A Look at the Senate Democrats' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS

[Toddsterpatriot]

He wants to fund those lower rates by eliminating loopholes, including ones that encourage sending jobs overseas.

There is no loophole that "encourages sending jobs overseas".

He also proposes a minimum tax on corporate foreign earnings – almost like a Buffett Rule for multinational corporations.

Oh, so his tax cut would raise taxes. DERP!

Is that how your small mind works? One fraction of high earners get a tax hike and the rest of the plan slashes taxes for corporations to manufacturers to wage workers and your translation is that his plan raises taxes?! Get real

and your translation is that his plan raises taxes?!

He also proposes a minimum tax on corporate foreign earnings – almost like a Buffett Rule for multinational corporations.

My translation? It was in your link.

So what’s your point? Let’s make it simple, instead of defining the plan by cherry picking how about you tell us what the NET outcome of the bill would have produced... less taxes or more taxes?

So what’s your point?

Obama was a lying liar.
He didn't want to cut corporate taxes, he wanted to posture.

Haha, Obama was a lying liar?! I heard he was also a mean meanie. Grow up man, both parties have strengths and weaknesses. Most politicians balance Good and bad. There is no absolute evil like you try and paint the left. Give it a rest. Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses. He wanted to offset the cuts and fund spending by taxing the top earners more. Deal with it, but at least try and deal with reality

Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses.

Baloney.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The GOP will attack them mercilessly on this and position it as them piggybacking off of Trumps plan when they have never supported tax cuts. In fact, none of them even had the respect for the taxpayer to vote on the current cuts!

That's how I would go at them, on top of telling the public, "they now what some of YOUR money back to spend on their friends and pals on boondoggles. Not to mention increase the tax cuts to corporations who have given raises and bonues to their employees. All of that will be lost if you elect them"

Didn’t Obama propose cutting the corporate tax rate to 25%?

No! You far left drones will always remember things wrong!

I remember things wrong? Is that your whole arguement? How about you back it up with something more than dimwitted insults. Ya know, use reason, logic, an articulated argument or... wait for it... a link! What a novel idea!!! You know something like this that can factually show data that backs up your argument. Obama’s proposed tax plan lowered the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% and the effective tax rate to 25%... so you were saying?
Analysis Of President Obama's Corporate Tax Reform Plan - Americans For Tax Fairness

Obama criticizes companies that leave U.S. for lower taxes

Good article, calling out companies who take advantage of inversions and instituting regulations to make it harder for companies to take advantage of the loopholes. Thanks

Good article, calling out companies who take advantage of inversions

Inversions only matter because we're the only large economy that tries to tax world-wide income.

 

[Slade3200]

Uhh, I just posted a link to Obama’s TAX CUT proposal that republicans wouldn’t even consider because they were in obstruction mode. Sound familiar?

Yeah, a tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes. Cool!

How does 35% to 28% not cut taxes? How does 35% to 25% not cut taxes? Turn your brain on for a second

From your link.......

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes will benefit corporations in the form of lower tax rates and increased tax subsidies.

Your point being?

A tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes.

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember the same analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, a tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes. Cool!

How does 35% to 28% not cut taxes? How does 35% to 25% not cut taxes? Turn your brain on for a second

From your link.......

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes will benefit corporations in the form of lower tax rates and increased tax subsidies.

Your point being?

A tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes.

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember a similar analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

 

[Slade3200]

Is that how your small mind works? One fraction of high earners get a tax hike and the rest of the plan slashes taxes for corporations to manufacturers to wage workers and your translation is that his plan raises taxes?! Get real

and your translation is that his plan raises taxes?!

He also proposes a minimum tax on corporate foreign earnings – almost like a Buffett Rule for multinational corporations.

My translation? It was in your link.

So what’s your point? Let’s make it simple, instead of defining the plan by cherry picking how about you tell us what the NET outcome of the bill would have produced... less taxes or more taxes?

So what’s your point?

Obama was a lying liar.
He didn't want to cut corporate taxes, he wanted to posture.

Haha, Obama was a lying liar?! I heard he was also a mean meanie. Grow up man, both parties have strengths and weaknesses. Most politicians balance Good and bad. There is no absolute evil like you try and paint the left. Give it a rest. Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses. He wanted to offset the cuts and fund spending by taxing the top earners more. Deal with it, but at least try and deal with reality

Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses.

Baloney.

You speak of sandwich meat and I post an actual proposal. I win

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

I say, let the Dems run on raising taxes.

The Dem plan would be a big improvement over the 2017 tax rates, but it would not be as beneficial and pro-growth as the Trump tax cuts and Trump's infrastructure proposal. And, yes, Dems would have to run on imposing a modest tax hike on corporations and on people in the top marginal income tax bracket. But they could also say, "Look, we wanna cut the corporate income rate as well, but just not by quite as much, and we're not gonna touch the middle-class tax cuts."

Tax hikes on Corporations are thinly veiled sales taxes. Businesses just add them to the cost of goods and services.

 

[Slade3200]

Didn’t Obama propose cutting the corporate tax rate to 25%?

No! You far left drones will always remember things wrong!

I remember things wrong? Is that your whole arguement? How about you back it up with something more than dimwitted insults. Ya know, use reason, logic, an articulated argument or... wait for it... a link! What a novel idea!!! You know something like this that can factually show data that backs up your argument. Obama’s proposed tax plan lowered the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28% and the effective tax rate to 25%... so you were saying?
Analysis Of President Obama's Corporate Tax Reform Plan - Americans For Tax Fairness

Obama criticizes companies that leave U.S. for lower taxes

Good article, calling out companies who take advantage of inversions and instituting regulations to make it harder for companies to take advantage of the loopholes. Thanks

Good article, calling out companies who take advantage of inversions

Inversions only matter because we're the only large economy that tries to tax world-wide income.

And now we can add some metal tariffs to the bill

 

[Oldstyle]

A few days ago, Senator Chuck Schumer and other leading Senate Democrats held a press conference to present their infrastructure and tax reform plan. The full title of the bill is SENATE DEMOCRATS' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS: RETURNING THE REPUBLICAN TAX GIVEAWAYS FOR THE WEALTHY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The Dem plan is actually pretty good. It is only a tax-hike measure compared to the new tax rates under the Trump tax cuts. Compared to the tax rates that existed until last year, it calls for huge tax cuts, even for corporations, in spite of the bill's unfortunately partisan subtitle. If Hillary had proposed this plan during the election, Bernie supporters and other Dems would have skewered her for wanting to "give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the rich." Consider:

* The Dem plan would set the corporate income tax rate at 25%. This is 4 percentage points higher than the Trump rate of 21%, but it's 10 percentage points lower than what the rate was last year and for decades before that. When Mitt Romney proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 25% in 2012, Dems attacked the idea as a "tax cut for the rich."

* The Dem plan would leave intact all of the Trump tax cuts for personal income taxes, with the sole exception of the top marginal rate, which would go back to the previous rate of 39.6%, which would still be lower than it was for most of Reagan's presidency. Moreover, the Dem plan would maintain the Trump threshold of $600K for the top bracket.

* As mentioned, the Dem plan would keep *all* of the massive Trump tax cuts for the middle-income brackets. It would also maintain the Trump tax-cut provisions of capping SALT deductions at $10K and of capping mortgage-interest deductions.

* The Dem plan would return the death tax (the estate tax) to 2017 levels, which were an improvement over the rates for most of the previous four decades, and it would also return to the previous GOP-backed threshold of $5.49 million for exemption from the tax (vs. $11 million under the Trump tax cuts).

* The Dem plan would bring back the AMT, a very bad, baffling move. But, the AMT only affected people who made over 120K (single)/160K (married), and it did not really bite anyone until they started making over $300K, and even then the bite was not draconian.

* The Dem plan would close the carried-interest loophole, something that should have been done with the Trump tax cuts.

* The Dem plan would use the assumed savings vs. the Trump tax cuts to fund $1 trillion in infrastructure spending, and even most conservative think tanks agree that infrastructure spending usually largely pays for itself and sometimes gives us a large net gain. Trump has called for at least $1.6 trillion in infrastructure spending.

The Dem plan is not bad at all, but it is not as good as the Trump tax-cut bill and the Trump infrastructure-spending proposal. The Dem plan is a non-starter as long as the GOP controls the Senate, but it is really a pretty good plan.

Full text of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan.pdf

Executive summary of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan One Pager.pdf

The GOP will attack them mercilessly on this and position it as them piggybacking off of Trumps plan when they have never supported tax cuts. In fact, none of them even had the respect for the taxpayer to vote on the current cuts!

That's how I would go at them, on top of telling the public, "they now what some of YOUR money back to spend on their friends and pals on boondoggles. Not to mention increase the tax cuts to corporations who have given raises and bonues to their employees. All of that will be lost if you elect them"

Well, I don't know that it's fair to say that Dems have never supported tax cuts. Remember that in 2013, against the urging of the left wing of his party, Obama made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent. Furthermore, the bipartisan budget deal of 2016, which most Dems voted for, protected over $700 billion in tax breaks. Also remember that Bill Clinton signed a massive tax-cut bill in 1997.

With all due respect, Mike...not allowing the tax cuts made by the GOP to expire isn't exactly Democrats "supporting" tax cuts! It was simply pointed out to President Obama that if he was to get rid of the Bush tax cuts it would pretty much put an already lethargic economy right in the toilet and the voters would torch the Democrats for it! The same is true with Clinton's signing the tax cut bill put forth by Newt and the GOP. What choice did he have? The Republicans had just steamrollered him in the midterms. The voters had spoken and they weren't calling for more spending and bigger government!

 

[Slade3200]

How does 35% to 28% not cut taxes? How does 35% to 25% not cut taxes? Turn your brain on for a second

From your link.......

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes will benefit corporations in the form of lower tax rates and increased tax subsidies.

Your point being?

A tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes.

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember a similar analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

Do you know what that means? It has nothing to do with what we are discussing

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

and your translation is that his plan raises taxes?!

He also proposes a minimum tax on corporate foreign earnings – almost like a Buffett Rule for multinational corporations.

My translation? It was in your link.

So what’s your point? Let’s make it simple, instead of defining the plan by cherry picking how about you tell us what the NET outcome of the bill would have produced... less taxes or more taxes?

So what’s your point?

Obama was a lying liar.
He didn't want to cut corporate taxes, he wanted to posture.

Haha, Obama was a lying liar?! I heard he was also a mean meanie. Grow up man, both parties have strengths and weaknesses. Most politicians balance Good and bad. There is no absolute evil like you try and paint the left. Give it a rest. Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses. He wanted to offset the cuts and fund spending by taxing the top earners more. Deal with it, but at least try and deal with reality

Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses.

Baloney.

You speak of sandwich meat and I post an actual proposal. I win

You speak of sandwich meat

That's Obama's proposal.

 

[Slade3200]

A few days ago, Senator Chuck Schumer and other leading Senate Democrats held a press conference to present their infrastructure and tax reform plan. The full title of the bill is SENATE DEMOCRATS' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS: RETURNING THE REPUBLICAN TAX GIVEAWAYS FOR THE WEALTHY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The Dem plan is actually pretty good. It is only a tax-hike measure compared to the new tax rates under the Trump tax cuts. Compared to the tax rates that existed until last year, it calls for huge tax cuts, even for corporations, in spite of the bill's unfortunately partisan subtitle. If Hillary had proposed this plan during the election, Bernie supporters and other Dems would have skewered her for wanting to "give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the rich." Consider:

* The Dem plan would set the corporate income tax rate at 25%. This is 4 percentage points higher than the Trump rate of 21%, but it's 10 percentage points lower than what the rate was last year and for decades before that. When Mitt Romney proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 25% in 2012, Dems attacked the idea as a "tax cut for the rich."

* The Dem plan would leave intact all of the Trump tax cuts for personal income taxes, with the sole exception of the top marginal rate, which would go back to the previous rate of 39.6%, which would still be lower than it was for most of Reagan's presidency. Moreover, the Dem plan would maintain the Trump threshold of $600K for the top bracket.

* As mentioned, the Dem plan would keep *all* of the massive Trump tax cuts for the middle-income brackets. It would also maintain the Trump tax-cut provisions of capping SALT deductions at $10K and of capping mortgage-interest deductions.

* The Dem plan would return the death tax (the estate tax) to 2017 levels, which were an improvement over the rates for most of the previous four decades, and it would also return to the previous GOP-backed threshold of $5.49 million for exemption from the tax (vs. $11 million under the Trump tax cuts).

* The Dem plan would bring back the AMT, a very bad, baffling move. But, the AMT only affected people who made over 120K (single)/160K (married), and it did not really bite anyone until they started making over $300K, and even then the bite was not draconian.

* The Dem plan would close the carried-interest loophole, something that should have been done with the Trump tax cuts.

* The Dem plan would use the assumed savings vs. the Trump tax cuts to fund $1 trillion in infrastructure spending, and even most conservative think tanks agree that infrastructure spending usually largely pays for itself and sometimes gives us a large net gain. Trump has called for at least $1.6 trillion in infrastructure spending.

The Dem plan is not bad at all, but it is not as good as the Trump tax-cut bill and the Trump infrastructure-spending proposal. The Dem plan is a non-starter as long as the GOP controls the Senate, but it is really a pretty good plan.

Full text of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan.pdf

Executive summary of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan One Pager.pdf

The GOP will attack them mercilessly on this and position it as them piggybacking off of Trumps plan when they have never supported tax cuts. In fact, none of them even had the respect for the taxpayer to vote on the current cuts!

That's how I would go at them, on top of telling the public, "they now what some of YOUR money back to spend on their friends and pals on boondoggles. Not to mention increase the tax cuts to corporations who have given raises and bonues to their employees. All of that will be lost if you elect them"

Well, I don't know that it's fair to say that Dems have never supported tax cuts. Remember that in 2013, against the urging of the left wing of his party, Obama made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent. Furthermore, the bipartisan budget deal of 2016, which most Dems voted for, protected over $700 billion in tax breaks. Also remember that Bill Clinton signed a massive tax-cut bill in 1997.

With all due respect, Mike...not allowing the tax cuts made by the GOP to expire isn't exactly Democrats "supporting" tax cuts! It was simply pointed out to President Obama that if he was to get rid of the Bush tax cuts it would pretty much put an already lethargic economy right in the toilet and the voters would torch the Democrats for it! The same is true with Clinton's signing the tax cut bill put forth by Newt and the GOP. What choice did he have? The Republicans had just steamrollered him in the midterms. The voters had spoken and they weren't calling for more spending and bigger government!

Obama extended the Bush cuts and then proposed bigger cuts in his own tax reform bill, did he not?

 

[Slade3200]

So what’s your point? Let’s make it simple, instead of defining the plan by cherry picking how about you tell us what the NET outcome of the bill would have produced... less taxes or more taxes?

So what’s your point?

Obama was a lying liar.
He didn't want to cut corporate taxes, he wanted to posture.

Haha, Obama was a lying liar?! I heard he was also a mean meanie. Grow up man, both parties have strengths and weaknesses. Most politicians balance Good and bad. There is no absolute evil like you try and paint the left. Give it a rest. Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses. He wanted to offset the cuts and fund spending by taxing the top earners more. Deal with it, but at least try and deal with reality

Obama wanted to cut taxes on the middle class and businesses.

Baloney.

You speak of sandwich meat and I post an actual proposal. I win

You speak of sandwich meat

That's Obama's proposal.

Well you gotta make a better case than that. Your lazy arguments don’t hold water

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

From your link.......

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes will benefit corporations in the form of lower tax rates and increased tax subsidies.

Your point being?

A tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes.

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember a similar analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

Do you know what that means? It has nothing to do with what we are discussing

Do you know what that means?

I know what a tax cut means. Allowing people, or corporations, to keep more of their earnings.
If you cut rates and "close some loopholes" and the corporations pay the exact same in taxes.........

YOU HAVEN'T CUT TAXES.

 

[Oldstyle]

A few days ago, Senator Chuck Schumer and other leading Senate Democrats held a press conference to present their infrastructure and tax reform plan. The full title of the bill is SENATE DEMOCRATS' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS: RETURNING THE REPUBLICAN TAX GIVEAWAYS FOR THE WEALTHY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The Dem plan is actually pretty good. It is only a tax-hike measure compared to the new tax rates under the Trump tax cuts. Compared to the tax rates that existed until last year, it calls for huge tax cuts, even for corporations, in spite of the bill's unfortunately partisan subtitle. If Hillary had proposed this plan during the election, Bernie supporters and other Dems would have skewered her for wanting to "give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the rich." Consider:

* The Dem plan would set the corporate income tax rate at 25%. This is 4 percentage points higher than the Trump rate of 21%, but it's 10 percentage points lower than what the rate was last year and for decades before that. When Mitt Romney proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 25% in 2012, Dems attacked the idea as a "tax cut for the rich."

* The Dem plan would leave intact all of the Trump tax cuts for personal income taxes, with the sole exception of the top marginal rate, which would go back to the previous rate of 39.6%, which would still be lower than it was for most of Reagan's presidency. Moreover, the Dem plan would maintain the Trump threshold of $600K for the top bracket.

* As mentioned, the Dem plan would keep *all* of the massive Trump tax cuts for the middle-income brackets. It would also maintain the Trump tax-cut provisions of capping SALT deductions at $10K and of capping mortgage-interest deductions.

* The Dem plan would return the death tax (the estate tax) to 2017 levels, which were an improvement over the rates for most of the previous four decades, and it would also return to the previous GOP-backed threshold of $5.49 million for exemption from the tax (vs. $11 million under the Trump tax cuts).

* The Dem plan would bring back the AMT, a very bad, baffling move. But, the AMT only affected people who made over 120K (single)/160K (married), and it did not really bite anyone until they started making over $300K, and even then the bite was not draconian.

* The Dem plan would close the carried-interest loophole, something that should have been done with the Trump tax cuts.

* The Dem plan would use the assumed savings vs. the Trump tax cuts to fund $1 trillion in infrastructure spending, and even most conservative think tanks agree that infrastructure spending usually largely pays for itself and sometimes gives us a large net gain. Trump has called for at least $1.6 trillion in infrastructure spending.

The Dem plan is not bad at all, but it is not as good as the Trump tax-cut bill and the Trump infrastructure-spending proposal. The Dem plan is a non-starter as long as the GOP controls the Senate, but it is really a pretty good plan.

Full text of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan.pdf

Executive summary of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan One Pager.pdf

The GOP will attack them mercilessly on this and position it as them piggybacking off of Trumps plan when they have never supported tax cuts. In fact, none of them even had the respect for the taxpayer to vote on the current cuts!

That's how I would go at them, on top of telling the public, "they now what some of YOUR money back to spend on their friends and pals on boondoggles. Not to mention increase the tax cuts to corporations who have given raises and bonues to their employees. All of that will be lost if you elect them"

Well, I don't know that it's fair to say that Dems have never supported tax cuts. Remember that in 2013, against the urging of the left wing of his party, Obama made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent. Furthermore, the bipartisan budget deal of 2016, which most Dems voted for, protected over $700 billion in tax breaks. Also remember that Bill Clinton signed a massive tax-cut bill in 1997.

With all due respect, Mike...not allowing the tax cuts made by the GOP to expire isn't exactly Democrats "supporting" tax cuts! It was simply pointed out to President Obama that if he was to get rid of the Bush tax cuts it would pretty much put an already lethargic economy right in the toilet and the voters would torch the Democrats for it! The same is true with Clinton's signing the tax cut bill put forth by Newt and the GOP. What choice did he have? The Republicans had just steamrollered him in the midterms. The voters had spoken and they weren't calling for more spending and bigger government!

Obama extended the Bush cuts and then proposed bigger cuts in his own tax reform bill, did he not?

What "bigger cuts" did Obama and the Democrats pass? I must have missed that...

 

[Slade3200]

Your point being?

A tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes.

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember a similar analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

Do you know what that means? It has nothing to do with what we are discussing

Do you know what that means?

I know what a tax cut means. Allowing people, or corporations, to keep more of their earnings.
If you cut rates and "close some loopholes" and the corporations pay the exact same in taxes.........

YOU HAVEN'T CUT TAXES.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes that took money out of the US. How dare he! Regardless he was still proposing cutting taxes for millions of people and businesses.

 

[Slade3200]

A few days ago, Senator Chuck Schumer and other leading Senate Democrats held a press conference to present their infrastructure and tax reform plan. The full title of the bill is SENATE DEMOCRATS' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS: RETURNING THE REPUBLICAN TAX GIVEAWAYS FOR THE WEALTHY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The Dem plan is actually pretty good. It is only a tax-hike measure compared to the new tax rates under the Trump tax cuts. Compared to the tax rates that existed until last year, it calls for huge tax cuts, even for corporations, in spite of the bill's unfortunately partisan subtitle. If Hillary had proposed this plan during the election, Bernie supporters and other Dems would have skewered her for wanting to "give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the rich." Consider:

* The Dem plan would set the corporate income tax rate at 25%. This is 4 percentage points higher than the Trump rate of 21%, but it's 10 percentage points lower than what the rate was last year and for decades before that. When Mitt Romney proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 25% in 2012, Dems attacked the idea as a "tax cut for the rich."

* The Dem plan would leave intact all of the Trump tax cuts for personal income taxes, with the sole exception of the top marginal rate, which would go back to the previous rate of 39.6%, which would still be lower than it was for most of Reagan's presidency. Moreover, the Dem plan would maintain the Trump threshold of $600K for the top bracket.

* As mentioned, the Dem plan would keep *all* of the massive Trump tax cuts for the middle-income brackets. It would also maintain the Trump tax-cut provisions of capping SALT deductions at $10K and of capping mortgage-interest deductions.

* The Dem plan would return the death tax (the estate tax) to 2017 levels, which were an improvement over the rates for most of the previous four decades, and it would also return to the previous GOP-backed threshold of $5.49 million for exemption from the tax (vs. $11 million under the Trump tax cuts).

* The Dem plan would bring back the AMT, a very bad, baffling move. But, the AMT only affected people who made over 120K (single)/160K (married), and it did not really bite anyone until they started making over $300K, and even then the bite was not draconian.

* The Dem plan would close the carried-interest loophole, something that should have been done with the Trump tax cuts.

* The Dem plan would use the assumed savings vs. the Trump tax cuts to fund $1 trillion in infrastructure spending, and even most conservative think tanks agree that infrastructure spending usually largely pays for itself and sometimes gives us a large net gain. Trump has called for at least $1.6 trillion in infrastructure spending.

The Dem plan is not bad at all, but it is not as good as the Trump tax-cut bill and the Trump infrastructure-spending proposal. The Dem plan is a non-starter as long as the GOP controls the Senate, but it is really a pretty good plan.

Full text of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan.pdf

Executive summary of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan One Pager.pdf

The GOP will attack them mercilessly on this and position it as them piggybacking off of Trumps plan when they have never supported tax cuts. In fact, none of them even had the respect for the taxpayer to vote on the current cuts!

That's how I would go at them, on top of telling the public, "they now what some of YOUR money back to spend on their friends and pals on boondoggles. Not to mention increase the tax cuts to corporations who have given raises and bonues to their employees. All of that will be lost if you elect them"

Well, I don't know that it's fair to say that Dems have never supported tax cuts. Remember that in 2013, against the urging of the left wing of his party, Obama made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent. Furthermore, the bipartisan budget deal of 2016, which most Dems voted for, protected over $700 billion in tax breaks. Also remember that Bill Clinton signed a massive tax-cut bill in 1997.

With all due respect, Mike...not allowing the tax cuts made by the GOP to expire isn't exactly Democrats "supporting" tax cuts! It was simply pointed out to President Obama that if he was to get rid of the Bush tax cuts it would pretty much put an already lethargic economy right in the toilet and the voters would torch the Democrats for it! The same is true with Clinton's signing the tax cut bill put forth by Newt and the GOP. What choice did he have? The Republicans had just steamrollered him in the midterms. The voters had spoken and they weren't calling for more spending and bigger government!

Obama extended the Bush cuts and then proposed bigger cuts in his own tax reform bill, did he not?

What "bigger cuts" did Obama and the Democrats pass? I must have missed that...

He didn’t pass, he proposed tax reform to take the corporate rate from 38 to 28 and down to 25 for manufacturers. The republicans wouldn’t even consider it. They were in full obstruction mode. You don’t remember this?

 

[WheelieAddict]

So called "fiscal conservative" republicans are skyrocketing the national debt.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A tax cut that didn't actually cut taxes.

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember a similar analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

Do you know what that means? It has nothing to do with what we are discussing

Do you know what that means?

I know what a tax cut means. Allowing people, or corporations, to keep more of their earnings.
If you cut rates and "close some loopholes" and the corporations pay the exact same in taxes.........

YOU HAVEN'T CUT TAXES.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes that took money out of the US. How dare he! Regardless he was still proposing cutting taxes for millions of people and businesses.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes

What's an "inversion loophole"

 

[Slade3200]

How so? Would manufacturing companies not see a tax cut from 38% to 25%? I believe they would

Remember a similar analysis scored Trumps tax plan at adding trillion to the deficit. Doesn’t a revenue neutral plan sound a little better to you?

The Senate’s Official Scorekeeper Says the Republican Tax Plan Would Add $1 Trillion to the Deficit

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

Do you know what that means? It has nothing to do with what we are discussing

Do you know what that means?

I know what a tax cut means. Allowing people, or corporations, to keep more of their earnings.
If you cut rates and "close some loopholes" and the corporations pay the exact same in taxes.........

YOU HAVEN'T CUT TAXES.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes that took money out of the US. How dare he! Regardless he was still proposing cutting taxes for millions of people and businesses.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes

What's an "inversion loophole"

Look it up, I’m not your teacher.
Tax inversion - Wikipedia

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How so?

From your own link.....again

In the long-term, the plan is revenue-neutral – savings from closing some corporate tax loopholes

Do you know what that means? It has nothing to do with what we are discussing

Do you know what that means?

I know what a tax cut means. Allowing people, or corporations, to keep more of their earnings.
If you cut rates and "close some loopholes" and the corporations pay the exact same in taxes.........

YOU HAVEN'T CUT TAXES.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes that took money out of the US. How dare he! Regardless he was still proposing cutting taxes for millions of people and businesses.

He wanted to cut taxes for corporations and manufacturers and he wanted to pay for it by eliminating inversion loopholes

What's an "inversion loophole"

Look it up, I’m not your teacher.
Tax inversion - Wikipedia

Obama want's to cut corporate taxes.

"Excellent"

He's the best!

"We paid $1 billion last year. How much will we pay after his tax cut?"

$1 billion.

"DERP!"