Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
60 percent of those taking home between $150,000 and $300,000 will get a tax INCREASE
^^^^ Looks like many hard working people will be getting a tax INCREASE so that the billionaires with 7 expensive houses around the world and their own private jet can get massive tax cuts.
And it's all supported by rural, poorly educated and poor white conservatives. And this further illustrates why the Dumbing Down of America is deliberate, targeted, and highly successful.
Here is what irritates me. The proposal does not remove the real estate depreciation rule that land lords enjoy. They can depreciate their properties for tax purposes despite the fact that the real world value has increased. Homeowners cannot do that (unless they rent out the home).
I'm sure that number would be much much higher when redefined as $100k-$150k.
The lower middle and middle class folks who don't itemize may make out slightly ahead.
The wealthy will make out like bandits with the repeal of AMT, lowering of rates, and HUGE reduction in corporate tax. Many wealthy will now incorporate.
It's the hardworking American family with $100k-250k income, not yet subject to AMT, that has children and pays high state/local/property tax that will get screwed.
And I'll say this, many of us in that bucket who came from nothing, worked EXTREMELY HARD to get to that place. That is money that we use to send our kids to school or save so we can start to build our own wealth.
I am LIVID at the thought of having to pay thousands more a year so Trump and the wealthy donors can increase their already fat bottom line.
How can you be livid, when the bill hasn't even been written by congress yet
you are going to give your self a heart attack for nothing
the proposal has double or 'almost' double the standard deduction
I think the idea of streamlining the brackets 7 down to 3, while removing some of the deductions (that liberals are constantly complaining the rich over use) is a good thing..............
...............the real question is where these brackets start
many (including liberals) have said on here(CD) make the first 40k/ 60/ and I even saw a first 90k(believe it was gregw hopefully greg will validate my memory) tax free then start your brackets
so IF, yes IF..they start at 40k and go say to 200k for the 12%
....................................200k to 2 million for the 25%
and...............................2 million to infinity for the 30%
then a person making 63.9k, using the new std ded or 24k would have a '''taxable''' income of 39.9k...meaning ZERO TAX DUE
then a person making 73.9k, using the new std ded or 24k would have a '''taxable''' income of 49.9k...meaning 12% of 9.9k (the first 40k is zero) or 1188 tax due (or 22 per weekly pay check)
see the thing is we (and all the media that is making ASSUMPTIONS) don't know what the bracket levels will be.
so instead of bashing a proposal, why not contact your representative, explain how it would be best for the '''little guy''' if they set the starting bracket at 40k, or 50k, or 90k....let him even think its HIS IDEA
Here is what irritates me. The proposal does not remove the real estate depreciation rule that land lords enjoy. They can depreciate their properties for tax purposes despite the fact that the real world value has increased. Homeowners cannot do that (unless they rent out the home).
All property depreciates. It's the cost of housing that increases, by what percentage, it depends on the location and demand for that property.
correct if it is set at 26k...but we don't know where they will set these brackets at, or where they will start at
currently
single
income 0-9,325..........10%
9,325-37,950.............15%
37,950-91,900...........25%
91,900-191,650.........28%
191,650- 416,700......33%
416,700-418,400.......35%(not even sure why this bracket is so small)
418,400+..................39.6%
married
income 0-18,650..........10%
18,650-75,900.............15%
75,900-153,100...........25%
153,100-233,350.........28%
233,350- 416,700......33%
416,700-470,700.......35%(not even sure why this bracket is so small but not as small as single)
470,700+..................39.6%
HOH
10%....$0 to $13,350
15%....$13,350 to $50,800
25%....$50,800 to $131,200
28%....$131,200 to $212,500
33%....$212,500 to $416,700
35%.....$416,700 to $444,500 (again this is a small bracket)
39.60%..$444,550+
its crazy having 7 brackets and starting at $0
The small 35% bracket is primarily due to the fiscal cliff/tax deal made for 2013. The 39.6% bracket was put back into place at $400,000 single/ $425,000 HOH/ $450,000 married filing jointly. This was slightly above what the previous 35% bracket was slated to start at as per the CPI index, so a small bracket wound up being created.
Why are we allowing people with so many kids to short change the federal govt coffers? Why are we allowing high COL and high tax states to short change the federal coffers. I'll bet its the same people that someone else needs to pay more.
As I always say, never cheer when someone else is forced to pay more taxes because sooner or later it may end up kicking you in the arse. And here we are.
Those in the high cost states are already sending more than they get back.
As far as kids, all it takes is ONE dependent to have a higher taxable income under the new proposal than the current one, even for those who currently take the standard deduction. Those with two dependents will see their taxable income rise by more than it will decrease for anyone with zero dependents.
Here is what irritates me. The proposal does not remove the real estate depreciation rule that land lords enjoy. They can depreciate their properties for tax purposes despite the fact that the real world value has increased. Homeowners cannot do that (unless they rent out the home).
Depreciation recapture is the USA IRS procedure for collecting income tax on a gain realized by a taxpayer when the taxpayer disposes of an asset that had previously provided an offset to ordinary income for the taxpayer through depreciation. In other words, because the IRS allows a taxpayer to deduct the depreciation of an asset from the taxpayer’s ordinary income, the taxpayer has to report any gain from the disposal of the asset (up to the recomputed basis) as ordinary income, not as a capital gain.
Those in the high cost states are already sending more than they get back.
As far as kids, all it takes is ONE dependent to have a higher taxable income under the new proposal than the current one, even for those who currently take the standard deduction. Those with two dependents will see their taxable income rise by more than it will decrease for anyone with zero dependents.
Their money is going to state and local taxes and the federal govt is being shortchanged. Maybe you should have stopped screaming someone else needs to pay more (to make up for the short)while you were ahead.
The child care tax credit "Families in this country will also benefit from tax relief to help them with child and dependent care expenses." there's speculation, thanks to reporting from The Washington Post, that the White House is considering a boost to the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, which allows parents to cut up to $2,100 from their tax bill for spending on child care.
Their money is going to state and local taxes and the federal govt is being shortchanged. Maybe you should have stopped screaming someone else needs to pay more (to make up for the short)while you were ahead.
The child care tax credit "Families in this country will also benefit from tax relief to help them with child and dependent care expenses." there's speculation, thanks to reporting from The Washington Post, that the White House is considering a boost to the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, which allows parents to cut up to $2,100 from their tax bill for spending on child care.
State and local taxes, including property taxes, have been excluded throughout the history of U.S. federal income tax to prevent double taxation of the same income. Eliminating that deduction is a radical change in U.S. federal tax law.
The child tax credit will phase out around $110k, meaning most families making $100k-$250k that itemize will be royally screwed.
Did they say when they'll release the full details? I don't know what the timeline is or what we should be expecting next in this process.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
