Federal Income Tax Reform Proposal - Effect on Californians (private schools, calculation)

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by jbgusa

Exactly right. Besides Democratic whiners/politicians such as Pelosi and Schumer, my legal colleagues who are wealthier than me are screaming.

Not even close to being exactly right. The Middle Class in those areas, the same families that are equivalent to those making $50k-$75K in many areas of the country are the ones that truly get slammed. And that's not hard to figure out for those that understand basic math (clearly not a strong point for some on this forum).

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

My comment was snark because I get tired of hearing people say "Where's mine? What about me?"

Yes, the snark was obvious. I'm not sure if you read the article in the post about how our cable bills have risen to cover these "tax cuts." The response has nothing to do with "Where's mine?"

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Yes, the snark was obvious. I'm not sure if you read the article in the post about how our cable bills have risen to cover these "tax cuts." The response has nothing to do with "Where's mine?"

Well then, I interpreted your response incorrectly and I apologize. And yes, I did read your articles. I'm not defending corporations. They have plenty of money and just as it was written in one of the articles,

corporations get better and better at dodging the taxman, wages and salaries now occupy their lowest share of GDP since the second world war. Real wages have barely budged upward since 1980—and have fallen for the lowest-paid workers. Wall Street actively cheers against pay bumps: When American Airlines announced raises for pilots and flight attendants, the company’s stock fell 5 percent.

And then we're supposed to believe it when they say they will invest more into the company and their employees:

CEOs have long said that lower taxes would lead to more spending on capital expansion, R&D, and wages. But at a conference in November, Trump’s chief economic advisor Gary Cohn asked a room full of CEOs who was planning to invest more if the tax bill passed. Almost no one raised a hand. “Why aren’t the other hands up?” Cohn asked.

The answer is easy, they lie. But the majority of us know that. So, if these if these lower level employees receive a bit of money, even if it is a PR stunt, I say good for them. Tax reform is a joke when it comes to the middle income earner. Historically, they've paid the most in taxes because they don't have all the loopholes that corporations do. If anyone can find a way to change that, I'll support them. Until then, I'll just be glad for the guy or gal who gets a few bread crumbs thrown their way. Again, sorry for offending you.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

Well then, I interpreted your response incorrectly and I apologize.

It's okay; thanks, HOM. You're always so polite, anyway!

[CA4Now]

A new tax regime is on its way. Here’s how Californians can adjust:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-...190643189.html

CHART: How The Final Version Of The Republican Tax Bill Would Affect You:
https://www.npr.org/2017/12/15/57125...uld-affect-you

[NewHomer556]

Californian's are really screwed. Their taxes are so high its ridiculous. I moved to Carmel Indiana 2 years ago and I easily save $15,000+ on my taxes yearly and another $10,000+ on basic cost of living expenses like housing, food, utilities etc.
So glad I moved because this tax reform will benefit me here as opposed to if I remained in California.

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by NewHomer556

Californian's are really screwed. Their taxes are so high its ridiculous. I moved to Carmel Indiana 2 years ago and I easily save $15,000+ on my taxes yearly and another $10,000+ on basic cost of living expenses like housing, food, utilities etc.
So glad I moved because this tax reform will benefit me here as opposed to if I remained in California.

Yep, no brainer on that one. We're outta there too. My clients told me my timing couldn't have been better. I'll get my final itemized deductions this year and then start living in a lower COL. But glad to rent our house out to people that just can't bear to live outside of the Bay Area.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by NewHomer556

Californian's are really screwed. Their taxes are so high its ridiculous. I moved to Carmel Indiana 2 years ago and I easily save $15,000+ on my taxes yearly and another $10,000+ on basic cost of living expenses like housing, food, utilities etc.
So glad I moved because this tax reform will benefit me here as opposed to if I remained in California.

I live in California and the SALT limit doesn't impact me a bit, nor does it impact most of my neighbors or friends. California is a big state and home prices in many areas are quite affordable.

I'm glad you are happy in Indiana but I am skeptical that you are saving $15,000 a year on tax and $10,000 on housing, food and utilities annually, could you provide the figures you used to arrive at that?

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

A new tax regime is on its way. Here’s how Californians can adjust:
New tax law limits Californians' ability to prepay, other hacks | The Sacramento Bee

CHART: How The Final Version Of The Republican Tax Bill Would Affect You:
https://www.npr.org/2017/12/15/57125...uld-affect-you

There are strategies that blue states might be able to use to mitigate the damage caused by the new tax law, and if they are successful this scam of a tax plan will fail and republicans may well find themselves at that table negotiating changes to their bill

Charitable gifts One tactic: Allow residents to make charitable gifts to the state instead of paying income tax. That would involve legislators encouraging residents to donate to, say, New Jersey (insert quip here), instead of paying income taxes. The self-interested philanthropists who took up the state on the offer would receive a state income-tax credit for the full amount of their gift, which would qualify for a federal deduction.

Channeling collections into payroll taxes would also allow both itemizers and non-itemizers to benefit, and states would keep more money within their borders. States with progressive income-tax rates would need to devise a system of tax credits to make payroll taxes hit the right rates.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...salt-deduction

And this might be the push California voters to change prop 13 to exclude commercial property, or at least tax it at a higher rate. If that was done property tax on residential property could probably be reduced.

[BBMW]

I'm pretty sure in order to be considered charitable gifts, they'd have to be voluntary. How many people would voluntarily pay taxes, especially in the amounts the government of California (and it's localities) demand.

And S&L payroll tax deductions would also be subject to the cap.

Both of these are non-starters.

Look for a mass migration from blue states to red states.

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

There are strategies that blue states might be able to use to mitigate the damage caused by the new tax law, and if they are successful this scam of a tax plan will fail and republicans may well find themselves at that table negotiating changes to their bill

Charitable gifts One tactic: Allow residents to make charitable gifts to the state instead of paying income tax. That would involve legislators encouraging residents to donate to, say, New Jersey (insert quip here), instead of paying income taxes. The self-interested philanthropists who took up the state on the offer would receive a state income-tax credit for the full amount of their gift, which would qualify for a federal deduction.

Channeling collections into payroll taxes would also allow both itemizers and non-itemizers to benefit, and states would keep more money within their borders. States with progressive income-tax rates would need to devise a system of tax credits to make payroll taxes hit the right rates.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...salt-deduction

And this might be the push California voters to change prop 13 to exclude commercial property, or at least tax it at a higher rate. If that was done property tax on residential property could probably be reduced.