The 2017/2018 Trump/GOP tax plan

[Snowboarder_Bo]

I love the way that headline sounds when you read it out loud.

Anyway, it’s true: the Koch brothers plan on pending $20M to “promote” the tax plan.

For now, at least, the conservative powerhouse will focus on the tax overhaul to help protect the Republican majorities. Phillips said the Koch network would host rallies and phone banks and run television and internet ads in the coming months.

“Our job is to make sure we shine a spotlight on those benefits that are occurring because of this law,” Phillips said. “Over time, that should overwhelm what has been a lot of demagoguery and rhetorical nonsense.”

This is my favorite line in the article:

The investment marks an early focus of the Koch brothers’ 2018 political strategy. It comes as the conservative billionaires work to expand their sweeping efforts to promote a “free society” in America.

There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch and there ain’t no such thing as a “free society” neither: everything costs something. Thing is, they figure we’re too stupid to figure out that we’re the ones being suckered into paying for it. Thing is, they might be right. Thing is, they figure, even if they’re wrong, what the fuck are we gonna do about it? Judging by the so-called financial crisis of '08, they must figure that all that we’ll do will amount to a whole bunch of nothing.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

Lobbying expenses and activity spiked during tax bill prep; prolly no surprise around here.

Money spent on lobbying by corporations, trade associations and special interest groups spiked during the final three months of 2017 as they battled for the biggest breaks possible in the most dramatic tax overhaul in more than 30 years.

The figures for the heavyweights are eye-popping.

The National Association of Realtors tallied $22.2 million between Oct. 1 and Dec. 31, according to newly filed disclosure reports. That’s double what the organization spent in the third quarter on lobbying activities. The Business Roundtable spent $17.3 million in the fourth quarter, nearly quadruple the amount over the three previous months, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce reported spending $16.8 million, a $3.7 million increase.

President Donald Trump swept into the White House promising to “drain the swamp” in Washington, but lobbyists continue to wield considerable influence and they plied their trade with vigor as Congress crafted the $1.5 trillion tax-cut package that Trump signed into law in late December.

The tax overhaul was hustled through Congress in less than two months and mostly written in private. Public Citizen, a nonprofit watchdog group, said in a Jan. 30 report that more than 4,600 lobbyists were engaged specifically on the tax rewrite while several thousand more sought to influence tax policy in addition to other legislative matters. That worked out to 13 lobbyists for every member of Congress.

[Silver_lining]

Trump has what he wants. He campaigned on tax cuts, which was accomplished, better boarder security " the wall " and infrastructure spending.

The massive increase to the Pentagon can be share shifted to boarder security or the wall. Is that his plan? A sitting President with a rising economy should win re-election, but with his mouth one never knows.

[Robot_Arm]

@Silver_lining

Trump has what he wants. He campaigned on tax cuts, which was accomplished, better boarder security " the wall " and infrastructure spending.

I don’t remember Trump saying much about infrastructure spending during the campaign, and I haven’t heard if the latest budget deal has any increase in infrastructure spending.

[Daylate]

I confess that I haven’t read all of the preceding posts, but am writing this one to provide a sort of data point regarding the effect of this tax bill on a small (7) group of employees - grossing from $20,000 to $40,000 annually - at an auto repair shop.

It appear that all of them will be getting a rather significant cut in their income taxes in 2018. This seems to be from $100 per month for the top ones, down to maybe $50 per month for the lower paid employees. This is not an insignificant amount over a year.

How many of them will be voting against Trump in the next election?

I’ll admit that the Bill Gates of the world will get a lot higher cut. I don’t think this matter at all to our guys - they haven’t seen any significant tax cuts in a long time, particularly here in the Great State of Washington, where the primary recreation of the state legislature seems to be cranking out tax increases of 20% or so a year.

[running_coach]

@Daylate

I confess that I haven’t read all of the preceding posts, but am writing this one to provide a sort of data point regarding the effect of this tax bill on a small (7) group of employees - grossing from $20,000 to $40,000 annually - at an auto repair shop.

It appear that all of them will be getting a rather significant cut in their income taxes in 2018. This seems to be from $100 per month for the top ones, down to maybe $50 per month for the lower paid employees. This is not an insignificant amount over a year.

How many of them will be voting against Trump in the next election?

I’ll admit that the Bill Gates of the world will get a lot higher cut. I don’t think this matter at all to our guys - they haven’t seen any significant tax cuts in a long time, particularly here in the Great State of Washington, where the primary recreation of the state legislature seems to be cranking out tax increases of 20% or so a year.

An extra $100 on top of $3333 is significant?
You have an odd idea of what constitutes “significant”.

[HurricaneDitka]

@Ravenman

Why aren’t you suggesting that the residents of Arizona and Florida ought to be undergoing heavy audits for the donation schemes that their states have implemented?

The only reason I can figure is that constituents of McCain and Rubio deserve less tax scrutiny than constituents of that gun grabber Feinstein.

You don’t think it might have something to do with California’s proposed scheme amounting to tax avoidance on a massive scale?

[Daylate]

When you’re living from paycheck to paycheck, a raise of over 3% is most certainly significant.

[running_coach]

@Daylate

When you’re living from paycheck to paycheck, a raise of over 3% is most certainly significant.

No, it’s a crumb. If they’re truly living pay-to-pay, then there’s things they don’t buy. An extra 100 will buy a bit more but it’s not really game changing. Can they move to a better home? Buy a car? Actually start saving for retirement, college or emergencies?

Or could it be the scale of tax breaks should have been turned the other way?

ETA: Don’t forget, that tax break gets to be a little less each year while the break for the rich stays.

[D_Anconia]

@running_coach

No, it’s a crumb.

So says Nancy Pelosi. :rolleyes:

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

You don’t think it might have something to do with California’s proposed scheme amounting to tax avoidance on a massive scale?

So the tax avoidance in places like Arizona and Florida are on an acceptable scale, eh?

[Lord_Feldon]

@Daylate

How many of them will be voting against Trump in the next election?

How many of them factored Obama’s 2009 tax cuts into their votes? (It was probably zero.)

[wguy123]

@Daylate

I’ll admit that the Bill Gates of the world will get a lot higher cut. I don’t think this matter at all to our guys - they haven’t seen any significant tax cuts in a long time, particularly here in the Great State of Washington, where the primary recreation of the state legislature seems to be cranking out tax increases of 20% or so a year.

WA only has a state sales tax and it has been the same rate for a long time. In what arena of taxes are you seeing tax increases of 20% per year? Maybe you live in King Co and you are upset at local taxes (not WA taxes)? But you specifically call out state legislators…are you referring to B&O taxes?

[jasg]

Remember the special tax on endowments? It snared a small but well endowed school in Kentucky of all places.

No problem, the Turtle crafted a carve-out in the budget deal to protect it.

@NYTimes

The carve-out exempts Berea from a tax on colleges with substantial endowments. Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, went out of his way to protect Berea, the only college in Kentucky — the state he represents — that would have been subject to the tax.

MAGA!

(I’m starting to think that the ‘G’ is for graft or grift or something other than great…)

[HurricaneDitka]

@Ravenman

So the tax avoidance in places like Arizona and Florida are on an acceptable scale, eh?

I’ve been sick all weekend and so perhaps I’m fuzzy on the details, but the purpose of California’s excellence fund idea seemed pretty clearly to be tax avoidance. Agree or disagree?

Second question: was the purpose of Arizona or Florida’s programs primarily for tax avoidance, or some other charitable effort? My impression is that it’s the latter, but you’re welcome to correct me if you think that’s wrong.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@HurricaneDitka

I’ve been sick all weekend and so perhaps I’m fuzzy on the details, but the purpose of California’s excellence fund idea seemed pretty clearly to be tax avoidance. Agree or disagree?

Second question: was the purpose of Arizona or Florida’s programs primarily for tax avoidance, or some other charitable effort? My impression is that it’s the latter, but you’re welcome to correct me if you think that’s wrong.

The purpose of Arizona’s program was Establishment Clause avoidance. The state couldn’t fund parochial schools directly, but it could make donations to them tax deductible.

[HurricaneDitka]

The Washington Post’s Wonkblog has an article that looks interesting and relevant. The headline is “California has a plan to skirt the GOP tax law. IRS veterans say it is likely doomed.” Unfortunately, the link doesn’t appear to be working right now.

[jshore]

@Daylate

When you’re living from paycheck to paycheck, a raise of over 3% is most certainly significant.

Yeah…Well, I’ll make a deal with you. If you give me your credit card, I’ll go withdraw $2000, give you $200 and me and my buddies will pocket the rest.

And, I expect you to be f-ing grateful for that $200 that I give you!

[elucidator]

I’ll give you mine, and if you manage to get 2 large out of it, you can keep it. Just tell me how you did it!

[Ravenman]

@HurricaneDitka

I’ve been sick all weekend and so perhaps I’m fuzzy on the details, but the purpose of California’s excellence fund idea seemed pretty clearly to be tax avoidance. Agree or disagree?

Second question: was the purpose of Arizona or Florida’s programs primarily for tax avoidance, or some other charitable effort? My impression is that it’s the latter, but you’re welcome to correct me if you think that’s wrong.

On the first, I agree. On the second, I recall seeing Arizona’s program for 100% tax credits for veterans causes being advertised as cutting contributors overall tax burden, so I’m not seeing why Arizona = good and legal and California = stupid liberal tax scam.

But to repeat, I think the Californian proposal is stupid scammy policy on the merits. But the IRS really out to treat all these scams the same.