Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Businesses Government The Almighty Buck United States

Bad News If You Make $150,000 to $300,000: Higher Taxes for Many (wsj.com) 483

From a WSJ report: If President Donald Trump sticks to what he has said, Americans earning between $149,400 and $307,900 are most likely to see an increase in their taxes as a result of tax reform (Editor's note: the link could be paywalled). Those figures come from a recent study by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group in Washington, and are based on Mr. Trump's statements and proposals. The study concludes that nearly one-third of about 19 million households in that income range could see tax increases averaging from $3,000 to $4,000 a year. By contrast, less than 10% of households earning the least or the most -- below $25,000 or above $733,000 -- would owe more after a tax overhaul. Over all, the study found that about 20% of taxpayers would owe more after tax reform than before it. The issue of tax reform's winners and losers has resurfaced after top congressional Republicans and the Trump administration released a set of broad principles for tax policy on Thursday containing few details.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Bad News If You Make $150,000 to $300,000: Higher Taxes for Many

Comments Filter:
  • About time (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Billly Gates ( 198444 ) on Saturday July 29, 2017 @04:16AM (#54902713) Journal

    You all voted for conservative politicians in the States who ran on cut now pay later starting with Reagan and vodoo economics.

    Later is here! No it is not Obama's fault. It is yours and your parents. The banks need their money and it is not fair for the rest of us to pay higher taxes and no services for things like healthcare. Pay the piper man and in 30 years we can pay off the interest and $19,000,000,000,000!

    Oh and lets blame it on the liberals so you can keep your nice home? Well expect a dollar crash and Great Depression 2.0 as the value of the dollar is nothing because the credit built on a house of cards for tax cuts and spending increases comes crashing once bankers start demanding a return on their money.

  • Fake high salaries (Score:5, Interesting)

    by monkeyxpress ( 4016725 ) on Saturday July 29, 2017 @04:20AM (#54902719)

    As a higher earner (well, when I'm not in startup mode), I don't actually have a problem with being taxed more - provided those that earn even more than me are not able to avoid the tax. The thing is, once you earn over about $100k, pretty much all your extra money is just going into bidding up the prices of a limited pool of assets such as housing. This doesn't benefit you or your fellow high earners, because if we can't build more, say, London housing when a rickety Victorian hovel costs over $1 million, then bidding up the prices to even more ridiculous levels isn't going to deal with the fundamental supply issue. All that happens is a parasite class forms around these things, consisting of speculators, gamblers and real estate agents. The same houses are still being traded between the same pool of high earners.

    If we had higher taxes, then it would help to curb speculation activity by preventing this form of asset inflation, and governments could use the money to redirect economic resources towards, say, actually creating new housing supply through transport infrastructure or training new engineers and doctors. Of course there is a big if there, because the government could also just use those resources to create more bureaucracy, but that is probably still better than real estate agents.

    The big problem, though, is that once you move into the 0.1% nobody is paying any taxes. I mean, the wealthy are even quite open about this - its not some sort of conspiracy. The problem then is that if you just tax the upper middle income earners more, all you do is allow the ultra rich to hoover up all the assets off them even faster than they are doing now. It is a one way road towards neo-feudalism.

    There is no easy solution. Probably a land tax would help, but that is almost impossible to achieve politically. France tried a wealth tax, and London is now stuffed full of rich French people. An aggressive death tax is probably the best solution, but again this is incredibly hard to achieve politically. Of course the natural solution is a revolution where the masses just confiscate everything. I really hope we can avoid this.

    • by tinkerton ( 199273 ) on Saturday July 29, 2017 @05:51AM (#54902887)

      I really hope we can avoid this.

      The current approach to avoiding this seems to be to install a huge surveillance system 'against terrorists'. Then, everyone who opposes the excessive concentration of wealth and power will become a terrorist. Done.

      I think taxing the rich can be done to some extent. There are two arguments against it that are not entirely sincere. One is that the rich will run away. That's partly true and partly a trick from people who would like you to believe that. Another is that there's a threat of 'if you're well off they're going to take your money away' to scare everyone who has a bit of money. Actually you can put the threshold very high.

      It's also about more than taxing the very rich. The very rich are getting richer. The mechanism is working in the other direction. Laws are made that accelerate this.

    • by aaarrrgggh ( 9205 ) on Saturday July 29, 2017 @06:37AM (#54902977)

      The easy solution is to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction or phase it out on homes over the median price for a county. Couple that with some kind of measures to block investment interest deductions on specific types of property (much trickier), and the speculation incentive starts to erode.

    • As a higher earner (well, when I'm not in startup mode), I don't actually have a problem with being taxed more - provided those that earn even more than me are not able to avoid the tax.

      Well geez, lower incomes did just that without reservations.

    • We have land taxes, they are called property taxes. You pay them to your state and local government and they fund lots of stuff including schools.

    • There is no easy solution.

      A relatively easy solution is to tax corporate income, rather than profit.

    • If you want to fix something, don't eliminate the mortgage interest deduction (that actually encourages people to invest in their own assets), or increase the property tax rates (which are, effectively, land taxes). Rather, eliminate the capital gains exemption on primary properties. Right now, single filers get their first $250,000 in capital gains on sold primary properties ($500K for married filers) exempted from tax. We pay income tax on other forms of earnings from "savings" - but not on this. Make

    • Taxes should be flat and based on percentage of income and assets. Yet in the US (I can't speak for the UK) we have over 80,000 pages of tax code to benefit the wealthy and punish everyone else who earns money. Middle class people can't afford to read through the tax codes or hire legal staffs to do so for them, only the wealthy can (and that means the very wealthy, because a millionaire can't afford to either).

      Taxes are one of several reasons for the revolt in the 13 colonies and founding of a new count

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 29, 2017 @04:22AM (#54902721)

    The rich don't have income, they have capital gains. The rich also never learn. This will end badly. Very badly.

    • The rich do pay capital gains taxes [schwab.com]. Short term capital gains are taxed as regular income. Long term capital gains are still taxed once you make more than $40K per year. And the long term capital gains tax rate starts at a rate equivalent to the average tax rate of the top 50% [taxfoundation.org] - surprisingly close to where that $40K income would put you...

      The rich do pay taxes on capital gains, but I understand it makes GREAT political theater to claim otherwise! It's great to ignore $716 billion [taxpolicycenter.org] in capital gains taxe

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 29, 2017 @04:48AM (#54902769)

    It's called "trickle-down economy". You asked for it, you got it. Staying rich becomes easier, getting rich harder.

  • by Max_W ( 812974 ) on Saturday July 29, 2017 @05:03AM (#54902785)
    The current model of governance was created as an alternative to a monarchy centuries ago. And it is time to start to think how to modernize it.

    I have got an impression that the "elected" officials represent mostly themselves.
    • What do you mean "modernize"? I am cautious about this line of reasoning because these days phrases like "new ideas" are often used to refer to things that aren't new at all but aren't common because they have failed (like Marxism). Our founding fathers were extremely wise and understood human nature well. Human nature hasn't changed since then.

      Our system of government is surprisingly well designed. Most of the fault lies in the voting population. So if your solution is some sort of direct democracy I

      • Only theoretically though since local governments are shit too.

        • The way we vote sucks. Ending FPTP will result in more populist governments. These have their own problems, but we've gone too far down the road of republicanism to the point where the People have very little autonomy themselves, not even to select their leaders. That's sort of the central premise of Trumpism, that by doing this thing that all these establishment types hate, they must be having a real effect on the country. I almost wish it could be true.

          We've been researching and theorizing about how best

  • ..if his proposals go through, I'm looking at a refund about 10x what I was anticipating, with my obligation falling from 14,500 to ~10,000.

    As I loathe giving this government a single dime, I have to say I'm quite pleased with this potential outcome.

  • by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Saturday July 29, 2017 @12:21PM (#54904205)

    Trump's policy statements are barely more relevant than they were during the Apprentice. Just look at what happened with health care, it's the congressional republicans driving legislation and Trump is essentially tweeting randomly based on clips he saw on TV.

    Now, when it comes to tax policy his personal beliefs, give rich people a tax cut, are in line with Republicans as a whole, and he might actually push a specific policy because it personally affects him. But I don't think he has the basic competency to impose that view on congress. Paul Ryan's view is the one that really matters.

If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton