GREAT AGAIN: 90% Of Workers Likely To See More Money In Paycheck -- Next Month!...

[Dschrute3]

Thank you President Trump!


The U.S. Treasury and the IRS on Thursday put out new guidance and withholding tables for employers that incorporate changes from the new tax law.

Under those new tables, the Treasury estimates that 90% of people who get a paycheck are likely to see more in take-home pay, as soon as February. Employers will have until Feb. 15 to incorporate the changes in their payroll systems.

The major changes affecting individuals include new tax brackets, (mostly) lower income tax rates,...

More:
90% Of Workers Likely To See More Money In Paycheck Next Month
DRUDGE REPORT 2018®

 

[buckeye45_73]

The Boston CBS is a right wing propaganda machine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Democrats are already complaining that it's not enough.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Thank you President Trump!


The U.S. Treasury and the IRS on Thursday put out new guidance and withholding tables for employers that incorporate changes from the new tax law.

Under those new tables, the Treasury estimates that 90% of people who get a paycheck are likely to see more in take-home pay, as soon as February. Employers will have until Feb. 15 to incorporate the changes in their payroll systems.

The major changes affecting individuals include new tax brackets, (mostly) lower income tax rates,...

More:
90% Of Workers Likely To See More Money In Paycheck Next Month
DRUDGE REPORT 2018®

Nancy says the millions of people who got bonuses this year just got scraps.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

 

[Moonglow]

Thank you President Trump!


The U.S. Treasury and the IRS on Thursday put out new guidance and withholding tables for employers that incorporate changes from the new tax law.

Under those new tables, the Treasury estimates that 90% of people who get a paycheck are likely to see more in take-home pay, as soon as February. Employers will have until Feb. 15 to incorporate the changes in their payroll systems.

The major changes affecting individuals include new tax brackets, (mostly) lower income tax rates,...

More:
90% Of Workers Likely To See More Money In Paycheck Next Month
DRUDGE REPORT 2018®

I don't claim my wages so no taxes...

 

[BluesLegend]

Cue the liberal sour grapes parade.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

 

[del]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

so it will probably cost closer to 3

 

[Wyatt earp]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

Bull shit they don't have a clue no one does..

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

Bull shit they don't have a clue no one does..

Well, we know for sure that you do not.

 

[Wyatt earp]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

so it will probably cost closer to 3

So where is your crystal ball, how many times did we lower taxes when we were not in a recession and unemployment was at basically full unemployment?

 

[Wyatt earp]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

Bull shit they don't have a clue no one does..

Well, we know for sure that you do not.

So you think your nonstradumbass?

 

[del]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

Bull shit they don't have a clue no one does..

wrong again

they might not have a clue, but they factored in the alleged revenue

The government scorekeeper says the GOP tax bill would fall short of Republicans' promises

 

[del]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

so it will probably cost closer to 3

So where is your crystal ball, how many times did we lower taxes when we were not in a recession and unemployment was at basically full unemployment?

calm down, chuckles

reagan tried to sell the same bulshit

it didn't work then and it won't work now

enjoy your extra $12/ week- it will evaporate in 2 years

 

[Wyatt earp]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

Bull shit they don't have a clue no one does..

wrong again

they might not have a clue, but they factored in the alleged revenue

The government scorekeeper says the GOP tax bill would fall short of Republicans' promises

Did they account for the flux capacitor they will be built and manufactured in 2021.... That will revolutionize time travel?

 

[Wyatt earp]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

so it will probably cost closer to 3

So where is your crystal ball, how many times did we lower taxes when we were not in a recession and unemployment was at basically full unemployment?

calm down, chuckles

reagan tried to sell the same bulshit

it didn't work then and it won't work now

enjoy your extra $12/ week- it will evaporate in 2 years

We were in a mini recession and high unemployment then..

 

[Reasonable]

Thank you President Trump!


The U.S. Treasury and the IRS on Thursday put out new guidance and withholding tables for employers that incorporate changes from the new tax law.

Under those new tables, the Treasury estimates that 90% of people who get a paycheck are likely to see more in take-home pay, as soon as February. Employers will have until Feb. 15 to incorporate the changes in their payroll systems.

The major changes affecting individuals include new tax brackets, (mostly) lower income tax rates,...

More:
90% Of Workers Likely To See More Money In Paycheck Next Month
DRUDGE REPORT 2018®

Can’t even use a respectable source.
You love your lying media because it tells you what you want to hear.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And it only cost a mere 1.5 trillion (at minimum) dollars for people to get a couple sawbucks more in the check. I am sure our grandchildren will not mind footing that bill for that.

Prove it , that it won't bring in more revenue

The "more revenue" was already factored into the cost.

so it will probably cost closer to 3

So where is your crystal ball, how many times did we lower taxes when we were not in a recession and unemployment was at basically full unemployment?

So, we are not in a recession which means the economy is already growing and we are at basically full employment (not full unemployment), so there can be no boom in jobs created...where is the revenue going to come from to offset the minimum of 1.5 trillion dollars?