Lion of the Blogosphere

Extreme disappointment in Trump’s tax plan

Read this article at the NY Times.

This is not populism, this is standard Republican huge tax cuts for the richest value transferers.

The biggest giveaways to the super rich are:

1. Eliminating the estate tax.

2. 15% “business tax,” which sounds like it opens up huge loopholes because everyone will try to change their “ordinary income” into “business income” and get a huge tax cut. Even if it doesn’t open up any loopholes (unlikely that), I don’t see why the lawyers who are partners in the law firm should pay 15% tax while their working-stiff employees making a lot less money have to pay 25% or 35% tax.

When he was campaigning, Trump said he would eliminate the carried interest loophole, but under the new Trump plan, instead of super-rich hedge fund managers paying 20% capital gains tax, their tax rate is actually LOWERED to 15% “business income” tax.

3. Top tax rate lowered 39.6 to 35%. For those who can’t figure out how to take advantage of the new “business tax” loophole. Remember that you need at least $418,401 of income to be in the 39.6% bracket, so that’s a tax cut for only the very rich.

It’s so unfortunate that we are stuck with this bozo in the White House instead of a true populist like Marine Le Pen.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

April 26, 2017 at EST pm

Posted in Taxes

114 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Business taxes should be cut to zero. The tax deficit should be made up by counting ALL income as income (capital gains [indexed for inflation], etc…). Only allow deductions against a certain amount.

    Some Guy

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • All taxes should be cut to zero. Why do you cucks want to continue to be tax donkeys, paying for unwed mothers’ useless kids?

      markpower49

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Because the liberals would start shrieking like body snatchers and that would hurt our ears.

        jack arcalon

        April 29, 2017 at EST am

  2. If you don’t like this tax plan, you don’t like money or don’t have any!

    One rumor is the 15% business income will only apply to money kept/reinvested in the business, so most lawyers and other small business people are going to need that money to live on rather than build their businesses, and therefore may end up paying individual rates on the income passed through their corporations.

    Truth

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • “If you don’t like this tax plan, you don’t like money or don’t have any!”

      Right, if you’re not in the top 1%, you don’t like this tax plan.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • One rumor is the 15% business income will only apply to money kept/reinvested in the business,

      The article specifically mentions an intention to apply the new tax rate to pass through entities that currently tax business income as individual income.

      Lion is right. This plan is really scummy. Personnel really does presage policy and his appointments and adviser picks have almost all been terrible. The picture on the top of the article is of Mnuchin and Cohn, two goldman sachs alumnae.

      Magnavox

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • The article is from the “Failing New York Times” (which also lists the winners of this tax plan as more than just the 1% – https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/upshot/winners-and-losers-in-the-trump-tax-plan.html) but even if you believe and like the NYT’s coverage on Trump’s tax plan, they are ultimately reporting on a one-page tax plan that has not been enacted, will have a lot more details to come, and some of those details will be compromises with Democrats (and Republicans) in Congress. So the fact that the NYT at this point says pass through income will be taxed at 15% leaves a lot of information to come as to how that aspect of the plan will work, including whether this part of Trump’s plan will ever be signed into law.

        Truth

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Those two look a lot like alumni.

        Anthony

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Yeah of course but it’s still much more authoritative than some rumor you heard.

        Magnavox

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

    • Its very easy to make it seem like you’re reinvesting money back into your business when you’re in fact using it on yourself.

      Trust me, I’m a small business owner.

      Jimi

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • TAANSTAFL. This is going to blow up the deficit. Eventually, taxes will increase, both to pay back the deficit caused by these tax cuts and Trump’s military spending hike, and to pay for all the dumb programs the Democrats will create once they retake power. Which they will if Trump wastes his political capital on unpopular economic policies while doing nothing on the issues that elected him, immigration and trade. Trade is important too, if in four years he hasn’t done anything on the issue, even symbolic steps like labeling China a currency manipulator, what will he be able to say to the Rust belt that elected him?

      jasonbayz

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • The Rust Belt doesn’t care about trade. They elected Trump to destroy the immigrant community. As long as Trump effectively sees through the destruction of the immigrant community, he will lose no significant amount of support.

        Otis the Sweaty

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • “In politics you can lie to your voters, but you can’t lie to yourself.”
        Don’t remember who said it, but it’s very true. To voters, it is advantageous to lie about the popularity of one’s policies. People will naturally be more likely to support policies if more people are believed to support them. But the problem with this strategy is that the politicians often become true believers in the lie. Thus, Romney ran and lost on a platform of tax cuts for the rich. Clinton ran on cultural Marxism and “black lives matter” and lost. You may say, “well Trump won.” But that was what the Clinton campaign said, rather than interpreting Obama’s victories as a result of anger at Bush’s disastrous presidency and Romney’s personal unpopularity, they interpreted it as evidence they would have a permanent lock on the presidency due to non-White and young voters who pro-“diversity”.

        Trump’s victory did have something to do with immigration, polls, when asked in a non-strawman fashion, consistently show support for lower immigration levels and opposition to amnesty. But they also showed pretty consistently that, in both the Republican primary and the general election, it was the economy, not immigration, which was seen as the most important issue among voters. Much of the rust belt hasn’t experienced much immigration. My conclusion is that the most important factor for Trump’s success in the rust belt was his emphasis on trade, this is how he won states that Bush and Romney could not.

        jasonbayz

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • The Rust Belt doesn’t care about trade. They elected Trump to destroy the immigrant community. As long as Trump effectively sees through the destruction of the immigrant community, he will lose no significant amount of support.

        You’re just on some script. The rust belt is one of the areas least touched by immigration and most touched by trade.

        Magnavox

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • You’re just on some script.

        Otis’ script has high predictive value. He is one of the greatest political commenters in the country.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

    • In other words, company cars & company boats.

      Maybe employees will choose to be paid their salaries as a business entity and live in “company housing,” siphoning off every ordinary living expense possible before taking as little as possible as personal income.

      The USA needs to lower its business income tax to 15-18%. Any more is not internationally competitive. But the other countries can have the low business income taxes because they primarily fund from a VAT, which the federal government doesn’t have.

      Rotten

      April 28, 2017 at EST am

  3. Trump already served his most important function, appointing a non-liberal justice.

    JW Bell

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • I fear Neil Gorsuch is a religious wacko who will approve every Muslim demand, right through full-blown Sharia. Anything labeled religious practice gets a free pass.

      Mark Caplan

      April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Can you at least wait before you write off Gorsuch?

        And there are three years to go for a couple of the other rotten apples to drop off the Supreme Court tree.

        I expected most of this from Trump. Think of where we’d all be if Hillary’d won.

        Just saying.

        gothamette

        April 28, 2017 at EST pm

  4. this is standard Republican huge tax cuts for the richest value transferers.

    The Republicans didn’t lose in the past because they promised tax cuts. They lost because they didn’t get trade and immigration right. Trump has sufficently corrected their position on those issues; now he is free to govern as an otherwise normal Reagan Republican.

    The Undiscovered Jew

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • “he Republicans didn’t lose in the past because they promised tax cuts. ”

      Mitt Romney lost because blue collar people saw him a a rich boss and not a friend of the working man.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • There’s a lot of really deluded Joe the Plumber types in the republican coalition who think they’re ship is about to come in.

        Magnavox

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • their ship is about to come in

        Lion is there any way to let people edit comments before they’re approved?

        Magnavox

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • Audacious Epigone has made an interesting point. Trump probably got the majority of his information from his Twitter feed and his loyalists during the campaign. Now he probably gets it from cable news and Washington insiders.

        Trump has never really been strong on ideology, to be honest. He mostly staked out a position for himself outside of the mainstream and was probably shocked to see how well received it was. But once you limit his sources of information to GOPe types, that’s largely how he will govern.

        If Trump were a bona fide populist, he’d be telling the Democrats he’d raise taxes on the rich if they manned up and payed for the wall. Instead, it looks like he’s choosing lower taxes over the wall, and therefore selecting the GOPe over his base.

        Sid

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • And Trump won’t have that problem because he is destroying the immigrant community.

        Trump needs to give the GOPe and the TruCons some of the things that they want. That is just reality. Only by keeping all factions of the Republican party happy will Trump have the leverage to destroy the immigrant community.

        Otis the Sweaty

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • He already gave them Gorsuch. He doesn’t need to put American into bankruptcy so that the super-rich can have their taxes halved.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • Trump needs to give the GOPe and the TruCons some of the things that they want.

        He did.

        Aside from trade and immigration Trump’s election platform was 90% of what TruCons wanted. He was always for Obamacare repeal, gun rights, opposition to abortion, tax cuts, a Reaganesque foreign policy, military buildup, and energy independence.

        The TruCons opposed him because they were stupid. But this doesn’t change the fact Trump’s policies were in reality largely in harmony with Reagan Republicanism from the start of his campaign.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • He doesn’t need to put American into bankruptcy so that the super-rich can have their taxes halved.

        To hell with the deficit. We’ve had deficits for how long and it’s never made a difference because the US dollar is backed by nuclear weapons. Any budget shortfalls from Trump’s tax cuts will, at worst, just be thrown onto the heap of debt we already have, and there is at least a 50-50 chance the cuts pay for themselves with higher economic growth.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • Instead, it looks like he’s choosing lower taxes over the wall, and therefore selecting the GOPe over his base.

        Trump hasn’t betrayed his base in any meaningful sense.

        The wall was left out of the budget resolution to avoid a shutdown. That was a tactical budget decision. He will have many opportunities to attach the funding to other budget bills coming up in Fall and Winter, or using the existing Secure Border Act from 2007 that was never implemented but still exists on the books. The only reversal was on DACA. Otherwise he has increased interior enforcement, raised the cost of hiring H1Bs, started litigating against sanctuary cities and Muslim refugees, and dissuaded new illegals from crossing the border.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • @Otis

        Repealing Dodd-Frank is another TruCon pet issue that was also embraced by Trump during the election.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • “To hell with the deficit.”

        The U.S. prints its own money and has a strong credit rating, so high deficits aren’t the end of the world. (If I wrote something in 2010 saying otherwise, that’s because I was a Tea Partier who hadn’t taken macro yet.)

        Even so, it’s imprudent over the long haul to raise the debt higher and higher.

        “Trump hasn’t betrayed his base in any meaningful sense.”

        His immigration policies have been stellar for the most part. I wish DACA would be deported but I recognize doing so could be a PR nightmare.

        I’m worried that his tough immigration policies will be something he’ll do for a limited period of time, before declaring mission accomplished. Then he might try to “make a deal” with his erstwhile rivals and grant amnesty to millions of illegals.

        Since people like to compare Trump to Hitler, this would be his Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The Wall is concrete proof he’s committed to fighting illegal immigration, and it’s something he promised.

        Sid

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • To hell with the deficit. We’ve had deficits for how long and it’s never made a difference because the US dollar is backed by nuclear weapons.


        Any budget shortfalls from Trump’s tax cuts will, at worst, just be thrown onto the heap of debt we already have, and there is at least a 50-50 chance the cuts pay for themselves with higher economic growth.

        Just thought I’d put these out there so everyone can see what a retard you are.

        Magnavox

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Ironically what the administration needs right now is Mitt Romney.

        Lion of the Turambar

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Just thought I’d put these out there so everyone can see what a retard you are.

        I’m sure your diseased brain conjured some fantasy universe where the US suffered consequences from running huge deficits post-WWII. This is also the same fantasy universe where you were right about anything during the campaign.

        Unfortunately for you this realm does not exist. In the real world your libertarian-cuck hyperinflation has not happened.

        Trump will storm to victory with tax cuts, corporate welfare, racism, and the extermination of the immigrant community which Otis is dictating to him.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Even so, it’s imprudent over the long haul to raise the debt higher and higher.

        The debt is largely the result of Progressive entitlement policy. Since Trump can’t reform entitlements he’s better off firing up economic growth with corporate and military industrial pork projects in the short to medium term than worry about a debt cataclysm that hasn’t materialized.

        I’m worried that his tough immigration policies will be something he’ll do for a limited period of time, before declaring mission accomplished. Then he might try to “make a deal” with his erstwhile rivals and grant amnesty to millions of illegals.

        Not likely to happen before his reelection campaign, if it happens at all.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • “Audacious Epigone has made an interesting point. Trump probably got the majority of his information from his Twitter feed and his loyalists during the campaign. Now he probably gets it from cable news and Washington insiders.”

        He’s surrounded by CEOs. I think that has something to do with the matter.

        Well, I’m reading a lot about the Civil War. After it was over someone asked General Lee why the South lost and he said “I always thought it had something to do with the Yankees.”

        gothamette

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Unfortunately for you this realm does not exist. In the real world your libertarian-cuck hyperinflation has not happened.

        Actually, housing has increasingly become unaffordable for ordinary American citizens, along with many other assets. So there has been significant inflation, it’s just that it hasn’t been counted as inflation by political metrics like the official CPI.

        Tom

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Actually, housing has increasingly become unaffordable for ordinary American citizens, along with many other assets.

        Housing inflation was caused by immigration, not deficits. Other assets inflated at normal rates.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

    • Mitt Romney lost because blue collar people saw him a a rich boss and not a friend of the working man.

      Romney didn’t run on Trump’s trade platform and Romney’s immigration platform wasn’t as forceful or Conservative as Trump.

      If Romney had adopted only those two positions of Trump’s while keeping everything else he might have won with increased blue collar turnout to offset unusually high black turnout in 2012.

      George HW Bush would certainly have won in 1992 if he hadn’t raised taxes, cut immigration from what was then 600,000 a year to 300,000 (instead of increasing it from 600k to 1 million/year as he did in 1990), and fought for better trade deals.

      The Undiscovered Jew

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • because they didn’t get trade and immigration right.

      And Trump has been surprisingly terrible on trade. I thought that would be the thing he would be strongest on since that’s the one issue he has a consistent track record on going back decades. The Canadian lumber tariffs are nothing new and don’t count as anything.

      Magnavox

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • And Trump has been surprisingly terrible on trade.

        No he hasn’t.

        He withdrew from TIPP and is writing up an executive order to withdraw from NAFTA if there isn’t a substantial renegotiation.

        The Undiscovered Jew

        April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • China is 3/4 of the US trade deficit and he’s done nothing. And I doubt he’ll do anything about Nafta either

        Magnavox

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • “China is 3/4 of the US trade deficit and he’s done nothing. And I doubt he’ll do anything about Nafta either”

        Hmmm seems like it’s been a pretty good week if you wanted something done about NAFTA.

        Mike Street Station

        April 29, 2017 at EST pm

    • Hear, hear

      B.T.D.T.

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • I am not a fan of huge tax issues this early in the game. Taxes are too complex to deal with correctly. However, I am impressed that the tax plan does not eviscerate deductions like the home mortgage. Someone is at least thinking about the middle class with this particular provision, something missing from previous tax cut proposals. Someone on the Trump staff is thinking.

      One thing to keep in mind is that we are entering a credit default cycle. Too many companies borrowed too much money over the last eight years and bonds are coming due. There is about a few hundred billion dollars in bonds that will not be paid back.

      Lower taxes will need to buffer this so the tax plan is, so far, a pretty good idea.

      You will also need lower taxes to buffer any losses from tarde and immigration policy.

      map

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

  5. Supposedly they’re planning on using reconciliation to get the legislation past the filibuster, but that requires that tax changes to be revenue neutral, which this proposal most definitely isn’t. So something doesn’t add up. Maybe it’ll all just implode like health care reform did and make the republicans look that much stupider.

    Magnavox

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • Republicans have long called for comprehensive permanent changes to the tax code, but lately they have shown increasing openness to the possibility of tax cuts with an expiration date. If they embark on a plan to move legislation that adds to the deficit and cannot be filibustered by Democrats, Senate budget rules dictate that the tax cuts would expire after a decade.

      Looks like I was wrong: tax cuts can add to the deficit but they have to expire in 10 years.

      Magnavox

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  6. I think Trump got in unexpectedly, and was essentially read the memo that: The whole thing is going to melt down pretty soon so you might as well go with our program and read the scripts we hand you. And unfortunately he went along with that.

    Look, the economy is going to crash in a way that few people grasp properly. We’re out of cheap energy. Rapid growth is no longer possible. All this stuff you see about getting 8% returns on a stock portfolio is total nonsense. All this huge debt and the unfunded liabilities we’ve run up is not serviceable. 20th Century America is over. The whole thing was based on accelerating energy consumption and debt growth. Neither can be done any more.

    I strongly suspect he got in, and it was explained to him that “No Mr. Trump, Making America great again is physically and financially impossible. We have plans in place to keep the downslide sane, so just stick with our program for now. Here’s your script.”

    bobbybobbob

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • How is the downslide sane if they keep importing millions of third worlders? When the crash happens and no recovery is in sight then favelas are the new thing. I guess rule by disorder and fear will be the operating principle of the 21st century.

      NotWesley

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • And how is the downside sane with massive levels of individual and government debt?

        Magnavox

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Well, you’re right, most of the expected down turn is not a sanely managed downslide, I misspoke. Mainly the elites are looting as much as they can before the fat lady sings. Trump was instructed not to mess that up and it was explained to him that he’s fucked, too. I think there’s a very real chance Trump will be personally broke during his administration.

        An example of “sane” planning from the “imminent crash” perspective is war in Syria. This is straight-up old school resource geopolitics. If you think it’s about gas attacks you’re a child.

        There is this pervasive misconception that trends are going to continue for 50 years and people at the top are being very stupid because of the obviously disastrous end game. I don’t think the looters at the top are being stupid at all. I think the Greater Depression is coming up soon and they know that and are doing rational things. Once you accept this many policies that are otherwise obviously insane start to make sense.

        bobbybobbob

        April 28, 2017 at EST pm

  7. The main difference between rich Dims and Repubs is that rich Repubs don’t like taxes. The problem is that the GOP needs their money to get elected. So Trump has no choice but to give them what they want. If he doesn’t they’ll just have their pet congressman block his agenda. He’s got to do what he’s got to do. I don;t like every business decision I make, either. But I don’t always have a choice.

    destructure

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  8. I don’t see why the lawyers who are partners in the law firm should pay 15% tax while their working-stiff employees making a lot less money have to pay 25% or 35% tax.

    just try harder and you too can love big brother. and by “big brother”, i mean…of course…

    “the job creators”.

    but it does take LOTS of gin.

    and yes. le pen was basically the trump/bernie hybrid that the american electorate ACTUALLY WANTS.

    so much for De La Démocratie en Amérique.

    sad!

    6079 Smith W

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  9. 2. 15% “business tax,” which also sounds like it opens up huge loopholes because everyone will try to change their “ordinary income” into “business income” and get a huge tax cut.

    Business, dividends, capital gains, and income should all have the same top rate, which would obviate that sort of nonsense. It would also be smart politically. Go back to Reagan’s 28% top rate on everything.

    Dave Pinsen

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  10. No one should have more than 25% of your income siphoned off by the governing authority. We’re not slaves or serfs. Wealth inequality is fought at the level of monopoly regulation not via tax policy.

    Andrew E.

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • High housing costs, high education costs, high health costs, swarms of incompatible immigrants siphoning your hard earned money — welcome to your wonderful country. Taxes pay for nothing in America!

      JS

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • Exactly. So precisely none of all the big problems in this country are caused by or will be solved by tax policy. (Except for the foreign savings loophole)

        Andrew E.

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • On the other side of the coin, you have White America in overdrive mode when it comes to consumption. I’ve come across quite a number of people living in Manhattan who make 6 figure salaries, and not a f–ing dime is saved up for taxes, let alone real emergencies.

        JS

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Quite amazing how I see expense sheets/finances, a single person living in Manhattan’s market rate rent, also spends ~ $50K eating out/annually.

        JS

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • O/T — I guess the organic food/clean food craze hasn’t stopped the rising rates of colon cancer among America’s youth:

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/02/28/colorectal-cancer-rates-rising-sharply-among-gen-x-and-millennials/

        JS

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

    • LOL

      imagine still being a libertarian in 2017

      james nsw

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  11. Trump has no fixed ideology. His goal is to win and he has a flexibility that allows him to swim in different directions while seeking his prey. He is after all, a shark of the highest order. He has taken a lay of the land and is honing in on key policies that will give both he and his party the greatest chance of long term success. Massive tax cuts will win over the donors and establishmentarians that he needs support from. It will also create enough short term economic growth to carry a second term. At the same time he is following through on trade and border enforcement. He is simply choosing his battles wisely, and if that translates into two terms and two or three more Supreme Court picks I am all for it.

    B.T.D.T.

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • Trump doesn’t need the support of the Koch brothers. He’s screwing over his prole white base.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • cutting taxes for the rich doesn’t hurt Trump’s base at all.

        Keep in mind that deficit spending is how Japan has kept it’s zombie economy afloat through 3 decades of private sector deleveraging

        Otis the Sweaty

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Proles will not care about tax cuts for the rich as long as Trump enforces the border, supports the military and creates jobs through economic growth and better trade deals. All indication thus far is that he will deliver.

        B.T.D.T.

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

    • Trump has no fixed ideology.

      Trump just repeats whatever the last person he heard said to him. People have been saying this about him for decades and I’m sure it’s much more extreme now that he’s 70 years old in a completely new field that he knows almost nothing about. Now look at who he has surrounding him telling him things. That explains the Trump presidency so far.

      Magnavox

      April 27, 2017 at EST am

  12. The best thing Trump’s tax plan can do is remove the foreign savings loophole that allows tax free foreign investment in US financial markets. This constant inflow of private foreign capital into US securities because of the tax savings is one of the main factors propping up our financial system. The system is badly in need of a complete reset and removing this loophole could help bring it about.

    Andrew E.

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  13. It’s not a great plan, but on the other hand, based on the flop in healthcare, it seems unlikely that Congress will get anything like this through to the President’s desk.

    Mike Street Station

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • Hopefully before surrendering Trump will use the threat of it to get something he actually needs, like the wall. It seems like we’re allowing issues to get talked about in isolation and then caving on them, instead of tying X to Y and getting a little bit of X to go with the Y we’d get screwed over with anyway.

      Richard

      April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • Yeah I don’t understand why Trump caved on the wall so quickly. It seemed to me the Democrats were handing him an issue by threatening to shut down the government if there were funds on the wall. An opportunity to put the Dems on the other side of the government shut down was golden.

        Mike Street Station

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

  14. Lion, Mnuchin claimed that the effective tax rate on the rich would not go down because the lower tax rate would be compensated by fewer deductions (they will only keep the mortgage interest and charitable contribution deduction). Does that sound valid?

    Biffoman

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • No, rich people don’t have many personal deductions, and if they did then the AMT tax stepped in and stopped it.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      April 26, 2017 at EST pm

      • From what I read, the Trump crew is looking into canning the AMT as well. No feelings one way or the other about that. However, one thing you neglected to mention in your analysis is that the elimination of deductions for state (income) and local (property taxes), is justifiably designed to put the screws to high tax blue states. I really resent the subsidy that Californians get for their 13.5% marginal state income tax, as well as the same for the outrageous property taxes levied in New York/New Jersey suburban counties. Trump has my full support for that

        sestamibi

        April 27, 2017 at EST am

  15. Another Hott Chix with Big Gunz entry! Okay, she’s a decent enough Asian chick but not what anyone would call hott, however she does a superb job handling a huge .375 H&H rifle (which seems about as long as she is tall):

    Peter

    ironrailsironweights

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

    • She’s cute, but that voice is terribly unfeminine. I doubt it’s even her fault, rather just a flaw in the language. One hears a language like that and instantly you know it’s an artless, dreary, mechanistic culture. Thanks Mao.

      Panther of the Blogocube

      April 27, 2017 at EST am

      • What language is that, anyway? Sure ain’t Mandarin. I’m not a pro at this game, but it’s got to be something Southeast Asian (they haven’t the world’s goofiest singsong tone sounds).

        Greg Pandatshang

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Some of the comments to the video are in what looks like Thai to me.

        She definitely has extensive firearms experience. To handle a monster like the .375H&H with anything approaching the skill she displays requires experience firing progressively larger calibers, hundreds of rounds at each stage. A sample progression might be .22lr – .223 – .243 – 7mm-08 – .308 – .30-06 – .300 WinMag – .338 Lapua – .375H&H. You might be able to skip one or two of these steps but it’s not advisable. Given the high price of rifles and ammo it just isn’t practical for most people, so the .375H&H is strictly off-limits for the vast majority of shooters.

        Here is a video of the same woman shooting a Benelli 12-gauge shotgun, once again very skillfully. The heaviest 12-gauge loads have .375H&H recoil levels, but based on the way the muzzle doesn’t jump as much she’s probably using a lighter “low brass” load.

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

  16. Still better than Hillary.

    Rosenmops

    April 26, 2017 at EST pm

  17. Obviously you don’t get it. This is not a tax plan. Trumped wanted to claim he introduced his tax plan in the first 100 days, so he dusted off some campaign documents and sent them out. The whole plan is one page.

    The actual tax plan with be put together in Congress. Unfortunately it will not be any better.

    Trump could of proposed a populist tax plan knowing full well it would not be implemented by Congress, but he couldn’t even do that.

    mikeca

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

    • Trump could of proposed a populist tax plan knowing full well it would not be implemented by Congress, but he couldn’t even do that.

      He couldn’t have because he doesn’t have anyone around him that could have written it for him.

      Magnavox

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • He had Steve Bannon and Steve Bannon has lots of populist contacts.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Where has Bannon ever proposed anything close to Sanders style economic reforms? Or even just Democratic party platform ones?

        Magnavox

        April 28, 2017 at EST am

      • Perhaps Bannon’s tax policies are standard Republican.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 28, 2017 at EST am

  18. This tax plan is part of the negotiation. He starts out with an extreme position so they have something to negotiate.

    The estate tax will not be eliminated.

    The cuts for the rich will not be as big..

    ttgy

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  19. It makes no sense to pay taxes. No taxation without representation! And who represents us, the working men? Nobody!

    Yakov

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  20. Triggered! Like the song from the Trump rallies says, you can’t always get you want.

    IHTG

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  21. Don’t worry, Lion; I’m sure a liberal federal judge will block it.

    Hermes

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  22. Le Pen is a doctrinaire socialist. All political parties and politicians in Europe are socialists. Left and right in Europe refer to one’s stance on the nationalism issue. Le Pen is a national socialist. Her opponents are international (marxist, globalist) socialists.

    bob sykes

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  23. You guys are crazy. This tax plan is awesome!

    Two in the Bush

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

    • The only silver lining coming from Trump’s tax plan is that the ~ $20K of income is not taxable for married filing joint taxpayers.

      It’s not a money if you ask me or Yakov!

      JS

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Another silver lining is it eliminated the deduction for state and local taxes. The rest of the country shouldn’t be subsidizing California’s reckless spending.

        jasonbayz

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • No, it will ensure more class disparity in America. Trump is a fool. The middle class will be completely driven out of the liberal centers, because they will be paying more in taxes. Do you expect them to relocate to places like Indiana and Arkansas?

        JS

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • California residents already subsidize the rest of the country. In spite of these tax deductions, more federal dollars flow out of California rather than back in (the same cannot be said for many “red” states).

        Vince

        April 28, 2017 at EST am

      • Eliminating the state and local tax deduction hurts middle income earners in the major cities.

        JS

        April 28, 2017 at EST am

      • “Another silver lining is it eliminated the deduction for state and local taxes. The rest of the country shouldn’t be subsidizing California’s reckless spending.”

        That’s one of the best features of the tax plan. Allowing a deduction for state and local taxes helps subsidize the voting decisions of blue state voters who feel free to vote for high state taxes knowing they’ll be deductible. They get the benefit of whatever service is being provided and the rest of the country helps foot the bill.

        Mike Street Station

        April 29, 2017 at EST pm

      • I’m looking forward to the country becoming a dead cadaver, where the rich elites have completely cannibalize the nation to its last breath, even effecting their cohorts, because it’s all about sound theories, not practical reasoning. What do lower tax-Red States have to offer to the White Middle Class or more importantly, businesses?

        JS

        April 29, 2017 at EST pm

      • “Eliminating the state and local tax deduction hurts middle income earners in the major cities.”

        You mean in the Democratic Archipelago? That’s a feature, not a bug.

        gda

        April 29, 2017 at EST pm

  24. Trump’s biggest failure right now is not taking on these two-bit judges who block his orders. Just saying “We’re going to the Supreme Court!” is weak, weak, weak. He needs to openly defy them. Cut the funds to the sanctuary cities anyway, right in the face of the judge, and then say “what are you going to do about it?”

    peterike

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

    • And who would enforce his orders? The vast majority of the people who work for him in the federal government voted for Hillary Clinton, and even most of his appointees are establishment men who would turn on him if he rejected judicial review. If the goal is victory and not comic book heroics then Trump’s wisest course of action is to present the best arguments in court and hope Anthony Kennedy hasn’t had his head turned by the cocktail set’s Trump hysterics.

      Richard

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

    • It’s been suggested that he request an accelerated hearing at the SC. Makes sense, and would certainly deflate and discourage the Resistance.

      gda

      April 29, 2017 at EST pm

  25. Yep this is in line with what they’ve said before… part of the reason I didn’t vote for him. Also similar to the healthcare bill he backed. The fact that this is regressive is just subtler than the healthcare bill was, which could help this pass.

    Do you regret backing the bozo?

    Anon

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

    • Who are you? People who won’t write under a consistent moniker are annoying.

      Richard

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

  26. The Einsteins on the Supreme Court declared that a corporation is a person. So corporation-persons should be filing their individual income tax returns on IRS Form 1040, like every other person. The same tax brackets should apply too.

    Mark Caplan

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  27. Trump should push an anti-usury EO that directs the DOJ to only enforce those financial lending contracts that are collateralized by unambiguously owned assets.

    And he should move to make passive index fund investing illegal.

    Suddenly we’d have a real economy again.

    Andrew E.

    April 27, 2017 at EST am

  28. Eliminating the state income tax deduction is a giant tax increase on wealthy NYC / California residents.

    It’ll be interesting to see what he can actually get through congress. Will Dems fight to save the state income tax deduction or fight the business tax decrease? What will be their priority?

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-26/trump-s-tax-plan-could-be-painful-for-new-york-new-jersey-and-california

    Thagomizer

    April 27, 2017 at EST pm

    • This will hurt middle class blue-staters. It should not be passed.

      map

      April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • I think middle class blue staters use the standard deduction which Trump’s plan would double in size. Eliminating the itemized deductions targets wealthy people. I wish the plan went one step further and capped itemized deductions to some level like 50k. This would help reduce the incentive for rich people to give so much to non-profits or fake charity.

        Stilicho

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Eliminating itemized deductions mostly hurts the well-off not-rich people like me. Those making low six figures.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 27, 2017 at EST pm

      • Getting rid of the state and local tax deduction on the itemized deduction section hurts low six figures earners, who are essentially “the middle class” residing in the important liberal centers. They might consider relocating to lower cost states/cities, but there are no significant jobs in those places.

        Worse…

        It’s quite a travesty that America is seen as the wealthiest nation on the planet, and yet it is perceived as an intellectual and a cultural desert. Not one place in America comes close to French Speaking Canada with a strong, burgeoning, intellectual class. French Canadians are seen as a lower breed from the rest of Canuckistan, so why is Montréal the best college city and their capital is one of the prettiest in North America? Something is not right.

        JS

        April 28, 2017 at EST am

  29. I am extremely disappointed too, to the point I am falling off the Trump Train…especially if this passes. My problems are different though. I am staunchly against raising the Earned Income Tax Credit and child tax credits. The childless get screwed again.

    Jay Fink

    April 29, 2017 at EST pm

    • Government policy absolutely should favor and incentivize family formation. Just need to make sure that it’s done in a way such that it is middle class (ie. white) families getting the benefits.

      I think having these bogus child tax credits all these years could turn out to be have been a blessing. This is one of the main ways Trump will be able to deport millions of the ‘good’, non-violent illegals once he’s done with the felons. There’s this misconception that most illegals come to America for the jobs. Our own Magnavox never shuts up about this. Actually most come to mooch off our welfare, mostly fraudulently of course. Gone!

      Andrew E.

      April 30, 2017 at EST am

    • To paraphrase: “Any action or behavior which, if universal, would result in the extinction of humanity in one generation is not to be celebrated or encouraged”

      Childlessness falls into that category. So logically the childless should not be encouraged by giving them tax breaks.

      Families still rule. Which is exactly how it should be.

      gda

      April 30, 2017 at EST am

      • You’re probably never going to see tax breaks for single childless people. The world thinks that single childless people don’t need money as much as people with children.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        April 30, 2017 at EST am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: