Where are the Fiscal Conservatives? GOP Tax Bill Adds $1.7T to Debt

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. Thus, tax expenditures are alternatives to direct spending programs or regulations to accomplish the same goals. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) each year publish lists of tax expenditures and estimates of their associated revenue losses. The Treasury Department prepares the estimates for OMB.

The key word in the definition of tax expenditures is “special.” OMB and JCT do not count all exemptions and deductions as tax expenditures. For example, the agencies do not count as tax expenditures deductions the tax law permits to measure income accurately, such as employers’ deductions for employee compensation or interest expenses. Similarly, OMB and JCT do not count personal and dependent exemptions as tax expenditures on the theory that adjusting for family size is appropriate in measuring a taxpayer’s ability to pay.

What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

Measuring a taxpayers ability to pay? WTF, using BS to say tax expenditures aren't really tax expenditures doesn't alter the fact that they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not. If any personal choice effects your tax liability, that is a tax expenditure, where do the feds get off using the tax code for social engineering?


.

they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not.

A company deducting employee salaries or interest expense isn't a tax expenditure.

Nope, net profits on businesses should be taxed, without the business expenses there would be no profits.


.

Exactly. That's why they aren't tax expenditures.

The same can't be said for individual wage earners.


.

What can't be said?

 

[OKTexas]

So you're talking between $40,000 and $110,000 in income

Er.. NO... again you're fixated on NOMINAL income, as I said it's adjusted for local cost of living, nominal income is totally meaningless as a measure of comparison between different geographical areas. The only meaningful comparison is REAL income which is purchasing power and that is directly affected by SALT burdens. So somebody making $100,000 a year in say New York city is in fact much less well off than somebody making $100,000 a year in say Reno, NV.

But you're suggesting that the poor slob in NYC should pay federal taxes on money he forked over to the State and City? Just because he lives and works in NYC? How is that any different than the Democrats that want to punish high income earners just because they're successful?

And yes, lifestyle is a determining factor in federal tax liability, where you live, whether you have children or a mortgage are all lifestyle choices.
.

WTF? You're categorizing the state and local tax burden that falls on a wage earner as a "lifestyle choice"? Wow that goes way beyond the tired old class warfare tactics of punishing real incomes for the successful and into a whole new category of punishing real incomes based on geographical location.

... and you still haven't addressed the double taxation question and the centralization of tax dollar flows question, not to mention the raising taxes on middle income wage earners question.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The dividend is based on after tax profits, so technically it's reduced by the taxes already paid.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Measuring a taxpayers ability to pay? WTF, using BS to say tax expenditures aren't really tax expenditures doesn't alter the fact that they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not. If any personal choice effects your tax liability, that is a tax expenditure, where do the feds get off using the tax code for social engineering?


.

they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not.

A company deducting employee salaries or interest expense isn't a tax expenditure.

Nope, net profits on businesses should be taxed, without the business expenses there would be no profits.


.

Exactly. That's why they aren't tax expenditures.

The same can't be said for individual wage earners.


.

What can't be said?

Salt taxes, mortgage interest and dependents don't have a direct effect the wages earned, like business expense have on their bottom line.


.

 

[rightwinger]

The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. Thus, tax expenditures are alternatives to direct spending programs or regulations to accomplish the same goals. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) each year publish lists of tax expenditures and estimates of their associated revenue losses. The Treasury Department prepares the estimates for OMB.

The key word in the definition of tax expenditures is “special.” OMB and JCT do not count all exemptions and deductions as tax expenditures. For example, the agencies do not count as tax expenditures deductions the tax law permits to measure income accurately, such as employers’ deductions for employee compensation or interest expenses. Similarly, OMB and JCT do not count personal and dependent exemptions as tax expenditures on the theory that adjusting for family size is appropriate in measuring a taxpayer’s ability to pay.

What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

Measuring a taxpayers ability to pay? WTF, using BS to say tax expenditures aren't really tax expenditures doesn't alter the fact that they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not. If any personal choice effects your tax liability, that is a tax expenditure, where do the feds get off using the tax code for social engineering?


.

You tax where the money is

Can't get blood from a stone

The key word in creating a taxable event in the 16th Amendment is income, if you tax the same income differently there is no equal protection under the law, see the 14th Amendment. It's just that simple.


.

Every person is taxed the same

Every dollar is not taxed the same

Yet the 16th says it's the income that is taxable, not the person. A dollar is the property of it's owner, how can you tax the same property differently and justify it?


.

The 16th gives Congress the power to levy taxes
They decide what those levies will be

 

[rightwinger]

So you're talking between $40,000 and $110,000 in income

Er.. NO... again you're fixated on NOMINAL income, as I said it's adjusted for local cost of living, nominal income is totally meaningless as a measure of comparison between different geographical areas. The only meaningful comparison is REAL income which is purchasing power and that is directly affected by SALT burdens. So somebody making $100,000 a year in say New York city is in fact much less well off than somebody making $100,000 a year in say Reno, NV.

But you're suggesting that the poor slob in NYC should pay federal taxes on money he forked over to the State and City? Just because he lives and works in NYC? How is that any different than the Democrats that want to punish high income earners just because they're successful?

And yes, lifestyle is a determining factor in federal tax liability, where you live, whether you have children or a mortgage are all lifestyle choices.
.

WTF? You're categorizing the state and local tax burden that falls on a wage earner as a "lifestyle choice"? Wow that goes way beyond the tired old class warfare tactics of punishing real incomes for the successful and into a whole new category of punishing real incomes based on geographical location.

... and you still haven't addressed the double taxation question and the centralization of tax dollar flows question, not to mention the raising taxes on middle income wage earners question.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

 

[bripat9643]

"The GOP’s tax bill would add $1.7 trillion to the national debt over the course of a decade, and increase the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio by 5.9 percentage points, according to the Congressional Budget Office."

GOP tax bill would add $1.7 trillion to debt: CBO

So where are those tea party conservatives that ran on a very strict ‘we will not add to the federal debt/deficit!’

Clearly, that policy does not apply to tax breaks for corporations and the already wealthy.

We are currently generating zero taxes on corporate profits that are earned overseas. Once earned overseas, they stay overseas. Lowering the rate on these funds means they will return to the United States and actually get get taxed. That means revenue will increase, not decrease.

Anyone claiming this bill will increase the deficit is a lying douchebag who wants the American economy to stagnate.

 

[bripat9643]

Measuring a taxpayers ability to pay? WTF, using BS to say tax expenditures aren't really tax expenditures doesn't alter the fact that they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not. If any personal choice effects your tax liability, that is a tax expenditure, where do the feds get off using the tax code for social engineering?


.

You tax where the money is

Can't get blood from a stone

The key word in creating a taxable event in the 16th Amendment is income, if you tax the same income differently there is no equal protection under the law, see the 14th Amendment. It's just that simple.


.

Every person is taxed the same

Every dollar is not taxed the same

Yet the 16th says it's the income that is taxable, not the person. A dollar is the property of it's owner, how can you tax the same property differently and justify it?


.

The 16th gives Congress the power to levy taxes
They decide what those levies will be

It gives Congress the power to levy taxes on income. It was the worst mistake Congress ever made.

 

[bripat9643]

Er.. NO... again you're fixated on NOMINAL income, as I said it's adjusted for local cost of living, nominal income is totally meaningless as a measure of comparison between different geographical areas. The only meaningful comparison is REAL income which is purchasing power and that is directly affected by SALT burdens. So somebody making $100,000 a year in say New York city is in fact much less well off than somebody making $100,000 a year in say Reno, NV.

But you're suggesting that the poor slob in NYC should pay federal taxes on money he forked over to the State and City? Just because he lives and works in NYC? How is that any different than the Democrats that want to punish high income earners just because they're successful?


WTF? You're categorizing the state and local tax burden that falls on a wage earner as a "lifestyle choice"? Wow that goes way beyond the tired old class warfare tactics of punishing real incomes for the successful and into a whole new category of punishing real incomes based on geographical location.

... and you still haven't addressed the double taxation question and the centralization of tax dollar flows question, not to mention the raising taxes on middle income wage earners question.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

Which is utterly stupid, of course, and that's the point.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Er.. NO... again you're fixated on NOMINAL income, as I said it's adjusted for local cost of living, nominal income is totally meaningless as a measure of comparison between different geographical areas. The only meaningful comparison is REAL income which is purchasing power and that is directly affected by SALT burdens. So somebody making $100,000 a year in say New York city is in fact much less well off than somebody making $100,000 a year in say Reno, NV.

But you're suggesting that the poor slob in NYC should pay federal taxes on money he forked over to the State and City? Just because he lives and works in NYC? How is that any different than the Democrats that want to punish high income earners just because they're successful?


WTF? You're categorizing the state and local tax burden that falls on a wage earner as a "lifestyle choice"? Wow that goes way beyond the tired old class warfare tactics of punishing real incomes for the successful and into a whole new category of punishing real incomes based on geographical location.

... and you still haven't addressed the double taxation question and the centralization of tax dollar flows question, not to mention the raising taxes on middle income wage earners question.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The dividend is based on after tax profits, so technically it's reduced by the taxes already paid.


.

Yes, the dividends are reduced because the earnings are double taxed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not.

A company deducting employee salaries or interest expense isn't a tax expenditure.

Nope, net profits on businesses should be taxed, without the business expenses there would be no profits.


.

Exactly. That's why they aren't tax expenditures.

The same can't be said for individual wage earners.


.

What can't be said?

Salt taxes, mortgage interest and dependents don't have a direct effect the wages earned, like business expense have on their bottom line.


.

Ok.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Er.. NO... again you're fixated on NOMINAL income, as I said it's adjusted for local cost of living, nominal income is totally meaningless as a measure of comparison between different geographical areas. The only meaningful comparison is REAL income which is purchasing power and that is directly affected by SALT burdens. So somebody making $100,000 a year in say New York city is in fact much less well off than somebody making $100,000 a year in say Reno, NV.

But you're suggesting that the poor slob in NYC should pay federal taxes on money he forked over to the State and City? Just because he lives and works in NYC? How is that any different than the Democrats that want to punish high income earners just because they're successful?


WTF? You're categorizing the state and local tax burden that falls on a wage earner as a "lifestyle choice"? Wow that goes way beyond the tired old class warfare tactics of punishing real incomes for the successful and into a whole new category of punishing real incomes based on geographical location.

... and you still haven't addressed the double taxation question and the centralization of tax dollar flows question, not to mention the raising taxes on middle income wage earners question.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Company profits are company profits, paid out or not.
When they pay them out as dividends, they're taxed for the second time.

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

But of course that isn't true.

 

[rightwinger]

You tax where the money is

Can't get blood from a stone

The key word in creating a taxable event in the 16th Amendment is income, if you tax the same income differently there is no equal protection under the law, see the 14th Amendment. It's just that simple.


.

Every person is taxed the same

Every dollar is not taxed the same

Yet the 16th says it's the income that is taxable, not the person. A dollar is the property of it's owner, how can you tax the same property differently and justify it?


.

The 16th gives Congress the power to levy taxes
They decide what those levies will be

It gives Congress the power to levy taxes on income. It was the worst mistake Congress ever made.

Been working for 75 years

 

[rightwinger]

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Company profits are company profits, paid out or not.
When they pay them out as dividends, they're taxed for the second time.

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

But of course that isn't true.

Afraid it is

If you believe otherwise....take it up with the IRS

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Company profits are company profits, paid out or not.
When they pay them out as dividends, they're taxed for the second time.

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

But of course that isn't true.

Afraid it is

If you believe otherwise....take it up with the IRS

Afraid it is

A corporation pays my salary, I'm taxed, they deduct.

A company pays interest to a bank, the bank is taxed, the corporation deducts.

I could also give examples involving trading where money changes hands and is not taxed.

 

[RDD_1210]

"The GOP’s tax bill would add $1.7 trillion to the national debt over the course of a decade, and increase the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio by 5.9 percentage points, according to the Congressional Budget Office."

GOP tax bill would add $1.7 trillion to debt: CBO

So where are those tea party conservatives that ran on a very strict ‘we will not add to the federal debt/deficit!’

Clearly, that policy does not apply to tax breaks for corporations and the already wealthy.

We are currently generating zero taxes on corporate profits that are earned overseas. Once earned overseas, they stay overseas. Lowering the rate on these funds means they will return to the United States and actually get get taxed. That means revenue will increase, not decrease.

Anyone claiming this bill will increase the deficit is a lying douchebag who wants the American economy to stagnate.

You're right, you know more than the CBO. How ignorant of me.

 

[bripat9643]

The key word in creating a taxable event in the 16th Amendment is income, if you tax the same income differently there is no equal protection under the law, see the 14th Amendment. It's just that simple.


.

Every person is taxed the same

Every dollar is not taxed the same

Yet the 16th says it's the income that is taxable, not the person. A dollar is the property of it's owner, how can you tax the same property differently and justify it?


.

The 16th gives Congress the power to levy taxes
They decide what those levies will be

It gives Congress the power to levy taxes on income. It was the worst mistake Congress ever made.

Been working for 75 years

Only if "working" means detroying the country.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[bripat9643]

"The GOP’s tax bill would add $1.7 trillion to the national debt over the course of a decade, and increase the country’s debt-to-GDP ratio by 5.9 percentage points, according to the Congressional Budget Office."

GOP tax bill would add $1.7 trillion to debt: CBO

So where are those tea party conservatives that ran on a very strict ‘we will not add to the federal debt/deficit!’

Clearly, that policy does not apply to tax breaks for corporations and the already wealthy.

We are currently generating zero taxes on corporate profits that are earned overseas. Once earned overseas, they stay overseas. Lowering the rate on these funds means they will return to the United States and actually get get taxed. That means revenue will increase, not decrease.

Anyone claiming this bill will increase the deficit is a lying douchebag who wants the American economy to stagnate.

You're right, you know more than the CBO. How ignorant of me.

That's an appeal to authority, a logical falacy.

The CBO is a gang of political hacks. It has been wrong about averything it has ever published.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

 

[OKTexas]

Measuring a taxpayers ability to pay? WTF, using BS to say tax expenditures aren't really tax expenditures doesn't alter the fact that they are tax expenditures whether they count them that way or not. If any personal choice effects your tax liability, that is a tax expenditure, where do the feds get off using the tax code for social engineering?


.

You tax where the money is

Can't get blood from a stone

The key word in creating a taxable event in the 16th Amendment is income, if you tax the same income differently there is no equal protection under the law, see the 14th Amendment. It's just that simple.


.

Every person is taxed the same

Every dollar is not taxed the same

Yet the 16th says it's the income that is taxable, not the person. A dollar is the property of it's owner, how can you tax the same property differently and justify it?


.

The 16th gives Congress the power to levy taxes
They decide what those levies will be

And the 14th requires them to apply equal protection under the law, treating one piece of property differently for tax purposes, that has the same value as all the others, simply because of where if lands in an arbitrary stack, is not equal protection.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax. What individual States charge their citizens should not be a federal concern. Cost of living in a particular area should not be a federal concern, federally taxing incomes equally is a constitutional mandate in the equal protection clause.


.

Only double taxation in the federal code is the death tax.

What about dividends?

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The dividend is based on after tax profits, so technically it's reduced by the taxes already paid.


.

Yes, the dividends are reduced because the earnings are double taxed.

Once again, you're conflating business income with individual income. If you sell a stock at a profit your profit it's taxed, the same applies to dividends, it's profit on a stock you just retain the stock.


.

 

[rightwinger]

Dividends are the equivalent of rental income, without the hassle of dealing with tenants and property maintenance.


.

Company earnings are taxed at the corporate level and again when the dividend is paid to the investor.

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

The company pays taxes on its profit
The investor pays taxes on HIS profit

Company profits are company profits, paid out or not.
When they pay them out as dividends, they're taxed for the second time.

Every time money changes hands, it is taxed

But of course that isn't true.

Afraid it is

If you believe otherwise....take it up with the IRS

Afraid it is

A corporation pays my salary, I'm taxed, they deduct.

A company pays interest to a bank, the bank is taxed, the corporation deducts.

I could also give examples involving trading where money changes hands and is not taxed.

That is accounting, not taxation

The company makes a profit and pays a tax
They pay me ....I pay a tax on the income
I use my salary to buy a car......I pay tax on the car

Every time that money changes hands....it is taxed