Wait they're really going to eliminate all deductions besides charity and mortgage?

[Johonny]

Last edited Wed Apr 26, 2017, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)

Eliminate itemized tax deductions other than charitable donations and mortgage payments

If that's true, this tax plan will be a huge tax increase to people that deduct state, local, sales tax, and medical expenses. It's basically a huge tax cut for Trump himself and a big middle finger to the middle class. What good does doubling the standard deduction to people writing off their mortgage? None. Is this BS really going to pass?

This is clearly a tax cut for the wealthy on the backs of the middle class, particularly the middle class in places like New York and California, who itemize. They're going to be screwed, hard.

[BamaRefugee]

1. I'm a process server

...meaning that I go out every day under the auspices of the Superior Court of California, the US District Court, and the US Marshal, and serve subpoenas, summonses, writs and levies, orders to appear, etc. in a large territory. So I put on a LOT of miles every single day, my own vehicle, as an independent contractor.
I HAVE TO HAVE my mileage deductions on my taxes or I might as well just walk away from the job, my profit margin would be SLASHED.
Yep, in California, and itemize, and like you said, "going to be screwed, hard".

[dumbcat]

17. Doesn't your milage expense come off your Schedule C

for your independent contractor business? There is no line for business mileage expense on Schedule A, which are the deductions being talked about.

[BamaRefugee]

47. I'd have to ask my acccountant!

I just figured my mileage was an itemized deduction, which apparently trump wants to end?

[dumbcat]

48. Then I would suggest you also ask your accountant

before making comments on things you don't know about.

Business mileage deduction is NOT on Schedule A, personal deductions, that Trump wants to slash. It is on Schedule D.

In retrospect, I'm sorry for sounding so snarky. I just sometimes forget how few people do their own taxes, even those in the low and middle income brackets. Which is another sign of how stupid the whole tax system has become. /rant.

[BamaRefugee]

49. "before making comments on things you don't know about" ?????

Schedule D has absolutely nothing to do with mileage. It's for Capital Gains and Losses.

But thanks for the snarky implication that I'm a low or middle income tax payer.

[dumbcat]

50. Oh Gads! I'm hit!

You got me, fair and square. I meant Schedule C.

I hate it when that happens.

[BamaRefugee]

58. no worries

...happens to lots of low and middle intellect posters

Have a great weekend!

[AgadorSparticus]

59. LOL!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

2. The thing about tax proposals

is that they are NEVER passed in their original form. The tax code is huge and extremely complex and there are many, many interlocking parts. So somebody decides it would be a good idea to eliminate a particular tax, then somebody else comes along and says, wait a second, doing that would hurt my business; and yet another person argues that if this tax is eliminated why not this other one, which is almost the same? That's not fair, and I'll sue. And so on.

The tax system is supposed to be just about raising money to operate the government, but in reality it is often used to encourage some things and discourage others. The home mortgage deduction, for example, is supposed to encourage home ownership, which is considered to be good for society in general because people and neighborhoods are more stable if homes are owned. It also encourages the construction industry (more houses get built) and raises the tax base for local government. There's no way in hell the mortgage deduction would be eliminated so they didn't even try - too many interests are at stake, some of them very powerful.

There are many other deductions and other taxes that also are intended to further or discourage some behavior or favor or disfavor certain groups. All of these will be examined and picked apart and debated. Nothing major is going to change soon; any changes will have to be phased in over time. And it might not give them what they expected; Reagan tried to reduce taxes in 1981 and again in 1986, but it turned out there were a lot of unintended consequences. http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/

[underpants]

3. Returning wealth to its rightful owners

[Wellstone ruled]

4. The true

definition of the GOP.

[sheshe2]

8. Is this now going to be...

trickle up economics?

[Wounded Bear]

14. When was it not?

The best liberals have been able to do at times is to slow down the flow temporarily. Money follows money.

[sheshe2]

18. So very sad, isn't it.

[WhiteTara]

20. No trickle! It's an opening for the

flood gates and they just have to sit back and watch the money pour int.

[WinkyDink]

24. "Returning wealth to OUR rightful owners." FIXED.

[Maeve]

27. And here's a hint--their idea of 'rightful owners' and yours are not the same!

Them as got, gits!

[crazylikafox]

5. Yup. It's a big middle finger to blue states

Where state & local & property taxes are usually much higher because they actually provide benefits to the middle & lower classes.

[mopinko]

35. this

mine are not that bad, as cook county has a good tax base.
but the chi suburbs, especially those that have good schools, most tax bills are higher than even a doubled standard deductions. those that have nice big homes, just across the boarder from me in evanston, pay easily $20k/yr. they are screwed because northwestern university owns half the town, and pays no property taxes. the only other thing they have to tax are the retail sector there.

go up the northshore of lake michigan, and it grows by leaps and bounds.

[marybourg]

6. Paying for a spouse or a parent's

long term care out of income and savings and not being able to deduct it, while paying tax on the income and savings interest, will be very painful and seem extremely unfair. I can't see that surviving.

[WinkyDink]

26. Since when was LTC tax-deductible? It wasn't for me, either with my husband in 2014 or my mother in

2015.

[marybourg]

41. I don't know why not. It's

listed right under "medical expenses". Of course, I'm talking about "medically necessary care" such as doctor-ordered assisted living or skilled nursing home care, not independent living.

[WinkyDink]

42. Unless the parent was declared a "Dependent" (and I'm thinking not just in December of the tax year)

I don't see how a parent would file under any but his or her own Federal Income Tax. That was my mother's situation, as she was not on Medicaid.

Also: "3. For whom you provided over half of the support in 2016."
https://www.irs.gov/publications/p502/ar02.html#en_US_2016_publink1000178988

[randome]

7. This is grade school kind of pie-in-the-sky thinking.

It's been debated many times before and Congress has always declined to bite that apple.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[MedusaX]

9. Notice how the "Homeowner" protection conveniently does not include

PROPERTY TAX.....

So effectively..... the feds no longer wish to recognize that our mandatory contributions to state & local governments actually reduce the federal funding needs of the states/local governments....


Those of us in Texas will need more than the increase in standard deduction to make up for property taxes...


But I suppose if I create a shell company-- which I own 100% of... and assign ownership of my house to the shell.... then the shell can rent my house back to me...and write off the property tax as an expense......resulting in a business loss...that then offsets other income...

Great way to encourage corrupt business/ tax practices...




I have not found the proposed income ranges for the newly proposed rates....

Bet a whole lot more are going to be in the 35% than expected.....

[Wounded Bear]

15. Good descriptor of Trump's business model...

[CousinIT]

10. Still screwing the middle class up the ass with a cactus isn't he? n/t

[FloridaBlues]

11. That would suck no medical, mileage etc will he lower our tax rate!

[Johonny]

13. They're "simplifying the tax rate" to three rates at not yet determined income levels...

I.E. he's had over a year now running and being president and somehow still doesn't have a fully formed tax plan.

The announcement today was basically crimping from his campaign material with no functionality on how it is supposed to work. I know many a middle class Republican Itemizer that will not like this plan one bit.

[JHB]

23. Anytime they talk about "simplifying" taxes by cutting brackets they're lying...

Last edited Wed Apr 26, 2017, 11:01 PM - Edit history (2)

They might be lying to themselves as well, but it's lying.

Dealing with different brackets is the simplest part of the tax code -- it's just straightforward math. It's all the other parts --whether this or that qualifies for a deduction, what type of income something qualifies as, etc. -- that cause the confusion (or provide cover).

The most brackets the income tax ever had was 56, in 1919-1921. Back when calculators were big clunky things that could double as exercise machines! Click-click-click-SHUNK!

This is the 21st century, fergawdsakes, we can make tee shirts with enough computing power to calculate tax from that many brackets, ONCE taxable income has been determined.

They just want to erase even the idea of progressive taxation.

[exboyfil]

29. You just go to the tax table

Circle your bracket, and, if by magic, the taxes owed are magically listed.

Idiots.

[Volaris]

43. Can somebody even tell me why we still use a bracketing system?

Seems to me any taxprep software or accountant should be able to figure out how much you owe or not on the graph of a simple curve...no cutoffs over or under, no bracket nonsense, no bullshit. Easy Peasy. Am I missing something?

[JHB]

44. Yes, you are missing something. Progressive taxation is based on a "credit" for basic necessities...

...and since that's difficult to quantify, there is a kind of a sliding scale upward. So that the heaviest taxation is on the luxuries of life, rather than on the necessities.

Right now we have, what?, 7 brackets topping out around $400K/year? For most of the post-WW2 period, particularly up until the 80s (you know, the time people think of when they "want their country back&quot there were 24 brackets, that (adjusting for inflation) topped out at 3.5 million dollars per year).

Progressive taxation on very high incomes was eliminated under Reagan and has not been restored. Not under Clinton, and not under Obama. We had more progressive taxation in the Roaring 20s than we do now.

Ideology-driven Movement Conservatives want to erase the very concept of progressive taxation from public discourse, and so they they support every single measure that "simplifies" the tax code by reducing the number of brackets.

[JHB]

45. 55 Minus 10

Below is an image of the US Federal income tax rates for 1955 adjusted for inflation.

Lop 10% off the rate in each bracket: 20% becomes 10%, 22% becomes 12%, all the way up.

The biggest reason for directly basing it off the 50s tax rates (and lower than what was in effect then) is to fire a shot across the bow of everyone who "wants their country back". These are the tax rates they're talking about for THAT country.

[WinkyDink]

31. I thought the rates were: 15% becomes 25%; 28% becomes 35%, as does 39.6%.

Last edited Wed Apr 26, 2017, 09:25 PM - Edit history (1)

[Igel]

40. That was one suspicion.

Who, it was claimed, used actual uncited sources.

Nothing more.

[Ilsa]

12. Stupid "postcard tax return" mentality.

There are other deductions people will be pissed about. Isn't there a deduction for teacher classroom expenses? College tuition? Sure, they say they are raising the standard deduction, but will they redefine who is eligible to be claimed?

In other words, I don't trust what they are doing or how it will affect our economy, especially the race to the bottom.

[JHB]

46. See #45 above

[DesertFlower]

16. the only deductions i have are charitable and

taxes. i'm a widow and i pay a lot now. doubling the standard deduction will not help me. last year i had over $19,000 in charitable and tax deductions. i still paid over $18,000 in federal income tax.

having a lot of expensive dental work this year which i was hoping would give me a small deduction.

if they eliminate the mortgage deduction many people will lose their homes or not be able to afford buying one.

[WinkyDink]

32. The mortgage deduction was stressed as one of TWO deductions remaining, the other's being chari-

table contributions.

[elias7]

19. I think the standard deduction wants to go to $30k

Up from $6.5k, so prolly don't need other deductions anymore

[uponit7771]

21. Not if a person just bought a middle class house and have prop taxes, 30k wouldn't cover no where...

... near what could be deducted.

This is a huge FU to middle class workers

[WinkyDink]

28. Um...subject-verb? "the standard deduction wants to go to $30k"---I don't get it. And no standard

deduction was mentioned in the Press conference.

In fact, only TWO----2---TWO were repeatedly emphasized:

Mortgages.

Charitable contributions.

[MedusaX]

30. individual goes from 6 to 12k ...

Married filing jointly from 12k to 24k

[Leith]

22. Michiganders and Pennsylvanians Are Going to Be Pissed Off, Too

There are local income taxes in those states in addition to state income tax. I don't know about WI and OH, but it's probably much the same there.

I hope his supporters enjoy the FU without a kiss.

[WinkyDink]

33. Oh, I AM (PA.).

[Dawson Leery]

57. Those swing states are not the only ones to be angered.

Any state with an income tax is going to be hit by this Con job.

[DFW]

25. I heard there is one more major deduction that will stand

Luxury rental and golf property within 35 miles of the West Palm Beach Airport, along with high rise residential towers bearing the names of owners that have five letters in them, the first and last of which are consonants.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

34. Exactly right.

[Doreen]

36. The middle class are going to be poor.

The already poor might be better off if we just kill ourselves.

[nikibatts]

37. Don't forget child care and other dependents.

[WinkyDink]

39. Gone.

[pnwmom]

38. It will hurt all the blue states the worst because they're the ones who are willing

to pay taxes for decent services.

[Warpy]

51. Working people are going to abandon this doofus by the millions

when they lose things like the child care tax credit that has been so important to people with children. The medical expense deduction has been cruelly small since Reagan fucked us over so not many people will be affected by that. However, not being able to deduct things like expenses that most families rely on is going to pack one hell of a wallop and it's not going to be directed at Democrats for once.

I think even the Republicans know this and his one page revision of a ten volume tax code is just not going to go any farther than his one page health care "plan" did.

Oh, this is going to be fun to watch, also.

[Kablooie]

53. No they won't. They've proven that they will continue to vote against their own interests so...

they will continue to vote Republican.

Just look at all the states ruled by Republicans now.
How many of those are making policies that help average people?

No. Voting Republican to many is more important than their own health, finances and life.
I don't understand why but it's been true for decades now.

[sharedvalues]

55. Conservative brainwashing radio, that's why

[Kablooie]

52. And mortgage deductions are only for people who can afford a mortgage.

Not necessarily rich but certainly not poor.

[MichMan]

54. I would see my taxes go down for sure

I think this proposal would be very beneficial to my situation. I have taken the standard deduction for years as my itemized deductions don't even come close anymore. Living in a modest home that will be paid off in a few years, so very little interest to deduct, relatively low property taxes and no local income taxes as we live in a rural area.