This needs to occur ---- there's no way that a person making $750k or more per year should be getting a tax cut.
"Also, the drop in the top rate to 35% from 39.6% may not stick. The framework gives tax legislators the "flexibility" to add a fourth rate above 35% to ensure reform keeps the tax code at least as progressive as the current system."
(10-02-2017, 10:45 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]This needs to occur ---- there's no way that a person making $750k or more per year should be getting a tax cut.
"Also, the drop in the top rate to 35% from 39.6% may not stick. The framework gives tax legislators the "flexibility" to add a fourth rate above 35% to ensure reform keeps the tax code at least as progressive as the current system."
Yes, yes they should.
(10-02-2017, 02:01 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (10-02-2017, 10:45 AM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ]This needs to occur ---- there's no way that a person making $750k or more per year should be getting a tax cut.
"Also, the drop in the top rate to 35% from 39.6% may not stick. The framework gives tax legislators the "flexibility" to add a fourth rate above 35% to ensure reform keeps the tax code at least as progressive as the current system."
Yes, yes they should.
Disagree. What you don't see is the fact that someone making $1m+ per year is making a killing on stock options, bonuses, and most likely is itemizing their deductions to the extent they are paying less of a tax rate than the average Joe making $100k per year. There are a lot of tax shelters in place (e.g. home office, ways to report losses from investments, etc.) that the multi-millionaires are already taking advantage of without having to lower their starting rate.
Answer me this, How does taxing The Rich at a higher rate affect your life? They already pay 81% of all federal taxes collected
(10-02-2017, 04:11 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Answer me this, How does taxing The Rich at a higher rate affect your life? They already pay 81% of all federal taxes collected
I'm just stating don't decrease their 39% rate, keep it the same.
... regarding their current rate however, as I noted in my prior post, top executives are allotted massive stock options, get more in matching 401k, etc. so there are numerous other offsets to their 39% rate. I'm just stating don't decrease their tax as this point in time. Given the increase in the Dow and Housing Market, there's no need to give them a 4% benefit.
Why should the government take 40% of someone's income?
Reduce spending, reduce taxes.
(10-02-2017, 04:54 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Why should the government take 40% of someone's income?
Reduce spending, reduce taxes.
Exactly, this whole "have more, pay more" crap is communistic bull [BLEEP].
(10-02-2017, 02:51 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: [ -> ] (10-02-2017, 02:01 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, yes they should.
Disagree. What you don't see is the fact that someone making $1m+ per year is making a killing on stock options, bonuses, and most likely is itemizing their deductions to the extent they are paying less of a tax rate than the average Joe making $100k per year. There are a lot of tax shelters in place (e.g. home office, ways to report losses from investments, etc.) that the multi-millionaires are already taking advantage of without having to lower their starting rate.
What you dont see is that I dont agree with progressive taxation or taxes based on income.
Tax the middles classes, eat/burn the poor for energy and leave the rich be.
(10-02-2017, 04:11 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]Answer me this, How does taxing The Rich at a higher rate affect your life? They already pay 81% of all federal taxes collected
They have more to be taxed, so it doesn't effect them as much. Just make them pay the same percentage on their income as everyone else. Everyone should pay a flat tax and then it will be fair.
(10-02-2017, 04:54 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]Why should the government take 40% of someone's income?
Reduce spending, reduce taxes.
Because certain politicians refuse to reduce overspending via national defense, even though we already spend more than the next 8 countries combined.