Unless you find a job that pays you to say stupid things on the internet your taxes wont go up moron.
Republicans Are Getting Ready to Repeat Kansas’ Tax Cut Disaster
- Thread starter moe
- Start date
That chart doesnt say anything about more or less taxes. I dont think he knows what he posted.
Best case scenario is YOU can no longer afford food and you starve to death while some illegal immigrant, that you champion, dines on lobster and steak bought with food stamps that you had to pay for.
I genuinely don't understand the chart. Please give me an idea of what the hell it means.
If you make less than 30k per year, your taxes will go up starting in 2019.
If you make less than 40k per year, your taxes will go up starting in 2021.
If you make less than 75k per year, your taxes will go up starting in 2027.
If you make between 100k and 500k, you should fare very well.....except they are eliminating personal exemptions, state and local tax exemptions and home equity interest deductions.
Im guessing sir dopehead has figured out he was wrong and disappeared cuntystyle.
Last edited:
And you don't even seem to get embarrassed by how stupid you look. I guess you're too stupid to figure out when you're wrong and how stupid you actually look.
It must really suck to figure out the hero you voted for is sticking it to you in taxes so him and his super wealthy buddies can make even more money.
Just your first line. "If you make less than 30k per year, your taxes will go up starting in 2019."
Am I going to pay 80 billion myself if I make 30k?
I don't know what mine go down, but they should go down. Not that many people are going to leave my bracket.
Did I ever say you would?
That chart shows federal revenue deltas grouped by salary ranges. That's not even close to being able to determine if an individual in one of those ranges increases or decreases.
And that is showing the groups who will pay more in taxes due to revenues increasing for that group.
And btw, I thought you worked in finance or business?
LOL! Never go full, half is ok. Oh wait, you inferred someone here is a house n****. Nevermind, keep going full throttle.
And you double down again. You might set a new record tonight. Of course I do remember explaining design speed versus posted speed limit to you and that took several hours and about three different sources cited before you realized you f'ucked that one up too.
http://www.businessinsider.com/senate-tax-plan-brackets-trump-tax-reform-two-charts-2017-11
Under the Senate's plan, there would still be seven federal income brackets but at slightly lower rates and adjusted income ranges. The brackets proposed are 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35%, and 38.5%.
About 70% of Americans claim the standard deduction when filing their taxes, and their paychecks will almost certainly increase — albeit slightly — if the tax plan passes.
In 2017, the standard deduction for a single taxpayer is $6,350, plus one personal exemption of $4,050.
The Senate proposal would combine those into one larger standard deduction for 2018: $12,000 for single filers and $24,000 for joint filers.
You posted a chart that you dont even understand. Explain how a lower rate on a smaller AGI equals higher taxes? I could ask @WVUCOOPER to explain it to you.
I posted a chart that I understand and you clearly don't understand. You have doubled down, tripled down and quadrupled down on your stupidity. I knew you were a stupid f'uck but I had no idea it went to this depth. You are so stupid you aren't even embarrassed. A normal person would be so humiliated they wouldn't show up again to this site.
In post 88, I explained exactly what the chart meant.
Not every bracket gets a 3% drop. In fact some of the lowest bracket goes from 10% currently to 12% proposed. Here are a couple of excerpts from Forbes and Business Insider to help explain it to you.
- A larger standard deduction. To avoid raising taxes on those currently in the 10% tax bracket, the standard deduction for all taxes would increase to $12,000 for individuals (up from $6,350) and $24,000 for married couples (up from $12,700). These are slightly less than the doubled deductions expected - and, as Business Insider's Josh Barro has written, the idea that this would save people money may be misleading since it eliminates other personal deductions and a secondary standard deduction.
In selling their soon-to-be-released tax plan, Republicans have been leaning hard on what they say is a provision to cut and simplify taxes for the middle class: doubling the standard deduction that people who pay income tax may take.
"You have to look at the plan in its entirety. It doubles the standard deduction, so in the end, even the lowest rates get a tax cut," Rep. Jim Renacci, a Republican who sits on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, told Reuters.
But a document published by Jonathan Swan of the news website Axios shows this is badly misleading - the plan would increase the standardized deductions available to taxpayers by 15% or less.
Meanwhile, taxpayers who still wouldn't take the standard deduction under the Republican plan - those who would instead deduct things like mortgage interest - would pay tax on more of their income than they do now.
Here's the important fine print: "To simplify the tax rules, the additional standard deduction and the personal exemptions for taxpayer and spouse are consolidated into this larger standard deduction."
Here's how that math works. Let's say you are single with no dependents, and you have a moderate income. Currently, you get to take the standard deduction ($6,350) and one personal exemption ($4,050). If you are 65 or older, you also get to take an additional standard deduction ($1,250). That adds up to $10,400, or $11,650 if you're over 65.
The Republican plan would replace all these provisions with a single deduction of $12,000 ($24,000 for married couples.) That's a 15% increase - except for seniors, who get a 3% increase.
And then your first dollar of taxable income would be subjected to a 12% tax rate, instead of the current 10%. But don't worry - the framework says "additional tax relief," as yet unspecified, will emerge for you during the committee process.
For married couples, all the relevant amounts are doubled under the current tax code and under the Republican proposal, so the percent changes would be the same.
If you have children, your fate is uncertain. The plan would abolish the $4,050 exemption you get to take for each of your dependent children. But it would also increase the child tax credit - by an unspecified amount. Once that amount is specified, you'll be able to figure out whether you face a tax increase or a tax cut or what.
Meanwhile, taxpayers who itemize their tax deductions for things like mortgage interest and state and local taxes would pay tax on more of their income under the Republican plan. The proposal says "most" itemized deductions would be abolished anyway, but those for mortgage interest and charitable giving would be retained.
Currently, you get to take the personal exemption even if you also itemize deductions, but you get to take the standard deduction only if you forego itemized deductions. Combining these provisions into a single, standard deduction would mean itemizers lose their personal exemption and get nothing back - meaning they'll typically pay tax on an extra $4,050 of income if they're single, or $8,100 if they're married.
Sad!
I noticed you didn't even attempt to show where I was wrong, Mr. Non-partisan CBO office can't be trusted. LMAO.
take a good look in the mirror...you are talking about yourself and a few other kool aid drinkers....and that's the whole point here......you guys are so hell bent on trying to make the GOP and Mr Trump look stupid that you are making complete fools of yourselves.....and folks like Devil Dog and my friend Atlkvb make you look like the MORONS (that's for you bru) that you truly are. Your tactics got Trump elected and your tactics , along with a bevy of idiotic cowboy hat wearing candidates will get him elected again.....so then you can make fools of yourselves for another 4 years.....but you all just go on ahead....makes for some fun reading
The chart didn't depict what you thought it did, first of all. Secondly, you started by stating that people making under $75k would see their taxes go up. Using your logic of what you thought the chart depicted, that didn't occur until 2027 (10 years later) and aggregate savings to that point would far eclipse the increase they would see 10 years later. In essence, you were wrong on the premise of your argument. You didn't understand what was depicted.
I didn't say anything about partisanship of the CBO. You claimed I did. I said reference the CBO's analysis of the ACA impacts as a reference in understanding that they aren't always accurate. Since the ACA was the last major piece of legislation to impact the budget, that's why I chose it as the reference point. ATL already explained to you the folly of CBO's analysis between static and dynamic scoring.