You’re the one ranting about how the tax code benefits the richest families in America. Then you changed to loopholes used by corporations. Your examples of loopholes are corporations which are owned by many shareholders. They aren’t owned by families. So what is your point?
See? There we go!
You are a bot. You changed whatever mistake you made into a new topic, you deflect on simple questions answered by your short vision: corporations are owned by many shareholders as if that was the point. The point was you denied that the loopholes didn’t help those “people” as stated by the constitution.
Do you know Bezos? The Facebook guy? Warren Buffet? Koch brothers? Are they janitors or $ billionaires?
Why do you think they have “charities or foundations”? You think is mostly to help people on whatever need?
WHO ARE THE 1%?
The richest 1% earn roughly half their income from wages and salaries, a quarter from self-employment and business income, and the remainder from interest, dividends, capital gains and rent.
According to an analysis of tax returns by Jon Bakija of Williams College and two others, 16% of the top 1% were in medical professions and 8% were lawyers: shares that have changed little between 1979 and 2005, the latest year the authors examined (see chart). The most striking shift has been the growth of financial occupations, from just under 8% of the wealthy in 1979 to 13.9% in 2005. Their representation within the top 0.1% is even more pronounced: 18%, up from 11% in 1979
Politically, Gallup polls find that the 1% are more likely than the 99% to identify themselves as Republicans (33% to 28%) and less likely to be Democrats (26% to 33%). A survey of 104 wealthy families in the Chicago area, led by Benjamin Page of Northwestern University, found the budget deficit was their leading worry, followed by unemployment; for the broader population, the reverse is true. Still the rich, like most voters, have eclectic views, often supporting liberal and conservative positions simultaneously. For example, Keith Whitaker, who advises wealthy families on behalf of Wells Fargo, says many of them sympathize with the Occupy Wall Street movement. A lot of them became rich by building businesses and consider Wall Street “the place where businesses are taken apart and run by someone else”.
I’m sorry you don’t realize a family and corporation aren’t the same thing. I’m not really sure how to explain that in words you’ll understand.
Now you’re talking about the top 1% in personal income. The top 1% by personal income are paying 35% of the income taxes collected. The top 20% by personal income are paying 87% of the income taxes collected. 42% of people are paying zero income taxes on their personal income.
LOL
I guess you don’t realize we are talking about taxes and personal income taxes are different from corporate income taxes. Personal taxes use 1040. Corporations use 1120. It’s awesome when you google things you don’t understand then copy/paste them.
You’re co-mingling of people and corporations to determine the 1% is interesting.
I am going to put it that simple for you to understand.
Not a single person, or corporation, same thing under the constitution, will pay willingly whatever their fair share is. They will utilize all the “help” they can find in the tax code, aka loopholes. Is that easy to understand by you or you need somebody with a better English to shove it down your brain? 
What in the hell are the republicans fixing the tax code if it’s not to help the “rich families-corporations”? If you think it is to help the lower class by increasing the tax bracket from 10% to 12%…then…sorry to tell you but you don’t get it.
Ah, so now you want to debate fair share. The top 1% make 19% of the income but pay 35% of the income taxes. That seems a bit unfair. You’d think making 19% of the income would lead to paying 19% of the taxes in a fair system. Only the top 1% and top 2-5% pay a higher percent of income tax than their income. 5-10% pay the same percent. Everyone else gets a deal.
This is huge for SV:
My God! I am losing concentration on my study to get another license!
Anybody, a corporation can pay 35%-100% for all I care on their bracket, gee!
I said that they have then utilized all the tax code loopholes to get there! They can easily earn $3B but they will go through all the holes in the tax code to pay 35% but their $3Bs are not $3B now.
Do you get it or not? Jesus!
POOR GRANDMA AND GRANDPA
Some tax credits are eliminated
The bill includes a host of changes that will impact taxpayers in different ways. For instance, it repeals certain tax credits, including a 15 percent credit for individuals age 65 or older or who are retired on disability. Right now, those individuals can claim up to $7,500 for a joint return, $5,000 for a single individual, or $3,750 for a married individual filing a joint return.
The House bill would entirely repeal that tax credit. It would also repeal the adoption tax credit, no longer allow deductions for tax preparation and repeal credits for alimony payments. And deductions for moving expenses would no longer be allowed.
Larger point is in this period where income equality has been rising, do we want another tax cut where the benefits will largely go to the top 1%, which can lead to poor getting poorer(lower wages) & the rich richer?
Soon we will have a Bernie(squared) or Warren(squared) as the President and that will be really bad…
1 Like
Amazing. It has subtitles.
This is why it seems the rich benefit the most from tax reform.
The rich will always get richer. The fact is that more money begets more money. The man who invests $1M in stocks will always make more than the one who invests $1K even if they invest in the same stock.
1 Like
Trump was NOT elected by the rich in Michigan, Wisconsin.
- Also the poor are getting poorer… so the gap is increasing.
1 Like
Yeah she could read out that whole sentence because it was written on a piece of paper. 
Republicans stop going on wars which are not paid for aka… don’t buy beer you can’t afford.
1 Like
The gap was increasing under Obama too. It’ll always increase, because the rich and poor have different financial habits.
We should cut military spending. However, it’s lower as a percent of gdp than it was in the 60’s. Meanwhile, social program spending has dramatically increased as a percent of gdp. Deficits are from rom social programs. That’s why by 2032 the big 3 and debt interest will consume very dollar of tax revenue.
Rep. favors rich group normally, but this time I see low income group is addressed equal or better.
The Rich gets Richer by virtue of having cash/investments, but this tax reform maximum helps low income people, esp below 100k income earners.
By removing state income from deduction, increasing standard deduction and reducing mortgage tax deduction, rich needs to pay more tax (after effective date) than current.
I am confident (with more clarity) low income pay less tax than now. How?
Even in my home, I see the difference.
My son, falls under low income, renting now (not own home) will get benefited by this tax reform. We, joint filing, own home, higher income and higher state tax, are going to pay more than what I pay now. Even our mortgage limit is maintained at 1.1M level, I need to pay higher tax as they remove state income tax from itemized !
IMO, this is good for country, but personally it is not helping (me) as we need to pay higher tax !
3 Likes
IMHO, shouldn’t allow mortgage deduction for primary in the first instance because in principle, there is no difference in buying asset like house, car and jet. Allowing it in the name of encouraging home ownership is going it the wrong way.
IMHO, state shouldn’t collect income tax at all. State either get funding from Federal or local taxes/ fees like property tax, permits, and similar. Allowing deduction means Federal is abetting them.
1 Like
The first modern federal income tax was created in 1894. Interest — all forms of interest — was deductible; the Supreme Court, however, quickly ruled that the tax was unconstitutional. In 1913, the Constitution was amended and a new income tax was enacted. Once again, interest was deductible.
Entire History is here
Second, you are questioning the basis how states are created and their rights. We are UNITED states, each state has their own rights, rules and balance sheet.
You are question the fundamentals here !
1 Like
Either Federal collects income tax and redistribute to States or States collect income tax and pay tax to Federal. Who is Federal serving? States or citizens?