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.
They SHOULD be paying closer to their fair share of the federal income tax. Formerly, their high state tax deductions let them duck paying federal income tax on those amounts, disproportionately so as compared to those who live in lower tax states who didn't get such a high deduction.
So far we've gotten "the size of my return check is smaller but I'm not telling you the change in total tax I paid" from the twitter crew.
They're usually incapable of computing that, or even recognizing that as the line item it is on one's US 1040. And I'm sorry that's true; it's NOT a good thing.
1. Because they voted for these local taxes themselves, so they should pay for them.
2. No reason why people in other states should subsidize high local tax states.
3. No reason why the Federal government should reward states for increasing their local taxes. This is just bad practice regardless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss
People at the lower and middle income levels have less, while the Top 1% have way more.
False narrative again. People at the lower income levels do not itemize in the first place. If you didn't itemize previously, your taxes should've gone down a lot under the Trump plan across the board, even in high tax states.
Middle middle class will do ok - the ones getting shafted are lower to low middle class, especially if they don’t have child credits and so on.
That depends on the state. In most states lower middle class will do ok as well. Majority of the people getting hit are the top 20% of income earners, proportionally from the higher tax states.
Middle middle class will do ok - the ones getting shafted are lower to low middle class, especially if they don’t have child credits and so on.
Why is that? Because that group was never mentioned in any of the assessments of the tax cuts I've read from a variety of sources.
It would be incredibly helpful if you were to give some sort of actual examples with your claims.
As it stands, most of the twitter stuff quite frankly is from innumerate millenials. (I have a bunch in my life and many of them are mathematically and economically and financially illiterate.)
I mean I totally get the impact on corporations and the deduction cap, regardless of how we feel about those. But NOT the claims of the poorer getting hit.
P.S. Won't do mine for a while yet. I figure I'll more or less break even since I have pretty vanilla taxes with standard deduction these days.
That is a mistake. The record high is on one side of the ledger. It is more then offset by the corporate side which is historically low. The tax cuts have done more harm to the ability to spend then fully understood.
People at the lower and middle income levels have less, while the Top 1% have way more. Corporations are not spending on areas where they used to get large tax breaks.
Between Trump's tax cuts and his tariffs we are watching a slow turn in the economy. Most resent unemployment now at 4% and U6 went up a half percent to 8.5%
Corporations are making huge profits and it is not being seen.
Trickle down is failing again.
And taking away the itemized deductions from the middle class didn't help EITHER. It certainly didn't help me
Fed shouldn't be subsidizing the states bad decisions, high tax and regulation causing a high COL.
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.