Lets call them the Obama tax increases...

All taxes will be on the table....and the mortgage interest deduction has already been identified as a target. Its worth 100 billion a year, so it could make up for 7% of our deficit.

Of course, it would slow home sales. Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

I don't think that "slow" is a very descriptive word. Home sales would fall off so rapidly we would face more economic downturns. Maybe a reduction would be a better stepping stone to phase them out over time. Maybe a 10% reduction every 3 years (30-year phase out), or 5% every year(20-year phase out) would be more appropriate. Possibly phase it out if your AGI meets a certain level.

As a holder of a 401K I would object. That was not the promise made to the American people. Kind of like Social Security. Funny how the party that says that SS is holy (though they are carrying all the gold out the back door) will now say that 401Ks are fair game. I guess because only rich people have them... Originally Posted by john_galt

There are plenty of people making a lower salary that participate in the 401(k), so it is not exclusively for the rich and saying otherwise is just plain stupid. It is a tax deferral tool, not a tax elimination tool. The taxes will eventually be paid. Plus, I do not think they would tax existing 401(k)'s, but rather eliminate any new tax deferred contributions, thus having contributions treated in the same manner as a Roth IRA.

I predict a phase out over time for mortgage interest deductions, with a floor based on AGI, will be recommended by the deficit comission.

I really don't want them to touch it, because it would hurt home sales.

Having said that, alot of that is psychological. In this era of uber low interest rates, alot of people aren't itemizing deductions. They don't know it (since everybody with even a simple tax situation feels compelled to go to H&R Block), so they thoroughly believe they are getting a big tax break from their home.

In fact, if any one of the itemized deductions falls, the others will be less used, since itemization will make less sense for so many people.

I think we are going to go down to the wire on renewal of the Bush Tax cuts (making withholding calculations very speculative right now). The dems will wait until after the deficit commission releases its findings, and try to 'horse trade' the tax cuts with some of the recommendations.

I guess next time I post I will have to hang a sign that says >>>SARCASM<<<

It's been proven time and time again - cut taxes and federal tax revenue rises (from both corporate and private income taxes). Originally Posted by northdak2003

If it's been proven time and time again, then you shouldn't have trouble listing half a dozen examples. Please list them in your response.

From what I've gathered, tax cuts never fully pay for themselves. They only partially pay for themselves.

Clip #1: Greenspan or Boehner. You decide.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrID_N_FQ_o

Clip #2: Bush tax cuts will blow 3 trillion dollar hole in the deficit, per Fox News

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6etf_z60pM

If it's been proven time and time again, then you shouldn't have trouble listing half a dozen examples. Please list them in your response. Originally Posted by Longermonger

How dare you ask for proof. We are living in the Fox News era of political debate. You just say what you want. No proof is necessary. Plus, do you know how hard it is to provide proof for stuff that is just pulled out of one's ass? If you want to know how hard it is, ask JG. He's the queen of this.

Until Congress quits spending, tax cuts or tax increases are irrelevant.

It is very difficult to prove cause and effect with taxes, since our economy is ever expanding (except lately ). Also, variations on state, local, fed income, business taxes, etc. make it hopeless. The Heritage foundation has found one interesting trend, though:

Here is a chart of top rates vs receipts as a percent of GDP. No matter what is done to the top rate, the receipts don't change much.

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartb...e-tax-receipts

Here is a simliar chart for corporate taxes:

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartb...e-tax-receipts

So...how do you increase tax receipts? If the fed gov always gets a fixed % of the GDP pie, no matter what the top rate is, the only way to increase revenue to the feds is make that GDP pie bigger.

How do you make that pie bigger? Some would argue that reducing tax rates accomplishes that goal.

Amazing that so few people realize that their federal tax went down under Obama.

http://farfromtheright.wordpress.com...obama-tax-cut/

Most people don't know about Making Work Pay, because a) They pay somebody else to do their taxes, and have no idea, and b) it was poorly administered.

Its not Obama's fault, but it had alot of problems.

First of all, alot of people who do their own taxes did not know about it. Personally, I reviewed taxes of two co-workers who had failed to fill out Schedule M.

Secondly, the IRS seemed to make no provision for people making over the cap, especially married couples. Maybe this is the fault of payroll companies, I don't know....but it seems like EVERYBODY had a reduction in withholding. If they made over the cap, at the end of the year when they paid it back, they percieved a tax Increase (not noticing the $13 a month extra that they pocketed).

The same can be said for withholding on people who could be claimed as a dependent. Their perception, when their eoy refund was squat - taxes must have gone up!

So I am not amazed at all that most people don't know about the credit.

Now, the graphs above dealt with top rates, people not eligible for Making Work Pay...illustrating how difficult it is to make comparisons with taxes.

Hey Big Mike, are you willing to say that we have had a CUMULATIVE tax cut? It is easy to give credit one, ONE tax decrease but then you have to take the heat for rising fees and taxes that wipe it out.


Of course if you lost your job and can't pay your taxes then never mind.

Of course if you lost your job and can't pay your taxes then never mind. Originally Posted by john_galt

You know John, you can't have any debate with out taking a personal swipe at someone, or trying to provoke them.

Why is that. Seriously, I want to know your rationale for it.

A fool finds no pleasure in understanding, and only delights in airing his opinion.

Until Congress quits spending, tax cuts or tax increases are irrelevant. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Be specific. Spending on what, exactly? How much? What DoD projects would you cut? The way I look at it, $3.7 Trillion in extended Bush Tax cuts are relevant.

Spending isn't automatically a bad thing, either. You do it every day. What matters is if you get a bargain for you money or if you get swindled, ripped-off, and just plain prison-raped. That's where class warfare comes in. The rich are waging a war against you and winning. They've convinced you that YOU are getting ripped off by the government while THEY (the rich) are the ones ripping you off. You see, you don't pay the same amount for government services as the rich. (The rich pay a LOT and don't use much. You pay SOME and use SOME. The rich would like to pay a LOT LESS, meaning that you will get LESS then the SOME you are currently getting.)

Democrats would like to use tax money to keep babies from dying and keep everyone healthy and productive. Republicans would like to give the upper 2% huge tax cuts so they can hoard their money in offshore accounts. The rest of the lower 98% get to pay for that shortfall.

Most of the tax changes proposed will affect our chidren, not us. They are all scheduled to go into effect years from now. We certain can't up the taxes of all the boomers who created this mess. Boomers vote.