Lowering Corporate Tax Rates The Coward’s Way

[Doc1]

Link, asshole!

No need, you were the one who decided to make a statement there lefty. You PROVE IT! I got mine in my favs, lol. Now work lefty, work, or shut up!

you said it asshole, now prove it

He will never cite anything, he just makes shit up as he goes.

waiting for you too hotdog!

Waiting for me to do what? The only claim I've made is that the kid doesn't know anything. You don't seem well suited for this.

Still waiting, you talk a lot, now put up or shut up fellas!

Apparently you're as dumb as the kid is.

Link, asshole!

No need, you were the one who decided to make a statement there lefty. You PROVE IT! I got mine in my favs, lol. Now work lefty, work, or shut up!

you said it asshole, now prove it

He will never cite anything, he just makes shit up as he goes.

waiting for you too hotdog!

Waiting for me to do what? The only claim I've made is that the kid doesn't know anything. You don't seem well suited for this.

Still waiting, you talk a lot, now put up or shut up fellas!

keep waiting asshole

We are still waiting Marxists-) Make your case, you phony-baloneys-)

Me a Marxist? You CLEARLY aren't cut out for this kid.

 

[g5000]

An allegory:

Bob earns $50k a year. Joe earns $50k a year.

When the federal budget is evenly divided up, Bob and Joe's share of government spending is $6000. So Bob and Joe should each be paying $3000. That works out to a 6 percent tax on their income.

But Bob is getting a subsidy from the government. He gets to deduct $1000 from his share of the tax burden. So his tax bill is $2000 instead of $3000.

That subsidy does not magically reduce the budget. That $6000 still needs to come from somewhere.

To balance the budget, Joe will have to make up the difference. He will have to pay $4000 instead of $3000.

Here's the problem: $4000 is not 6 percent of Joe's income.

To fix this problem, the government has to increase tax rates so that after Bob's subsidy is factored out, Bob is paying about $2000 while Joe pays $4000. And we end up with an insane system where two people earning identical incomes are paying radically different amounts of tax.

Doing the math, tax rates have to be increased to around 8 percent to make this happen.

Joe pitches a royal hissy fit at having his taxes increased by 33 percent, as he damn well should.

So Congress decides to raise the tax rate to 7 percent instead, and borrow the rest from China.

This is the effect your tax expenditures are having on our country.

Now let's eliminate Bob's tax deduction.

If we leave the tax rate at 7 percent, the government would bring in $7,000. That's a $1,000 surplus, without any deficit.

We can choose to spend that surplus by lowering tax rates to 6 percent.

Then we have equilibrium. Bob does not get a deduction, but now he is paying a lower tax rate, as is his neighbor Joe.

That means Joe gets instant tax relief. The guy you haven't given a flying fuck about as long as you got your government subsidy. Joe has been carrying Bob.

And by eliminating Bob's subsidy, we don't have to borrow money from China any more. Not only that, Joe and Bob pay identical taxes since they earn identical incomes.

Joe is no longer carrying Bob on his back.

This is what fiscal conservatives are trying to achieve.

But as you heard from Congressman Nunes, the special interests have stopped it cold.

Your simplistic analogy doesn't really address the ramifications of eliminating deductions/tax expenditures. Imagine if the interest deduction for home mortgages was eliminated. How many people would lose their house, how many loans would go into default, how many banks would be insolvent.

Countries which have eliminated the MID have seen no reduction in home ownership rates.

The MID increases the cost of your home. So it is ridiculous to think eliminating it would have a negative effect. It would REDUCE the price of housing.

You seem to think you can turn a switch and eliminate these expenditures and balance the budget. The budgets of businesses and people are constructed with these expenditures considered.

That's right. The MID is factored into the price of your house, making it more expensive.

So ask yourself: Who benefits from the higher home prices produced by the MID?

The people who lend you the money for your mortgage, the people who build houses, and the realtors.

As I said, the MID is a massive wealth transfer scheme from the pockets of home owners up the food chain to bankers, builders, and realtors. This one tax expenditure is an annual robbery of $80 billion.

There's a reason the real estate lobby spends $100 million a year on lobbying and campaign contributions.

 

[brummelben]

No need, you were the one who decided to make a statement there lefty. You PROVE IT! I got mine in my favs, lol. Now work lefty, work, or shut up!

you said it asshole, now prove it

waiting for you too hotdog!

Waiting for me to do what? The only claim I've made is that the kid doesn't know anything. You don't seem well suited for this.

Still waiting, you talk a lot, now put up or shut up fellas!

Apparently you're as dumb as the kid is.

No need, you were the one who decided to make a statement there lefty. You PROVE IT! I got mine in my favs, lol. Now work lefty, work, or shut up!

you said it asshole, now prove it

waiting for you too hotdog!

Waiting for me to do what? The only claim I've made is that the kid doesn't know anything. You don't seem well suited for this.

Still waiting, you talk a lot, now put up or shut up fellas!

keep waiting asshole

We are still waiting Marxists-) Make your case, you phony-baloneys-)

Me a Marxist? You CLEARLY aren't cut out for this kid.

piece of shyte would be far more appropriate

 

[Doc1]

you said it asshole, now prove it

Waiting for me to do what? The only claim I've made is that the kid doesn't know anything. You don't seem well suited for this.

Still waiting, you talk a lot, now put up or shut up fellas!

Apparently you're as dumb as the kid is.

you said it asshole, now prove it

Waiting for me to do what? The only claim I've made is that the kid doesn't know anything. You don't seem well suited for this.

Still waiting, you talk a lot, now put up or shut up fellas!

keep waiting asshole

We are still waiting Marxists-) Make your case, you phony-baloneys-)

Me a Marxist? You CLEARLY aren't cut out for this kid.

piece of shyte would be far more appropriate

LOL< well it is very easy to make you look like the idiot you are. We cross?

 

[Rustic]

As I have explained many times, every time you give a special interest a tax break, someone else has to make up the difference. This is achieved by raising tax rates on everyone. So even the lobby that got the tax break now has a higher tax rate, along with everyone else.

However, if we raised tax rates high enough to pay for the $1.4 trillion of them that are given out each year, the American people would revolt. So tax rates are raised to a barely tolerable level, and then the rest is borrowed.

And that is how we got to $19 trillion in debt and a 39.1% corporate tax rate.

As I have explained many times, if you get rid of all these government gifts to all these special interests, you could substantially lower tax rates. And you get the extra bonus of everyone being on a level playing field. Entities which earn identical incomes would pay identical taxes.

Instead, we have an insane system where entities which earn identical incomes pay radically different taxes.

Enter the House Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Kevin Brady. This committee came up with a plan to do just what I have been saying for years. They came up with a plan to lower the corporate tax rate substantially by getting rid of all those government giveaways.

Their original plan was simple. Get rid of all the special interest deductions, credits, and exemptions.

Guess what? Those special interests are so powerful that this turned out to be impossible. Our Congress is now completely owned, boys and girls, and it is long past time to wake the fuck up to this fact.

You simply must wake up. Anyone who defends $1.4 trillion of thievery is on the wrong side, and yet we are burdened with pseudocons who do just that. They defend deductions, credits, and exemptions which add up to $1.4 trillion.

They have been fed a lie that these tax expenditures mean they get to keep more of their own money. This is a giant lie. A YUGE lie.

As it happened, every time the House Ways and Means committee tried to take away all those special interest tax breaks, the special interests forced them back in. Which then forced the House Ways and Means to raise tax rates back to 39.1%.

Impasse.

So House Ways and Means came up with Plan B: The border adjustment tax. It’s real name is a “destination-based cash flow tax”, but the colloquial term is border adjustment tax.

The border adjustment tax is, very basically, an import tax. Even better, it’s a consumption tax. The corporate tax is a tax on production.

All of our allies have a border adjustment tax. We don’t. We’ve been living on that unlevel playing field forever. Now that House Ways and Means introduced the idea of the US moving to one, our allies are screaming at how unfair it would be for us to have the same kind of import tax they do!

Go figure.

We can get into the pluses and minuses of a border adjustment tax a little later. But for now, here’s how the GOP plan was going to work.

Since the special interests refused to give up their special tax breaks, the GOP decided to leave them in.

Since the special interests want their cake and to eat it, too, they also got the corporate tax rate lowered. To somewhere around 15%.

Because of this, all the lost revenue due to the tax breaks was no longer made up for by the 39.1% tax rate. So House Ways and Means intended to make up the lost revenues with the Border Adjustment Tax.

Enter Trump.

Donald Trump was “ambivalent”, at best, about the Border Adjustment Tax. And now he has decided he is against it.

So bye-bye Border Adjustment Tax.


But…he is keeping the lower corporate tax rate AND all those special interest tax breaks. And that means, boys and girls, a gigantic spurt in national debt if the Trump way comes to pass.


This is a total cop-out. It is the coward’s way out, and every fiscal conservative should be vehemently opposed to this.

An insanely high corporate tax rate that we happen to have now, along with the stupidity of capital gains tax makes for a weak economy… Fact

We don't have an insanely high corporate tax rate. You know dam well that almost no one pays the full tax rate

If corporate taxes are above single digits it's insanely high… Fact

 

[Rustic]

Real tax reform would have another benefit. The people who lend money to the government would suddenly have much more faith in our ability to honor our debts, and interest rates would drop, making the interest on our debt easier to manage.

It's win/win.

Whoa, you can stop right there because that is the key.

First, congratulations--pretty rare to see someone talk about "tax expenditures". Even more rare do you find someone that actually understands them. But here is the deal, the people lending money to the government, they are the very same people reaping the benefits of those tax expenditures. Take the big three--payment of medical benefits with pre-tax dollars, the home mortgage interest deduction, and the "step-up", especially the "step-up", listed by the Department of Treasury as "capital gains"--those three alone account for three hundred fifty billion of your 1.7 trillion dollar figure. Rather conservative if you ask me. Steinbrenner's family opted for an estate tax and the step-up. That alone cost the government three hundred million.

https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/Tax-Expenditures-FY2016.pdf

The government is required to list tax expenditures within each budget. The above is that required report.

When Reagan took office the wealthy figured out pretty damn quick that it was much better to lend money to the government than pay taxes. Hell, anyone would rather collect interest, and especially when it is considered "risk-free", than PAY taxes. And the most effective way to cut taxes paid by the wealthy is not with some big swooping "rate cut", but with "tax expenditures". Stealthy, confusing, limited, and complicated--damn perfect for those that can afford the "access", rather it be the funds to pay lawyers, accountants, or people like me, or the funds to donate to politicians in order to create some more "tax expenditures".

First of all the government should not be borrowing anything, borrowing put you as the slave of the lender.

DING, DING, DING, and we have a winner.

Think about what you said,

the borrower is a slave to the lender.

Hello Howdy, precisely what I am saying. The slave, that is the government, can't possibly touch the "tax expenditures" spent on the Massahes, the holders of government bonds.

Career politicians and their federal government have only themselves to blame in the situation they brought the country to… Fact

 

[Rustic]

Give big to the rich that has fucked us over for the last 50 years, while screwing the middle class over royally.

Damn

Class warfare only sounds good to the weak minded progressive, that always is lazy

 

[Rustic]

The federal government should be starved, that way they will work for their money... really work

 

[BuckToothMoron]

="g5000, post: 17119897, member: 34052"]

An allegory:

Bob earns $50k a year. Joe earns $50k a year.

When the federal budget is evenly divided up, Bob and Joe's share of government spending is $6000. So Bob and Joe should each be paying $3000. That works out to a 6 percent tax on their income.

But Bob is getting a subsidy from the government. He gets to deduct $1000 from his share of the tax burden. So his tax bill is $2000 instead of $3000.

That subsidy does not magically reduce the budget. That $6000 still needs to come from somewhere.

To balance the budget, Joe will have to make up the difference. He will have to pay $4000 instead of $3000.

Here's the problem: $4000 is not 6 percent of Joe's income.

To fix this problem, the government has to increase tax rates so that after Bob's subsidy is factored out, Bob is paying about $2000 while Joe pays $4000. And we end up with an insane system where two people earning identical incomes are paying radically different amounts of tax.

Doing the math, tax rates have to be increased to around 8 percent to make this happen.

Joe pitches a royal hissy fit at having his taxes increased by 33 percent, as he damn well should.

So Congress decides to raise the tax rate to 7 percent instead, and borrow the rest from China.

This is the effect your tax expenditures are having on our country.

Now let's eliminate Bob's tax deduction.

If we leave the tax rate at 7 percent, the government would bring in $7,000. That's a $1,000 surplus, without any deficit.

We can choose to spend that surplus by lowering tax rates to 6 percent.

Then we have equilibrium. Bob does not get a deduction, but now he is paying a lower tax rate, as is his neighbor Joe.

That means Joe gets instant tax relief. The guy you haven't given a flying fuck about as long as you got your government subsidy. Joe has been carrying Bob.

And by eliminating Bob's subsidy, we don't have to borrow money from China any more. Not only that, Joe and Bob pay identical taxes since they earn identical incomes.

Joe is no longer carrying Bob on his back.

This is what fiscal conservatives are trying to achieve.

But as you heard from Congressman Nunes, the special interests have stopped it cold.

Your simplistic analogy doesn't really address the ramifications of eliminating deductions/tax expenditures. Imagine if the interest deduction for home mortgages was eliminated. How many people would lose their house, how many loans would go into default, how many banks would be insolvent.

Countries which have eliminated the MID have seen no reduction in home ownership rates.

The MID increases the cost of your home. So it is ridiculous to think eliminating it would have a negative effect. It would REDUCE the price of housing.

You seem to think you can turn a switch and eliminate these expenditures and balance the budget. The budgets of businesses and people are constructed with these expenditures considered.

That's right. The MID is factored into the price of your house, making it more expensive.

So ask yourself: Who benefits from the higher home prices produced by the MID?

The people who lend you the money for your mortgage, the people who build houses, and the realtors.

As I said, the MID is a massive wealth transfer scheme from the pockets of home owners up the food chain to bankers, builders, and realtors. This one tax expenditure is an annual robbery of $80 billion.

There's a reason the real estate lobby spends $100 million a year on lobbying and campaign contributions.[/QUOTE]

Now I'm getting annoyed, are you really that simple minded? First, provide a link of the countries who have done away with the MID, so we can compare the respective economies. Second, if you automatically eliminate it, yes home values/cost will reflect it, and over time it will balance. But before that, you will have MILLIONS of people who are upside down in their mortgage, many will default and it will cause a ripple across the economy. Who knows what the overall effect will be? Like I said, I don't disagree with eliminating many exemptions and trying to real in congress to prevent more, but it has to be done in a systematic, methodical way. Otherwise nobody can predict the ensuing chaos. BTW- $80 billion is like 2% of the total budget. Entitlement spending more than tax expenditures/deductions is the behemoth that will destroy us.



Did you see this-
Fannie Mae Is At It Again: Loan-To-Value Ratio Now Higher Than During Housing Bubble
Fannie Mae Is At It Again: Loan-To-Value Ratio Now Higher Than During Housing Bubble | Zero Hedge

 

[g5000]

Real tax reform would have another benefit. The people who lend money to the government would suddenly have much more faith in our ability to honor our debts, and interest rates would drop, making the interest on our debt easier to manage.

It's win/win.

Whoa, you can stop right there because that is the key.

First, congratulations--pretty rare to see someone talk about "tax expenditures". Even more rare do you find someone that actually understands them. But here is the deal, the people lending money to the government, they are the very same people reaping the benefits of those tax expenditures. Take the big three--payment of medical benefits with pre-tax dollars, the home mortgage interest deduction, and the "step-up", especially the "step-up", listed by the Department of Treasury as "capital gains"--those three alone account for three hundred fifty billion of your 1.7 trillion dollar figure. Rather conservative if you ask me. Steinbrenner's family opted for an estate tax and the step-up. That alone cost the government three hundred million.

https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/Tax-Expenditures-FY2016.pdf

The government is required to list tax expenditures within each budget. The above is that required report.

When Reagan took office the wealthy figured out pretty damn quick that it was much better to lend money to the government than pay taxes. Hell, anyone would rather collect interest, and especially when it is considered "risk-free", than PAY taxes. And the most effective way to cut taxes paid by the wealthy is not with some big swooping "rate cut", but with "tax expenditures". Stealthy, confusing, limited, and complicated--damn perfect for those that can afford the "access", rather it be the funds to pay lawyers, accountants, or people like me, or the funds to donate to politicians in order to create some more "tax expenditures".

First of all the government should not be borrowing anything, borrowing put you as the slave of the lender.

DING, DING, DING, and we have a winner.

Think about what you said,

the borrower is a slave to the lender.

Hello Howdy, precisely what I am saying. The slave, that is the government, can't possibly touch the "tax expenditures" spent on the Massahes, the holders of government bonds.

Career politicians and their federal government have only themselves to blame in the situation they brought the country to… Fact

Nope. It is entirely the fault of the American voter.... Fact

 

[Kosh]

As I have explained many times, every time you give a special interest a tax break, someone else has to make up the difference. This is achieved by raising tax rates on everyone. So even the lobby that got the tax break now has a higher tax rate, along with everyone else.

However, if we raised tax rates high enough to pay for the $1.4 trillion of them that are given out each year, the American people would revolt. So tax rates are raised to a barely tolerable level, and then the rest is borrowed.

And that is how we got to $19 trillion in debt and a 39.1% corporate tax rate.

As I have explained many times, if you get rid of all these government gifts to all these special interests, you could substantially lower tax rates. And you get the extra bonus of everyone being on a level playing field. Entities which earn identical incomes would pay identical taxes.

Instead, we have an insane system where entities which earn identical incomes pay radically different taxes.

Enter the House Ways and Means Committee, chaired by Kevin Brady. This committee came up with a plan to do just what I have been saying for years. They came up with a plan to lower the corporate tax rate substantially by getting rid of all those government giveaways.

Their original plan was simple. Get rid of all the special interest deductions, credits, and exemptions.

Guess what? Those special interests are so powerful that this turned out to be impossible. Our Congress is now completely owned, boys and girls, and it is long past time to wake the fuck up to this fact.

You simply must wake up. Anyone who defends $1.4 trillion of thievery is on the wrong side, and yet we are burdened with pseudocons who do just that. They defend deductions, credits, and exemptions which add up to $1.4 trillion like they are welfare queens.

They have been fed a lie that these tax expenditures mean they get to keep more of their own money. This is a giant lie. A YUGE lie.

As it happened, every time the House Ways and Means committee tried to take away all those special interest tax breaks, the special interests forced them back in. Which then forced the House Ways and Means to raise tax rates back to 39.1%.

Impasse.

So House Ways and Means came up with Plan B: The border adjustment tax. It’s real name is a “destination-based cash flow tax”, but the colloquial term is border adjustment tax.

The border adjustment tax is, very basically, an import tax. Even better, it’s a consumption tax. The corporate tax is a tax on production.

All of our allies have a border adjustment tax. We don’t. We’ve been living on that unlevel playing field forever. Now that House Ways and Means introduced the idea of the US moving to one, our allies are screaming at how unfair it would be for us to have the same kind of import tax they do!

Go figure.

We can get into the pluses and minuses of a border adjustment tax a little later. But for now, here’s how the GOP plan was going to work.

Since the special interests refused to give up their special tax breaks, the GOP decided to leave them in.

Since the special interests want their cake and to eat it, too, they also got the corporate tax rate lowered. To somewhere around 15%.

Because of this, all the lost revenue due to the tax breaks was no longer made up for by the 39.1% tax rate. So House Ways and Means intended to make up the lost revenues with the Border Adjustment Tax.

Enter Trump.

Donald Trump was “ambivalent”, at best, about the Border Adjustment Tax. And now he has decided he is against it.

So bye-bye Border Adjustment Tax.


But…he is keeping the lower corporate tax rate AND all those special interest tax breaks. And that means, boys and girls, a gigantic spurt in national debt if the Trump way comes to pass.


This is a total cop-out. It is the coward’s way out, and every fiscal conservative should be vehemently opposed to this.

Yes JFK was coward, but the far left loves him all the same!
Carter was coward as well, but the far left loves him now, not then as they tried to bring him down..