It might be a super duper screw the upper middle!
Politics aside, this seems to be where we are heading anyway.

How so? I agree with your characterization of typical Dem/Rep tax approaches, but it seems to me that those in the upper middle class are doing increasingly well overall, while those in the lower middle class are struggling mightily to avoid falling into the lower class altogether.

Did I just read that 401K Tax Deferred contributions will be limited to $2,400 a YEAR?!!!!!!!!!!!!

Right, I'm not arguing about the upper middle class getting shafted on taxes. I'm saying despite that, the upper middle class is continuing to thrive. My impression is that you're fairly typical- you're upper middle class in terms of assets and income, and you're losing some deductions, but you're also doing quite well with the current employment trends. So while it might not be fair, you aren't hurting, either. Quite the opposite, overall.

Did I just read that 401K Tax Deferred contributions will be limited to $2,400 a YEAR?!!!!!!!!!!!!

https://www.marketwatch.com/...llionaire-2017-10-27

This opinion piece is interesting.
A bit alarmist. And often incorrect. But interesting.

Personally, I feel that:
1) Democrats (post Reagan) typically raise taxes on the upper middle class and claim they are "raising taxes on the rich"
2) Republicans typically cut taxes for the extremely rich and say that they are "cutting taxes for everyone."

It seems this new tax bill is going to attempt to do both a Republican thing and Democrats thing at the same time.
It might be a super duper screw the upper middle!

Politics aside, this seems to be where we are heading anyway.

1) Are we heading for an economy where everyone who is NOT poor will be a "business owner"?
(Where all good jobs will be done by "contractors business owners" and all idle rich will be CEO's of investment companies)?
2) When the middle and upper middle classes have either become poor or become "small business people"
How will the government collect taxes then?
(Clearly, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have any inclination to cut government).

Did they keep the provision to kill the individual health insurance mandate?

It appears that the upper-middle class gets hit big-time (esp. in blue states), and that pays for tax cuts for corporations and the ultra-wealthy. The corporate tax cut is also partially funded via debt. Middle and lower classes get very small tax cuts that are actually much smaller than they would get if they simply got a rebate check paid out of the $150B/year that this thing costs. Of course, there are winners/losers throughout the system. Eventually, since all individual tax breaks are sunsetted after 10 years, all individual filers could/will be screwed then. This is based on prior news and may have changed. We won't know the specifics for another hour.

You can spin this anyway you like, but the vast majority of folks are getting a tax cut. Only 30% itemized and after this bill the number may only be 15%. Your are right, those is high tax states will get less but then again, they have be subsidized the most through the years but it will be mostly anyone making over $150K. So I would tell you to make more money and feel confident that you next marginal dollar earned will be taxed less.

And once again, middle and lower classes cannot get large tax cuts because they don't pay much in taxes if at all...do you suggest that we send them bigger checks?

So I would tell you to make more money and feel confident that you next marginal dollar earned will be taxed less.

yet we're still on pace this year to run a damn $600 BILLION deficit.

If we cut military spending back to the level we agreed to with our NATO peeps, we could cut that almost in half.

yet we're still on pace this year to run a damn $600 BILLION deficit.

If we cut military spending back to the level we agreed to with our NATO peeps, we could cut that almost in half.

I was a big fan of sequestration because it triggered the cuts side of the equation to some degree when politicians could not do their job.

Right, I'm not arguing about the upper middle class getting shafted on taxes. I'm saying despite that, the upper middle class is continuing to thrive. My impression is that you're fairly typical- you're upper middle class in terms of assets and income, and you're losing some deductions, but you're also doing quite well with the current employment trends. So while it might not be fair, you aren't hurting, either. Quite the opposite, overall.

Lol talk about spin. I suppose you'll tell me that in the 10 years over which most of the middle class benefits expire, I should have plenty of time to be making >1 million / year, eh?

Stop drinking the breitbart kool-aid.

Middle and lower classes get very small tax cuts that are actually much smaller than they would get if they simply got a rebate check paid out of the $150B/year that this thing costs. Of course, there are winners/losers throughout the system. Eventually, since all individual tax breaks are sunsetted after 10 years, all individual filers could/will be screwed then.

Show me with facts that the vast majority of the tax payers do not get a cut?

https://www.marketwatch.com/...llionaire-2017-10-27

This opinion piece is interesting.
A bit alarmist. And often incorrect. But interesting.

Personally, I feel that:
1) Democrats (post Reagan) typically raise taxes on the upper middle class and claim they are "raising taxes on the rich"
2) Republicans typically cut taxes for the extremely rich and say that they are "cutting taxes for everyone."

It seems this new tax bill is going to attempt to do both a Republican thing and Democrats thing at the same time.
It might be a super duper screw the upper middle!

Politics aside, this seems to be where we are heading anyway.

1) Are we heading for an economy where everyone who is NOT poor will be a "business owner"?
(Where all good jobs will be done by "contractors business owners" and all idle rich will be CEO's of investment companies)?
2) When the middle and upper middle classes have either become poor or become "small business people"
How will the government collect taxes then?
(Clearly, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have any inclination to cut the government payouts for their pet constituencies).

And while it might not be fair, it's not exactly as unfair as raising taxes on young hotties because they get to enjoy a lot of sex. Taxes and ones economic status are inexorably tangled, no?

So I would tell you to make more money...

...middle and lower classes cannot get large tax cuts because they don't pay much in taxes if at all...do you suggest that we send them bigger checks?

You can spin this anyway you like, but the vast majority of folks are getting a tax cut. Only 30% itemized and after this bill the number may only be 15%. Your are right, those is high tax states will get less but then again, they have be subsidized the most through the years but it will be mostly anyone making over $150K. So I would tell you to make more money and feel confident that you next marginal dollar earned will be taxed less.

And once again, middle and lower classes cannot get large tax cuts because they don't pay much in taxes if at all...do you suggest that we send them bigger checks?

What is "upper middle class"?

Is upper middle class in Ca different than upper middle class in Az? Wy?

To contrast. I am a londoner. My college room mate is a mancunian. Basically the same as (or as close to Manhattan v's Columbus ohio)

If we both made 100k

4 bed house in London 1.25m. 4 bed house in Manchester starts at maybe 3-400k

What you earn has little to do with it. People earning 50k in parts of UK experience better quality of life than those earning double elsewhere

I would also edit to add

I know people asset rich cash poor with out a pot to piss in who would by most measure be wealthy but income wise are lower middle class

I know middle class people with millions in assets who would not consider themselves wealthy

Money is relative to where you are and how much you have.

I shit you not. The person who owns the property over the road from me was bought out from their family business for 380m euros more than 20 years ago. My house is smaller than his gardeners.

Money is Very literally a relative measure of anything. 100k a year gets you nothing in Monaco. You could be a king in delhi.

Earnings are a poor measure. They say nothing about your circumstances and the argument you can move is fatuous because the same job in Columbus v's NY or monaco v's Delhi will not pay the same

Seems like a good argument for a flat tax. 20% on all income from all sources. Everybody pays no matter how much or how little they make.

Anyone with 3 or more kids (3 kids is close to wash 4 or more no doubt a loser) who did the Standard deduction in the past, will most likely LOSE (I am one of them). No one seems to be talking about the deduction for dependents ($4050 per dependent) is going away. So I use to deduct $12k Stand. Ded plus 5 (3kids, wife, self) * $4k = $32k new plan $24k. Oh and the higher kid credit (use to be $1k up to age 17, now will be $2k up to 16) yeah my youngest would have been in the last year of that but will now be dropped. Even with the lower tax brackets, I am looking at about $1000 tax increase (now if I made more that might change into a tax savings as the lower rates would help more)

Cry me a river...

I raised kids, never got a child tax credit, now they are in college and none of the expenses are deductible because I make above some arbitrated AGI number invented out of thin air. I can't deduct contributions to IRA for my wife. I have had to pay AMT a couple of times and I am not rich.

I am so tired of this "what's in it for me" when you have been getting all the benefits of the tax code.

How about 8 years of global central banks driving down interest rates to 0% and inflating asset prices?

Tax reform is all about getting votes in the mid term elections and appeasing the special interest groups.

The only argument against this is the deficit will raise, but when we are going to spend 50T in the next decade,

... when we are going to spend 50T in the next decade, I am not going to get hung up on a 1.5T increase...

Again, tax cuts always benefit those that actually pay taxes...why must you and others keep saying this is a negative?

My beef with the last post is taking a singular family and starting they now have to pay more when the vast majority are not going to have to pay more.

.

the vast majority are not going to have to pay more for a few years. Then the breaks for most people expire while the ones for the rich and corporations go on forever.

I guess the question comes down to how much growth are we going to get versus how much will the deficit rise?

I don't get too worked up about the equality spin put out on all this. It's only logical that tax cuts will primarily help those getting taxed. Nevertheless, I'm not totally against some progressive tax ideas. If it were me, I think I would have gotten rid of more deductions, added another income bracket at the top (after the $500k or $600k top bracket), and not have increased the death tax exemption.

Do you really believe they will take away these goodies from the middle class? About every 10 years someone comes in and either raiser taxes in general or lowers them. If the bill is such a dog, then I am sure Bernie will come in and all of you will sign up for his tax increases on the rich.

I would support this approach...the bottom line for me is I want all deductions and credits gone. Lets get some purity to the code. If we keep progressive rates but get rid of all deductions I would be for it. I just hate the constant winners and losers arguments that are happening because of the code. Is it really necessary to have 6 or 7 brackets? I like the orginal Trump plan of basically 4 - 0%, 10%, 25% and 35%.

Some one's going to have to pay back the trillion we're borrowing to give to the rich.