Posted on 07/31/2018 3:54:38 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
What would revenues have been like under the old tax code?
We have to keep cutting until that doesn't happen anymore.
Or raise them until revenue goes down. That also is a way of determining where on the curve you are.
The Laffer Curve is very simple, but very important.
It is, for those who take the time to look at it. But the Laffer Curve also recognizes that you reach a point where lowering rates will lead to lower revenue. The unknown in this is where on the Laffer Curve we currently lie and where we were before the tax cuts. Unless it can be shown that the prior rates would have resulted in lower revenues than the new rates did then by definition they were either to the left of mean or at mean itself. And that the new rates, while increasing revenue, didn't increase them as much as the old rates would have. And it's almost impossible to answer that.
But it stands to reason, does it not, that if you cannot cut spending to reduce the deficit then cutting revenue even more is the wrong solution. Assuming you are serious about cutting the deficit to begin with.
In order to fund government at it's current level by a 10% tax on income then wouldn't you need about $40 trillion in income to tax? And isn't that about twice our current GDP?
So is spending, and what is not known is how much higher - or lower - Federal revenue would have been under the old tax code than the new.
Capital gains benefit most working people, not just the “Rich”.
Spoken like a good establishment Republican, or Democrat for that matter, who doesn't care about deficits unless the other party controls Congress.
Thank you.
I’m not rich but I would definitely benefit from a capital gains cut. We want to retire and we could then sell out to our son so he could carry on.
As it is we will put it in a trust and he will inherit it and no taxes will be paid.
Still waiting for any impact whatsoever of these deficits.
Nope, ain’t seen any yet.
One of Trump’s major campaign promises was to repatriate money and to bring down the deficit.
Already tax revenues have risen, and money is flowing in.
It’s a good idea.
We are not undertaxed, and as long as the job creation numbers continue to be what they are, this will be celebrated everywhere but DemoKKKrat headquarters.
If they do this, more assets will be sold and taxed in life, instead of having to die never selling, and having no money collected from the gain.
How much do you think they need to collect?
https://freebeacon.com/issues/1-48-trillion-government-collects-record-high-taxes-first-half-fy-2016/
Payments on the debt is the fastest rising part of the federal budget. The CBO estimates that by 2020 payment on the debt may well exceed the defense budget and will certainly exceed all discretionary spending. But most importantly, it continues the never ending, never slowing, increase in the bloated federal government. And you don't see any impact in that?
When are we going to get around to the second part of that promise?
Enough to meet expenses. If you are not going to cut spending to meet your income then at least stop reducing your income.
FWIW, I celebrate whenever anyone gets some of their money back. Just wish I was getting more of mine.
Yet according to the story the revenue loses from the tax cut will average over $30 billion a year.
Pard, there will never be enough money to keep Fedzilla in the style to which it's become accustomed.
Well, I suppose it would produce an additional bump in economic growth while the Left spends the next five years trying to overturn it in court.
“Yet according to the story the revenue loses from the tax cut will average over $30 billion a year.
That assumes people will sell and the current tax rate is collected.
Tax policy influences behavior. Why sell and pay a tax, if you can die with the asset and give your heirs a stepped up basis?? So people do not sell. Money is locked up due to confiscatory tax rates. Little is collected.
To believe their are losses, you have to deny the reality of what is happening now.
Conversely, lower rates incentivize people to move money more freely, increasing revenue.
And beyond all that, it is not the government’s money. Conservatives know that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.