Trump Offers Plan To Lower Taxes For All, Obviously Leads To Screeching About Tax Cuts For Rich

Realistically, Trump (or any Republican) could offer a plan that specifically raises taxes on corporations and The Rich, and it’d still be called tax cuts for the rich

(Breitbart) President Donald Trump announced the framework of his tax plan Wednesday afternoon, boasting that it would restore the American dream for working families.

“This is the right time. Democrats and Republicans in Congress should come together to deliver this giant win for the American people and begin the middle-class miracle once again,” Trump said as the crowd applauded. “It’s also called a miracle for our great companies.”

The president traveled to Indiana for his speech, noting that under Governor Mike Pence the state made impressive economic gains as a result of lower taxes and regulations. He spoke at the Farm Bureau Building at the state fairgrounds in Indianapolis.

He wants the average family to fill out one piece of paper when doing their taxes. And some of what he is looking to enact

Trump promoted the idea of cutting taxes for working-class Americans, allowing the first $12,000 of earned income to remain tax-free — $24,000 for married couples.

He promoted three different tax rates of 12 percent, 25 percent, and 35 percent for different income brackets.

The president promoted pro-family policies like the expansion of the child tax credit and eliminating the marriage penalties. He also promoted a $500 tax credit for dependent adults or the elderly. His framework also included a plan to eliminate the alternative minimum tax and end the “death tax” permanently.

Trump said his plan aims to cap the tax rate for millions of small businesses and farms at 25 percent and allow them to write off the cost of equipment in the same year they purchased it.

You can read the one-pager release from the White House here, and the full framework here. Remember when Obama’s plans were essentially written on sticky notes?

Obviously, this has caused freakouts, like

Trump Tax Plan Benefits Wealthy, Including Trump

which appears in the hard news section, yet reads like an op-ed. Then we have the Editorial Board in apoplexy

A Boondoggle Masquerading as Tax Reform

After months of secret negotiations, the Trump administration and congressional leaders have come up with a tax plan — sort of. What they have really come up with is a wish list of tax cuts for the wealthy, with lots of “we’ll get back to you on that” promises where the details are supposed to be.

This much is clear: The tax “framework” published by Republican leaders on Wednesday would greatly increase the federal deficit, would not turbocharge economic growth and could leave many middle-class families worse off by ending deductions they rely on. It would do little or nothing to improve the lot of the working class, a group President Trump says he is fighting for. It would instead provide a windfall to hedge fund managers, corporate executives, real estate developers and other members of the 1 percent. And can it be just a happy coincidence that Mr. Trump and his family would benefit “bigly” from this plan?

It’s the same old same old complaints from the media elite. They manufacture ways that lowering tax rates for individuals and small businesses aren’t actual cuts. You can tell they really didn’t read the materials from the White House. And, as far as deficits go, the last people who should be complaining about deficits and debt are Democrats.

Much of the Trump plan is about streamlining taxation, things like removing all the different “tax regimes”, which “exist to govern the tax treatment of certain industries and sectors.” Everyone should be taxed the same. And so much more. Considering how many people the NY Times has laid off, and looks to lay off, they’re the last ones who should be whining about knowing how business works.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

48 Responses to “Trump Offers Plan To Lower Taxes For All, Obviously Leads To Screeching About Tax Cuts For Rich”

  1. drowningpuppies says:

    It would do little or nothing to improve the lot of the working class, a group President Trump says he is fighting for.

    Doubling the personal exemption to $12,000 for a single and to $24,000 for a family does nothing?

    That’s real tax free money there for the lower and middle class workers and we can’t have them use that for whatever they want, can we?

    • Dana says:

      That’s not the personal exemption, which I believe would be eliminated; that’s the standard deduction.

    • Deserttrek says:

      the middle class individual will take a hit as always

      FU*K families already! The single filer has been raped by both sides of the aisle for too long
      I do cringe when I hear a conservative or for that matter any politician say “families deserve ” and there is no such thing as “a working family”
      families don’t do SH*T for the economy , people spending and investing do and that includes the individual

      supporting special family benefits , and higher rates for individual filers makes one the same type of scum and abuser who supports global warming

      10% flat rate for ALL

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    An aside concerning our horrible President…

    White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said on Twitter Thursday that Mr Trump has authorised a waiver for the US territory for a little-known federal law that prohibits foreign-flagged ships from shuttling goods between US ports.

    She said Mr Trump was responding to a request from Puerto Rico Governor Ricardo Rossello, and that the Jones Act waiver “will go into effect immediately”.

    One might recall Loose Shoes refused to issue this waiver during the BP oil spill.

    • david7134 says:

      I don’t think the press understands the issue in PR, or rather likes to continue the lies. There are no harbors, there are no air fields, and we have the liberal Jones Act to assure that labor unions get their cut.

      • Jeffery says:

        dave,

        The Merchant Marine Act of 1920, also known as the Jones Act, is a United States federal statute that provides for the promotion and maintenance of the American merchant marine. Among other purposes, the law regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports. Section 27 of the Jones Act deals with cabotage and requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on U.S.-flag ships, constructed in the United States, owned by U.S. citizens, and crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. The act was introduced by Senator Wesley Jones.

        You’re welcome.

        • drowningpuppies says:

          During the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the government…refused to issue Jones Act waivers so foreign vessels could aid in the cleanup and containment. Despite several offers for foreign assistance during an ongoing ecological disaster, the government cited the Jones Act to justify turning them away. Many suspect that the Obama administration was reluctant to go against the pro-Jones Act labor unions (tr. every labor union) he needed to cement his re-election. It’s not a leap to say that such cronyism may have delayed the eventual resolution of the spill.

          https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/you-higher-prices-enriched-cronies-weak-national-security-then-youll-love

          • Jeffery says:

            It’s been the law for nearly 100 years. Rather than a dictatorial fiat from tRump, the Republican majorities and almost-a-president tRump can change the law.

            If President Obama had waived the law, the Con Men would have gone batshit crazy.

          • drowningpuppies says:

            Hardly, little jeffvckery, learn to read.

  3. Dana says:

    Yeah, President Trump wouldn’t cut taxes at all for those people already paying no taxes, so obviously it favors the rich.

    The top producers pay the most in taxes; of course they should see the most benefit. However, I do not support cutting taxes until spending is cut, and I mean cut to the f(ornicating) bone! Welfare should be not just cut, but eliminated, and if you won’t work, you starve.

    • Jeffery says:

      Welfare should be not just cut, but eliminated, and if you won’t work, you starve.

      Many retirees and the disabled do not work. Should we remove all support and let them starve?

      • david7134 says:

        Jeff,
        We should remove all support except for the trust money that we were forced to pay. There, fixed it for you fool.

  4. Jl says:

    “Trump tax plan benefits the wealthy” would have exactly the same effect as “Trump’s plan to cut the federal gas tax would benefit those who drive a lot.” (If it happened). Hardly anyone would think the second scenario as being unfair, but it’s just the same as the first. Any across the board tax cut will always benefit those who pay more tax to begin with. Its simply math.

  5. Jeffery says:

    Realistically, Trump (or any Republican) could offer a plan that specifically raises taxes on corporations and The Rich, and it’d still be called tax cuts for the rich

    Nope.

    • david7134 says:

      Yes it would Jeff. With the upper 10% paying most of the taxes, any tax cut will effect the rich. If the rich have more money, they will invest and start new business. Learn basic economics.

  6. Zachriel says:

    Trump Offers Plan To Lower Taxes For All, Obviously Leads To Screeching About Tax Cuts For Rich

    If everyone receives a tax cut, then presumably deficits don’t matter any more.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Deficit spending hasn’t mattered for quite a while.
      What’s so different now?

    • david7134 says:

      X
      It is simple, Congress should spend less and we should keep more. Amazing that you can’t understand that.

      • Zachriel says:

        david7134: It is simple, Congress should spend less and we should keep more. Amazing that you can’t understand that.

        That’s nice. Please point us to the proposal in Congress which ties tax cuts to equivalent spending cuts, and we will withdraw the comment.

        • david7134 says:

          Z,
          No, you would cry and carry on if they cut your precios, bloated, corrupt government.

          • Zachriel says:

            david7134: No

            That’s what we thought. There is no proposal in Congress which ties tax cuts to equivalent spending cuts. If everyone receives a tax cut without also cuts in spending, then apparently deficits don’t matter any more.

  7. Jeffery says:

    Eliminating the Estate Tax does nothing for the middle class, and adds to the national debt. It will help the tRump family when The Don dies.

    Cutting corporate tax loopholes and the nominal corporate tax rate WILL cut employment of tax attorneys and tax accountants, but that’s of some value. But knowing the GOP, once their benefactors weight in, they will cut the rate but not harness the corporate tax avoidance schemes.

    Someone should tell adviser Cohn that the typical American family doesn’t “earn $100,000”, and can’t “buy a new car”, “renovate a kitchen” or “increase their lifestyle” with a potential $1000 tax cut. The typical family earning $100,000 is paying $7000 or less in federal income tax.

    There was a reason Cohn selected the top 10% for an example. The median family income is around $58,000 per year, and their federal tax burden is already pretty low ($382 filing jointly with 2 children). So half the households make less than $58,000 and pay little federal income tax already. Republicans think this is unfair and now want to cut taxes on those making more than the median. Is there a suggestion to cut the regressive payroll taxes (that all wage earners pay)?

    On the other hand, someone making $3,000,000 a year will save about $150,000 a year in taxes!

    If tRump and his klan actually paid taxes this would benefit them a lot!

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Eliminating the Estate Tax does nothing for the middle class, and adds to the national debt.

      Nonsense. Keep making up shit, little jeffvckery…

    • david7134 says:

      Overspending by Congress adds to the debt. Keeping what is mine does nothing to the government. But you don’t have to worry as you shelter your income in your corporation. Why don’t you pay your share Jeff.

      • Zachriel says:

        david7134: Keeping what is mine does nothing to the government.

        If your government spends more than it raises in taxes, then it does have an effect on you. U.S. debt is denominated in U.S. dollars, so there is no chance of a default due to lack of cash alone, however, if deficits are high enough, it could result in a debasement of the currency. That wasn’t a problem during the recovery from the Great Recession, but now that the U.S. economy is nearing capacity, deficits will become a more important factor as they compete with borrowing by business.

        • david7134 says:

          Z,
          We’re was all that smart logic when Obama was in office. We are in for 20 trillions most coming from the big O. You really think we can recover? No you had your chance to protest over spending and didn’t do you have lost yourvoice.

          • Zachriel says:

            david7134: We are in for 20 trillions most coming from the big O.

            Most of it was due to the Great Recession, which was due to events during the Bush Administration, and the aftermath of the Great Recession.

            david7134: You really think we can recover?

            Sure. But it will require not repeating the mistakes of the past.

            david7134: No you had your chance to protest over spending …

            It’s called countercyclical policy. The government runs deficits during recessions, then saves during expansions. The Bush Administration spent and cut taxes during an expansion, exacerbating the bubble economy; then Republicans resisted stimulus spending, exacerbating the recession. As the economy has finally climbed out of the recession, it is time to lower the deficit, and set money aside for eventualities.

        • drowningpuppies says:

          now that the U.S. economy is nearing capacity,

          WTF does that mean?

          • david7134 says:

            Dp,
            He heard the phrase in class and repeated it without obtaining background. Fairly typical of this generation that does not know what sex they are or what bathroom to use.

          • Zachriel says:

            Economic capacity is defined as the amount a company or an economy can produce using its current equipment, workers, capital and other resources. During a recession the economy is not working at capacity, as labor and capital are idled.

          • drowningpuppies says:

            now that the U.S. economy is nearing capacity,

            You still haven’t explained your quote nor provided evidence that “now” the U.S. economy is “nearing” capacity…

      • david7134 says:

        Z,
        Ran out of replies. Just suffice to say you are wrong on all of your statements. By the way, the recession was the baby of Barney Frank and Bush was a liberal.

  8. Jeffery says:

    The American middle class is not being killed by federal income taxes but by low wages.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Obviously, you haven’t a clue.

    • david7134 says:

      Jeff,
      Try to learn economics, then you would not be a fool.

    • That past 8 years of Obama was great, eh?

      • Jeffery says:

        That past 8 years of Obama was great, eh?

        Actually, not too bad. The economy had to recover from the worst recession since the Great Depression and we’ve had a record number of consecutive months of jobs growth. Wages have even started to creep up with full employment. We still have work to do in further wage growth and we need to recognize that the new economy evolving over the past decades is away from manufacturing and farming and toward finance, technology and service. And while the economic elites are flourishing the working classes are struggling to keep up. We still have work to do, but there is no evidence that Dotard tRump has either the inclination or the intelligence to help.

  9. Dana says:

    It’s simple: the left see all money as belonging to the government, and whenever a politician proposes cutting the amount of money seized by the government from the wallets of the people who produce it, they wax apoplectic.

    The estate tax? People work all their lives to build estates, paying taxes on those estates all along, but Jeffrey somehow thinks that those estates belong to the government, and not to the heirs of the people who built them. Perhaps, as a good socialist, he thinks the people build estates not for their children, but for the proletariat.

    The Sixteenth Amendment was the worst idiocy ever foisted upon us. The Framers had it right: people should be taxed as individuals, not on how much money they have.

    • david7134 says:

      Actually it is worse than most think. Jeff has his corporation that can be passed along to his kids with little tax. Big players like the Clintons and Gates will have charities and other nonprofits that protect their money and allow easy passage of the estate to the family. The left are pure scum.

    • the left see all money as belonging to the government

      The left sees Everyone Else’s money as belonging to the government. Fixed that (sadly, can’t do a strikethru with this plugin)

      • Jeffery says:

        The US government has responsibilities with Social Security, Defense, Medicare, Interest on the Debt and Medicaid making up most of the costs (everything else takes about 25% of spending). We pay for these through taxes including personal income taxes (47& of revenues), payroll taxes (35%) and corporate taxes (11%). When we take in less than we pay out we run a deficit. Congress determines spending and taxation with advice from the executive branch, and the signature of the President.

        If there is a better way to fund the federal government we’re certain Congress would be open to it.

        The Estate tax doesn’t contribute much to overall revenues, but serves to capture taxes on capital gains from estates. The first $5.5 million is exempt, with amounts over that being taxed. Estates passed to a surviving spouse are exempt as well.

        • david7134 says:

          Jeff,
          Medicare and social security are trust with money set aside for future use. Everything else can be cut.

          • Jeffery says:

            dave,

            Many people believe as you do concerning SS and Medicare but it’s just not true. Workers today are paying for the Social Security payments going to seniors. In addition, Congress can cut the payments in a number of ways.

            Aren’t Social Security and Medicare extreme cases of socialism?

            Would you be willing to slash defense spending?

  10. david7134 says:

    Funny Jeff, but they are classed as trust, funny why the Democrats would do that. As to the military, sure being them home and let the world fight it out. As to socialism I agree, these programs are socialism but that is The game and you have to play the game until we can change it. Jeff, repeat over and over, Jeff is a loser and post stupid foolish comments.

  11. Jeffery says:

    dave,

    If you actually believe there’s a huge pot of money tucked away to pay Social Security and Medicare expenses you’ve been misled. We pay as we go through our FICA payroll taxes (and a touch of general revenue for Medicare).

    For a while we peons paid in more than was paid out and generated a SS surplus which was used to cut federal income taxes for the wealthy! Thanks, GOP! Now that SS will start running a deficit, the GOP wants to cut the pay outs rather than increase revenues. Thanks, GOP! We fell for Reagan’s (and the GOPs) lies that the surplus would be used to offset the current SS shortfall. Silly us.

    And we all understand what the GOP wants to do to Medicare.

  12. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    I know better than you about the system and how it was sold to the public and how it was robbed by the Dems.

    • Jeffery says:

      dave,

      Nice diversion. And an appeal to authority with you as the authority! LOL.

      Do you now admit that there is no huge pool of money accumulated over the decades to pay for SS and Medicare expenses?

      Please note too that the Congress and Prez can change the way SS and Medicare are paid for and how the pay outs are made.

      Would you like to eliminate Medicare and SS as you’ve hinted?

Bad Behavior has blocked 5870 access attempts in the last 7 days.