Oh Dear! Did the Trump Tax Cuts Really "Pay For Themselves"?

Yet in President Biden’s latest budget, the administration’s own baseline forecast for corporate tax revenue (i.e., before the revenue effects of its budget proposals) is now above the CBO’s pre-2017 forecast for every year from 2023 through 2027. This is true for both the level of corporate tax receipts and as a share of GDP. Originally Posted by lustylad

Why on God's Green Earth do many Democrats and WTF still want to jack the federal corporate rate back up to 35%?

Why on God's Green Earth do many Democrats and WTF still want to jack the federal corporate rate back up to 35%? Originally Posted by Tiny

Seems to me that it's all about demagoguery that progressives think will sound good to voters.

Remember the Barack-Hillary debate in 2008 when Charlie Gibson asked the candidates about their opinions regarding the capital gains tax rate?

Gibson (no conservative, obviously!) noted that revenues from the tax had fallen after rate hikes and risen during periods following rate cuts, time and again.

Barack responded by insinuating that he couldn't care less about whether a higher rate raised more revenue, it was all about "fairness." In other words, he didn't give a fuck whether a tax increase might impede capital formation or fail to raise much revenue. If it seemed like good partisan politics, he was all-in on the idea!

Why on God's Green Earth do many Democrats and WTF still want to jack the federal corporate rate back up to 35%? Originally Posted by Tiny

I did not say I want to Jack corporate rates back up to 33%...I've argued for a comprehensive tax system (federal, state,local) that keeps income inequality from continuing to grow.

That is a recipe for disaster....unless you're filthy rich and even then you may go the fate of Louie the XVI !!!

. If it seemed like good partisan politics, he was all-in on the idea! Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

You mean to tell me politicians care more about getting elected than they do the overall good of the country!?

I would argue that Carter and Bush Sr are more the exceptions than the rule here.

Seems to me that it's all about demagoguery that progressives think will sound good to voters. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

Hello CM! Thanks for chiming in. Some eccie know-it-alls post too much. You post too little (and you're far from a know-it-all). Sorry if I presumed to speak for you in this thread on the issue of US tax progressivity, but it seemed like a safe bet given your well-expounded views on that subject over the years.

But to get back to my OP topic, would you care to opine on the success - or lack thereof - of the 2017 tax reforms known as the TCJA? It appears to me that more & more empirical evidence is piling up that points to their being a resounding success.

...I've argued for a comprehensive tax system (federal, state, local) that keeps income inequality from continuing to grow. Originally Posted by WTF

Wow! That sounds extremely impressive!

Sorry, but I must've missed your scholarly tome. Where did you publish such a comprehensive influential analysis?

Was it in the Journal of Economic Literature or the Quarterly Journal of Economics?

Please provide a link!

Wow! That sounds extremely impressive!

Sorry, but I must've missed your scholarly tome. Where did you publish such a comprehensive influential analysis?

Was it in the Journal of Economic Literature or the Quarterly Journal of Economics?

Please provide a link! Originally Posted by lustylad

Not my field lustylad...and evidently not your field either if you want to try and have us believe that the Trump tax cuts effectiveness can be determined with any degree of certainty AFTER a World wide Pandemic...6 trillion injected into the economy and now a war that is disrupting markets!

You sound like a little boy who wants approval for your third grade finger painting project.

Jesus, I'm kinda hoping CM will hurry up and pat you on the head so you'll run along and stfu.

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/20/78954...-gops-promises

Not surprising, if you cut taxes, you get less in revenues," MacGuineas said. "And what we've been doing at the same time is we've been increasing spending. And no surprise, our deficit has exploded."

The federal deficit this year was $984 billion — an extraordinary figure at a time when the country is not mired in recession or widespread war.

The tax cut also failed to produce a permanent boost in economic growth, despite promises from Republican supporters.

"After eight straight years of slow growth and underperformance, America is ready to take off," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said when the tax cut passed two years ago.

In fact, the economy grew 2.9% last year — exactly the same as in 2015.

The tax cut, along with increased government spending, did give a short-term lift to the economy and businesses temporarily boosted investment. But the rocket fuel burned off quickly. Business investment declined in the last two quarters.

Not my field lustylad... you see, I don't really have a field of expertise. I'm just a partisan hack who knows nothing about everything, which is why I can't stop compulsively spamming every thread and bragging about how smart I am. Originally Posted by WTF

Wow! You're finally being honest and self-reflective for a change. Keep it up!

Got any more 3-year-old articles to toss over the transom in a desperate and futile effort to "debunk" the accumulated weight of recent empirical evidence trotted out by the WSJ and Tyler Goodspeed/Kevin Hassett?

P.S. When you quote from a link, you're supposed to put quotemarks around the author's words. Or are you trying to plagiarize and fool everyone into thinking you are smart enough to have written them?

Wow! You're finally being honest and self-reflective for a change. Keep it up!

Got any more 3-year-old articles to toss over the transom in a desperate and futile effort to "debunk" the accumulated weight of recent empirical evidence trotted out by the WSJ and Tyler Goodspeed/Kevin Hassett?

P.S. When you quote from a link, you're supposed to put quotemarks around the author's words. Or are you trying to plagiarize and fool everyone into thinking you are smart enough to have written them? Originally Posted by lustylad

I always provide the link....put my commentary above the link and the article's contents below the link.


Are you still trying to act like the 6 trillion infusion of stimulus has nothing to do in skewing the numbers?

Because that is wtf your initial post sure sounded like wtf you were trying to do and still seem trying to do so!

What self respecting economist would try that?

Now tell the truth....you're not a real economist. You're not a stock broker either,right? You recieved a degree in economics 30 years ago and haven't really worked in that FCC field. Yet you come around here acting like you work for BOA in there forecasting department!

Tell the truth...the grad student in Good Will Hunting was crafted after you!

https://youtu.be/LMD2vUErcYU

...businesses temporarily boosted investment. But the rocket fuel burned off quickly. Business investment declined in the last two quarters. Originally Posted by WTF

This is just one specific data point where your info is wrong, outdated and/or incomplete.

Oh wait, excuse me - it’s not YOUR info. I mean NPR's info.

Like a good plagiarist, you failed to put it in quotemarks.

Try to keep up. Here's what Goodspeed/Hassett just told us:

"In 2017, we predicted that reducing the federal corporate tax rate to 21% from 35% and introducing full expensing of new-equipment investment would boost productivity-enhancing business investment by 9%. Though growth in business investment had been slowing in the years leading up to 2017, after tax reform it surged. By the end of 2019 it was 9.4% above its pre-2017 trend, exactly in line with the prediction of our models. Looking solely at corporate businesses—those most directly affected by business-tax reform in 2017—real investment was up by as much as 14.2% over the pre-2017 trend, slightly more than we expected. Among S&P 500 companies, total capital expenditures in the two years after tax reform were 20% higher than in the two years prior, when capital expenditures actually declined."

^^^ (Properly quoted to avoid any suggestion I am the author.)

I did not say I want to Jack corporate rates back up to 33%...I've argued for a comprehensive tax system (federal, state,local) that keeps income inequality from continuing to grow.

That is a recipe for disaster....unless you're filthy rich and even then you may go the fate of Louie the XVI !!! Originally Posted by WTF

One minute five second mark.

You can shove the link up your ass Originally Posted by WTF

I'm not a big NPR fan - so how about if I shove it up yours instead?

But first you need to tell me if your ass has recovered from all the drilling your boyfriend Matt Damon administered to it in Beyond the Candelabra.

Speaking of assholes, has yours recovered yet from the way Matt Damon thoroughly demolished it in Beyond the Candelabra?

Originally Posted by lustylad

Play them at the same time.

Adjust the volume as you wish. Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

nice art work of goddess athena!

nice art work of goddess athena! Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

You think so? The left leg got me. I don't know art, but I know what I like. Or don't like in this case.

Your comment makes me want to search for the artistic term. Or maybe it's a term of nature. That is to say her . . . dimensions look off. Her right leg looks too long. Giving her disproportionate hips. That's just my perspective.

The Greek godess of creation. This one is multi-layered. Not a simple comic joke. I thought it was creative to post all three videos. Tiny gave me the feedback I was going for. Talking numbers is boring to me.

But intricate drama fascinates me. Er go the Sopranos, Harlots on Hulu, and Soap.

Hello CM! Thanks for chiming in. Some eccie know-it-alls post too much. You post too little (and you're far from a know-it-all). Sorry if I presumed to speak for you in this thread on the issue of US tax progressivity, but it seemed like a safe bet given your well-expounded views on that subject over the years.

But to get back to my OP topic, would you care to opine on the success - or lack thereof - of the 2017 tax reforms known as the TCJA? It appears to me that more & more empirical evidence is piling up that points to their being a resounding success. Originally Posted by lustylad

Missed that earlier in the thread! At first, I wasn't sure what you were referring to when said you "presumed to speak for me" in a post. Now I see that you referenced my linkage of the Casey Mulligan piece on "who pays for big governmant," and the associated chart.

As you inferred, my main point was that if you want to finance a big, generous government, you have to soak millions of taxpayers well outside the top few percentage points of the income distribution. Tax hikes -- even big ones -- limited to the "wealthy" ain't gonna get you much of the way there.

Consequently, the tax code in European social democracies is highly regressive, as shown by the graph you and Tiny posted. Middle class and working class taxpayers there not only pay much higher income taxes than Americans do; they pay a VAT (consumption tax) rate of typically 20-25%, as well as very high fuel taxes and all manner of other levies. Typically, a middle class European pays an all-in effective tax rate (all tax types) that's actually higher than that levied on a wealthy citizen of the same nation.

By contrast, Americans who are lower in the income distribution pay an effective tax rate that's much lower than the wealthy pay. So, the US tax code is progressive, if more mildly so than claimed by those who only consider the federal income tax.

Good explanation here:

https://itep.sfo2.digitaloceanspaces...in-America.pdf

.