As last year, it does come out to be about even for me and I'm fine with taxes being simpler to file.
OT: Income tax changes
- Thread starter ArmyTiger27
- Start date
If you cannot afford a house without your federal deduction. Then you cannot afford a house.
This. All these deductions need to go away. It should be simple for people to understand.
I will report back after I file
I’m close to finished paying off my house, so I’m probabky taking the standard deduction
I’m close to finished paying off my house, so I’m probabky taking the standard deduction
The other thing is the Child tax credit was expanded to now include most folks..many who werent eligible before.
As long as married joint AGI is below $400k you qualify (used to be 150k) and the credit doubled from $1k to $2k per child
As long as married joint AGI is below $400k you qualify (used to be 150k) and the credit doubled from $1k to $2k per child
We expect to save five figures as a result of the new tax law due to some combination of generally lower tax brackets, softening of the marriage penalty, elimination of AMT and preferred treatment of pass through income.
We will still itemize even with the new standard deduction. Eliminating the SALT deduction is the biggest negative for us. Otherwise, we would save a ton more.
All in all, we expect the law to be a nice success for the scotchtiger household.
We will still itemize even with the new standard deduction. Eliminating the SALT deduction is the biggest negative for us. Otherwise, we would save a ton more.
All in all, we expect the law to be a nice success for the scotchtiger household.
What most people miss is that although the standard deduction for married is a net gain of $12,000, the exemptions are eliminated which results in a loss of slightly over $8,000 for those filing married. IMO the failure to mention the loss of personal exemptions is intentional by those supporting the “tax cut.” By the way, I did my federal taxes yesterday. I paid about a $1000 less. I had itemized in previous years and the return took about 10% of the time. I think more people should consider doing their own taxes with the help of software. I have not done my state taxes. SC made changes to adapt the IRS changes and understand there will be winners and losers.
That was my experience. Major benefits will be to those have pass through incomes from self-owned businesses.
You continue to say a lot of us and other than @Cris_Ard and Lucas Glover, that I am aware, that post on this board that earns 8 figures a year, who else are these multi-millionaires that posts on this board? I'm not at the level yet so I need to do some networking.
You do know that the proposed 70% tax rate (which would never happen) would only apply to people making $10 million a year or more? Or did you fall for the Sean Hannity propaganda having you to believe it would apply to "a lot of us"?
Still waiting on @Cris_Ard to confirm or deny! What gives? And forgot about @Larry_Williams because he is aspiring to be on the New York's Best Sellers list.
Well yeah, you're the person the tax bill was supposed to help. Not the normies.
The Sixteenth Amendment to the Constitution significantly hurts your argument re: constitutionality
All of the people complaining about the SALT reductions are ridiculous. I get that you don't want to pay them, heck, I wish someone else would pay my taxes for me as well. Still, the fact that the rest of the country has been paying your local/state taxes is asinine. You people need to start hammering your state and local governments about that. They are the ones taxing you, not the federal govt.
There is absolutely no reason I should be paying someone else's taxes because they chose to live in an area where the state and local govt rape them financially. This is long overdue. If you want to live somewhere that has more/better infrastructure, museums, libraries, parks, and an overall higher standard of living, I have no problem with that. Just don't expect the rest of the country to pay for it. You live there, you pay for it.
Edit to say that I am aware that no federal tax revue is actually used to pay for any state or local taxes. Still, reducing federal taxes on those who chose to live in areas with enormous state/local tax burdens is not justifiable, imo.
There is absolutely no reason I should be paying someone else's taxes because they chose to live in an area where the state and local govt rape them financially. This is long overdue. If you want to live somewhere that has more/better infrastructure, museums, libraries, parks, and an overall higher standard of living, I have no problem with that. Just don't expect the rest of the country to pay for it. You live there, you pay for it.
Edit to say that I am aware that no federal tax revue is actually used to pay for any state or local taxes. Still, reducing federal taxes on those who chose to live in areas with enormous state/local tax burdens is not justifiable, imo.
Last edited:
Not understanding that the rates are only applied to the net taxable income is why something like this gets approved. Allow me to establish the deduction which determines amount subject to tax and I will gladly lower the rate while simultaneously increasing what you pay.
I just think that any time we assume government is better equipped and can more efficiently take care of elderly parents, disabled adults, charity organizations than an individual can is simply wrong. I just thought a Republican tax reform would have sought to empower citizens to make those decisions- I was wrong. Just one reason I am now a recovering former Republican.
It will apply to the job creators. There are lots of us. We will be hit hard and be forced to move overseas. Then the socialists will see what happens!
AOC is too immature to be making economic policy!
State taxes have never been paid by others, the deduction simply prevented DOUBLE taxation- which was a premise and promise dating from the establishment of the federal income tax.
Trust me, I don’t live in a place that actually invests in its community- I live in SC.
I would suggest that the folks tat are being subsidized are those using the 24k standard deduction that have significantly less itemized deductions. Want fair? Scrap all deductions tax all income regardless of source, lower the rates, create more brackets and set the revenue targets based on a federal budget on a strict diet that doesn’t get to subsidize individual groups.
I've never cared for the "double taxation" argument. For a moment, let's ignore the fact that whenever we buy something we're paying sales tax, income tax on the money we used and paying an increased price on the item because of corporate taxes, property taxes, et al. Why is "double taxation" fundamentally a problem?
I would be in favor of this. Also would probably be in favor of some sort of federal sales tax that exempted staple goods such as groceries so the impact on the truly poor would be minimal.
Follow the thought to it’s natural conclusion, allowed to increase independent of each other taxes would eventually consume 100% of all income and a tax authority would always place the blame on the “other” taxing authority. Allowing credits for taxes paid to subordinate authorities places the onus on the higher authority to either adjust rates or rein in subordinate taxing authorities.
So in our 250+ years of allowing double taxation, we still haven't reach the natural conclusion? I'm pretty skeptical of your argument.
I don’t think people need Sean Hannity to explain a 70% tax rate on any income is complete horse shite.
First, fed income tax is about 100 years old and initially very small and has always (until now) excludedlocal and state taxes, so double taxes on income are an emerging issue.
Explain how two demanders of your income are ultimately restrained without placing mutual constraints on both. They most assuredly won’t limit their demands in light of the other unless required to do so.
They are restrained by economics and taxation not existing in a vacuum.
No what is absolutely horse crap is for a middle class person to be paying 22% of their income in taxes and a billionaire only paying 16% of their income. Which one of these people do you think is being affected more? I will bet my house you are closer to the middle income bracket than you are the billionaire bracket, but yet you defend the billionaire's bank account?
This. I don't come out a winner. I am probably in a similar situation to @ArmyTiger27 . I itemized a good bit already between tithes, other charitable giving, mortgage interest, Iptay dues, unreimbursed business expenses, etc. so increasing the standard deduction didnt do anything for me. We also don't have kids, so no benefit there.
In fact, when you take away my wife's ability to deduct her unreimbursed business expenses (she is in sales and the amount was significant) and Iptay dues, etc. I am losing a great deal of ability to deduct because those were items that would still be above the $24k standard deduction that I wont get credit for when I itemize. I pretty much exceeded the increase in standard deduction with just tithing and mortgage interest, but taking those unreimbursed business expenses and Iptay dues off the top hurt.
If you didnt itemize before because you didnt give much to charity, have much mortgage interest, tithe, give to Iptay or have unreimbursed job expenses, then you are gaining a little. If you are a very wealthy person or corporation, you are very happy. Meanwhile I will see no benefit while I watch deficit spending increase substantially to around $1 Trillion annually and growing.
I am quite anxious and have set aside some funds in case I have to pay a lot in. My top rate is certainly lower but only 1/3 of my SALT is now deductible. And none of IPTAY. I hope it is a wash but I expect I will be hurt. Luckily when I retire my income will go away and i won’t care
Same here. I fully expect to grab my ankles on 4/15.
I drove 60k this past year. The deduction doesn't come close to off-setting that amount of miles.
I mean, I guess it makes sense to help the folks who were getting drilled by higher effective tax rates.
So magic dust? They exist in a political world, both groups will tax to appease their favored political group. I agine 2 thieves trying to make their mob bosses happy and get their kickbacks, when will the thieves have enough of your money?
I already explained to you how we have been double taxed for forever. Even if you only want to go since income tax has become a thing, we've been paying sales tax, corporate taxes, property taxes, and income taxes for 100 years. How is taxing income fundamentally different?
For the record, I don't believe you or I have ever been "drilled' by our effective tax rates. I don't think it makes sense to lower already low taxes just for the sake of doing it.
Something has been keeping them from taking all of our money for thousands of years. Call it magic dust or the principles of efficient taxation. You're the one who's claiming that suddenly, after literally thousands of years of taxation, all of our money is going to be taxed. Somehow.
