Ten Popular Deductions That Republicans are Limiting Or Repealing In Their Tax Bill

David

Opinions are my own...
PREMO Member
Hell must have froze over again, because I agree 100% with Steny Hoyer on this so called tax cut reform being offered by the Republicans (I'm an ecumenical abuser when it comes to corrupt/unethical/bought-and-paid-for politicians).

This is the Republican version of the AFFORDABLE Care Act. The stated desired results are the exact opposite of the actual results.


As Republicans prepare to markup their tax bill – without holding any hearings or receiving input from the public – here’s a look at a number of deductions that middle-class families rely on that would be changed:


  1. Limits the State and Local Tax deduction, which imposes an unfair double tax on middle class families and undermines the ability of state and local governments to fund priorities, such as law enforcement and education.
  2. Limits the mortgage interest deduction used by homeowners.
  3. Eliminates the student loan deduction, which makes it harder for Americans to afford higher education.
  4. Eliminates the medical expense deduction, which Americans with disabilities, long-term care needs, and high dental expenses rely on to afford care.
  5. Eliminates the deduction for moving expenses to take a new job and taxing employer-provided moving expenses.
  6. Eliminates the adoption tax credit, which allows taxpayers to claim a credit of $13,570 per eligible child they adopt.
  7. Eliminates a deduction for teachers that helps them purchase supplies for their classroom.
  8. Eliminates the casualty loss deduction, which makes it harder for Americans to recover from damage, destruction, or loss of property due to sudden events, such as a flood, hurricane, tornado, or fire.
  9. Eliminates the deduction for dependent care assistance, making it harder for families to afford day care, nursery school, or care for aging parents.
  10. Eliminates personal exemptions, which Americans can currently deduct for themselves, a spouse, and dependents and grows with the size of a family.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Steny is a lying sack partisan bot, so I won't take his word for what is in the tax bill. At some point I will run down the actual bill itself and read it instead of having it "explained" to me by the party hacks on both sides.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Steny is a lying sack partisan bot, so I won't take his word for what is in the tax bill. At some point I will run down the actual bill itself and read it instead of having it "explained" to me by the party hacks on both sides.

If it wasn't for the Government tit Steny would starve.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
hell must have froze over again, because i agree 100% with steny hoyer on this so called tax cut reform being offered by the republicans (i'm an ecumenical abuser when it comes to corrupt/unethical/bought-and-paid-for politicians).

This is the republican version of the affordable care act. The stated desired results are the exact opposite of the actual results.


as republicans prepare to markup their tax bill – without holding any hearings or receiving input from the public – here’s a look at a number of deductions that middle-class families rely on that would be changed:


  1. limits the state and local tax deduction, which imposes an unfair double tax on middle class families and undermines the ability of state and local governments to fund priorities, such as law enforcement and education.
  2. limits the mortgage interest deduction used by homeowners.
  3. eliminates the student loan deduction, which makes it harder for americans to afford higher education.
  4. eliminates the medical expense deduction, which americans with disabilities, long-term care needs, and high dental expenses rely on to afford care.
  5. eliminates the deduction for moving expenses to take a new job and taxing employer-provided moving expenses.
  6. eliminates the adoption tax credit, which allows taxpayers to claim a credit of $13,570 per eligible child they adopt.
  7. eliminates a deduction for teachers that helps them purchase supplies for their classroom.
  8. eliminates the casualty loss deduction, which makes it harder for americans to recover from damage, destruction, or loss of property due to sudden events, such as a flood, hurricane, tornado, or fire.
  9. eliminates the deduction for dependent care assistance, making it harder for families to afford day care, nursery school, or care for aging parents.
  10. eliminates personal exemptions, which americans can currently deduct for themselves, a spouse, and dependents and grows with the size of a family.

awesome!!!
 

transporter

Well-Known Member
Steny is a lying sack partisan bot, so I won't take his word for what is in the tax bill. At some point I will run down the actual bill itself and read it instead of having it "explained" to me by the party hacks on both sides.

Oh please!!! You don't want to know what is in this bill. If you did, you would have to admit what a POS our incompetent President is. So here's another option to read the text. Of course you could just do your own internet search, but that is SOOOOO difficult.

In addition to the list above, CNBC reports that alimony will no longer be deductible. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/how...lose-out-if-popular-tax-breaks-disappear.html

Student loan interest, medical expenses, doubles your standard deduction but eliminates your personal exemption (so taxes would go UP for a family of 4). What a deal for the middle class huh!

Corps get to pay even less than they do now AND the top .2% of beneficiaries get to inherit their billions without paying a penny of tax.

MAGA!!! MAGA!! MAGA!!! (if you haven't figured out who our President want to Make America Great FOR this bill ought to tell you. If it doesn't you are hopeless.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Oh please!!! You don't want to know what is in this bill. If you did, you would have to admit what a POS our incompetent President is. So here's another option to read the text. Of course you could just do your own internet search, but that is SOOOOO difficult.

In addition to the list above, CNBC reports that alimony will no longer be deductible. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/how...lose-out-if-popular-tax-breaks-disappear.html

Student loan interest, medical expenses, doubles your standard deduction but eliminates your personal exemption (so taxes would go UP for a family of 4). What a deal for the middle class huh!

Corps get to pay even less than they do now AND the top .2% of beneficiaries get to inherit their billions without paying a penny of tax.

MAGA!!! MAGA!! MAGA!!! (if you haven't figured out who our President want to Make America Great FOR this bill ought to tell you. If it doesn't you are hopeless.
Good thing you wear Depends
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Good thing you wear Depends

He confuses me when he blames this bill on Trump.

Doesn't the Congress write this Bill.

I can see that maybe Trump suggested some of these things, but he doesn't write the laws, Unlike Obama.
But please tell me, what else has Trump suggested and the Congress ignored. So how does he get the blame for this until he signs it.
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
Another insightful comment by Gillian Anderson . Eye roll

Tell us about your small business and rusty trailers why don’t you?

You, really, have no clue about Gill, the forum, or the World. But, go on with your bad self! :roflmao:

And, just to point out that SoMD is mostly conservative; just in case you didn’t know. And, no, we really have no say so in an election, but it is not for trying because of gerrymandering above and beyond to the point of ridiculousness. You’re welcome.

And, to add, since MD conservatives’ hands were tied, thank goodness a lot of Americans got tired of the bulllcrap, and elected Trump.

After what you have seen Donna B bring out in the last few days, would you really have wanted Hillary as your POTUS? Honest question. Looking forward to your reply. :smile:
 
Last edited:

Rommey

Well-Known Member
In addition to the list above, CNBC reports that alimony will no longer be deductible. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/03/how...lose-out-if-popular-tax-breaks-disappear.html
Well, I guess it depends how they will handle Line 11 (Alimony received) with Line 31a (Alimony paid) being removed. If both lines are eliminated, then it should be close to a zero-sum equation, since Line 11 falls in the income portion and is part of the taxable income. So one spouse is taxed on the money the other spouse deducted. If Line 31a is eliminated and Line 11 remains, how many spouses are going to report that? There would be nothing for the IRS to know if anyone received alimony.

Student loan interest, medical expenses, doubles your standard deduction but eliminates your personal exemption (so taxes would go UP for a family of 4). What a deal for the middle class huh!
Maybe...maybe not. Depends what you consider "middle class" and where they fall in the new brackets. For example between $92K and $200K would fall in a lower bracket than currently exists; that group would be in the 25% bracket and currently they are in the 28% and 33% brackets.
The student loan interest deduction currently gets phased out at AGI of $130K and only about 9% of the returns file for some student loan interest deduction.
Medical expenses are a biggie due to the Unaffordable Care Act, but fewer returns claimed medical expenses (~6%) than did the Student interest deduction.
Standard deduction doubled and no exemptions = $24K; Current standard deduction $12,700 and four exemptions ($4,050 ea/$16,200) = $28,900. Yes there is less deducted from income, but again it depends where they would fall in the new brackets. For the family of four with $200K of taxable income, under the new plan, their tax would be $38300; under the current law, their tax would be $42885.

Corps get to pay even less than they do now
Many don't pay anything now because they avoid exposing their income to the IRS. If lowering the corp tax rate to be less than what they are paying overseas, then maybe revenues to the US might increase.
AND the top .2% of beneficiaries get to inherit their billions without paying a penny of tax.
Why should the government be entitled to any of it in the first place? The .2% made their money and had they not died, the government would be entitled to none of it. But just because the person dies, that automatically means somehow the government should get a portion??
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
Rommey. I didn’t want to waste ‘white’ space to duplicate your post. I think you are really smart in your reply, and you know your stuff. I just want to know why Americans are taxed twice on the money that was made while working, saving for living after retirement, or giving to descendants. That has never made sense to me.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
I guess I will have to find out exactly what some of these will be. On the surface, the deductions being eliminated are ones that are largely taken by people who need it - why would someone who is rich need a deduction for dependent care expenses, especially when it is means-tested?

I've used a lot of these in the past. I do have to admit that while the mortgage deduction, SALT deduction and charitable giving are convenient and have helped me a lot - an increase in the standard deduction would largely make them pointless, especially since at this point I have a lot less mortgage interest.

My biggest concern is of course the adoption tax credit, even though I have completed my adoptions. And this is partly because adoption is not just expensive - it takes *YEARS*. And you don't get the credit until it is finalized. Depending on how it is administered, it's not like the EIC which is just money given away - tax credits lower your tax liability which means you only get money back that Uncle Sam might have gotten. And since adoptions can cost a fortune - this is just money to defray the cost. I can't tell you how much it would suck to be three years into an adoption, borrowed money to the hilt - only to have one of your costs yanked from you. (Actually I had this happen - a benefactor who pledged support and who reneged once we got home).

Most of these can be means tested but some of them are pretty small to begin with - the news has mentioned that 70% of all returns don't use deductions. I just can't grasp how small some of these have on the overall picture.

Dependent care? It's bad enough that Obamacare slashed the flex accounts for this, but now no deduction? Dependent care isn't just kids - it's for people taking care of older children with severe special needs or people taking care of elderly. There's really no need to eliminate it.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Another insightful comment by Gillian Anderson . Eye roll

Tell us about your small business and rusty trailers why don’t you?
your obsession with "rusty things" that are entirely figments of your imagination is disturbing. Seek professional help, son.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Many don't pay anything now because they avoid exposing their income to the IRS.

No kidding. I just read how Hollywood screws some of its actors who negotiate for a portion of the profits - only to find that on paper - NONE of them make a profit.
Because most if not all of them play this shell game of reporting their receipts to other companies which are the same company in such a way as to show no profit.

However, the fact that we HAVE corporate tax revenue coming in means, they're paying it.
Just as the idea that the "rich" don't pay taxes but somehow as a whole we're getting tax revenue comparable to the taxes we SHOULD get from them, works out.

Generally, my sentiment about the tax code is that it is unwieldy and huge because everyone is carving out "exceptions" for themselves.
The tax code has turned into a means to persuade or manipulate people and corporations to doing things the government wants.
 

Rommey

Well-Known Member
My biggest concern is of course the adoption tax credit, even though I have completed my adoptions. And this is partly because adoption is not just expensive - it takes *YEARS*. And you don't get the credit until it is finalized. Depending on how it is administered, it's not like the EIC which is just money given away - tax credits lower your tax liability which means you only get money back that Uncle Sam might have gotten. And since adoptions can cost a fortune - this is just money to defray the cost. I can't tell you how much it would suck to be three years into an adoption, borrowed money to the hilt - only to have one of your costs yanked from you. (Actually I had this happen - a benefactor who pledged support and who reneged once we got home).
Not to belitle those who do adopt, but why should the government subsidize their adoption costs? What drove the government to decide they needed to make that a deduction? Was it to encourage more people to adopt?
 

Rommey

Well-Known Member
From the list:
Limits the State and Local Tax deduction, which imposes an unfair double tax on middle class families and undermines the ability of state and local governments to fund priorities, such as law enforcement and education.

How is it double tax? There are only about 30% of the returns that itemize and the only way to get this deduction is to itemize, so if its "unfair" then what about the 70% that take the standard deduction? Would it also be unfair to them as well?

A person is taxed on the income at a Federal level and taxed at the state level and at the local level (assuming the state and local entities tax income). So a person paid their state taxes and the state received that money " to fund priorities, such as law enforcement and education"...how is eliminating the State and Local Tax deduction on the FEDERAL return going to affect the tax revenue the state/local government received?
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Not to belitle those who do adopt, but why should the government subsidize their adoption costs? What drove the government to decide they needed to make that a deduction? Was it to encourage more people to adopt?

Yes - to encourage more adoptions. Hard to be the family friendly, right to life party - and then not support them.

In the grand scope of things - it's a pittance compared to - well just about anything.
It's not even that BIG a "cost".
The last chart I saw said it "cost" the United States about 350 million dollars, and the overwhelming number of returns that use it are squarely in the middle class range (50,000 to 100,000). That's about what, less than one one-hundredth of a percent? This is cutting out a nickel out your monthly budget.

And it goes against tax liability - you don't get a nickel unless you actually PAY taxes first.
I can see it being eliminated - but - over time. Again, the thing with adoption is, it takes *years*, and if you plan something for four or five years only to have part of your funding yanked in year five, it's - well, it's not fair. Phase it in. I'm in favor of means-testing it, but stats show that rich people don't adopt much or apply for it.

My GUT tells me they wanted to eliminate deductions in general, so they upped the standard deduction - the Child Tax credit they kept - and now they're fighting over stuff like SALT because it looks partisan.

Actually, it's the medical one that annoys me the most - people with really staggering medical costs need it.
Ours are always high, and we still don't meet the threshold required.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
From the list:

How is it double tax?

I think the reference went off topic slightly. It IS double tax to tax income - then tax savings - and then tax inherited money - because we tax anything that looks like income.
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
I have read this and although I am certainly no tax expert , what is proposed does not sound all as bad as the original poster made it out to be.
 
Top