cutting, businesses losing money and all of a sudden taxes go up 15%? It would sink the economy and force govt to pay trillions. It was a comically absurd idea that becomes easily refuted with 5 seconds of thought. Unfortunately, 99% of politics is grandstanding, just hope that things that pass into actual law are rational.
- juicefs 9y agoThe result is very different from this one[1], for a family with 2 kids. Which one is more close to the fact? [1] http://taxplancalculator.com/calc http://taxplancalculator.com/calc
- egberts1 9y agoMarriage deduction is not yet fully implemented.
- vkdelta 9y agolink is dead. Please check if your server is dead. any alternate links?
- aosmith 9y agoAnd it's down. This is why we can't have nice things.