LyrArc Article Gist
Key aspects of the new tax plan of the Trump administration are a 35% top tax rate for individuals, instead of the current 39.6% top rate, and lower brackets at 10% and 25%. Standard deductions are to be doubled, other deductions except for mortgage interest and charitable giving, are to be eliminated. The deduction for state and local taxes will be eliminated, with this hurting residents of high local tax states such as New Jersey, New York, and California. Gary Cohn, head of the National Economic Council and Treasury Secretary, Steven Mnuchin,  have helped formulate the plan. Cohn sees a big opportunity here for a huge tax cut and simplifying the tax system. The corporate tax rate would drop from 35% to 15%, and future foreign profits would owe little or no taxes. Corporate tax rates are lower in the UK, Germany and Japan- closer to 20%, and France has a similar 35% corporate tax rate. The hope of the Trump administration is that this will generate 3% GDP growth rate and spur creation of jobs. Still to be decided at what level tax brackets for individuals will be set, and what level earlier foreign profits will be taxed, and the child care break. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Trump tax cuts were seen as helping people in the 95th to 99th percentile for most of the gains by the Tax Policy Center, with little benefit to lower income households. Penn Wharton Model shows for the bottom 60% of the taxpayers the after tax benefit is only 1.5% with much larger gains for wealthy households if they are renewed in 2025. Democrats and Biden who say no taxes will increase for people making over $400,000 a year may prefer to let the Trump tax cuts expire in 2025 and make targeted changes to bring fairness.

LyrArc Article Gist
Germany's increased borrowing and tax breaks for business to increase growth- Germany's version of DJT's US Tax Cuts Bill.

Chancellor Merz and Finance Minister Klingbeil of the two main parties CDU and SPD have put forward this bill to increase growth and productivity, with increased investment from business and government. The debt brake in the German constitution was taken out for increased borrowing.

Merz told the German parliament-

“None of us is doing this lightly. We know that this will place a considerable burden on future budgets, including interest obligations in future budgets. But the alternative — doing nothing, not enabling investment, especially from the private sector in Germany — is not a better option.”

Germany like the US is taking an approach of investing for growth to chart a new future.

LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ cautions about thinking that the GDP growth of 3% is likely to be achieved with the Trump plan for a corporate tax rate of 15%. He says evidence from Britain and Canada- Britain reducing the tax rate from 30% in 2007 to 19% today, and Canada from 28% in 2000 to 21% in 2004- is disappointing. In Britain the increase in GDP averaged about 0.1% a year. Business investment increases with cut in corporate taxes, and the U.S. corporate tax rate is higher than other advanced countries such as Germany, yet GDP growth includes other factors, such as the business cycle, demographics, productivity growth, aging, technology, regulation, says Ip. It is better if the tax cuts are spread broadly over the population, and tax cuts are offset to a greater extent by savings in other areas, and that tax cuts promote productivity boosting investment, to create enough of a surge in growth above 2%.

LyrArc Article Gist
The corporate share buybacks announced by U.S. companies in the last 3 months now exceed $200 billion, more than double than in 2017, according to a WSJ analysis. This includes Cisco, Wells Fargo, AbbVie, Amgen, Alphabet (Google). The surge in corporate buybacks started in December after the tax cut of the Trump administration cut U.S. taxes by $1.5 trillion over a decade, cutting the corporate tax rate for large companies from 35% to 21%. The tax cut also included a one time tax for repatriation of $2 trillion held by U.S. companies overseas. This WSJ analysis says there are questions whether the tax cut is working, whether it will encourage new investment, lead to companies increasing wages, or whether this will largely result in corporations returning money to investors with larger dividends and corporate buybacks. Morgan Stanley's analysis of earnings transcripts of companies in the S&P 500 show 44% of the companies say they will use some portion of the tax gains to make capital investments and increase wages, with 28% going in the opposite direction and using them to return money to shareholders. Experts caution that corporate buybacks do not always lead to the company's stock outperforming the stock market. The future of companies depends more on the capital investments and in human capital. There is a sense that workers wages have stagnated since the mortgage financial crisis in 2008, with the economic crisis, globalization and outsourcing, reduced alternatives for workers, geographic pressures in relocation, all pushing wages down.  This is being closely watched with articles on stagnation in wage growth this week in the NYT and WSJ, and earlier in the Economist magazine. Reports on the Trump administration tax cuts passed by a Republican Congress suggested a large tilt towards benefitting the highest income households. Problem with higher stock prices reaching the broader middle class are recognized in that one third of stocks are owned by overseas investors, and 84% of the remaining stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10%. Republicans have turned to bonuses typically of $1000 per person given by companies yet this amounts now to about a few billion dollars over an estimated 4 million Americans, says this WSJ analysis. This is not enough to justify a huge tax cut and raise the deficit by over a trillion over 10 years on the assumption that it would lead to higher wages or capital investment when about $200 billion goes to boosting stock prices. This comes at a time when the American middle class is not broadly invested in the stock market after the exit following the battering stock prices took during the 2008 financial crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the federal tax rate for the top 1% is 34% in 2013, according to the Congressional Budget Office, because president Obama let the high end Bush tax cuts to expire. It is the number to remember says Krugman- 34. In 2008 the figure was 28.2. Under Hillary Clinton the average tax rate for the top 1% would go up by 3.4 percentage points, according to the Tax Policy Center. Some of this would help pay for the tution plan to provide access to the middle class to public universities. Under populist Trump, Krugman points to the elimination of the inheritance tax and tax rates going down substantially, and no such programs to promote the upward mobility that everyone is talking about, and no way to pay for a big infrastructure building effort for growth and jobs- upward mobility that is the focus of every candidate's election campaign including Sanders, Trump in appealing to older white working class families, Clinton, Ryan, Bush, and others in both parties.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) who seeks deeper spending cuts, Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) who sees Medicaid co pay for able bodied at 100% of federal poverty level as a "sick tax," Lisa Murkowski who differs on taxing providers, and other Congressmen and Women in the Republican party are opposing the new tax cut package of president Trump. Senator Rand Paul (R- Kentucky opposes the raising of the debt ceiling, and is also opposed.

Most of the main Medicaid cuts come after 2029 after Trump no longer is president, so that Republicans who want to see the shrinking of the Medicaid program so it meets only needs of the most needy, want to see faster cuts while Trump is president. And there are other Republicans in Congress who face tight elections and see big risks of losing their seats.

 

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's 2017 budget is an effort to reshape spending priorities by the Republican party. Apart from Medicare and Social Security all other entitlement programs from the days of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society are subject to cuts. Deep cuts to Medicaid and food stamps, including introducing work requirements. The philosophy behind it is that compassion will now be measured not by how large these programs are but by how much the government can get people "off these programs and back in charge of their lives,"  according to Budget Director Mulvaney.  The cuts are $616 billion to Medicaid and Children's Health programs, $193 billion in cuts to Food Stamps, $143 billion in student loans, $72 billion in disability programs. The overhaul of the Affordable Health Care Act is part of this change. The reallocation would put more money into infrastructure for $200 billion, and in tax cuts, $19 billion in a parental leave program and $29 billion for veterans programs, plus added spending on the military. William Hoagland of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Republican who worked on budget issues says it will be politically difficult as the cuts to lower income groups come with tax cuts for small businesses and higher income individuals.  Beyond the policy priorities there is an area where both Republicans and Democrats are skeptical of the budget. This is how it impacts the U.S. debt. Under Congressional Budget Office estimates the U.S. debt as a percentage of GDP which rose to about 75% after the Great Recession starting in 2008, is projected to grow to about 85%. In sharp contrast the Trump administration estimates of the Office of Management and Budget are for it to drop to 65% based on rosier estimates of 2% inflation, 3% growth for the decade ahead. Experts say this is unlikely once the Fed raises interest rates and the unemployment rate currently at 4.4% leads to rising inflation, undercutting growth which has remained below 2% for a long period. These concerns are also voiced by Hilsenrath in the WSJ based on the experience of other countries such a Britain that cut corporate taxes without seeing an uptick in economic growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Hear this America- Trumps call to end tax on social security benefits is a HUGE MISTAKE. It will result in seniors getting an average of about $560 now in exchange for a cut in social security by 25% in 2033 only 9 years from now, and Medicare insolvency 6 years from now. The insolvency dates and cuts are estimates of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

Senator Larson says Trump's plan to end tax on social security benefits is "a fatal mistake," because it does not make up for the lost revenue.The Committee for Responsible Federal Budget, bipartisan budget evaluation says it will bring forward by 6 years Medicare insolvency from 2037 to 2031 just 6 years from now, and advance Social Security Fund insolvency by 1 year from 2034 to 2033. It will lead to a cut in Social Security benefits of 25% in 2033 which would have dangerous and tragic consequences for seniors in America pushing many into poverty.

LyrArc Article Gist
 Donald trumps economic plan would worsen the country's economy through extravagant borrowing and lower economic growth in the long run. Because it lowers taxes by 15 percent without any paired cuts Trump's plan would worsen the deficit, so that large debt would hurt the economy in the long run. Clinton's plan would increase taxes by 4  percent largely on high incomes so as not to hurt consumer spending, with paired spending to help lower income households. Because Trump's tax cuts benefits go disproportionately to higher incomes the benefits in terms of consumer spending are slight or insignificant. In the current state of weak income gains of the last ten years it would take some time for the middle and working class to recover. Clinton's plan carefully nudges that recovery forward without aggravating the debt, so that as incomes and net worth recovers across broad parts of the population, the U.S. is poised to go forward with strong growth as in the postwar years. Trump's plan frontloads tax benefits to higher incomes at the expense of worsening debt and enlarging future debt. In the process it worsens income disparities already aggravated by the 2008 financial crisis. Reducing the chances of a broad based recovery for all parts of the population, necessary for a strong recovery.                       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
WSJ shows breakdown on federal spending hikes and cuts in the big DJT US Tax Bill. 2025 US Tax Bill renews the tax cuts put in place by Trump in his first term that expire in 2017. About $2.75 trillion in spending increases are not offset says WSJ. Briefly it has spending hikes for $2.18 trillion      DJT Tax Cuts from first term  $1.31 trillion       Increase Standard Deduction $820 billion         Deduction for businesses $797 billion         Child tax credit $1.41 trillion        Limits on Alternative Minimum Tax The goal is to promote business growth and help small business owners, parents with children, help ordinary Americans take more in take home pay during cost of living pressures for the average American. Savings come from $1.87 trillion repealing personal dependent exemption and $916 billion from capping state and local tax deductions. Added savings from repealing clean energy tax incentives and EV credits. Increasing work requirements for Medicaid saves $625 billion, tution aid cuts $346 billion, $300 billion from SNAP changes.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The $3.5 trillion bill of president Biden to help America get back on its feet after the pandemic and after years of neglect of infrastructure, manufacturing technologies, child care, health and education, is that much only if offsetting tax increases and spending cuts are not included. When this is taken into account the US is spending about $871 billion to rebuild its economy and for a better life for Americans. That is the estimate provided in the report September 13 by the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

Experts say that if president Trump's bill- Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was calculated without offsetting cuts and tax increases the same bill would be $5.5 trillion package.

LyrArc Article Gist
A Trump-Vance nomination with its huge tariffs inside a Republican shell with its preference for tax cuts is with a large degree of certainty likely to put America further behind China, slipping even further by a decade. And slipping in renewable energy and in meeting the aspirations of ordinary Americans. Most of the public does not realize that Trump-Vance 60% tariffs and Republican preference for tax cuts over infrastructure spending would create inflation and lack of growth in a Trump-Vance second term. Things would get worse because of the contradictions existing in the choice of tariff preferring Trump in a Republican party that sees tax cuts not infrastructure spending -even when desperately needed- as the answer to every economic problem. Without a clear policy of making the trillion dollar investments in the US economy, in manufacturing, in renewable energy, in chips and science, as it has under Biden the US under Trump-Vance policies would have two serious problems- first it would revive inflation. 60% tariffs on Chinese imports and 10% tariffs on other nations proposed by Trump-Vance would increase inflation. In the absence of the infrastructure investment that Biden has put in place it would create both a lack of growth for the jobs missing that come from infrastructure that is badly needed in a aging dilapidated infrastructure economy, and the inflation that the high tariffs would engineer. The benefits would not be great if China chooses to find other ways to conduct business and continues to keep its currency at levels that promote its exports. Even today Chinese products enter the US through other countries or when China builds factories in the US as Japan has done. The Republican aversion to tackling Chinese industrial challenges in the same way that China does by actively supporting American manufacturers would give China another decade of advantage as America slips even further behind in chips, science and manufacturing. This is the real problem in mixing Trump-Vance to the Republican philosophies on the economy which are not right for this point in time whatever their merits may have been in the 1980's when America was the industrial leader in the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman in the NYT cites president Trump's reference in an interview with the Economist magazine to the expression "priming the pump." Trump in that interview in May 2017 said he had come with the expression and feels good about it. "Priming the pump" is an expression used by president Franklin Roosevelt during the Depression period. During the depression and in 2009 the economic crisis needed a stimulus response and priming the pump. The economy today with lower unemployment is not the time to increase deficits with tax cuts for the wealthy, says Krugman. Only infrastructure spending with a long term return justifies increasing the deficit. He is critical of Speaker Ryan for supporting deep cuts into Medicaid for poor people, and yet supporting the tax cuts weighted more towards helping higher income people.

LyrArc Article Gist
US Senate increases debt limit increase to $5.1 trillion from House 3B Tax Cuts Bill debt limit of $4.1 trillion in 2025. The Big Bold Beautiful Bill as the president calls it will also make the debt limit increase permanent to avoid the brinksmanship of earlier administrations. Republicans will pass this as they assume the mantle of working for the average middle class and working class household. Republicans have taken up the cause of small businesses in the US who are supported by this bill. The bill in the view of Treasury Secretary Bessent helps growth of the economy through its 100% expensing provisions, so that the capital expenditures spending of small and large businesses on equipment and buildings that is now held up will take place  rapidly in the coming year. The 3B Tax Cuts Bill does decrease the taxes of the higher income households, yet it also decreases the taxes of small business owners, and of people in the middle income range. Similar bills in the Reagan period led to a larger share of national income going to a majority of the population, and increasing growth and investment. This bill's expensing provisions goes a step further to release capex energies. During the Carter period before Reagan and the Biden period before Trump's second term the lower income classes were cheated out of their income's propensity for a better standard of living by inflation. Republican administration of DJT has focused on inflation to help working class people and focused on capital investment to generate the growth that will increase jobs. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
In the third and final debate of the 2016 U.S. presidential election Hillary Clinton shows she has mastered the techniques used by Trump to use short jabs and comments to unsettle her opponent, yet doing it in a meaningful way to make a point about how she is better qualified and her program helps the middle and working class.

On taxes she added to her plan about not increasing taxes for people making more than $250,000, with the comment that it would increase her and Trump's taxes provided she said Trump hasn't "figured out how to get out of it." It also was meant to draw Trump's response about not revealing his tax returns and plans to give hugely disproportionate tax cuts to higher income people. Trump called her "a nasty women," in response, which was a point cited by media reports as a negative for women voters.

LyrArc Article Gist
A second term Trump-Vance will face uphill risks and a mess in economics from a Trumpian Republican party and Congress, says WSJ. WSJ Editorial Board says a second Trump term is not without risks. Tariffs cost 1.1% in annual growth in the Trump first term says WSJ, and it did have an impact on inflation. It would have had greater impact on inflation with the supply chain crisis of Biden's first term, had this supply chain crisis happened in Trump's first term. A second term Trump-Vance support tariffs as high as 60% on Chinese imports which would have a bigger effect on inflation and economic growth than of the first term. The key difference is that with tax cuts a basic rule for Republican policies Trump-Vance second term would not invest in infrastructure the way Mr. Biden has done and Biden will do so in a second term. As a result the economic growth is likely to be greater and inflation smaller under a Biden administration. Trillions of dollars in investment in the economy and infrastructure under Biden in a second term will be missing in a Trump-Vance tax cuts administration policy. And with it hundreds of thousand of jobs created each quarter will be missing in Trump-Vance second term. Add to this the level of clarity of stable economic policy under a Biden second term and contrast it with some of the chaos in economic policy of a Trump-Vance second term. The basic contradiction between tax cuts policy and the nation's need for infrastructure spending/rebuilding under a Republican under Trump administration will not go away, present a huge stumbling block. Chaotic policy could come from Project 2025 that says consider abolishing the US central bank Federal Reserve. This kind of erratic and unwise policy proposals are clearly not happening under Biden and Yellen. Another key difference is the cost to the economy of delays of several years in doing nothing for climate in Trump-Vance 2024-2028. Severe effects on climate if nothing is done could cause acceleration of climate negative costs which a future economy under Democrats would face, in reality the Nation would face. America's Business has taken a short term approach to climate change, when the time comes to pay the costs of short term thinking it assumes it is somebody else's problem- this happened with supply chain concentration in China the burden falling on the middle and lower classes, it would happen again with missing climate change action under Trump-Vance second term. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal looks back at president Trump's first year in office from the inauguration speech to the passage of the new tax law. Race and immigration issues form the background of much of the domestic politics as Democrats prepare to shutdown government by December 2017 over a comment by the president. This happens during a meeting between the two parties on the Dreamer legislation to allow children of people illegally in the U.S. to stay in the country, when the president makes a derogatory remark about immigrants from Haiti and says he prefers immigrants from Norway. Efforts to repeal the Obama healthcare legislation fail during the first year. Democrats win a Senate seat in Alabama. A special counsel, Mr. Mueller, is appointed to investigate the Russian meddling in the U.S. presidential election. The tax law is skewed towards more tax cuts for the wealthy than the middle class, with the increase in the deficit not justifying the cut as infrastructure and other needs in health and education require funding. In international affairs Trump recognizes Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and takes a strong stand on Iran and North Korea.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden feels the tax system is not fair for most Americans and the Trump tax cuts favored the wealthiest Americans. Detailed studies from universities Chicago, Harvard, Princeton and Treasury Department on 2017 Trump tax cuts lowering taxes for corporations from 35% to 21% for top corporate tax rate, and accelerated investment spending deductions, show much of the investment that took place after tax cuts in 2017 would have taken place anyway. And that the tax cut did not pay for itself, adding $100 billion to the national debt of $34 trillion each year. Striking was the point in the studies that said that instead of $4000 the average American only benefitted by $750 per year, most of the benefits going to the wealthiest and corporations. Many of the largest corporations tech and oil companies pay less in taxes than any notion of fairness would call for sometimes much less than ordinary workers.  Biden now proposes the tax increases for corporations to go up to 28%, higher taxes on foreign profits, and the corporate minimum tax increased from 15% to 21%. And for employees paid more than $1 million corporations not to be able to take deductions. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ provides an excellent summary of the positions of the candidates in the U.S. presidential election of 2016 on key issues, education, healthcare, immigration, taxes, national debt, infrastructure spending, and economic growth. Clinton is clear on specifics, Trump has not made clear the details of policies and talks in general terms. On immigration the 2 candidates are far apart, on issues of infrastructure Clinton plans a $275 billion effort to repair the country's infrastructure and Trump says he would make a big effort. On taxes Clinton plans to pay for spending with higher taxes on the rich. Trump says he would provide huge tax cuts, yet make large infrastructure spending without clarifying how this would be done with sharply lower taxes. Both candidates oppose the TPP and oppose trade agreements that lead to loss of U.S. jobs.

LyrArc Article Gist
The NYT, Wash Post, WSJ, and television shows such as CBS, fail to clearly give a summary of Harris and Trump policies, showing  dangers or opportunities. Key issues are Immigration and here Kamala Harris simply will sign into law in the first months of her presidency the Republican Lankford McConnell legislation that president Biden has negotiated and agreed to for closing the Border with Mexico and fixing asylum policy.  

Social Security Medicare- The Trump plan for ending tax on Social Security in effect defunds Social Security and Medicare. For what purpose? Ending the tax only gets people earning less than $60,000  90 dollars. That's correct $90, according to Tax Policy center. And on average $550. It will bring up the insolvency of Medicare up by 6 years to 2031, and lead to cut in Social Security Benefits of 25% in 2032, according to Center for a Responsible Budget.