Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   House Democrats' tax reforms would raise taxes on households earning $1 million a year an extra 11% ($96,000), but would cut taxes of those earning $30,000 by 87% (almost $19,000). This is a terrible thing, right? RIGHT?   (cnbc.com) divider line
    More: Scary, Taxation in the United States, Taxation, House Democrats, average tax rate, federal taxes, average tax, Democrats' policies, taxes  
•       •       •

1476 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Sep 2021 at 4:50 AM (8 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



84 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-09-14 10:25:23 PM  
For the rich, yes, yes it is terrible.
 
2021-09-14 10:31:34 PM  
For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?
 
2021-09-14 10:32:13 PM  
It's a step in the right direction, so I'll take it for now. But the rich need to be taxed even more and in my humble opinion nobody who makes less than $30,000 a year should pay any income taxes.
 
2021-09-14 10:35:33 PM  

enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?


I.. think... That by a base reading of the tax code, before credits and deductions and everything, they might owe 2/3s their income? Maybe? Although that'd be insane to put in a tax document. Maybe the article added a 0 to their tax bill? Or dropped one from their income?
 
2021-09-14 10:43:09 PM  

BizarreMan: For the rich, yes, yes it is terrible.


Yeah. How terrible. Paying 12% on annual income is devastating.
 
2021-09-14 10:43:42 PM  

Bootleg: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

I.. think... That by a base reading of the tax code, before credits and deductions and everything, they might owe 2/3s their income? Maybe? Although that'd be insane to put in a tax document. Maybe the article added a 0 to their tax bill? Or dropped one from their income?


I'd guess an extra 0 got added.  Then again, I agree that anyone making $30,000 shouldn't be paying any federal income taxes.
 
2021-09-14 11:09:37 PM  

enry: Bootleg: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

I.. think... That by a base reading of the tax code, before credits and deductions and everything, they might owe 2/3s their income? Maybe? Although that'd be insane to put in a tax document. Maybe the article added a 0 to their tax bill? Or dropped one from their income?

I'd guess an extra 0 got added.  Then again, I agree that anyone making $30,000 shouldn't be paying any federal income taxes.


Yea, that's for the state taxes to pillage.
 
2021-09-14 11:17:16 PM  
As a retiree making ~32k/yr, I approve this initiative.

You young'uns had better be saving for your retirement.
That is all.
 
2021-09-14 11:19:44 PM  

enry: Bootleg: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

I.. think... That by a base reading of the tax code, before credits and deductions and everything, they might owe 2/3s their income? Maybe? Although that'd be insane to put in a tax document. Maybe the article added a 0 to their tax bill? Or dropped one from their income?

I'd guess an extra 0 got added.  Then again, I agree that anyone making $30,000 shouldn't be paying any federal income taxes.


The wife and I make well more than $30K a year and our total tax before factoring in withholding is not even half of the quoted figure.
 
2021-09-14 11:48:38 PM  
Current tax rates on $30K is $3202.  Maybe they multiply by 6 years to show the savings?

Anyway, it's ridiculous to have people earning 100 times more paying less percentage wise.    The bottom half of wage earners should be getting UBI, not drained by the government.
 
2021-09-15 12:10:40 AM  
Nearly a dozen posts and my sad rich woodcut illustration people haven't arrived yet? Thanks Obama Biden!
 
Xai [TotalFark]
2021-09-15 1:29:13 AM  
People earning $30k/yr pay tax? Why?
 
2021-09-15 4:54:02 AM  
Welp. Even if it does pass the House, there's no way Manchin will let it through the Senate.

/Farking asshole
 
2021-09-15 4:56:05 AM  
Stop fixating on annual income.
 
2021-09-15 4:57:54 AM  
Scary tag?
 
2021-09-15 5:01:08 AM  
What if you earn about 15k as an essential worker?
 
2021-09-15 5:02:29 AM  
So basically a tax cut for over 90% of Americans.

This is the kind of vote buying that I can get behind.
 
2021-09-15 5:03:09 AM  

Spaced Lion: Welp. Even if it does pass the House, there's no way Manchin will let it through the Senate.

/Farking asshole


Senator Manchin is doing his job representing all the hard-working millionaires of West Virginia.
 
2021-09-15 5:04:58 AM  
Oblig;

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-09-15 5:07:06 AM  
oops forgot,

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-09-15 5:11:22 AM  

Xai: People earning $30k/yr pay tax? Why?


Why don't they hire good accountants and avoid tax like a sensible person?

Oh wait.
 
2021-09-15 5:17:23 AM  
IIRC, the standard deduction is about 22k.  That would put the tax burden at 19,000 for the remaining 8,000.  Making the FEDERAL tax rate 237%.
 
2021-09-15 5:28:49 AM  
Huh. Even democrats.org says

"For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates."
 
2021-09-15 5:32:08 AM  
Redistribution of wealth! Socialism! Marxism! Communism! Atheism! Reverse racism!
 
2021-09-15 5:37:28 AM  
The report (https://www.jct.gov/publications/202​1/​jcx-44-21/ ) is pretty clear that it's $18,719,000,000 less revenue from that income class (not $18,719 per family). It represents an effective rate change from 4.3% to 0.5%.
 
2021-09-15 5:38:36 AM  
Putting the fundamental tax burden on the working class and off of the backs of the wealthy has been a GOP unspoken strategy for decades now. The reasoning behind it is that the wealthy elites feel the do not use the same infrastructure as the working class uses (including social safety net), they use "less", so the burden should be paid for by the working class; while they should live more ala carte and only pay for government the benefit from. They never speak this officially, but their minions do speak of this online or in personal conversations to justify their version of the tax code. It's not really about creating jobs or any of the more palatable stuff they try to use to justify pillaging the working class. It's just like everything else, it's about themselves, just as with masks, social distancing, and vaccinations.
 
2021-09-15 5:46:14 AM  

Chagrin: The report (https://www.jct.gov/publications/2021​/jcx-44-21/ ) is pretty clear that it's $18,719,000,000 less revenue from that income class (not $18,719 per family). It represents an effective rate change from 4.3% to 0.5%.


That.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-09-15 5:49:19 AM  

heavymetal: Putting the fundamental tax burden on the working class and off of the backs of the wealthy has been a GOP unspoken strategy for decades now. The reasoning behind it is that the wealthy elites feel the do not use the same infrastructure as the working class uses (including social safety net), they use "less", so the burden should be paid for by the working class; while they should live more ala carte and only pay for government the benefit from. They never speak this officially, but their minions do speak of this online or in personal conversations to justify their version of the tax code. It's not really about creating jobs or any of the more palatable stuff they try to use to justify pillaging the working class. It's just like everything else, it's about themselves, just as with masks, social distancing, and vaccinations.


I think the retort to this point is, in that case these should be footing the bill for our entire security infrastructure, from local police (who would prevent the masses from pitchforking them) to the entire military which exists to protect US foreign interests, by which we mean the assets of rich people.
 
2021-09-15 5:52:40 AM  

Elvis Jagger Abdul-Jabbar: Redistribution of wealth! Socialism! Marxism! Communism! Atheism! Reverse racism!


Absurd.  The redistribution of wealth is the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC)
 
2021-09-15 5:54:01 AM  
Remember how the MAGAs always want to get back to the good ol' 1950s?

Here's their chance to re-implement some of the stuff from back when "America was great":

2.bp.blogspot.comView Full Size
 
2021-09-15 6:12:52 AM  
I was amazed when this passed the senate.
 
2021-09-15 6:13:42 AM  
Maybe they got confused when trying to reduce 87% of a negative number. Really shocked that anyone making that level of income is paying anything after 40 years of successive parties trying to outdo each other with vote buying via the tax system.

What are we going to be up to after the combination of the Trump cuts and now these Biden cuts? 60% of households paying no federal income tax?

Remember, tax cuts are a wasteful extravagance except when we do it.
 
2021-09-15 6:17:14 AM  

Chagrin: The report (https://www.jct.gov/publications/2021​/jcx-44-21/ ) is pretty clear that it's $18,719,000,000 less revenue from that income class (not $18,719 per family). It represents an effective rate change from 4.3% to 0.5%.


Journalism is dead.
 
2021-09-15 6:30:53 AM  

hobbes0022: heavymetal: Putting the fundamental tax burden on the working class and off of the backs of the wealthy has been a GOP unspoken strategy for decades now. The reasoning behind it is that the wealthy elites feel the do not use the same infrastructure as the working class uses (including social safety net), they use "less", so the burden should be paid for by the working class; while they should live more ala carte and only pay for government the benefit from. They never speak this officially, but their minions do speak of this online or in personal conversations to justify their version of the tax code. It's not really about creating jobs or any of the more palatable stuff they try to use to justify pillaging the working class. It's just like everything else, it's about themselves, just as with masks, social distancing, and vaccinations.

I think the retort to this point is, in that case these should be footing the bill for our entire security infrastructure, from local police (who would prevent the masses from pitchforking them) to the entire military which exists to protect US foreign interests, by which we mean the assets of rich people.


Very true, but since theoretically the working class benefits from that also, they have no problem with wealth redistribution from the working class paying for that. The wealthy also can afford private security, so that is another excuse regarding not paying their fair share for local law enforcement. Not justifying it, just posting the crap I hear from them when I post the same counter arguments. It's all about moving goal posts and debating in bad faith.
 
2021-09-15 6:40:18 AM  

enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?


Hurt my head reading the headline.

Also, people earning $30k/yr probably pay no federal taxes to start with simply due to the standard deduction. It's too early for me to maths, so who knows.
 
2021-09-15 6:44:30 AM  

Nick Nostril: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

Hurt my head reading the headline.

Also, people earning $30k/yr probably pay no federal taxes to start with simply due to the standard deduction. It's too early for me to maths, so who knows.


It will probably give most a bigger refund depending what they withhold.
 
2021-09-15 6:54:10 AM  
fark yeah.   DO IT!
 
2021-09-15 6:58:07 AM  

Xai: People earning $30k/yr pay tax? Why?


Well, there's lots of them, so even after credits and incentives we still make money off them.

Also, because they don't have the money to buy their way out of paying taxes.

Poor and Middle-income also get audited at a higher rate, because the IRS knows they'll never squeeze a dime out of a wealthy person but everyone else will pay up.
 
2021-09-15 7:23:55 AM  
You know what would really raise tax revenue? Making corporations pay a fair tax rate.
But since they fund Congress critters, that's not going to happen.
 
2021-09-15 7:34:59 AM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: You know what would really raise tax revenue? Making corporations pay a fair tax rate.
But since they fund Congress critters, that's not going to happen.


Let's toss churches into the mix as well just for fun. It's long overdue.
 
2021-09-15 7:56:22 AM  
But shouldn't those lucky job recipients have more skin in the game?
 
2021-09-15 8:08:27 AM  

enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?


So they are counting excise taxes, employment taxes and corporate income taxes as part of the existing tax amounts.

The refund portion of refundable credits is also counted ( i guess as a negative number).

So my guess is making refundable credits more prominent is essentially all of that change but the number started artificially high because of the weird attribution of taxes not paid directly by the individual.
 
2021-09-15 8:09:33 AM  

Excelsior: Remember how the MAGAs always want to get back to the good ol' 1950s?

Here's their chance to re-implement some of the stuff from back when "America was great":

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 400x365]


They mean the 1950s when men were men, wifey was barefoot and pregnant, cars burned leaded gasoline, Feelthy Queers were in the closet and Those People knew their place or else.
 
2021-09-15 8:12:14 AM  

OptimisticCynicism: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

So they are counting excise taxes, employment taxes and corporate income taxes as part of the existing tax amounts.

The refund portion of refundable credits is also counted ( i guess as a negative number).

So my guess is making refundable credits more prominent is essentially all of that change but the number started artificially high because of the weird attribution of taxes not paid directly by the individual.


Sorry made the same damn mistake as the media on the 18k.

I was too focused on the stuff under the chart.
 
2021-09-15 8:14:52 AM  

Bootleg: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

I.. think... That by a base reading of the tax code, before credits and deductions and everything, they might owe 2/3s their income? Maybe? Although that'd be insane to put in a tax document. Maybe the article added a 0 to their tax bill? Or dropped one from their income?


The article is bonkers. Federal tax bracket for someone making $30k as a single filer (highest it could be) is 10% for the first $9875 and then %12 for the remaining $20125.  (Source: https://www.nerdwallet.com/a​rticle/tax​es/federal-income-tax-brackets )

Math: ($9875 * .1) + ($20125 * .12) = $3402.50 in total tax before any deductions. 87% of that is $2960 so I'm not clear on where they farked up the math.
 
2021-09-15 8:18:20 AM  
Income tax?

Yawn. Call me when they tax idle capital gains as high as labor income.
 
2021-09-15 8:18:40 AM  
Has anyone here looked at the bill yet?

Before we litter the street with ticker tape, has anyone looked to see if the bill also includes any changes to the kinds of deductions those top earners are allowed to make?

I know I'm a Debbie Downer here but I don't trust my party enough to believe that this wouldn't include a few extra loopholes that would ultimately make what the rich pay change. It's the kind of thing that would make huge political waves but quietly do nothing thereby pleasing the owner/donor class.
 
2021-09-15 8:19:21 AM  

cfreak: Bootleg: enry: For example, those with $20,000 to $30,000 of income would get an 87% reduction in their federal taxes in 2023, amounting to more than $18,700 of tax savings, according to the Committee estimates.

I thought subby was misquoting but there it is.  The dumbest thing I've read today.

Are there a lot of people that make $30,000 a year paying $18,700 in Federal taxes?

I.. think... That by a base reading of the tax code, before credits and deductions and everything, they might owe 2/3s their income? Maybe? Although that'd be insane to put in a tax document. Maybe the article added a 0 to their tax bill? Or dropped one from their income?

The article is bonkers. Federal tax bracket for someone making $30k as a single filer (highest it could be) is 10% for the first $9875 and then %12 for the remaining $20125.  (Source: https://www.nerdwallet.com/ar​ticle/taxes/federal-income-tax-bracket​s )

Math: ($9875 * .1) + ($20125 * .12) = $3402.50 in total tax before any deductions. 87% of that is $2960 so I'm not clear on where they farked up the math.


The math is fine really, but media reading comprehension decided to convert 18,000,000,000 in total tax revenue for the group to 18,000 per family. As there are more than 1 million tax paying families in that group, that mistake blotches the numbers.
 
2021-09-15 8:24:11 AM  
Can we at least implement a system where sales tax is included in the price of goods?

"What, you don't actually know the final price until you ring it up?" -  every country except the USA and Canada
 
2021-09-15 8:31:04 AM  
are they also going to fund the enforcement of this tax code?
 
Displayed 50 of 84 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.