Rand Paul criticizes GOP tax plan

Printable View

10-02-2017, 07:32 PM
William Tell

Rand Paul criticizes GOP tax plan

Quote:

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Monday criticized the tax-reform framework released last week by Trump administration officials and congressional GOP leaders after a think tank issued a report finding that many middle-class taxpayers could see their taxes go up.

"This is a GOP tax plan? Possibly 30% of middle class gets a tax hike? I hope the final details are better than this," Paul said in a tweet that included a link to the study from the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center (TPC).

This is a GOP tax plan? Possibly 30% of middle class gets a tax hike? I hope the final details are better than this. https://t.co/lcjkI4YRz8
— Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) October 2, 2017

The TPC's analysis found that by 2027, almost 30 percent of taxpayers with income between about $50,000 and $150,000 would see their taxes increase under the framework that the White House and congressional GOP leaders released last week.

In total, about 25 percent of taxpayers would see higher taxes under the GOP's plan by 2027, TPC said.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/35...s-gop-tax-plan
10-03-2017, 08:42 AM
EBounding

The rates go up, but it's offset by the much larger deduction. Overall, everyone saves money based on the framework:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DK6XFMiXcAADsh3.jpg

But I'm glad he's doing this because it could be much better.
10-03-2017, 09:04 AM
dean.engelhardt

From the link in the first post:

Quote:

The TPC's analysis found that by 2027, almost 30 percent of taxpayers with income between about $50,000 and $150,000 would see their taxes increase under the framework that the White House and congressional GOP leaders released last week.

In total, about 25 percent of taxpayers would see higher taxes under the GOP's plan by 2027, TPC said

I don't really believe the government is going to lower taxes with reform. Great trick of the government is when an increase in spending or taxes is less than a projection, (pulled out of their behind) they sell it as a reduction. Just THEFT.
10-05-2017, 08:19 AM
Valli6

Sen. Rand Paul: Cut Taxes For All!

Rand Paul keeps his head while others are flailing about.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...taxes-for-all/

Quote:

Exclusive – Sen. Rand Paul: Cut Taxes For All!
by SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY) 4 Oct 2017

I’m in favor of cutting taxes. I’ll take the biggest tax cut we can pass, but I’m also certainly willing to compromise. I realize not everyone in my caucus wants a big, bold cut like I do. If all we are talking about is how much to cut taxes, I can assure you, they will have my vote, happily.
Unfortunately, though presented as a tax cut for all, the first draft of the GOP tax reform plan wasn’t about how much to cut from everyone; rather, it was who are the winners, and who are the losers.

The plan lowered the top rate, which is great. It lowered corporate taxes, which is necessary for job growth. It lowered taxes on the lowest income people, as well. I’m good with all of that.

However, somewhere in the authors’ efforts to cut taxes for our highest and lowest earners, the middle class was seemingly left to bear the burden. The problem is, after lowering those rates, they decided the rest of the plan should be “revenue neutral.”

If you’ve already cut taxes for the rich and lower incomes, how do you make up the difference to account for those cuts? By raising taxes on those who are left – the middle class.

Now, as they have noted, and I fully admit – the plan is not final. There are question marks, and the plan could change. But that’s exactly why I am speaking up now. I don’t want to vote for a plan that cuts some taxes but raises them on others, especially not on the middle class. So I want everyone to see the errors in their plan, look for solutions, and come together for a plan that can pass.

I’m not looking to dictate the details, nor am I set that the plan has to have a definite amount of tax cuts – it just should not be a tax HIKE on anyone.

The problem comes because in their plan they’ve eliminated the deductions many Americans take for their state and local taxes, and they’ve also eliminated the personal exemption. This could put many Americans in the $50,000-$200,000 range in a trap where their taxes would go up – some very significantly.

There are solutions, and I’ll offer a few possible ones here.

First, if you really do want to eliminate the state and local deductions and think it is good policy, that’s fine. But then the rate the taxpayer pays must be low enough to compensate for it. That’s always been the idea behind the “Flat Tax,” but it applies here. You have to lower the middle rate from 25 to 20 to come near fixing the problem for everyone.

You can also adjust the brackets, making more middle and upper-middle class people subject to the 12 percent rate for a larger share of their income.

In order to fix the problem of eliminating the personal exemption, you could increase the child credit by an additional $1,000 and make the income and age limits of the old exemption system apply, so more people in the middle can take it.

Finally, you could scrap the idea of removing these deductions taken by tens of millions of Americans and simply put in an across-the-board tax cut that everyone gets and favors no one.

I want to be clear – I’m not trying to dictate the details, and I don’t think they should have to pass my tax plan.

But at the end of the day, I do believe one very simple thing should happen as a result of this plan – no one should pay MORE in taxes than before we started.

As many people as possible should get a tax CUT, which is why I have already given my ideas to the White House and congressional leaders for their consideration.

This isn’t about the tax cut being perfect. It’s just about it not being a tax HIKE because of some policy wonk goal no one in America is asking for.

I guarantee you this – when we pass a bill, no one is going to cheer for bullet points on a white paper. All they will do is ask – do I pay more or less under your plan? A Republican Congress should always be able to say “less” to that question, and I look forward to fixing and filling in the details on their plan to make sure that’s true.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-taxes-for-all
10-05-2017, 08:24 AM
euphemia

We already work through May to pay the government. Something about that picture needs to change, and it's the side that's taking the money. Lay that budget out in front of a dozen frugal grandmas and we would get down to bare bones, limited government in a big fat hurry. Anyone who wants to complain can talk to the grandmas. We've heard it all.
10-06-2017, 09:52 AM
Valli6

Ryan Ellis @ Forbes thinks Rand misunderstands the GOP Tax cut

At least Ryan Ellis acknowledges that "When it comes to the conscience of liberty in the United States Senate, no one beats the intellectual honesty of Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) He really does try to get the policy right, and much more often than not does so."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanell.../#1fc565d44219

Quote:

Rand Paul's Giant Tax Cut Misunderstanding
Ryan Ellis - Opinion #BeltwayBrief
OCT 4, 2017 @ 09:00 PM

When it comes to the conscience of liberty in the United States Senate, no one beats the intellectual honesty of Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) He really does try to get the policy right, and much more often than not does so.

But he's suffering from an honest misunderstanding when it comes to the GOP tax framework.

Senator Paul is against the framework as written. Rather than explain his position for him, I'll quote his own explanation below:

I’m not looking to dictate the details, nor am I set that the plan has to have a definite amount of tax cuts – it just should not be a tax HIKE on anyone.

The problem comes because in their plan they’ve eliminated the deductions many Americans take for their state and local taxes, and they’ve also eliminated the personal exemption. This could put many Americans in the $50,000-$200,000 range in a trap where their taxes would go up – some very significantly.

Now, on its face that's totally reasonable. A Republican tax plan probably shouldn't result in a tax increase for working or mass affluent middle class families. And if the GOP Framework did as Senator Paul is describing, we'd have some tinkering to do.

The only problem is, the GOP Framework does no such thing.

Senator Paul is assuming the Framework has laid out the tax brackets in dollar terms for the 12 percent, 25 percent, and 35 percent brackets. You can tell by reading Paul's "solution" to the "problem" he has:

more: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanell.../#1fc565d44219
10-06-2017, 10:13 AM
Valli6

Brian Darling responds to Ryan Ellis' article re Rand on tax cuts

Brian Darling - Rand's former Senior Communications Director and Counsel - has written a response to Ryan Ellis' opinion piece at Forbes. http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...t-for-tax-cuts

Quote:

Brian Darling: Rand Paul’s Fight for Tax Cuts
by BRIAN DARLING5 Oct 2017

Ryan Ellis wrote a piece in Forbes that exhibits a complete misunderstanding of my former boss, Senator Rand Paul’s (R-KY), position on the Trump tax plan.

Sen. Paul has been a consistent opponent of the idea of “revenue neutral” tax reform and a proponent of tax cuts that will expand economic growth. I can’t tell you the number of times I listened to my former boss discuss the idea that “revenue neutral” leads to results that some taxpayers pay more and some pay less. In other words, some get a tax cut and others get a tax hike. That is an idea that will not spur economic growth.

I know Ryan Ellis and know him to be an expert in tax policy, yet he mischaracterizes the Paul position on the Trump plan.

Ellis argues the following:

The GOP Framework doesn’t say when the 12 percent bracket ends. The 12 percent bracket is the first bracket, for sure. But it’s up to the tax writing committees and the Congress to decide how far up the income scale the 12 percent bracket goes. Senator Paul is assuming it will stop at a certain point, and that taxpayers earning income above that point will be squeezed. He can’t know when the 12 percent bracket will stop, because no one does–it’s not in the Framework.

It is perfectly reasonable for Sen. Paul to argue this point, because, as Ellis admits, nobody knows where the Congressional tax writers will end the 12% tax bracket. The fact of the matter is that nothing prevents the GOP framework from being more specific now. Sen. Paul is playing his role as a legislator to push hard to make sure that taxes are not hiked on any American in a final draft of a bill.

Ellis makes a second point:

The GOP Framework doesn’t say how much it will grow the child tax credit, or where it will phase out. Under current law, the child tax credit is $1000 and begins to phase out at $110,000 of adjusted gross income for a married couple. The Framework calls for both of these numbers to rise, but it leaves how high to the tax writing committees and the Congress. Senator Paul cannot possibly know if middle class families with kids are getting squeezed if he doesn’t know how big the child tax credit will be, nor to whom it will be available.

Again, it is reasonable for Sen. Paul to have a say and to argue that the tax writing committees have the authority to set the rates in a way that will hurt the middle class. It is a favorite argument of the establishment to argue that it is premature to make an argument until the Congress finishes drafting up a bill. At that point it is too late to impact the debate. A smart legislator would, like Sen. Paul, make the case early so that the tax writing committees don’t make bad decisions.

And Ellis’s final point is to criticize Sen. Paul for using the liberal Tax Policy Center as authority for his arguments:

(more) http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...t-for-tax-cuts