A Middle-Class Tax Increase
At first, people talked about the Republicans’ plan for tax reform. Once most of the plan’s reform elements disappeared, a more appropriate name seemed to be “tax cut.” But now that the bill’s details are coming out, it’s time to update the name again. Here’s my suggestion:
Paul Ryan’s 2017 Tax Increase
on Middle-Class Families .
Amazingly, the bill released by House Republican leaders last week would increase taxes, on net, for families that have at least one child and make less than $100,000. That conclusion comes from a rigorous independent analysis of the bill, released yesterday afternoon by the Tax Policy Center.
It was one of two damaging evaluations of the bill that came out yesterday; the other came from the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan arm of Congress. The budget office projected that the plan would increase the deficit by $1.7 trillion over the next decade, even more than Republican leaders had claimed.
Ultimately, Congress will need to find a way to pay those costs, and the most likely strategy will involve tax increases or benefit cuts for the middle class and poor. Put it all together, and this bill is a middle-class tax increase.
In effect, Ryan and other House leaders are proposing an enormous tax cut for the wealthy and then trying to hold down the bill’s cost by raising taxes on middle-class and poor families. On average, households making at least $5 million would receive an annual tax cut of almost $300,000 once the bill was fully phased in.
The situation for the middle class is quite different.
A big reason is that personal exemptions — the $4,000 in income, per person, that families can write off — would disappear. The bill would increase standard deductions that all taxpayers can take, but the increase isn’t large enough for many families to make up for the disappearance of per-person exemptions, as Michael Linden of the Roosevelt Institute explained to me. A Times editorial breaks down other parts of the bill that hurt the middle class.
The chart above breaks down the estimated changes for families with children, by income level. (I left out the top income groups from the chart, because their tax cuts are so large that every other bar in the chart becomes difficult to read.)
The cynicism of this proposal is jarring, even for anyone who is already cynical about Washington. After decades in which the middle class and poor have been struggling, congressional leaders want to raise taxes on many of them, all while claiming that the bill would do the opposite. A few days ago, Mitch McConnell, the Senate leader, went so far as to say, “At the end of the day, nobody in the middle class is going to get a tax increase.”
The good news is that many people seem to have caught on. Polling shows the bill to be highly unpopular, with many Americans correctly saying that it would help the wealthy rather than the middle class.
I expect Republicans to scramble in coming days to make the bill less bad for the middle class. Senate Republicans are reportedly meeting to talk about taxes this morning and may release their own bill shortly thereafter. But tweaks aren’t enough. Anything less than an entirely new tax plan from the Senate isn’t worth passing.
I mean, does the Paul Ryan Middle-Class Tax Increase sound as if it’s a good idea?
-------------------------------
by David Leonhardt
There may be links in the Original Article that have not been reproduced here.
Tags
Who is online
23 visitors
The Trump Unthinking FaithfulTM will support a hike in their own taxes, of course, as their Great Leader commands...
None of your sources are credible, just more fake news and biased interpretation.
You do as you please. I really don't care if others remain ignorant.
Upon returning home this weekend, one of my first tasks will be to pull last years tax return and apply the "proposed" cuts to the Adams family. Since the House proposal removes medical expenditures and SALT, I anticipate a tax increase.
Suggest everyone do the same
Willing to report back.
This bill is written for the ultra-rich. There's no surprise that all others get screwed.
This is what the GOP is today: a machine for lowering taxes on the ultra-rich. Nothing else has any importance for the party.
So True Bob.
.
Republicans Admit That CEOs And Donors Really Need The Tax Cut Bill To Pass — Or Else
“The most excited group out there are big CEOs,” said Gary Cohn.
Look at the chart.
Interesting, if you look at it, at the number of Congressional members who enter Congress as "Middle Class" citizens wind up becoming Millionaires prior to them "leaving" Congress.
Guess we're in the wrong business, eh?
" The Center for Responsive Politics analyzed the personal financial disclosure data from 2012 of the 534 current members of Congress and found that, for the first time, more than half had an average net worth of $1 million or more: 268 to be exact, up from 257 the year earlier."
"A n analysis of disclosure filings by the Center for Responsive Politics reveals that while lawmakers like to talk about the plight of poor and middle-class Americans, few of them can relate financially.
How vast is the discrepancy in their fortunes? The median net worth of a member of Congress was $1.03 million in 2013, compared with $56,355 for the average American household. "
Think about their health care plans upon retirement, too.
Why shouldn't people who pay the most taxes get a break?
Why should they?
Confucius say:
he who answers question, with a question, has no answer
Yep, I agree, the poor and, middle class should get a tax cut.
Well, it's hard to pay less than zero.
I assume you are talking about the poor with your comment, fact is they do pay taxes on their income, just because they are poor doesn't mean they have no income and, pay no tax.
At a point the poor get those taxes paid refunded to them.
All citizens use services of the government and should pay their part. The current tax code is used by politicians to reward their base, big donors and punish their opponents. That is wrong.
Fairness is what the public wants. We want all to pay their portion of the cost of government.
A no deduction tax code that has more rates not less is what we need. Set the rate at the current effective rate level. With all of the deductions and loopholes nobody pays the published tax rate.
A structure something like this
$1- $20,000 = 1%
20,001-$40k = 8%
$40,001- $60k=16%
$60,001-200K=24%
200k-400k 30%
400k and up 35%
The corporate rate matches or beats Canada.
Everybody pays something.
Nothing like this will ever happen though. The pols are already in full protect their base mode. The worst deduction is the state income tax deduction. I am tired of subsidizing NY and CA. If those residents don't like their high taxes then they need to vote in pols who will lower them.
People who choose to live there must be willing to pay the price of living there.
Both of those states send more tax revenue to the federal government than they receive back in services.
It depends on what is considered a service. Is having a federal building or Army base in your town a government service? It isn't! What should be on that list so we can make a real comparison and not the bogus one the left touts.
My list includes roads and other infrastructure, welfare payments, medicaid payments. Things that all citizens benefit from.
What is on yours?
It would seem he doesn't consider funding illegal aliens to be a federal service either.
In all actuality, the ONLY fair way to collect taxes would be a National Sales Tax of a flat percentage. The more you have to spend, the more you pay. I would exempt food, clothing, and shelter--yep you heard me right! I wouldn't put a sales tax on home purchases. Why? Because we pay property taxes as homeowners. I would also either exempt, or cut the percentage rate in half for re-sale items, just to cut down on how much winds up in landfills. This would increase demand for goods that are actually durable, and cut down on the buying of cheap imports that keep breaking that wind up in the dump in short order.
I could support a consumption tax instead of income tax.
Yes and no. Yes that you can't pay less than zero, no that it isn't only the poor that pay no net federal income tax. Some that pay net zero are well above the "poverty" or poor rate.
The liberal narrative some folks are trying to push here is disingenuous as hell.
It's total bullshit actually.
i agree, consumption/use taxes are one of the fairest ways to tax if one must tax but ...... one more thing that will never happen though. Use taxes do penalize the poor the more in that they will pay a higher % of their income to the tax.
The left wing hive will and does scream bloody murder on that one.
No list.
The federal government spends less in those states than it takes in.
Then they should be looking forward to paying less enthusiastically.
As you pointed out, much of the population does not pay income tax. Therefore, replacing that revenue stream with a consumption tax would radically ship the tax burden downward on the income scale. Is that your intention?
The precision of the factual data you present is... stunning!
Why does that matter? You control all three branches of government. What does it matter what the left thinks?
Oh, wait... I forgot... you may control all three branches of government, but you still can't actually get anything done...
Ummm...... Pay attention, Dean...
One of the key features of the GOP plans is to eliminate federal deductions for state and local taxes... which are higher in Blue states. It's a way to make Blue states pay even more of the federal budget.
Appreciate the delusions of grandeur you offer me but "I" am not in control of anything but my little slice of turf in this world.
and there it is .....
thanks but once again this is not about me. But by all means, feel free to prove me wrong. that would be interesting though since in doing so you would be disproving one of the bedrock principles of mathematics.
that zero is not actually zero.
Pythagoras, Descartes and Newton would be proud!!
The people with the highest revenues are the people who benefit most from the system. Obviously.
So... why do you waste energy whining about an imaginary hive?
Kinda difficult since you present... nothing...
once again and for the last time, feel free to prove me wrong but this isn't about me.
They already pay local and state sales taxes so once again, I see no valid reason why they can't pay their fair share of taxes. Notice the exemptions I suggested--the ONLY thing considered necessities. If they can afford a cellphone or a TV, but not the sales tax; then they can't afford it!
Then you want to include defense spending on military bases as a government benefit to that state. Some states have more bases than others. That distorts the whole "red states are taker" meme the left promotes.
What you want to promote are dishonest comparisons. Typical lib tools.
Rich people don't buy things?