Tax reform

[Texas Jeff 1998]

1 hour ago, GSU&UT said:

Probably not the most appropriate thread since this isn't directly related to the tax cut, but I'd love to hear from the Surly financial geniuses how this lady should somehow get the money to move to a cheaper city.

I have no doubt that there is a tremendous gap between those at the top and those at the bottom in today's society, even within the same company as this person describes.  It's important to have a middle class and provide a living income for those who want to work and all children should have a stable home.  IMHO, we should strive to provide everyone with those things as much as we can.

However, once you introduce math in the conversation I am intrigued ...  are those numbers correct?

I did a quick 1040 for a $35k head of household filer.  If the person has one child and is filing head of household with about $35,000 in income, they have a taxable income of around $17,000.  Tax on that is $1,771, however a combo of the child tax credit and the earned income credit means that the $35,000 head of household should receive back a refund of around $1,075 with zero withholding.  Now, this person also has to pay SS tax (around $2170) and Medicare tax (about $500) but if you add all of that up this person is paying about $1600 in income tax + SS + Medicare.

This person also lives in California, so there is some CA income tax, maybe 2% of income above a threshold, I'm not familiar with CA state tax.  So maybe $700 in CA tax.  I'm not sure where the $6000 tax is coming from but it would be nice to know.  If Rep Katie's tax calculation is off by $4,400, that's $366 of the $567 shortfall.

There are other taxes like sales tax, property tax, car registration fees, and so on but it's hard to find the extra $4,400 in tax.

Maybe MY math is wrong, but I'm not sure this theoretical bank teller is paying $6000 in taxes.

This bank teller is in a rough spot, but it's always going to be tough to be in that spot.  In theory, this person is a single parent with a six year old kid working an entry level job in a state with a high cost of living.  The other parent, in this case, is providing nothing.  The job, bank teller, is a candidate for automation and might not exist 5-10 years from now.  The market-clearing price for that job is minimum wage, and it may drop to zero once physical banks go away.

Part of the problem is income inequality but part of the problem is bad decision making leading to a tenuous existance.  We need to work on both.

[GSU&UT 1799]

2 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

I have no doubt that there is a tremendous gap between those at the top and those at the bottom in today's society, even within the same company as this person describes.  It's important to have a middle class and provide a living income for those who want to work and all children should have a stable home.  IMHO, we should strive to provide everyone with those things as much as we can.

However, once you introduce math in the conversation I am intrigued ...  are those numbers correct?

I did a quick 1040 for a $35k head of household filer.  If the person has one child and is filing head of household with about $35,000 in income, they have a taxable income of around $17,000.  Tax on that is $1,771, however a combo of the child tax credit and the earned income credit means that the $35,000 head of household should receive back a refund of around $1,075 with zero withholding.  Now, this person also has to pay SS tax (around $2170) and Medicare tax (about $500) but if you add all of that up this person is paying about $1600 in income tax + SS + Medicare.

This person also lives in California, so there is some CA income tax, maybe 2% of income above a threshold, I'm not familiar with CA state tax.  So maybe $700 in CA tax.  I'm not sure where the $6000 tax is coming from but it would be nice to know.  If Rep Katie's tax calculation is off by $4,400, that's $366 of the $567 shortfall.

There are other taxes like sales tax, property tax, car registration fees, and so on but it's hard to find the extra $4,400 in tax.

Maybe MY math is wrong, but I'm not sure this theoretical bank teller is paying $6000 in taxes.

This bank teller is in a rough spot, but it's always going to be tough to be in that spot.  In theory, this person is a single parent with a six year old kid working an entry level job in a state with a high cost of living.  The other parent, in this case, is providing nothing.  The job, bank teller, is a candidate for automation and might not exist 5-10 years from now.  The market-clearing price for that job is minimum wage, and it may drop to zero once physical banks go away.

Part of the problem is income inequality but part of the problem is bad decision making leading to a tenuous existance.  We need to work on both.

This last part is what I find so funny about so many of you on this board. Ignoring whether the math was correct, there is a tremendous and obvious problem with wealth inequality and how CEOs continue to earn many orders of magnitude more than their average employees. There is a much much smaller problem where poor people don't make enough tough decisions that can lead them out of poverty. Our focus should be 99% on the former.

[elfenix 34658]

55 minutes ago, Texas Jeff said:

The job, bank teller, is a candidate for automation and might not exist 5-10 years from now.

they thought that back when ATMs first came out.  turns out, people like talking to people. 

Edited April 12, 2019 by elfenix

[elfenix 34658]

1.1 trillion dollar deficit projected for fiscal 2019, which is the one we're in. 

good job, good effort

[bad_teammate 13479]

Katie Porter is super awesome and I love her.

[CooterBrown 18272]

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

So, I am supposed to believe Irvine CA Single Mom earning 16.50 is not on any welfare/WIC/rent subsidy?

The question is should she be? If you can and do work full-time, you should be able to be self-sustaining, especially in a job that isn't for high-schoolers like burger flipping, without tax payer assistance.

[Bama Chick 28596]

So, I am supposed to believe Irvine CA Single Mom earning 16.50 is not on any welfare/WIC/rent subsidy?

I wouldn’t imagine an annual income of $35,000 would qualify anyone.

I just looked up California Medicaid and the maximum annual income for a 2 person household to qualify is $22,000.

So nope on Medicaid.

Looked up California WIC and the maximum annual income for a 2 person household to qualify is $30,400.

So nope on WIC.

Looked up how to qualify for housing assistance in California. To qualify for Section 8 in the state of California, your combined household income needs to be below 80% of the median income in the area.

The median income for a two person household in Orange County is $70,400.

So she would qualify for some housing assistance but it looks like Rep. Porter already figured that in. The average rent for a one bedroom apartment in Irvine, California is $2,100 and she only calculated $1,600 rent in her example.

[SaucyJack 3517]

24 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

I wouldn’t imagine an annual income of $35,000 would qualify anyone.

I just looked up California Medicaid and the maximum annual income for a 2 person household to qualify is $22,000.

So nope on Medicaid.

Looked up California WIC and the maximum annual income for a 2 person household to qualify is $30,400.

So nope on WIC.

Looked up how to qualify for housing assistance in California. To qualify for Section 8 in the state of California, your combined household income needs to be below 80% of the median income in the area.

The median income for a two person household in Orange County is $70,400.

So she would qualify for some housing assistance but it looks like Rep. Porter already figured that in. The average rent for a one bedroom apartment in Irvine, California is $2,100 and she only calculated $1,600 rent in her example.
 

 

[ChickenSandwich 9918]

Well she did directly identify the biggest problem and it’s not the salary of $35k. 

Its the unaffordable housing. That 1600 in rent buys a house and all bills paid in many other cities with money left over. 

The elephant in the room. 

[ChickenSandwich 9918]

The example listed spends nearly 66% of her take home pay on a one bed room apartment. 

[fattyflattie 4640]

3 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Well she did directly identify the biggest problem and it’s not the salary of $35k. 

Its the unaffordable housing. That 1600 in rent buys a house and all bills paid in many other cities with money left over. 

The elephant in the room. 

So stupid. Don’t you understand we should all be able to live wherever we want, regardless of our monetary situation, and taxpayers should make up the rest with artificial market wages set by the govt.   Really, it’s not fair a GED that operates a phone at a bank isn’t middle class.  

Truth is she very likely provides less that $16.50 an hour in value for her employer.  And likely has 50x less education and intelligence than the CEO. But yeah, his fault daddy isn’t in picture to support their child, and she’s decided Irvine is where she wants to plant her feet.  You want to talk about $5.15/hr, OK. But we’re talking 300% above minimum wage.  What’s she worth, $25, 30, 40? 

This is going to sound a lot like Sack/Slorch, so I’m sure I’ll be deemed racist for this.  Everything listed below is a decision that she absolutely controls.  

1) don’t have children until you can afford to  

2) live where you can afford to.

3) there are education opportunities galore, many specifically  for the poor  

 

[Nivek 17330]

Well she did directly identify the biggest problem and it’s not the salary of $35k. 

Its the unaffordable housing. That 1600 in rent buys a house and all bills paid in many other cities with money left over. 

The elephant in the room. 

So, you think the problem is the rent. So I guess there should be no low skill jobs in Irving. The people there would be fine if all the grocery stores, restaurants, bars, movie theaters, and banks closed due to lack of staffing.

[ChickenSandwich 9918]

Well, yes. If they refuse to fill the posisitons for less than a living wage and these things disappear that would be the marketing correcting itself. 

The truth is her position could easily be filled by thousands willing to work for $5k less, and if they actually paid a living wage I doubt she would be the most qualified applicant that applies.

 It’s a big reason illegal migration is so harful to the lower class/skilled Americans. It increases the competion for jobs, education and housing with no real solution in sight  

And...if Americans refused the positions illegals will gladly take them at any wage. California needs mass migration for these low skilled jobs to replace the middle class Americans leaving in droves who simply can’t afford to exist in their state. 

 

[Incredulity 11861]

2 hours ago, Nivek said:

So, you think the problem is the rent. So I guess there should be no low skill jobs in Irving. The people there would be fine if all the grocery stores, restaurants, bars, movie theaters, and banks closed due to lack of staffing.

Our economy had NEVER been based on EVERY SINGLE JOB providing a “living wage”.

 

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

Our economy had NEVER been based on EVERY SINGLE JOB providing a “living wage”.

 

 

It was never based on the tax code rewarding and incentivizing productivity gains being directed away from median wage growth, either. And yet, here we are.

[berlinerbaer 692]

It's a good feeling when an elected official says things that not just make you think, but require one to pull out their calculator. That doesn't happen all that often anymore.

If only fact checking a Republican could be as sophisticated.

Edited April 14, 2019 by berlinerbaer

[Bozo_Casanova 26773]

10 hours ago, berlinerbaer said:

It's a good feeling when an elected official says things that not just make you think, but require one to pull out their calculator. That doesn't happen all that often anymore.

If only fact checking a Republican could be as sophisticated.

Does TI or HP make a calculator with the potato function?

[Nivek 17330]

It was never based on the tax code rewarding and incentivizing productivity gains being directed away from median wage growth, either. And yet, here we are.

Or privatizing gains, socializing risk. Or creating policies that damage constituents then bailing them out with opposition money.


Republicanism.

[David Dennison 19441]

17 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Our economy had NEVER been based on EVERY SINGLE JOB providing a “living wage”.

True, which means taxpayers have to pick up the slack.

[Bookman 4754]

FWIW, for the first time in my life I’m writing a check to the U.S. Treasury on April 15.

[Incredulity 11861]

1 minute ago, Bookman said:

FWIW, for the first time in my life I’m writing a check to the U.S. Treasury on April 15.

So fucking what?

 

Let me guess you would be happier giving the US Treasury and interest free loan.

 

What was your tax rate? up or down.

[Bookman 4754]

Are you a moron? You’re acting like one. 

[Incredulity 11861]

2 minutes ago, Bookman said:

Are you a moron? You’re acting like one. 

I'm sorry you can't spend your refund at Rent-A-Center.

It gets better.

 

[Bookman 4754]

I guess you are.

[Bookman 4754]

So, what part of what I wrote communicated to you that I was complaining?

[Incredulity 11861]

1 minute ago, Bookman said:

So, what part of what I wrote communicated to you that I was complaining?

The thread and 865 or so of the previous posts.

If I jumped the gun I apologize.

[zork 629]

 

Trump Gave Most Americans a Tax Cut and They Didn’t Notice

Quote

Republicans passed a sweeping tax cut for two-thirds of Americans in 2017, saying it would pay for itself and the American public would thank them.

Now, as Americans finish filing to the IRS for the first time under the new system, the law has swelled the deficit and surveys show just one-fifth of taxpayers believe their taxes have gone down. That’s made it hard for President Donald Trump to leverage the tax cuts as an issue in 2020, when he’s up for re-election and his party will be seeking to retake the House of Representatives.

“The Democrats really outmaneuvered the Republicans by convincing the American people that the main thrust of the tax reform package was to cut taxes for the wealthy,” said Dan Eberhart, a major Republican donor who runs the drilling services company Canary, LLC. Republicans “failed to fully explain the success to voters.”

Trump is going to try again on Monday when he goes to Minnesota, a potential swing state in the 2020 election, to promote what Republicans consider their signature legislative achievement. It’s part of a week of events designed to promote the tax law’s effects on the economy as he turns to his next campaign.

...

That’s despite an analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that two out of three taxpayers would see their taxes go down. The biggest benefits, though, go to the top 1 percent, who are projected to receive an average tax break of $62,000 in 2018, while the middle one-fifth of income earners got an average tax cut of $1,090 — about $20 per week.

...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-15/trump-gave-most-americans-a-tax-cut-and-they-didn-t-notice

 

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by zork

[Okie State 3887]

I'd bet more people would be satisfied with paying more overall as long as they got a nice refund.

[Incredulity 11861]

2 minutes ago, Okie State said:

I'd bet more people would be satisfied with paying more overall as long as they got a nice refund.

And thank the government for giving them their own money. It’s astounding.

[David Dennison 19441]

1 hour ago, zork said:

 

Trump Gave Most Americans a Tax Cut and They Didn’t Notice

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-15/trump-gave-most-americans-a-tax-cut-and-they-didn-t-notice

 

 

That is how much of a political failure the tax bill was.

[Okie State 3887]

It's also how stupid the average person is.

[David Dennison 19441]

Just now, Okie State said:

It's also how stupid the average person is.

Stupid people vote in droves. That's how we wound up with President Trump.

[Okie State 3887]

Stupid people vote in droves. That's how we wound up with President Trump.

Can't argue with that although the lack of comprehension around tax refunds is not isolated to any single party.

[David Dennison 19441]

Just now, Okie State said:

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Stupid people vote in droves. That's how we wound up with President Trump.

Can't argue with that although the lack of comprehension around tax refunds is not isolated to any single party.

No it is not. Unfortunately, roughly half of this country does not save anything they make, so their refund is a forced interest free savings account.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

That is how much of a political failure the tax bill was.

And how meager the tax cut actually was for most people, particularly relative to its cost. 

[SDG 3335]

17 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

And how meager the tax cut actually was for most people, particularly relative to its cost. 

I just submitted my payment and I can say my income went up and my taxes went down by $231 per month (given that I made 8% more this year I’ll consider it a win.)  I’d be willing to bet most people, who actually pay taxes, are in this camp.

ill give you that the withholdings tables need adjusting, but I wouldn’t call the savings meager. 

[Nivek 17330]

No it is not. Unfortunately, roughly half of this country does not save anything they make, so their refund is a forced interest free savings account.

It’s not all stupidity. If you make a marginal salary, you don’t have much left over. When you see the increase of cost of living, including several key sectors such as health care, coupled with stagnant wages, and a bombardment of credit opportunities and predatory lending doesn’t help.

Our tax system is pretty ridiculous. Overly complex, and the fear of fucking up makes some willing to let the government get an interest free loan.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

On 3/6/2019 at 11:23 AM, Bama Chick said:

 

Greg Abbott
Dan Patrick
Ken Paxton
Sid Miller
David Whitley
John Cornyn
Ted Cruz
TEXAS A&M


In conclusion, eat it.

The lady has a point.  I have always chuckled at our arrogance with respect to most of our neighbors.  Only Dallas, Austin, and Houston separate us.  Maybe San Antonio.

[TwiceHorn 31987]

The tax difference is negligible, really.  Knowing that we're further fiscally cornholing ourselves is depressing.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

29 minutes ago, SDG said:

I just submitted my payment and I can say my income went up and my taxes went down by $231 per month (given that I made 8% more this year I’ll consider it a win.)  I’d be willing to bet most people, who actually pay taxes, are in this camp.

ill give you that the withholdings tables need adjusting, but I wouldn’t call the savings meager. 

I think if that were true, more than 20% of Americans would think they got a tax cut.  I mean, I certainly wouldn't turn down $50 bucks a week (for the middle fifth of income earners, just $20/week according to that article above), but when we're all going in the hole by a couple of trillion dollars, people expect more. 

[fattyflattie 4640]

3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Stupid people vote in droves. That's how we wound up with President Trump.

And Obama.  Lets hope this shit gets better blah fucking blah give me a fucking break.

[Fudge Nuggets 19407]

My effective tax rate went up 1.75% this year.

Thanks a lot, fucking dotard.

[EuroHorn 3287]

Thanks for paying your fair share...

[Fudge Nuggets 19407]

2 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Thanks for paying your fair share...

Glad to do my part to subsidize the likes of Amazon, Chevron, Netflix and Salesforce.

[zork 629]

3 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

My effective tax rate went up 1.75% this year.

Thanks a lot, fucking dotard.

guessing: somewhat big house, substantial loan, rising property taxes, kids grown?  or is it a humblebrag about an income rise offsetting the tax cut?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I got screwed by the Trump tax cuts.  Mostly on the unreimbursed business/home office expenses I used to be able to deduct but no longer can. 

Praying the democrat straight up repeal the the whole thing in early 2021. 

Fuck Trump

[BradInATX 9208]

I got screwed by the Trump tax cuts.  Mostly on the unreimbursed business/home office expenses I used to be able to deduct but no longer can. 

Praying the democrat straight up repeal the the whole thing in early 2021. 

Fuck Trump

Are you self employed? I got some new fangled QBD thing that more than offset that. S corp tho

 

[Js1 86936]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I got screwed by the Trump tax cuts.  Mostly on the unreimbursed business/home office expenses I used to be able to deduct but no longer can. 

Praying the democrat straight up repeal the the whole thing in early 2021. 

Fuck Trump

ThAnK yOu FoR pAYiNg YoUr FaIr ShArE

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

20 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Are you self employed? I got some new fangled QBD thing that more than offset that. S corp tho

 

I’ve consulted with a local accountant about going the S Corp route.  Probably going to do it next month.

[Incredulity 11861]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’ve consulted with a local accountant about going the S Corp route.  Probably going to do it next month.

You are stupid enough to be a sole proprietor?  

makes sense.