Trump's Republican primary campaign

[Procrustus]

@RTFirefly

Hey, here’s Trump’s tax plan! The top tax bracket’s gonna drop from 39.6% to 25%, he’s gonna cut the corporate tax rate to 15%, and he’s gonna abolish the Federal estate tax and the alternative minimum tax.

This doesn’t seem as insane as other things he wants to do.

I don’t know enough economics to have an opinion on the corporate tax rate. I don’t even know what it currently is.

The alternative minimum tax is a valid concept, but the way it operates in reality definitely means it should be revised or eliminated.

I’ve got no beef with the estate tax, as long as the gov’t doesn’t get too greedy. I think they’d rather have 25% of estates valued over 10 million than zero on everything if they try to get 50% or more like they did before. I don’t see a need to eliminate it entirely.

I do think he’s going to run out of money to run the government and “growing the economy” isn’t going to pay for all these cuts

[BobLibDem]

This part

4.No family will have to pay the death tax. You earned and saved that money for your family, not the government. You paid taxes on it when you earned it

is moronic. Often the capital gains in the estate were NEVER taxed. You buy a stock for $1000 and when you die 40 years later it’s worth $1 million. Tax was never paid on those gains. So where is the logic in letting the heir get a tax-free windfall?

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@BobLibDem

This part is moronic. Often the capital gains in the estate were NEVER taxed. You buy a stock for $1000 and when you die 40 years later it’s worth $1 million. Tax was never paid on those gains. So where is the logic in letting the heir get a tax-free windfall?

The logic is that it will get him votes.

ETA: What, did you think this tax plan was really about governing the country effectively?

[BobLibDem]

@Snowboarder_Bo

The logic is that it will get him votes.

ETA: What, did you think this tax plan was really about governing the country effectively?

Of course not. Nor do I think he had anyone crunch the numbers to see the impact on overall tax revenue. Cut taxes and simplify the tax code is just word salad that low-information voters eat up.

[Fear_Itself]

Abolishing the alternative minimum tax will cost 1.2 TRILLION dollars over the next 10 years. No way is Trump going to make that up by plugging loopholes and chasing down fraud. But they will take the tax cut first, and blame the ballooning deficit on the Democrats, because that’s what low information voters will believe.

[RTFirefly]

@Fear_Itself

Abolishing the alternative minimum tax will cost 1.2 TRILLION dollars over the next 10 years. No way is Trump going to make that up by plugging loopholes and chasing down fraud. But they will take the tax cut first, and blame the ballooning deficit on the Democrats, because that’s what low information voters will believe.

Besides, deficits only matter when a Democrat is in the White House.

[not_what_you_d_expect]

Who cares about deficits. He’ll just have the USA file bankruptcy a few times.

Easy Peasy.

[inscrutable]

@BobLibDem

This part is moronic. Often the capital gains in the estate were NEVER taxed. You buy a stock for $1000 and when you die 40 years later it’s worth $1 million. Tax was never paid on those gains. So where is the logic in letting the heir get a tax-free windfall?

Where is the logic in letting the government get the windfall?

[GIGObuster]

@inscrutable

Where is the logic in letting the government get the windfall?

IMHO they should also pay a bit for the defence of the nation, it includes also the power of the state (not just the military, but it is the police what I’m talking about here) that did and does protect that property, not to mention the protection of the people that owns more of it. That is the logic.

[inscrutable]

@GIGObuster

IMHO they should also pay a bit for the defence of the nation, it includes also the power of the state (not just the military, but it is the police what I’m talking about here) that did and does protect that property, not to mention the protection of the people that owns more of it. That is the logic.

But the decedent would have already paid income tax on the $1000 he used to buy the stock. Why should he (through his heirs) be penalized for being a prudent and responsible saver/investor?

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@inscrutable

But the decedent would have already paid income tax on the $1000 he used to buy the stock. Why should he (through his heirs) be penalized for being a prudent and responsible saver/investor?

Let’s go to the quarry and throw stuff down there! You really think it’s the dead guy getting taxed? Seriously?

[GIGObuster]

@inscrutable

But the decedent would have already paid income tax on the $1000 he used to buy the stock. Why should he (through his heirs) be penalized for being a prudent and responsible saver/investor?

That part “he (through his heirs)” is where you lost me, and the argument was not good in the past either. The heirs are not the saver/investors, they will have to pay a bit to maintain the security of their state by the state.

Or just see how everything is lost once the time comes for many to go for the torches and the pitchforks.

[inscrutable]

@Snowboarder_Bo

Let’s go to the quarry and throw stuff down there! You really think it’s the dead guy getting taxed? Seriously?

Well, it wasn’t the heirs who invested in the stock. Why should they be taxed on the gain?

[GIGObuster]

@inscrutable

Well, it wasn’t the heirs who invested in the stock. Why should they be taxed on the gain?

It is then almost the same then as winning the lottery, and those gains are taxed indeed.

[inscrutable]

@GIGObuster

That part “he (through his heirs)” is where you lost me, and the argument was not good in the past either. The heirs are not the saver/investors, they will have to pay a bit to maintain the security of their state by the state.

Or just see how everything is lost once the time comes for many to go for the torches and the pitchforks.

The heirs already pay taxes on their own income. Why should they be billed for more just because their father wasn’t a dumb loser?

Torches and pitchforks? No thanks. When the time comes, I’ll side with the conservative gun-owners.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@inscrutable

The heirs already pay taxes on their own income. Why should they be billed for more just because their father wasn’t a dumb loser?

Mainly because the inheritance is income for the heirs.

[GIGObuster]

@inscrutable

The heirs already pay taxes on their own income. Why should they be billed for more just because their father wasn’t a dumb loser?

Torches and pitchforks? No thanks. When the time comes, I’ll side with the conservative gun-owners.

What makes you think the others will not have guns? Of course it will be the government that will keep the peace in the end so they will have to be paid.

[inscrutable]

@Snowboarder_Bo

Mainly because the inheritance is income for the heirs.

Income, or family property/heritage?
If a sixteen-pound, solid gold historical Hispanic icon has been handed down for generations, would you honestly expect the latest recipient to pay inheritance tax on it?
Good night.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@inscrutable

Income, or family property/heritage?
If a sixteen-pound, solid gold historical Hispanic icon has been handed down for generations, would you honestly expect the latest recipient to pay inheritance tax on it?

Is that what the vast majority of people are getting as an inheritance? Historical icons made of solid gold? :dubious:

[bengangmo]

@Snowboarder_Bo

Mainly because the inheritance is income for the heirs.

Not unless it’s cash.

Property / Stocks / Family Heirlooms only become income if / when they are sold.

Why not charge tax as some form of capital gains / income tax at the point when the inheritance is liquidated?