Trump getting rid of a major thorn in his side, and of all those ultra high income like him ... the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT made sure the wealthy paid some tax versus using deductions and accounting tricks to eliminate taxes. A minimum tax has been in place since 1969 and the current AMT has been in place since 1982.

 

Trump is also proposing eliminating the estate tax, sometimes called death tax.

 

I will be interested in seeing the breakdown comparing benefits to the middle class versus benefits to the ultra wealthy.

Trump getting rid of a major thorn in his side, and of all those ultra high income like him ... the Alternative Minimum Tax. The AMT made sure the wealthy paid some tax versus using deductions and accounting tricks to eliminate taxes. A minimum tax has been in place since 1969 and the current AMT has been in place since 1982.

 

Also getting rid of deductions and accounting tricks as well...I think there will only be two allowable deductions now.

Also getting rid of deductions and accounting tricks as well...I think there will only be two allowable deductions now.

 

I like that. Simplification is good. We will have to see the impact of his plan versus the old.

It didn't cost Treasury anything, if the 5% hadn't been offered all of the money would have just stayed overseas. It may have came in $3.3B under projections...but still drove a lot of revenue to the treasury that would not have occurred without the Tax Holiday. Treasury got an infusion of over $16B from the Tax Holiday.

 

 

Found this...

 

 

Very informative but long read on the 2004 Tax Holiday Tax Analysts -- Effects of 24 Int'l Tax Holiday, Recommendations Going Forward

 

 

Pretty sure the Senate report took the income into account.

 

I know the study found that companies parked even more overseas waiting for the next tax amnesty plan from the US Govt.

Do individual rates change?

Pretty sure the Senate report took the income into account.

 

I know the study found that companies parked even more overseas waiting for the next tax amnesty plan from the US Govt.

 

Many companies did invest Permanently Reinvested Earnings and grew them in the years to follow. Some did do as you say, however...but the economy post 9/11 wasn't the strongest it had ever been either.

 

Excerpt from the link...However, the act did have some positive consequences, and among those was the generation of $16.4 billion in revenue for the U.S. treasury. Some critics focus on the $128 billion in tax revenue that would have been raised had the same earnings been repatriated without the enactment of the tax holiday, but that is only chimera. As the growth in PRE during the years before and after the holiday suggests, it is likely that none of those extraordinary dividends would have been paid to the USS group companies, and thus the forgone revenue to the treasury would have been zero.

Do individual rates change?

 

It's my understanding there will only be three, 10%, 25% and 35%. Also, married couples first $24,000 of their income is not taxable.

I guess this means national debt is a non-issue.

I guess this means national debt is a non-issue.

 

All the sudden liberals are worried about the debt, after adding 9-10 trillion to the debt over the last 8 years? I am all for individuals, all individuals, keeping more of their money. It does not belong to the government. Reduce government spending in actual dollars, not the hocus-pocus tricks DC uses.

All the sudden liberals are worried about the debt, after adding 9-10 trillion to the debt over the last 8 years? I am all for individuals, all individuals, keeping more of their money. It does not belong to the government. Reduce government spending in actual dollars, not the hocus-pocus tricks DC uses.

 

And conversely, conservatives now aren't worried about the debt, since it was a big talking point over the last 8 years?? The arguments don't change. It's just that whoever is doing the arguing depends on who is in charge at the moment.

I guess this means national debt is a non-issue.

 

All the sudden liberals are worried about the debt, after adding 9-10 trillion to the debt over the last 8 years? I am all for individuals, all individuals, keeping more of their money. It does not belong to the government. Reduce government spending in actual dollars, not the hocus-pocus tricks DC uses.

 

And conversely, conservatives now aren't worried about the debt, since it was a big talking point over the last 8 years?? The arguments don't change. It's just that whoever is doing the arguing depends on who is in charge at the moment.

 

The national debt is one of my biggest issues, and why I expressed concerns in this thread. We just came out of eight years where Obama crapped all over the debt and I just think this is going to help continue that trend. We have to get this under control IMO.

Same dance; just changing partners.

Also getting rid of deductions and accounting tricks as well...I think there will only be two allowable deductions now.

 

What are the two, has it been said?

What are the two, has it been said?

 

Charitable Giving, Mortgage Interest were the two I heard but I think Retirement Savings was on there also.

And conversely, conservatives now aren't worried about the debt, since it was a big talking point over the last 8 years?? The arguments don't change. It's just that whoever is doing the arguing depends on who is in charge at the moment.

 

With potential of economic growth creating tax-paying jobs and with allowing money parked overseas coming home paying 15% in taxes, instead of getting 35% of nothing that stays parked overseas, that will in part pay for the lower tax rates. But, what will also be needed is actual reduction in spending. Example: if $100 is spent this year, next year you spend $98, not saying the projected budget is $110 and reducing it to $105 and calling it a budget cut. And yes, both Republicans and Democrats are guilty, but there are not enough true conservatives to keep the Republicans in line.