3 ms·

>The current federal system doesn't change thresholds based on where you live either, so that criticism seems a bit unfair? It does, in a way. I submit my mort

>The current federal system doesn't change thresholds based on where you live either, so that criticism seems a bit unfair? It does, in a way. I submit my mortgage interest, what I paid in property taxes, etc and a million other things itemized specifically about me and my income/expense level. A flat tax removes those things for that 14% which is fine, but it shouldn't be after 50k, it should start at 1 dollar of income. Not to mention the rebates I get due to current law like adoption credit, electric car credit, home insulation credit, home office business expense, etc. Losing those incentives will have a non-trivial effect on society. It will, for example, make adoption financially impossible for most folks who current are able to do it and probably strangle the electric car in the cradle. For reference, our adoption was $40,000 out of pocket and x percentage will be returned to us over y years. How many people can drop that kind of money and not get any of it back? Its challenging for many as-is.

dnautics 11y ago
So you're complaining because you'll lose privileges that have been granted to you, that you get to take advantage as a upper-middle class individual. Boo hoo. People in the bottom tier (making under 50k) are generally not taking adoption credits, electric car credits, home insulation credits, etc. It's doubtful that the electric car will be strangled. Tesla owners are not buying teslas for the credit. Likewise, Prius/Insight owners were not buying those for the credit (when that existed) either. The only electric cars that will die without the credit are the leaf and the volt.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  Actually, the kinds of people who adopt are often not well off. They borrow from friends, family, church, etc. Then they pay it back using these credits. > electric car credits, Lets talk in 5 years when even the poorest will be driving EV's. They'd be stupid not to considering how cheap electricity is compared to gas. Not to mention in a country of high class mobility putting in "donut holes" in the tax code is just stupid. Now you'll be incentivized to not go past making $50,000 unless you suddenly want to be hit with taxes. Employers will cap salaries at arbitrarily $50,000 to avoid tax concerns. These kinds of "one fits all" caps are often economically destructive. Look at India, where if a company is larger than x employees, it is illegal to fire anyone. You need to petition the government to fire that person. That's why there are so many small companies there and why they struggle to compete with China and other nations in their development class who don't have weird one-size-fits all legislation.
  - dnautics 11y ago
    > Actually, the kinds of people who adopt are often not well off. They borrow from friends, family, church, etc. Then they pay it back using these credits. Yes, these people aren't helped by the process of taking deductions because they are basically covered by the standard deduction to have zero tax anyways. >Now you'll be incentivized to not go past making $50,000 unless you suddenly want to be hit with taxes. Huh? if you make 50,010 you're not going to be paying 14.5% of 50,010, you're going to be paying $1.45 in taxes. >These kinds of "one fits all" caps are often economically destructive. No doubt, and the US idiotically implements these, too, like in the ACA where small businesses are exempt below certain sizes, unless you are wal-mart and can obtain a backdoor administrative exemption. Now, if you want to rail against "donut holes" the american welfare system has plenty of those, but that's a separate debate. >Lets talk in 5 years when even the poorest will be driving EV's. They'd be stupid not to considering how cheap electricity is compared to gas. If the lowered expense of the cars is matched by the cheapness of the electricity to make it economical for 'the poorest', then there would be no need for a credit. As it is, the credit (like most tax credits) only helps rich people.
  - rrss1122 11y ago
    They won't cap salaries at $50,000. If there is a 14.5% flat tax, then it wouldn't make sense to have a salary anywhere between $50,000 and $58,479.54. That still leaves a company free to offer a "competitive" $60,000 salary to lure employees away from a competitor who would cap salaries at $50,000. This argument goes away if we only tax the money after $50,000. Either way, salaries won't be arbitrarily capped at $50,000.
- rrss1122 11y ago
  People often complain about the rich using loopholes to avoid paying less taxes, but when laws are proposed that will effectively close all those loopholes, they balk at the possibility that their own loopholes would be closed too.
jessaustin 11y ago
I submit my mortgage interest... Paul proposes leaving the mortgage deduction in place, so that may alleviate your concerns. ...it shouldn't be after 50k, it should start at 1 dollar of income. This would have the effect of raising your taxes. ...adoption credit, electric car credit, home insulation credit... This is kind of the point of this entire exercise. ...home office business expense... My understanding is that write-offs for business expenses are untouched? You can't really have an income tax system based on gross income, can you?

dnautics 11y ago

So you're complaining because you'll lose privileges that have been granted to you, that you get to take advantage as a upper-middle class individual. Boo hoo. People in the bottom tier (making under 50k) are generally not taking adoption credits, electric car credits, home insulation credits, etc. It's doubtful that the electric car will be strangled. Tesla owners are not buying teslas for the credit. Likewise, Prius/Insight owners were not buying those for the credit (when that existed) either. The only electric cars that will die without the credit are the leaf and the volt.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago
Actually, the kinds of people who adopt are often not well off. They borrow from friends, family, church, etc. Then they pay it back using these credits. > electric car credits, Lets talk in 5 years when even the poorest will be driving EV's. They'd be stupid not to considering how cheap electricity is compared to gas. Not to mention in a country of high class mobility putting in "donut holes" in the tax code is just stupid. Now you'll be incentivized to not go past making $50,000 unless you suddenly want to be hit with taxes. Employers will cap salaries at arbitrarily $50,000 to avoid tax concerns. These kinds of "one fits all" caps are often economically destructive. Look at India, where if a company is larger than x employees, it is illegal to fire anyone. You need to petition the government to fire that person. That's why there are so many small companies there and why they struggle to compete with China and other nations in their development class who don't have weird one-size-fits all legislation.
- dnautics 11y ago
  > Actually, the kinds of people who adopt are often not well off. They borrow from friends, family, church, etc. Then they pay it back using these credits. Yes, these people aren't helped by the process of taking deductions because they are basically covered by the standard deduction to have zero tax anyways. >Now you'll be incentivized to not go past making $50,000 unless you suddenly want to be hit with taxes. Huh? if you make 50,010 you're not going to be paying 14.5% of 50,010, you're going to be paying $1.45 in taxes. >These kinds of "one fits all" caps are often economically destructive. No doubt, and the US idiotically implements these, too, like in the ACA where small businesses are exempt below certain sizes, unless you are wal-mart and can obtain a backdoor administrative exemption. Now, if you want to rail against "donut holes" the american welfare system has plenty of those, but that's a separate debate. >Lets talk in 5 years when even the poorest will be driving EV's. They'd be stupid not to considering how cheap electricity is compared to gas. If the lowered expense of the cars is matched by the cheapness of the electricity to make it economical for 'the poorest', then there would be no need for a credit. As it is, the credit (like most tax credits) only helps rich people.
- rrss1122 11y ago
  They won't cap salaries at $50,000. If there is a 14.5% flat tax, then it wouldn't make sense to have a salary anywhere between $50,000 and $58,479.54. That still leaves a company free to offer a "competitive" $60,000 salary to lure employees away from a competitor who would cap salaries at $50,000. This argument goes away if we only tax the money after $50,000. Either way, salaries won't be arbitrarily capped at $50,000.
rrss1122 11y ago
People often complain about the rich using loopholes to avoid paying less taxes, but when laws are proposed that will effectively close all those loopholes, they balk at the possibility that their own loopholes would be closed too.

jessaustin 11y ago

I submit my mortgage interest... Paul proposes leaving the mortgage deduction in place, so that may alleviate your concerns. ...it shouldn't be after 50k, it should start at 1 dollar of income. This would have the effect of raising your taxes. ...adoption credit, electric car credit, home insulation credit... This is kind of the point of this entire exercise. ...home office business expense... My understanding is that write-offs for business expenses are untouched? You can't really have an income tax system based on gross income, can you?