So would you rent instead?
They should be reducing spending as well. But the other part is while the percentage rates are being reduced many deductions are being eliminated thus making many loopholes used to pay much lower taxes and/or no taxes for some particularly the wealthy that have lobbyists in Washington with heavy influence on getting tax deductions in the law. The other part is the belief that they will be adding more tax payers to the system as well as many corporations that currently have things in other countries for the benefit of lower tax rates than the U.S. They bring that portion of their business back to U.S. and thus pay something into the U.S for it instead of nothing as well as hire peeps in the U.S. again creating more taxpayers. Not saying this will or will not work, but that would be the belief by some.
They should be reducing spending but we know that never happens. To count on 6% growth to pay for the cuts is pure folly.
I believe I heard the biggest blow will be for those in NY and California and other statrs that have high state and property taxes as those will no longer be deductible.
Seems like it should be relatively simple concept. Spend less than what you get in.
Unless I'm mistaken, it was at the end of Bill Clinton's 2nd term.
Seems like it should be relatively simple concept. Spend less than what you get in.
I wonder how often the projections are accurate or how much they are off if anyone goes back and does that. Especially when there are tax changes and they update it to be able to see the original projection versus the reality of what happened. And then wonder if someone does analysis on what caused the projection to be off and then if they update their assumptions to take that into account for their next projections.
Ha. I don't think very many people on either side are going to go for that or even come close to agreeing with completely eliminating corporate tax with no other stipulations or regulations. There would need to be some sort of requirement to get more people on board. Something perhaps related to having X# of employees making X # of dollars and say no one employed being at a wage that is below a certain threshold. Additionally not having work subcontracted out overseas to ensure Americans are the recipients of them no longer paying any tax. And in turn their employees would be contributing to some tax revenue.
I understand the concept but certainly you understand the potential for abuse of it not going to their employees or only going to the Senior Senior management positions of the corporation. So rather than waiting for the abuse to happen and then react, why not put some measures in place to ensure the capital in fact goes to the employees.
Please provide proof that lowering taxes raises revenue or investment.
You're assuming that all of the freed up cash will be designated to capital. And even if additional cash is designated to capital, that it'll be used to buy things that are built/programmed/etc by Americans. What if all that extra capital is used to buy IT assets that were made by foreign companies overseas? More than likely though, extra cash = larger bonuses for the C-level execs.
