Tax change in virus package overwhelmingly benefits millionaires, Congressional body finds
Source: AP via pressherald
More than 80% of the benefits of a tax change tucked into the coronavirus relief package passed by Congress last month will go to those who earn more than $1 million annually, according to a report by a nonpartisan congressional body expected to be released on Tuesday.
The provision, inserted into the law by Senate Republicans, temporarily suspends a limitation on how much owners of businesses formed as pass-through entities can deduct in taxes from losses on other business income. The limitation was created as part of the 2017 Republican tax law to offset other tax cuts to firms in that legislation.
Suspending the limitation will cost taxpayers about $90 billion in 2020 alone, part of a set of tax changes that will add close to $170 billion over the next 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the nonpartisan congressional body.
The provision has fueled criticisms by congressional Democrats and some tax experts who have called it a giveaway to the wealthy and real estate investors, who frequently face large losses on their investments. Conservatives have said enacting the limitation was a mistake in the 2017 law and that suspending it gives badly needed liquidity during the economic downturn caused by the coronavirus by reducing their tax obligations.
An analysis by the Joint Committee on Taxation, a nonpartisan congressional entity, found suspending the limit overwhelmingly benefits higher-earners. About 82% of the benefits of the policy go to roughly 43,000 taxpayers who earn more than $1 million annually. Less than 3% of the benefits go to Americans earning less than $100,000 a year, the JCT analysis found. The JCT analysis included the impact of another tax change in the coronavirus legislation that allowing firms to write off 100% rather than 80% of their losses, reversing another change in the 2017 tax law.
Read more: https://www.pressherald.com/2020/04/14/the-latest-leader-of-sinn-fein-party-recovers-from-virus/#
So, the fascists slip this into the package just like they did the USPS poison pill years ago. They have people that do nothing but poison legislation like this getting their rich handlers more money.
RVN VET71
(2,690 posts)For a while there it looked like the GOP had actually worked with the Dems to do something urgently needed by all Americans! What was I thinking?
LiberalArkie
(15,708 posts)AllaN01Bear
(18,119 posts)hidden riders and trailors that have nothing to do with the current emergency. bah humbug.
Wednesdays
(17,337 posts)rickyhall
(4,889 posts)SWBTATTReg
(22,100 posts)of the time. What happens when ALL lose money, like 2020 will end up like? Pass through business losses will exceed huge amounts and I'll bet that there will be entities that will be facing the music (bankruptcy) shortly if things don't pick up soon.
The abolition of the limitation probably doesn't really change things, it simply allows them to deduct everything at once instead of piece meal over a couple of years (instead of carrying over losses from year to year, can deduct all at once). Big deal. What pisses me off about this is that they should allow regular, low income people like us deduct a 100% of our stock (short or long term) all at once, instead of limiting it to no more than $3000 a year. I lost money in the 2008 crash, and it literally took me 10 years to write off the losses. It really pissed me off, and now when I see stuff like this, unlimited losses being given to these people all at once?
I don't understand the increasing liquidity issue (increases it) during the economic downtown, after all, these people can simply borrow money to pay the owed taxes for at least one year to the next. Again, 'conservatives' have spoken (what the hell are they doing involved w/ a tax bill?). I thought conservatives didn't believe in paying for government, in that taxes were a cardinal sin, etc.
I suspect rump is one of these entities facing such music before too long, if one has engaged in bad business practices before (six bankruptcies), it will happen again. Apparently he's facing losses (see above) and must deduct them all so he won't have a heck of a tax bill.
SamKnause
(13,091 posts)Is it legal to add inserts into existing laws???
machoneman
(4,006 posts)If the House votes for examples sake a 50 paragraph bill, then the Senate added another paragraph afterwards, how can this become law unless the House gets the expanded 51 paragraph bill back one more time and votes for it?
I'd also like to know..............
jimfields33
(15,763 posts)Senate submitted to house. Yes I know house should start but for whatever reason the senate version began. The house read, added of took out whatever negotiations there were. The house voted, the senate voted and the trump signed it.
sdfernando
(4,929 posts)but all spending bills are supposed to originate in the House...That was the intent when the Constitution was written. Somehow a loophole was found and it has been exploited ever since.
jimfields33
(15,763 posts)You are right about house is supposed to start all bills. Not sure where the train swerved but I wish it got back to original process.
TygrBright
(20,756 posts)Bigredhunk
(1,349 posts)These tax laws are going to kick ass when I'm a millionaire in 2165!
safeinOhio
(32,658 posts)You know all of those how-to videos on FB on how to make a virus mask?
How about a bunch on how make a guillotine.
bronxiteforever
(9,287 posts)Kick nasty Republicans
Sunriser13
(612 posts)I'm not.