Friday, December 1, 2017


The GOP tax plan is not all bad.  Obviously it is not as good at the Republicans suggest, and not as bad as the Democrats insist.  There is good and there is ok.

* Reducing the complexity and inequity of the current Tax Code is good.

* Increasing the Standard Deduction is good. 

* Replacing the personal exemption with a credit is ok, but the taxpayer/non-child credit amount should be higher.

* Limiting the deduction for mortgage interest to $500,000 of a taxpayer’s one primary personal residence and doing away with the deduction for home equity (non-acquisition or improvement related) debt interest is good.

* Limiting the deduction for real estate taxes is good – but the limitation should not be a dollar amount but, like the mortgage interest deduction, allowing a deduction for one primary personal residence only.

* Repealing the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) is very good.

* Increasing the “death tax” exemption while maintaining a full step-up in basis for all inherited property is good.  However, the main “good” is the maintenance of full-step up in basis, and keeping the tax with a lower increase in exemption is ok.

* Reducing the maximum corporate tax rate while at the same time repealing industry-specific loopholes and credits is good – but less of a rate reduction is ok.

And there are certainly things in the plan that are definitely good for some of my clients, whether or not I think they are necessarily good in general.

Two things are certain –

1) The plan is NOT a “massive tax cut” for the middle class.

2) Trump, his family, and the true “wealthy” DO benefit from the plan.  Trump and family benefit “huuuuuuugely”.

What is bad with ANY legislation at ANY time is rushing it through without proper intelligent review, research and discussion merely so the idiot in the White House, and the Republican Party, can claim a legislative victory (Trump really doesn’t give a rodent’s hind quarters what is actually in the bill – he just wants Congress to pass ANY bill so he looks good).

The current proposed legislation is certainly not what I would have written – but I would not be upset if it passed in a less expensive form.

Of course, one way to counter the reduction in money raised under the plan is to cut wasteful spending from the budget.  But that will actually take more intelligent thought and review than writing a proper tax Act – and we all know, from past history, that Congress is apparently incapable of intelligent thought and review.


No comments: