Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Whatcha going to with all your extra money? Go hire an extra gardener? The poors need your trickle down you know.

Gonna have to replace the minivan soon (cost of breeding).

[mocat]

xmas light fund

[Cire]

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

xmas light fund

Dude, you clearly haven't followed the xmas light thread. Because I bought smart, that was a one-time investment about 5 years ago. Follow my advice. KSUdub is wise.

[mocat]

xmas light fund

Dude, you clearly haven't followed the xmas light thread. Because I bought smart, that was a one-time investment about 5 years ago. Follow my advice. KSUdub is wise.

i didn't realize your xmas light situation couldn't be improved in any way

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Interesting chart. It seems like a lot of the criticism I'm reading from liberals focuses on what happens after 2025 when portions of the individual cuts are set to expire. This criticism is pretty ironic, given that it is the liberals who would cause such cuts to not be extended. They're essentially saying "don't get too excited - here's what your rates will be if you elect more of us to office." Strange message.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

xmas light fund

Dude, you clearly haven't followed the xmas light thread. Because I bought smart, that was a one-time investment about 5 years ago. Follow my advice. KSUdub is wise.

i didn't realize your xmas light situation couldn't be improved in any way

No. It's AMAZING.

[Dugout DickStone]

There should be more credits for SAHM and private schools IMO

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

McCain says he's a YES. Merry Christmas everyone!!

[Kat Kid]

ksuw-

do you have a site you are using to crunch the #'s?

[Kat Kid]

The one that I used had the CTC as $5,400, but aren't those going away?

Am I missing something?

[Rage Against the McKee]

The calculator I ran gave me a $600 family/child credit. Do you still get the $300 credit for parents if you don't have kids?

[Phil Titola]

Guys don't worry about the deficit this will cause...the stock market will go up! Solved!

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I'm just using a spreadsheet because I haven't found a calculator that shows its work. Without seeing its work, I can't tell whether its assumptions accurately reflect the law, and some of the calcs I've looked at seem overly simplistic and/or outdated.

Keep in mind there is a difference between the Child Tax Credit and the Child and Dependent Care Credit. As I understand it, neither the House nor Senate plans are changing the dependent care credit. The CTC is increased from $1000 to $1600 per qualifying dependent and the Senate goes from $1000 to $2000. In both cases, the phase out threshold for this credit is significantly boosted, which is important to higher AGIs. Without boosting the phase out, higher AGIs wouldn't qualify for the CTC and would be adversely affected by elimination of the $4,050pp personal exemptions.

[Phil Titola]

I'm just using a spreadsheet because I haven't found a calculator that shows its work. Without seeing its work, I can't tell whether its assumptions accurately reflect the law, and some of the calcs I've looked at seem overly simplistic and/or outdated.

Keep in mind there is a difference between the Child Tax Credit and the Child and Dependent Care Credit. As I understand it, neither the House nor Senate plans are changing the dependent care credit. The CTC is increased from $1000 to $1600 per qualifying dependent and the Senate goes from $1000 to $2000. In both cases, the phase out threshold for this credit is significantly boosted, which is important to higher AGIs. Without boosting the phase out, higher AGIs wouldn't qualify for the CTC and would be adversely affected by elimination of the $4,050pp personal exemptions.

We so very trust your spreadsheet calcs!

[Rage Against the McKee]

His calcs are probably accurate. It's not like the math is difficult.

[Phil Titola]

It was more a joke about him not being able to trust website calculators.

[Dugout DickStone]

the business equipment deduction increase is pretty dreamy

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

His calcs are probably accurate. It's not like the math is difficult.

I think it's accurate. I kept the scenarios simple.

Start with 2017:
1. AGI
2. Deduct personal exemptions (for joint filers, $4,050 for you, spouse, and kids under 18 in the home)
3. Deduct your standard or itemized deductions (I supplied hypothetical itemized deductions, which are probably on the high side for the AGIs I selected)
4. This gives you taxable income, which you tax according to the brackets I linked.
5. Subtract current CTC.

Repeat for House or Senate Bill:
1. AGI
2. No more personal exemptions
3. Subtract newly doubled standard deduction of $24,000 (I assumed that this new standard deduction is almost always going to exceed itemized deductions for middle class, especially after many of those deductions are eliminated)
4. Tax the taxable income according to the revised brackets.
5. Subtract the new CTC.

I didn't make any changes for child and dependent care credit because I don't think there are any changes.

I didn't include student loan interest in my scenarios, which deduction is being eliminated, but I still think my assumptions on itemized deductions for middle class erred on the high side.

What am I missing?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Guys don't worry about the deficit this will cause...the stock market will go up! Solved!

This is probably a good spot to update how amazing President Business has been for the markets and folks' retirement accounts. The DJIA:

November 4, 2008 (election day): 9,625
November 5, 2009 (the next day): 9,139 (the market plummets 486 points - that is incredible)
November 27, 2009 (387 days later): 10,310 (1,171 points up from 11/5)

November 6, 2012 (election day): 13,246
November 7, 2012 (the next day): 12,933 (the market plummets 313 points - ouch)

November 8, 2016 (election day): 18,363
November 9, 2016 (the next day): 18,590 (the market leaps by 227 - weird....)
November 30, 2017 (387 days later): 24,251 (5,888 point gain)

Ok, so key takeaways:
1. The markets did quite well under Obama, gaining 9,224 points from his election to Trump's election.
2. But investors sure hated Obama being elected in general, punishing the markets the day after both his elections.
3. By contrast, investors loved Trump's election, adding 227 points the day he was elected.
4. And most staggering of all, the markets have added 5,888 points in the 387 days since Trump was elected.

That's right, in a little over one year under Trump, the markets have already achieved 2/3 of the total gains under Obama's 8 years.

Which segues nicely to the NYT's preeminent economist Paul Krugman, the night of Trump's election:

It really does now look like President Donald J. Trump, and markets are plunging. When might we expect them to recover?

Frankly, I find it hard to care much, even though this is my specialty. The disaster for America and the world has so many aspects that the economic ramifications are way down my list of things to fear.

Still, I guess people want an answer: If the question is when markets will recover, a first-pass answer is never.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/opinion/election-night-2016/paul-krugman-the-economic-fallout

[chum1]

That's quite a bit of flawed reasoning. Just use this.

http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

That's quite a bit of flawed reasoning. Just use this.

http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president

Ok bub. I just stated numbers. You can rationalize it all you want, but the market's enthusiasm for Trump and tax reform is undeniable.

[chum1]

That's quite a bit of flawed reasoning. Just use this.

http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president

Ok bub. I just stated numbers. You can rationalize it all you want, but the market's enthusiasm for Trump and tax reform is undeniable.

If you look at percentages, which can also be stated as numbers, the stock market performance during Obama and Trump is extremely similar. And Obama did not have a major corporate tax cut. That seems like the opposite of what you are wanting to conclude.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

That's quite a bit of flawed reasoning. Just use this.

http://www.macrotrends.net/2481/stock-market-performance-by-president

Ok bub. I just stated numbers. You can rationalize it all you want, but the market's enthusiasm for Trump and tax reform is undeniable.

If you look at percentages, which can also be stated as numbers, the stock market performance during Obama and Trump is extremely similar. And Obama did not have a major corporate tax cut. That seems like the opposite of what you are wanting to conclude.

Extremely similar? In one year under Trump, the markets are up about 33%. They increased by 12% under Obama's first year, and that was coming out of a horrible recession. At this rate, Trump will vastly exceed Obama's market performance.

[sys]

many intl markets are up more than us indices over the same time span.  undeniable, the intl enthusiasm for trump.