Letter: My concerns with the GOP tax plan

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Desert Suburbanite Mesa, AZ
    Dec. 4, 2017 1:33 p.m.

    Based on the published rates, if the senate version passes the taxes on my $114K salary will go up by 10%. If I was making just $50K a year, the senate wants to raise my taxes by about 80%. On the other hand, the house rate, gives me about a 3% cut, and the hypothetical me making $50K also gets a tax cut. I guess the answer is, to vote out all the senators of both parties.

  • Frozen Fractals Salt Lake City, UT
    Dec. 1, 2017 10:07 a.m.

    Revenues eventually increase after a tax cut (it takes time after bigger tax cuts before that happens) because of inflation and population growth.

    Tax cuts themselves do not increase revenue. If they did Republicans and Democrats would be tripping over themselves to cut taxes and use the extra money to give out more "free stuff" and then they'd never lose an election again because what kind of idiot would not do exactly that if that was a thing that existed?

    Or maybe the idea that tax cuts increase revenues is just too good to be true. Probably why the Republicans are cutting 1.5 trillion in Medicare/Medicaid spending in their budget.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Dec. 1, 2017 7:00 a.m.

    To "UtahBlueDevil" the deficit is a different matter from increasing revenues. The deficit is determined by the members of Congress in their budget. The problem that we have is that Congress refuses to cut spending even when they get an increase in revenues.

    For example, in the 1980's the US had some good growth in its GDP. As a result the revenues into the government increased. The problem during the 1980s wasn't income because that was going up faster than it had during the previous decade. The problem was the Democrat controlled Congress increased spending faster than the money was coming in.

    If you want to reduce the deficit the only way is to spend less.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 30, 2017 6:21 p.m.

    @Redshirt.... "To "The Real Mavrick" read "Do Tax Cuts Increase Government Revenue?" in Forbes. They show that lowering income tax rates actually does increase revenues to the government."

    Show me one time where cutting taxes decreased the deficit.... one. I see lots of theories. But everything in the past says no. Look what happened to the deficit during Reagan (.9 Tillion to 2.8 Trillion in 7 years). Deficit tripled. If history repeats, in 8 years were looking at 60 Trillion in national debt.

    When you or Forbes can show me in practice where lowering taxes lowered national debt, I'll believe it.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Nov. 30, 2017 6:16 p.m.

    I love that this new tax plan want to tax the stipends and tuition deferrals offered by universities as normal income So if you kid gets a tuition waiver - say 20,000 a year - that now become all taxable income. This is taxing someone for something where they get no cash income at all.

    So for example, medical students. Medical School can range from 40,000 a year to over 100,000. Many students get tuition waivers or stipends to help offset that cost. But may still need to borrow to fill the gap between cost and what offsets they get. To make it easy math, lets say a student gets a 20,000 stipend, but then still needs to borrow the other 20,000 to meet expenses.

    The republicans have now deemed that this person with no income, and that in accruing 20,000 a year in debt, needs to figure out a way to now pay the taxes on the stipend/tuition waiver. For many college students - like many medical students - that means beside their residency responsibilities, they will now have to get another job to pay their taxes on income they didn't ever get to see.

    This will put a huge chill on advanced degree obtainment, sending America even more backwards. Great plan guys.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 2:42 p.m.

    To "airnaut" did anybody force your child to take out $60K in loans?

    You do relize that the damage to the healthcare system was done by your ilk under Obama, not Trump.

    If your child is going to be getting low wages, maybe they should have majored in something that results in high wages. A Masters Degree in Feminist Studies won't earn as much as a Masters Degree in Chemical Engineering. Again, your child made a choice and must live with the consequences. You may also want to look again at Obama, and the policies that he implemented that resulted in the average US wage DROPPING by $5000.

    Why it it suddenly Trump's fault for Obama's policies?

  • airnaut Everett, WA
    Nov. 30, 2017 1:58 p.m.

    My son graduates next week with a Master's degree.

    Between his $60K in loans,
    low pay,
    higher taxes,
    NON-deductible education,
    and less healthcare for his family --

    Because of what Trump and the GOP are doing is less than 12 months,
    he's seriously looking at moving to Scandinavia, Asia or Canada...

    America for now is still pretty good,
    but to young people,
    it is no longer the place to be - the city on the hill....

    the light is quickly fading...

  • Curmedgeon Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 1:43 p.m.

    @ Real Maverick -

    I certainly hope you know the difference between Revenue and Deficits.

    I stated that Revenue increases when tax rates are cut, and that is a fact. Look at the revenues after the Kennedy / Reagan / Bush tax cuts took effect. THEY INCREASED. Yes, the deficits also increased but that was because SPENDING increased more than revenues did.

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 12:42 p.m.


    How can you make the assumption that rich people paid their share along the way?

    People like you think millionaires paid taxes along the way but you forget about capital gains. Most rich people get rich off of assets not income. These assets grow untaxed hence the estate tax.

    The estate tax is more than fair.

    Also since you chide people for listening to liberal talking points would you do the same and stop listening to conservative talking points that are not based on any facts.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 12:28 p.m.

    To "Kerry Soelberg" I don't know where you get your information from, but it appears to be wrong.

    According to "The House just passed its big tax bill. Here’s what is in it." in the Washington Post the middle class and small businesses get a tax cut. Granted the cowards put in an expiration date on the cuts, but at least we get a few years of being able to keep more of our money.

    As for the deficit, how about we do something radical, like cut spending. Historically adjusting tax rates does little for changing how much the Feds collect as a percent of GDP.

    The Reagan tax cuts worked. The problem wasn't the cuts, but the increases in spending that he agreed to let Democrats have in order to pass his tax cuts. Also, we know that the cuts worked because the labor participation rate increased during the 1980s.

    To "The Real Mavrick" read "Do Tax Cuts Increase Government Revenue?" in Forbes. They show that lowering income tax rates actually does increase revenues to the government.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    Nov. 30, 2017 11:58 a.m.


    There is a bill right now, it may or may not change, but what is in the bill should be looked, praised or criticized on what is in the bill. If our legislators are truly doing their job, they will listen to that feedback and make efforts to amend if necessary what is in the bill. If we sit quietly and do nothing we deserve the government that we get. If they fail to respond, elect someone else. I know that is unlikely since today we seldom vote for people we vote for parties. My hope is that this disaster of a tax bill will be the wake-up call that the republicans do not represent the middle class.

    My wife and I make about $140,000 between us and under this bill my taxes will go up and Donald Trumps will go down. Someone anyone tell me how that will be good for America.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 10:50 a.m.

    I know some grad students that are pretty upset about being thrown under the bus.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 9:59 a.m.


    Here are some facts, since you asked for them. I calculated my 2016 taxes based on the GOP's tax reform parameters. I am middle class. I would have paid $529 more, yes more, in 2016 under the GOP's plan. If we look at Donald Trump's taxes for the year that was leaked to the press, it shows that he paid about $38.4 million in taxes. Without the alternative minimum tax, he would have paid $7.2 million. So, under the GOP's new program, which kills the AMT, Trump would have paid $31.2 million less than he did. Go ahead, Joe, spin this any way you want. You can't escape the reality that this is a tax cut for the wealthy, not for the middle class, and certainly not for the poor.

  • The Real Maverick Spanish Fork, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 9:26 a.m.

    "I know how you feel since so many things like Obamacare were passed this way."

    More fake news.

    Obamacare was debated for months, openly and transparently, the GOP was permitted to tact on their own amendments to the bill, and then it was passed to help the 99 percent, not hurt it. The GOP didn't vote for the bill after putting amendments onto it because they wanted to make President Obama a one term president.

    Again, repubs, if you have to lie to try and prove your points, then your points probably aren't worth it.

    This tax bill increases the national debt by $1.5 trillion, increases taxes for most Americans, cuts health care for 13 million Americans, and will greatly impact Social Security and Medicare for the future. All so that folks like the Hiltons, Kochs, and Dumps will receive more money.

    Is it really worth it repubs?

    "Rep. Chris Collins, a New York Republican, said donors have told him to pass the GOP tax bill or "don't ever call" them again."

    Repubs are shamelessly admitting that this is a handout to the richest yet folks are so partisan, so brainwashed by Fox and AM radio that they are going along with it. This is how Putin has maintained control.

  • pragmatistferlife Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 9:09 a.m.

    "1) Whenever taxes have been cut in the past, REVENUES to the treasury increase. It may seem counter-intuitive, but it has been the pattern."

    That's is a completely meaningless statement. Revenues always go up except during recessions. 1971, 1983, and 2009 being the exceptions.

    Lots of things make revenue go up, and with revenue increasing every year tax cuts clearly aren't on the list as a major cause.

    So far the only "economist" I can find that thinks this cut will spur growth and revenue is Arthur Laffer. Everyone else says you are being sold a false bill of goods.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 9:04 a.m.

    Shaun: "If you wait for all the details as in the final version, it will be voted on with out any real feedback from voters."

    I know how you feel since so many things like Obamacare were passed this way. I think you are misguided if you think feedback from voters will have any affect on what happens in D.C. these days. It certainly didn't during the Obama years.

    Still, throwing out criticism for a tax bill that is not even finished yet seems disingenuous. That won't stop the left from making wild claims without any evidence about what the tax bill will or will not do.

    You are right about eliminating the estate tax benefiting the rich, but that was an unfair tax to begin with. The government has no right to take half of your wealth just because you saved and invested over your lifetime instead of spending it all. Those people paid taxes on their income over their lifetimes just like everyone else. The estate tax is stealing, plain and simple.

  • The Real Maverick Spanish Fork, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 9:00 a.m.

    "1) Whenever taxes have been cut in the past, REVENUES to the treasury increase. It may seem counter-intuitive, but it has been the pattern."

    That's fake news. Dnews, you need to do a better job of vetting posts. This is deliberately wrong and devoid of factual basis. People are welcome to form their own opinions but they are not welcome to form their own facts. The facts and historical economic information are readily available. The Actor's tax cuts along with Bush's lead to skyrocketing deficits, not revenue increases.

    How does eliminating the estate tax, lowering the corporate tax, and eliminating deductions for medical bills and tuition help the middle class? The CBO projects this will increase the national debt by $1.5 trillion and those making $100k or less will actually end up paying more, how does this help the middle class? More trickle down crap? How long are we going to be using that nonsense as an excuse?

    Repubs, you've been called out. Now answer.

  • Curmedgeon Bountiful, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 8:02 a.m.

    2 things about this tax cut -

    1) Whenever taxes have been cut in the past, REVENUES to the treasury increase. It may seem counter-intuitive, but it has been the pattern.

    2) Using the 1.4 billion cost of the tax cut, that is over 10 years. During that 10 year period, the country will spend around 45 Billion dollars. It would seem VERY possible that government could figure out where to cut 2 cents for every dollar spent.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 7:53 a.m.

    @JoeCapitalist2 "Even if it doesn't, anyone can find an instance where a rich person is somehow better off and a poor person is somehow worse off. "

    We've had 40 years of this!

  • Freiheit Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 7:28 a.m.

    Cut taxes and increase spending on the military. It's the same "voodoo economics" that George H. W. Bush called out Ronald Reagan for, then turned around and embraced it. Son George W. tried it again and it gave us the financial debacle of 2008. When will we ever learn?

  • Utefan60 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 30, 2017 6:24 a.m.

    JoeCapitalist2 - Orem, UT, even though the Republicans have done all this behind closed doors and in secret, the details have come out. The Congressional Budget Office, (non-partisan) has come out with information that indeed the wealthily, corporations, and those inheriting large estates will all benefit disproportionately. In fact it is estimated that Trump will benefit around 0ne billion in the removal of the estate tax. (Kind of sounds self serving doesn't it?)

    Even with all the lack of GOP transparency, the Congressional Budget Office has put out information that the poor and middle class, and large families will lose the most while the wealthy will get the lions share. Easily available information.

    So tell us how wonderful that will be when your children and future generations will be saddled with 1.4 trillion of debt that the Republicans are putting on our shoulders? The GOP whines and shouts "reduce the deficit", but when it comes to giving the rich a return on their political donations they go silent about debt. GOP = Greed Over People

  • Shaun Sandy, UT
    Nov. 29, 2017 6:44 p.m.


    If you wait for all the details as in the final version, it will be voted on with out any real feedback from voters.

    It does benefit the rich. It eliminates the estate tax (benefits the rich), it eliminates the AMT (primarily benefits the rich but also higher middle class), lowers the corporate tax (which primarily benefits the rich).

    How this hurts the middle class and poor. It removes personal exemptions and a lot of deductions that benefit the middle class and poor. The lowest tax rate rises to 12 versus 10.

    I think it is fair to say the tax cut primarily benefits the rich at the expense of the rest of the taxpayers since it is debt financed.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    Nov. 29, 2017 6:23 p.m.

    "As the details crawl in, it is becoming clear that this plan will enrich the wealthy and punish the poor, especially over time."

    And yet the letter writer doesn't detail a single one. No specifics at all to back up that claim.

    It is a long standing talking point of the left that ANY tax cut will just 'Enrich the wealthy and punish the poor'. Does this one? I really don't know until the real details are worked out, but I am skeptical of anyone who simply parrots the mantra of the left.

    Even if it doesn't, anyone can find an instance where a rich person is somehow better off and a poor person is somehow worse off. It might not be anywhere close to being the general case, but that won't stop the leftist pundits from claiming it is.

  • Impartial7 DRAPER, UT
    Nov. 29, 2017 5:39 p.m.

    "Do we care about the deficit and our national debt?"

    Only when Democrats are in the White House. When Republicans are in, they can wreck the economy, start unfunded wars and blow up the debt, leaving the next Democratic administration to fix the mess. GOP voters forgot about the disaster that Bush created because Obama, gay marriage and "they're going to take our guns".