BUCKNACKT'S SORDID TAWDRY BLOG We should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive & well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate, bier or wein in hand, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WHOO-HOO, WHAT A RIDE!!!!!!"
Showing posts with label 1% tax cuts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1% tax cuts. Show all posts
07 April 2017
03 February 2017
02 December 2016
06 November 2016
Would 51% of single parents see taxes rise under Donald Trump's tax plan?
ANOTHER example of the drumpf/trump-pence commitment to represent the 1% at the expense of the poor, the working and middle classes. The Clinton-Kaine campaign's proposals raise taxes on those who can afford to and should pay more, the rich, especially the 1%. Check this out from +PolitiFact ......
Under Donald Trump's tax plan, "51 percent of single parents would see their taxes go up."
— Hillary Clinton on Friday, November 4th, 2016 in a campaign rally 
Would 51% of single parents see taxes rise under Donald Trump's tax plan?
Campaigning in the final stretch of the presidential election, Hillary Clinton took a brief break from knocking Donald Trump’s character to hammer his tax plan.
"He's taking care of himself, he's taking care of his family, he's taking care of the super wealthy and corporations," Clinton said at a rally in Pittsburgh on Nov. 4, 2016, adding that under Trump, "51 percent of single parents would see their taxes go up."
Briefly, Trump’s tax plan would collapse the seven federal income tax brackets into three (12 percent, 25 percent and 33 percent). He would also raise the standard deduction (the amount everyone can deduct from taxable income) but repeal personal exemptions and head of household filing status.
Tax analysts have found that Trump’s plan would deliver, on average, tax cuts across all income brackets. So how is it possible that single parents would pay more?
The Clinton campaign referred us to analysis of Trump’s tax plan from the Tax Policy Center, which is affiliated with the left-leaning Urban Institute.
According to the report, authored by New York University professor Lily Batchelder, about 20 percent of households and more than half of single parents would wind up paying more in federal taxes.
How?
First, Trump’s proposal to increase the standard deduction wouldn’t be enough to offset the amount many single parents could have deducted with personal exemptions (which Trump would take away).
For example, a single mother with one child can take a $9,350 standard deductionand two $4,050 exemptions, one for herself and one for her child in 2017 under the current system — or $17,450 in exemptions in total. Under Trump’s plan, she would be able to take just a $15,000 standard deduction. The end result? That mother would have to pay income tax on an additional $2,450 under Trump’s plan.
Second, the head of household filing status currently applies to unmarried filers with dependents, and their standard deduction and tax rates are between those of married filers and single filers. Repealing this provision as Trump proposes would require single parents to file as individuals with higher tax rates.
Third, Trump’s three brackets would increase taxes for many head of household filers. For example, the current lowest bracket is 10 percent, but Trump’s lowest bracket is 12 percent.
"For example, in 2017 a single parent with one child who claims the standard deduction would face a 25 percent tax rate on adjusted gross income between $53,050 and $68,550, compared with just a 15 percent rate under current law," Roberton Williams, an analyst at the Tax Policy Center, wrote in Forbes.
Put it altogether, 51 percent of single parents or about 5.8 million households would see a tax increase under Trump’s plan, Batchelder calculated. As our colleagues at FactCheck.org noted, "single parents tend to do worse under Trump’s plan than under current law."
For example, a single parent with an income of $75,000 and two school-age children would see his or her taxes increase by $2,440 or by $1,640 if the family had child care costs that could be deducted under Trump's plan, according to Batchelder. Similarly, a single parent making $50,000 and who had three children would face an increase of $1,188.
The Tax Foundation, a free market-oriented think tank, has not released similar analysis. But its director of federal projects, Kyle Pomerleau, found no faults with Batchelder’s report.
ICYMI: @lilybatch 's new study finds that many families would see a tax increase under Trump's new plan. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
.@lilybatch We were able to replicate many of the numbers in the report. The results seem reasonable to me.
The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
Our ruling
Clinton said, under Trump's tax plan, "51 percent of single parents would see their taxes go up."
Trump’s proposal would simplify the federal tax code and provide tax cuts for many. But, analysts say, Trump’s plan would make changes that would affect some people negatively.
Trump’s proposal to eliminate the head of household filing status and personal exemptions would raise federal income taxes for many single parents.
We rate Clinton’s claim True.
About this statement:
14 October 2016
Clinton is right: Trump tax plan gives more to rich than Bush tax cuts 11OKT16
SO much of the past week has been focused on donald drumpf's/trump's sex tape, mike pence's defence of drumpf's/trump's misogyny and the meltdown of the republican party. We can not loose sight of the fact that the drumpf/trump-pence tax plan rewards the 1% with massive tax cuts at the expense of the American poor, working class and middle class. They are selling this with a slick propaganda campaign that condemns congress for leaving tax loopholes benefitting the rich in place allowing people like drumpf/trump the opportunity to pay no or little in taxes. It must be noted drumpf/trump still hasn't released his tax filings, speculation is he won't because they will show he is not as rich as he claims and they will show how little he pays in taxes and how little he actually contributes to charity. The drumpf/trump-pence campaign claims their their tax cuts for the rich will result in massive job growth in the American economy. bush used the same lie, and we are still recovering from his administration's failed tax and economic policies. Go to the Clinton-Kaine website to see their tax and economic policies. This from +PolitiFact .....
Says Donald Trump’s tax plan gives the wealthy and corporations "more than the Bush tax cuts by at least a factor of two."
Clinton is right: Trump tax plan gives more to rich than Bush tax cuts
With a backdrop of leaked lewd comments and Bill Clinton’s alleged sexual misconduct, you may not necessarily remember what Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton said about tax policy in the deeply personal and nasty Oct. 9 presidential debate.
When Trump touted his proposal to deliver tax cuts for all, Clinton pointed out that his tax plan would help millionaires and billionaires like himself the most.
"His plan will give the wealthy and corporations the biggest tax cuts they’ve ever had, more than the Bush tax cuts by at least a factor of two," Clinton said. "Donald always takes care of Donald and people like Donald, and this would be a massive gift."
Is Clinton right that the wealthy would benefit from Trump’s tax plan twice as much as they did under the Bush tax cuts?
The Clinton campaign told us their data comes from an analysis by the conservative Tax Foundation and the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities on after-tax incomes of the top 1 percent. We also looked at the share of tax relief received by the top 1 percent as a percentage of GDP.
The evidence shows Clinton is right.
The Bush tax cuts
As a refresher, the Bush tax cuts, enacted under President George W. Bush in 2001 and 2003, reduced the then-top marginal tax rate of 39.6 percent rate to 35 percent, the 36 percent rate to 33 percent, and so forth.
The left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the Bush cuts increased the after-tax income of the top 1 percent between 5.3 percent and 6.7 percent from 2004 to 2012 (tax rates for high-income earners were raised the following year).
Altogether, the top 1 percent received a cut equivalent to about 0.66 percent of GDP (the Bush tax cuts were altogether 2.4 percent of GDP, while the top 1 percent received 27.5 percent of the cuts.)
Trump’s plan
Trump’s plan would increase after-tax incomes of the wealthy between 10.2 to 19.9 percent, according to the Tax Foundation, and deliver a tax cut equivalent to about 1.32 percent of GDP.
Two key provisions in Trump’s latest tax plan, released September 2016, are particularly relevant to this fact-check.
First, Trump would collapse the current seven tax brackets into four, reducing the current top marginal income tax rate of 39.6 percent to 33 percent. (His previous tax plan called for a top marginal rate of 25 percent.)
Second, Trump would also reduce the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. He would also apply this rate to pass-through businesses, so-called because their profits currently "pass through" the business and instead are taxed as their owner's ordinary income. These would include partnerships like law firms and investor groups, sole proprietorships, limited liability corporations (LLCs) and corporations with less than 100 shareholders.
In its analysis of Trump’s tax plan, the Tax Foundation used both the 33 percent personal tax rate as well as the 15 percent pass-through business rate to assess the plan’s impact on individual taxpayers.
The Tax Foundation found that, depending on which rate you apply and whether you factor in growth, the top 1 percent of taxpayers would see their after-tax incomes increase by 10.2 to 19.9 percent. Here’s a table breaking down Trump’s proposed tax cuts by income group:
Similarly, the Tax Policy Center, which is affiliated with the left-leaning Urban Institute, estimated that the top 1 percent would see a 13.5 percent gain in after-tax income.
The think tank also said the Trump’s cuts would amount to about 2.6 percent of GDP, with 50.8 percent of the cuts going to the top 1 percent. In other words, the top 1 percent would see a tax break equivalent to about 1.32 percent of GDP.
Clinton may actually be understating the gains the top 1 percent would receive under Trump.
The Tax Foundation does not take into account one additional proposal that could affect the bottom line of many one percenters: eliminating the carried interest tax break.
Currently, profits from investment funds can be taxed at a personal capital gains tax rate of 23.9 percent rather than the top marginal income rate of 39.6 percent. Taxing these lucrative earnings as ordinary income would raise about $18 billion over 10 years.
While Trump’s plan calls for closing this loophole, it could also lower the tax rate since he’s proposing to tax pass-through businesses at a corporate tax rate of 15 percent — an 8.9 percentage point reduction from the current rate applied to hedge fund and private equity profits, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted.
Our ruling
Clinton said Trump’s tax plan will give the wealthy "more than the Bush tax cuts by at least a factor of two."
After-tax incomes for the top 1 percent of taxpayers increased by 5.4 to 6.7 percent thanks to the Bush tax cuts. The same group would see incomes gains of 10.2 to 19.9 percent under the Trump tax plan, if not more.
Measuring it in a different way, the top 1 percent received a tax break equivalent to 0.66 percent of GDP under Bush. Trump’s tax plan would deliver a cut equivalent to 1.32 percent of GDP.
We rate Clinton’s claim True.
https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/7d98cf58-b2a5-4f26-9f42-bf63296e908d
About this statement:
24 June 2016
Paul Ryan Wants to Increase the Medicare Eligibility Age to 67 22JUN16
THIS is another reason why the republican party can not be allowed to win the presidency or control of the US Congress. Speaker of the House rep paul ryan r WI is reviving the no government policies of grover norquist, who said "My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub". Raise the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67, fewer people will be alive to receive the services they have paid for, leaving more money for tax breaks for the 1%. This is class warfare, plane and simple, and it must not be allowed to ever be part of any legislation voted on by the House and Congress. From +Mother Jones .....
Paul Ryan Wants to Increase the Medicare Eligibility Age to 67
JUN. 22, 2016 12:55 PM
Republicans announce a lot of health care plans. All of them are essentially the same, "a familiar hodgepodge of tax credits, health savings accounts, high-risk pools, block granting of Medicaid, tort reform, and interstate purchase of health plans." Today, after months of cogitating, House Republicans have 
finally agreed on yet another health care plan. It's not a hodgepodge, however, it's a "backpack." Beyond that, however,it should sound pretty familiar:
finally agreed on yet another health care plan. It's not a hodgepodge, however, it's a "backpack." Beyond that, however,it should sound pretty familiar:In place of President Barack Obama’s health law, House Republicans propose providing Americans with refundable tax credits.... catastrophic insurance.... health-savings accounts.... plans offered in other states.... fee-for-service insurance through a newly created Medicare insurance exchange [not a voucher! not a voucher! absolutely positively not a voucher! –ed.].... pay taxes on the value of whatever health insurance employers provide.
Hmmm. There's no mention of high-risk pools or tort reform or Medicaid block grants. What the hell is going on here? Who was responsible for—oh, wait. Maybe the Wall Street Journal just did a lousy job of describing the GOP plan. I can hardly blame them for not taking it too seriously. Let's check in with the Washington Post:
The GOP plan floats a variety of proposals.... refundable tax credit.... health savings accounts.... “high-risk pools”.... Medicaid funds would be handed to the states either as block grants or as per-capita allotments.
Now we're talking. Every single buzzword is there except for tort reform. But maybe I should check in with Reuters:
The Republican proposal would gradually increase the Medicare eligibility age, which currently is 65, to match that of the Social Security pension plan, which is 67 for people born in 1960 or later....The Republican plan includes medical liability reform that would put a cap on non-economic damages awarded in lawsuits, a measure aimed at cutting overall healthcare costs.
Tort reform is there after all! And as an extra added bonus, the Medicare eligibility age goes up to 67. Hallelujah!
How could this possibly have taken more than five minutes to write? It's identical to every health care plan ever proposed by Republicans. There is, of course, no funding mechanism, possibly because Republicans know perfectly well that it will do nothing and therefore require no funding. But here's my favorite bit of well-hidden snark from the Washington Post account:
The most significant omission from the Republican health-care plan, though, is to what degree it will maintain — or, more likely, reduce — insurance coverage for Americans....Asked about the plan’s effect on coverage, a Republican leadership aide said Monday, “You’re getting to the dynamic effect of the plan and we can’t answer that until the committees start to legislate.”But there is a significant clue in the GOP plan that it anticipates a surge in the ranks of the uninsured. Before the Affordable Care Act, the federal government’s primary mechanism for compensating health providers for delivering care to the uninsured was through “disproportionate share hospital” payments, or DSH, which are allocated to facilities that treated large numbers of the uninsured. Under Obamacare, DSH payments were set to be phased out because coverage rateswere expected to increase dramatically....The Republican plan would repeal those cuts entirely.
Bottom line: this is just the usual conservative mush. It would accomplish nothing. It would insure no one. It would wipe out all the gains of Obamacare. Millions of people would have their current health care ripped away from them, all so that Republicans can repeal the 3.8 percent tax on high-earner investment income that funds Obamacare.
And just for good measure, it will also raise the Medicare eligibility age to 67. Because apparently, the old hodgepodge just wasn't quite Scrooge-like enough.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)