Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Latest updates to GOP tax draft bill

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    We had a president get impeached for lying about getting a hummer in the oval office.  Do you honestly believe if Trump were to testify under oath he wouldn't do the same exact thing?

    Comment


    • #77
      Ran my 2017 tax outlook with the current PROPOSAL. Even though I live in a no income tax state (I do use the state SALES tax deduction), my taxes still go UP but by less than $200/0.5%.

      Biggest personal hit is the no self employment health insurance premium deduction (this is correct, right?). I make good EM pay in the South. I give greater than 10%.

      I don't see any doctor who doesn't give to charity getting a significant tax break.

      For my EM colleagues in NY/CA is lower pay, HCOL, and now this at least proposed $10k tax hike worth it? Flyover country isn't that bad

      Even though I don't benefit from the proposal, I support reducing deductions across the board. Even the charitable deduction (left alone in this proposal) I think encourages bad charity but wouldn't personally affect my giving.

      The most concerning thing to me is the definition of a business which still seems muddy / encourages cheating. How about defining it as having at least 1 employee who is not in your family? This makes sense because reduction in taxes for businesses is always made in hopes of increasing employment opportunities. Once again this would exclude my sole proprietorship but would make an even playing field. Even playing field = lower taxes on the average but the debate on its level of progressiveness still would exist.

      Comment


      • #78




        Ran my 2017 tax outlook with the current PROPOSAL. Even though I live in a no income tax state (I do use the state SALES tax deduction), my taxes still go UP but by less than $200/0.5%.

        Biggest personal hit is the no self employment health insurance premium deduction (this is correct, right?). I make good EM pay in the South. I give greater than 10%.

        I don’t see any doctor who doesn’t give to charity getting a significant tax break.

        For my EM colleagues in NY/CA is lower pay, HCOL, and now this at least proposed $10k tax hike worth it? Flyover country isn’t that bad ????

        Even though I don’t benefit from the proposal, I support reducing deductions across the board. Even the charitable deduction (left alone in this proposal) I think encourages bad charity but wouldn’t personally affect my giving.

        The most concerning thing to me is the definition of a business which still seems muddy / encourages cheating. How about defining it as having at least 1 employee who is not in your family? This makes sense because reduction in taxes for businesses is always made in hopes of increasing employment opportunities. Once again this would exclude my sole proprietorship but would make an even playing field. Even playing field = lower taxes on the average but the debate on its level of progressiveness still would exist.
        Click to expand...


        I dont think the small business rules were that difficult or complex, they made a lot of sense and will not be easily gamed at all. They presupposed that all income is labor and the onus is on you to prove its not. Now, we can definitely say that if they were to really be trying to help small business and not large corporates, maybe they should have some kind of separate rate for actual small businesses or professional firms.

        Comment


        • #79
          Who will be able to get around this "onus"? Accountants and lawyers yes, doctors no.

          Comment


          • #80









             
            Click to expand…


            It’s cuckoo when things are wildly speculative.  There is more evidence, for example, that the DNC engaged in campaign finance violations with the dossier they funded.  For the record I have stances that land on both sides of the political aisle but find myself more libertarian than anything else (with important caveats).  Anything that makes people accountable for their actions, charges people for the negative externalities they create, and supports the free market I tend to support heavily.  As for the Obamacare 529 thing, of course I had a problem with it.  Why?  Because he failed to understand that the wealthy, who preferentially benefit from the 529 program, subsidize other students when universities engage in price discrimination.  So the parents not only pay a higher marginal tax rate on the money they put away for education, but they have to pay the full sticker price for their children’s education so other kids can learn on the cheap.  That’s effectively getting taxed twice (and at a substantially higher rate), so anything that corrects that absurdity tends to be ok in my book, including the 529.  Government loans have created this student loan mess.  The less they’re involved the better.
            Click to expand…


            If you are comparing this to the rapidly escalating story of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia + the now innumerable connections between the two that were systematically lied about by everyone including the President, then you are simply incorrect.

            For every action by someone you kind of like, there is simply not automatically an equal and opposite reaction by someone you don’t.

             
            Click to expand...


            I'm not comparing anything.  I was calling out the ludicrous claims that impeachment is on the horizon or warranted with the current known facts.  Also, bringing up the fact that the "other side" has equally damning things that have come out (and since I posted my last reply as well) isn't engaging in whataboutism - it was to highlight your bias.  You're complaining of Trump but seem to give a pass to the other side, which is laughable.  They were both terrible candidates, and all the facts that have come forward since the election have done nothing but prove that point.  Perhaps they were not equally bad, but it seems to me you're really pissed about a giant douche and happy with a turd sandwich.

            Comment


            • #81













              Wow.  People have gone political cuckoo here.  There is no basis for impeachment at this point, and all evidence at this point does not point to this as a likely event.  Regarding this being a plan for the ultra rich, that is preposterous.  What was posted in the OP was a segment of the overall tax plan, was it not?  If you’re going to say it only benefits the ultra wealthy then you’ve seemingly purposely neglected the other aspects of the plan.  The estate tax is immoral, regardless of who it benefits.  Repealing that can be justified on those grounds alone.  As for repealing the deductions, I’m fully in favor of all deductions going away.  All they do is create market distortions that don’t make people realize the full cost of whatever is being deducted. Think this had nothing to do with the housing crisis?  People living in high tax states that want to provide any and all services under the sun are being subsidized by all Americans in the form of foregone revenue, which essentially translates into our national debt.  These deductions account for hundreds of billions in foregone revenue.  And repealing them is by no means immoral.  In fact it brings things back to more normal market function.
              Click to expand…


              It’s not cuckoo dude. Zaphod and I were both clearly up last night and start talking a little politics.

              We’re not saying it only benefits the ultra wealthy, we’re saying it’s tilted towards them in a way that is telling.

              From prior discussions you sound like a pretty conservative guy. Were you happy when Obama briefly proposed shutting down the 529?
              Click to expand…


              It’s cuckoo when things are wildly speculative.  There is more evidence, for example, that the DNC engaged in campaign finance violations with the dossier they funded.  For the record I have stances that land on both sides of the political aisle but find myself more libertarian than anything else (with important caveats).  Anything that makes people accountable for their actions, charges people for the negative externalities they create, and supports the free market I tend to support heavily.  As for the Obamacare 529 thing, of course I had a problem with it.  Why?  Because he failed to understand that the wealthy, who preferentially benefit from the 529 program, subsidize other students when universities engage in price discrimination.  So the parents not only pay a higher marginal tax rate on the money they put away for education, but they have to pay the full sticker price for their children’s education so other kids can learn on the cheap.  That’s effectively getting taxed twice (and at a substantially higher rate), so anything that corrects that absurdity tends to be ok in my book, including the 529.  Government loans have created this student loan mess.  The less they’re involved the better.
              Click to expand…


              I dont get what that has to do with anything. They can all and should go to jail if any wrongdoing was done. Its ideological to think anything otherwise. Just because person A commits a crime it does not lessen person B’s crime, its ridiculous. They should all get in trouble. I’d love a clean sweep of all these corrupt people.

              Its not that speculative, lets see where this goes.
              Click to expand...


              The key word you use is "if".  I prefer to allow evidence to come forward and, I agree, if anything shows wrongdoing then destroy them all.  I never once stated or implied that one wrongdoing overturns or lessens another.  Many of the comments on the first page of this thread are just highly partisan without factual basis.  Kind of annoying for what could have been a more fact-based discussion of implications for physicians, our debt, etc.

              Comment


              • #82




                “You were proportionally benefiting more than other groups, something you seem to be vehemently opposed To”

                How was i proportionally benefitting more?

                I live in a place where a 100 year old 2500 sq foot house costs a million dollars and my state taxes are outrageous. I wasn’t benefitting proportionally more, the state and county were.

                And doctors already make less than the national average where I live.

                So please, go ahead and tell me how I’m freeloading off the government because I chose to live near my chronically ill parents
                Click to expand...


                If you were itemizing your taxes and getting deductions for those state taxes and property taxes then, yes, you were proportionally benefiting in the form of forgone tax revenues - more than people in low tax states.  This is, in part, why we have to take on hundreds of billions in national debt every year.  If you don't like your state and property taxes, you can move or vote someone into office who will lower taxes.  That is a choice you have as a human being and an American.  But until you do (assuming you itemize) then know you are not realizing the full cost of your living arrangements, even though you think they are ludicrously high.  The point is, it should be worse.

                Comment


                • #83












                   
                  Click to expand…


                  It’s cuckoo when things are wildly speculative.  There is more evidence, for example, that the DNC engaged in campaign finance violations with the dossier they funded.  For the record I have stances that land on both sides of the political aisle but find myself more libertarian than anything else (with important caveats).  Anything that makes people accountable for their actions, charges people for the negative externalities they create, and supports the free market I tend to support heavily.  As for the Obamacare 529 thing, of course I had a problem with it.  Why?  Because he failed to understand that the wealthy, who preferentially benefit from the 529 program, subsidize other students when universities engage in price discrimination.  So the parents not only pay a higher marginal tax rate on the money they put away for education, but they have to pay the full sticker price for their children’s education so other kids can learn on the cheap.  That’s effectively getting taxed twice (and at a substantially higher rate), so anything that corrects that absurdity tends to be ok in my book, including the 529.  Government loans have created this student loan mess.  The less they’re involved the better.
                  Click to expand…


                  If you are comparing this to the rapidly escalating story of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia + the now innumerable connections between the two that were systematically lied about by everyone including the President, then you are simply incorrect.

                  For every action by someone you kind of like, there is simply not automatically an equal and opposite reaction by someone you don’t.

                   
                  Click to expand…


                  I’m not comparing anything.  I was calling out the ludicrous claims that impeachment is on the horizon or warranted with the current known facts.  Also, bringing up the fact that the “other side” has equally damning things that have come out (and since I posted my last reply as well) isn’t engaging in whataboutism – it was to highlight your bias.  You’re complaining of Trump but seem to give a pass to the other side, which is laughable.  They were both terrible candidates, and all the facts that have come forward since the election have done nothing but prove that point.  Perhaps they were not equally bad, but it seems to me you’re really pissed about a giant douche and happy with a turd sandwich.
                  Click to expand...


                  I guess we can revisit this in 6 months and see who is crazy. If Mueller doesn't conclude what I think he will I will be fairly satisfied b/c I think he's honorable and credible. You're clearly very devoted to Trump and I guess that's fine. Would be interested to see if you would plant a few ethical flags publicly or if you'll just continue down the Hannity line all the way to "Russia did us a favor." Based on our limited interactions on this forum I have a guess.

                  The HRC "scandals" will continue to grow exactly alongside whatever comes out about Trump in your mind, that's not because of truth or reality, that's because that's how this works. Trump could be being led out of the WH in handcuffs and Fox will be talking about uranium.

                   

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I guess we'll take this to the lounge. Amazing how hard it is for people to discuss taxes and stay on topic.
                    Helping those who wear the white coat get a fair shake on Wall Street since 2011

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      This is getting depressing. I feel like I am just going to be tipping my wallet upside down and dumping my hard earned cash into Trump's pocket.  How big does a business have to be to get these tax breaks? Maybe all of us doctors need to form a BIG business.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        We all need to be vocal with our state representatives and let them know we oppose this bill.  Lobbying plays a big role in how they cast their votes.  Citizens being vocal is no small part in that process.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Can this bill even pass the house? The budget only passed the House by 4 votes, and that included some New York and New Jersey members who are guaranteed to lose their seats if they vote to eliminate the SALT deduction

                          Comment


                          • #88




                            Can this bill even pass the house? The budget only passed the House by 4 votes, and that included some New York and New Jersey members who are guaranteed to lose their seats if they vote to eliminate the SALT deduction
                            Click to expand...


                            not this bill no, I dont think any bill ever passes without some kind of adjustment.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                               















                               
                              Click to expand…


                              It’s cuckoo when things are wildly speculative.  There is more evidence, for example, that the DNC engaged in campaign finance violations with the dossier they funded.  For the record I have stances that land on both sides of the political aisle but find myself more libertarian than anything else (with important caveats).  Anything that makes people accountable for their actions, charges people for the negative externalities they create, and supports the free market I tend to support heavily.  As for the Obamacare 529 thing, of course I had a problem with it.  Why?  Because he failed to understand that the wealthy, who preferentially benefit from the 529 program, subsidize other students when universities engage in price discrimination.  So the parents not only pay a higher marginal tax rate on the money they put away for education, but they have to pay the full sticker price for their children’s education so other kids can learn on the cheap.  That’s effectively getting taxed twice (and at a substantially higher rate), so anything that corrects that absurdity tends to be ok in my book, including the 529.  Government loans have created this student loan mess.  The less they’re involved the better.
                              Click to expand…


                              If you are comparing this to the rapidly escalating story of coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia + the now innumerable connections between the two that were systematically lied about by everyone including the President, then you are simply incorrect.

                              For every action by someone you kind of like, there is simply not automatically an equal and opposite reaction by someone you don’t.

                               
                              Click to expand…


                              I’m not comparing anything.  I was calling out the ludicrous claims that impeachment is on the horizon or warranted with the current known facts.  Also, bringing up the fact that the “other side” has equally damning things that have come out (and since I posted my last reply as well) isn’t engaging in whataboutism – it was to highlight your bias.  You’re complaining of Trump but seem to give a pass to the other side, which is laughable.  They were both terrible candidates, and all the facts that have come forward since the election have done nothing but prove that point.  Perhaps they were not equally bad, but it seems to me you’re really pissed about a giant douche and happy with a turd sandwich.
                              Click to expand…


                              I guess we can revisit this in 6 months and see who is crazy. If Mueller doesn’t conclude what I think he will I will be fairly satisfied b/c I think he’s honorable and credible. You’re clearly very devoted to Trump and I guess that’s fine. Would be interested to see if you would plant a few ethical flags publicly or if you’ll just continue down the Hannity line all the way to “Russia did us a favor.” Based on our limited interactions on this forum I have a guess.

                              The HRC “scandals” will continue to grow exactly alongside whatever comes out about Trump in your mind, that’s not because of truth or reality, that’s because that’s how this works. Trump could be being led out of the WH in handcuffs and Fox will be talking about uranium.

                               
                              Click to expand...


                              So because I point out clear bias on your end I'm "clearly devoted to Trump" and then presume to know my ethics and align them with a talk show host I never watch or care for?  You need to check your emotions at the door, pal.  It won't serve you well on internet forums, or investing more importantly.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                I have to mention something. I’ve been venting about a number of aspects of this plan. One is the loss of the self-employed health insurance premium deduction. It has come to my attention that this may in fact NOT be part of the proposed plan. Which would help me a great deal, as that is a $29,000 deduction next year. While I have other gripes about the plan and its underlying approach and philosophy, I’m a little less cranky after hearing this. Sorry if I have led anyone astray inadvertently.
                                My Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFF...MwBiAAKd5N8qPg

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X