Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: A new study says Trump would raise taxes for millions. Trump’s campaign insists he won’t

  1. #1

    A new study says Trump would raise taxes for millions. Trump’s campaign insists he won’t

    A new study says Trump would raise taxes for millions. Trump’s campaign insists he won’t

    More than half of America's single parents and one-fifth of its families with children could see their federal income taxes go up under Republican Donald Trump's revamped tax plan, according to a new analysis of the plan by a New York University professor who previously served as a tax specialist for the Obama administration and the Senate Finance Committee.

    The Trump campaign called the findings "pure fiction," contending the analysis neglects a crucial benefit for low-income taxpayers — and insisting that Trump would instruct the congressional committees drafting his plan into law that taxes would not be allowed to rise for any low- or middle-income American.

    "The fact that NYU didn't include in their model the $500 per-child match — a central element of our plan — demonstrates that their entire exercise is fatally flawed," Trump national policy director Stephen Miller said in a statement. "Nor did they model the effects of the tax-free spending on both children and elderly dependents that is additional to either the new deductions or those in current law. They modeled someone else's plan, but not ours."

    The analysis comes from Lily Batchelder, a professor at NYU's law school who focuses on tax policy and worked for President Obama's National Economic Council. She has friends and former colleagues on Democrat Hillary Clinton's campaign team but says she conducted this study entirely independent of the campaign.

    Batchelder examined the likely effects of Trump's proposed changes to the income tax code on individuals and families, to see whether their tax bills were likely to rise or fall based on his plan. That makes her analysis different from the broader economic analyses of groups such as the Tax Foundation, which has estimated Trump's plan would reduce federal revenue by up to $5.9 trillion over a decade. Those broader analyses predict the average size of tax cuts at various points on the income distribution, but they don't look at individuals.

    What Batchelder discovered, for millions of individual Americans, was a math problem in Trump's tax plan as written. The plan eliminates some tax breaks while adding others. Notably, it eliminates what's called the personal deduction, which is currently $4,050 for every member of a household filing taxes. It also raises the standard deduction for all tax filers and creates new benefits to offset the cost of child care. It shuffles and consolidates tax brackets so that the first income to be taxed for anyone is taxed at a 12 percent rate instead of the current 10 percent.

    For 8 million families, Batchelder found, the Trump plan's tax breaks would add up to less money than the breaks they receive today. (That was what she called the "conservative" estimate; under a different set of assumptions about the provisions of Trump's plan, Batchelder found more than 10 million families would see tax increases.)

    The math is straightforward: A middle-class family of five — two parents, three children — would gain $17,000 for their standard deduction but lose $20,250 in personal deductions. Their remaining income would be taxed at 12 percent, not 10 percent. Extra child-care benefits might not be enough to make up the difference, so they would pay more.

    About 1 in 5 families would fall into that category, Batchelder estimated. “That becomes more and more of an issue the bigger the household, and if they have kids,” she said in an interview. “It is primarily going to raise taxes for low- and middle-income taxpayers.”


    The analysis estimates that more than half of single parents would see tax increases, because Trump eliminates what is called "head of household" filing status, which gives single parents a higher standard deduction and lower rates than they otherwise would have had. Other researchers have also flagged that possibility.

    “Single parents get hit with all three of the tax increases under Trump’s plan,” including the loss of personal deductions, the loss of head-of-household status and higher rates on some income, said Harry Stein, the director of fiscal policy for the liberal Center for American Progress Action Fund, who has written about the potential effects of the Trump plan.

    The Tax Foundation estimates that middle-class taxpayers, on average, will see a nearly $500 a year boost in their incomes from Trump's plan, even before factoring in additional economic growth spurred by tax cuts. But an economist at the foundation who conducted that analysis, Alan Cole, said Friday that on a family-by-family basis, Batchelder's estimates sound "plausible," though the foundation has not done similar modeling itself.


    “There are a lot of significant tax changes going on" with Trump's plan, Cole said. "If you were taking advantage of the personal exemption a lot before, and you don’t have that anymore, that would be a prime candidate for potentially having a tax increase under the plan right now.”

    Trump's campaign disputes the analysis in two ways. First, it notes that Batchelder did not estimate the benefits to families of one provision in Trump's proposal: a government match of up to $500 per year, per child, for parents who put money into a tax-preferred dependent care savings account. Any analysis without that provision is "invalid," Miller said.

    (The Tax Foundation, whose estimates the Trump campaign touted to reporters in a news release Friday, also did not estimate the effects of the savings account provision, either on family incomes or on the overall cost of the plan. Batchelder and Stein both said it is difficult to predict how many families would take advantage of the provision, especially because low-income families are often hard-pressed to find enough money to put in savings accounts.)

    Most importantly, Miller said Trump will instruct the committees writing his plan into law to make sure that it does not raise taxes on any low- or middle-income earners. "In sending our proposal to the tax-writing committees we will include instructions to ensure all low and middle income households are protected," Miller said.

    If that were the case, and Batchelder's analysis is correct, then the cost of Trump's plan would need to rise even further.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...sists-he-wont/
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    "New study" reported by WaPo neocons probably is misleading and Trump campaign is not always fully honest.

    So I would like to know what is Hillary Clinton's campaign's view on this? They are the folks with high repute for honesty and trustworthiness.
    What part of it specifically do you disagree with?
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by CPUd View Post
    What part of it specifically do you disagree with?
    I didn't even start to read it after I saw that WaPo was reporting this study results.
    Their editors reported at least 27 times that Iraqi WMD needed an invasion. No credibility in my book unless they are just publishing something by someone not connected to them at all.

    Hence I requested cliff note version from Hillary campaign of their take on this study.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    I didn't even start to read it
    I see.
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  7. #6
    Only divided governments puts any kind of restraint on spending. When spending goes up, taxes have to go up and currency devalued to cover it. With a Republican controlled executive and legislature, spending will be at least as out of control as it was when Bush II was President, and that means higher taxes.
    Last edited by robert68; 09-24-2016 at 05:48 PM.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by enhanced_deficit View Post
    I didn't even start to read it after I saw that WaPo was reporting this study results.
    Their editors reported at least 27 times that Iraqi WMD needed an invasion. No credibility in my book unless they are just publishing something by someone not connected to them at all.

    Hence I requested cliff note version from Hillary campaign of their take on this study.
    Breitbart shows how in 2000, Trump thought WMD were in Iraq and then flipflipped

    Republican frontrunner Donald J. Trump told the GOP debate in South Carolina on Saturday night that former President George W. Bush had “lied” about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq.

    However, as Buzzfeed’s Andrew Kaczynski noted, in Trump’s 2000 book, The America We Deserve, he said that Iraq had continued to develop WMDs and that it might be necessary to ““carry the mission to its conclusion” to stop Saddam Hussein.

    Trump fans have noted The America We Deserve as evidence of his prescience in national security matters. In the same book, Trump predicted a major terrorist attack on American soil “that will make the bombing of the Trade Center [in 1993] look like kids playing with firecrackers.” His argument about the possible need to use force in Iraq also mirrors the bipartisan consensus at the time–one Democrats quickly forgot for the sake of political expediency.

    Now, Trump is claiming that he opposed launching the Iraq War prior to March 2003, at least privately. He emerged as a vocal opponent of the war in 2004.

    Some conservatives have pointed out that Trump’s attack on President Bush is very similar to those used by the far left. The Huffington Post notes that Code Pink–the anti-war group legendary for disrupting campaign events and congressional hearings–praised Trump’s comments at Saturday night’s debate.

    It is unclear why Trump is making such strong claims about the Iraq War, and about his own past positions, which are becoming more difficult for him to substantiate. It could be a giant “flip-flop,” an attempt at obfuscation, or a tactic aimed simply at reminding voters that he represents a break with the Bush family and the GOP establishment.

    Regardless, Trump is reinforcing one of his rivals’ lines of attack: that he is erratic, and not reliably conservative.
    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...-wmds-in-iraq/
    There is no spoon.

  9. #8
    I have a new study about Trump too. It says look at his $#@!ing history. He's blatantly flip flopped on so many things nothing would surprise me at this point. Nothing. What does surprise me is there are actually people who believe his $#@!. They are mind-f***ed and deluded. The worst are the pro-gun people, because they care about that one issue more than anyone else cares about all issues combined. And yet...here we have an orange faced NYC sleezeball like Trump who outright stated he "hates the concept of guns" and wrote in his own damn book that he supports gun bans, and now he's on stage with the NRA and they completely trust him again. They tell me he's not a politician. He's pro-gun. He loves the second amendment now. I just ]look at them like they have 8 heads.

    Sorry for the tangential rant, just strange times we are living in.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Murray N Rothbard View Post
    I have a new study about Trump too. It says look at his $#@!ing history. He's blatantly flip flopped on so many things nothing would surprise me at this point. Nothing. What does surprise me is there are actually people who believe his $#@!. They are mind-f***ed and deluded. The worst are the pro-gun people, because they care about that one issue more than anyone else cares about all issues combined. And yet...here we have an orange faced NYC sleezeball like Trump who outright stated he "hates the concept of guns" and wrote in his own damn book that he supports gun bans, and now he's on stage with the NRA and they completely trust him again. They tell me he's not a politician. He's pro-gun. He loves the second amendment now. I just ]look at them like they have 8 heads.

    Sorry for the tangential rant, just strange times we are living in.
    Once upon a time a NRA endorsement would get LOL'd at on RPFs, unless there was also a GOA endorsement.
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul



Similar Threads

  1. Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton
    By TER in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 11-24-2016, 10:06 AM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 09-01-2016, 04:45 PM
  3. Trump Campaign Says He Won't Be Releasing Taxes
    By Antischism in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 07-28-2016, 05:39 PM
  4. Trump & Sanders to Raise Taxes on the Poor
    By jct74 in forum Ron Paul Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2016, 09:55 AM
  5. Millions upon millions of jobs under a President Trump
    By Jan2017 in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-30-2015, 07:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •