NYT: How Big Companies Won New Tax Breaks From the Trump Administration

[ocean515]

Is that just adding to the point I'm trying to make?

Perhaps I'm not understanding the point you're trying to make.

Tax breaks to corporations have not increased the national debt.

 

[ocean515]

Federal spending was up more than $25B over the previous year - thus the federal "budget" deficit was increased.

No question.

Tax breaks to corporations have had little impact on the deficit. It's spending that has led to the increase.

 

[Luther]

Perhaps I'm not understanding the point you're trying to make.

Tax breaks to corporations have not increased the national debt.

I never said they did


I getting at there should be more tax Revenue now from company's that are coming back/staying in the U.S. no?

 

[ocean515]

I never said they did


I getting at there should be more tax Revenue now from company's that are coming back/staying in the U.S. no?

There has been an increase.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Until politicians get serious about mandatory spending, nothing will change. On the plus side, over time, Boomers like me will die off, so some correction will take place within mandatory spending in the coming decade or two.

Not so since a big part of that "mandatory" federal spending is paying interest on the (constantly increasing) national debt. The sad fact is that even if 100% of non-defense federal "discretionary" spending was cut then we would still have a federal "budget" deficit. You just can't ignore having federal spending of $4T/year while having federal revenue of $3T/year will (not might) result in a federal deficit (of $1T/year) - no matter who dies off or how big GDP gets.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No question.

Tax breaks to corporations have had little impact on the deficit. It's spending that has led to the increase.

That is much like saying that working few hours did not make you go broke faster - it was paying your bills which made that happen.

 

[ocean515]

Not so since a big part of that "mandatory" federal spending is paying interest on the (constantly increasing) national debt. The sad fact is that even if 100% of non-defense federal "discretionary" spending was cut then we would still have a federal "budget" deficit. You just can't ignore having federal spending of $4T/year while having federal revenue of $3T/year will (not might) result in a federal deficit (of $1T/year) - no matter who dies off or how big GDP gets.

Social Security and the Dept of HHS both spent more than $1 trillion in FY '19. No other agencies were over $1 trillion.

No meaningful plans to address deficit spending can be considered without looking at mandatory spending.

 

[Helix]

Don't worry, everyone. Once companies buy back enough stocks and reward their CEOs for doing that, the big raises for workers will be coming!

 

[bluesmoke]

It can't be shown, with evidence of fact, that repatriation of overseas cash has any significant benefit to the avg American. Mycroft, Ocean 515, etc. can talk about it, but they can't show the evidence.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Social Security and the Dept of HHS both spent more than $1 trillion in FY '19. No other agencies were over $1 trillion.

No meaningful plans to address deficit spending can be considered without looking at mandatory spending.

Reducing federal income tax rates had nothing to do with reducing federal spending - that was the problem. It is pure insanity to pass a federal "budget" which includes annual spending of about 25% more than annual revenue - yet congress does that on a regular basis now. So long as doing so results in a congress critter re-election rate of over 90% then nothing will change. The bottom line is that annual federal revenue falls short of annual federal spending - that (alone) creates the federal "budget" deficit.

 

[TomFitz]

And those big corporations have brought over a trillion dollars back to the US from overseas. Sounds like a good thing to me.

Here's just one corporation...

As you have probably conveniently forgotten, the critics of Trump (Mnuchin)’s tax bill predicted that the lions share fo the windfall would go to corporations and the 1%. They also predicted that most of corporate America would fritter away the windfall on stock buy backs, designed to generate rich bonuses for CEO’s and Wall Streeters. They also predicted that the Trump tax bill would explode the deficit (as the Reagan and Bush tax cuts had done).

The critics were right on all counts.

As for what Apple did with its windfall.

You posted what they said they might do.

This is what they actually did.

Apple took the GOP tax cut and made it a $100 billion stock buyback - Vox

 

[Mycroft]

Trump said it would be more like 4 Trillion no?

Also, is this 1 trillion brought back working on lowering our increasing national debt?

What do you think happens when the money is put back into our economy?

Ultimately, tax revenue increases which will lower the "increase" of the national debt.

But the real solution to lowering the increase in our national debt is less federal spending.

You got to stop digging before you can fill the hole.

 

[Mycroft]

Do you care about the 30,000 (even more than we already had) increased jobs for a bunch of Foreigners?

I sure in the hell don't

Trump Administration announces additional 30,000 seasonal worker visas | WPMT FOX43

In March, a group of senators asked Homeland Security to raise the number of available visas above the 66,000 statutory annual cap.

Talk to Congress.

 

[TomFitz]

Reducing federal income tax rates had nothing to do with reducing federal spending - that was the problem. It is pure insanity to pass a federal "budget" which includes annual spending of about 25% more than annual revenue - yet congress does that on a regular basis now. So long as doing so results in a congress critter re-election rate of over 90% then nothing will change. The bottom line is that annual federal revenue falls short of annual federal spending - that (alone) creates the federal "budget" deficit.

And?

That is the pattern with the Reagan and later the Bush tax cuts.

The White House can propose a tax bill that radically reduced income. Congress could radically cut spending. But it never does.

Presidents Reagan, Bush and Trump all told people they could have it all and a tax cut too. Congress isn’t about to have to be the ones to tell them the truth. So they borrow the money. And the PResident isn’t going to admit that the deficits is growing, so he signs the spending bills.

That’s the way it worked with Reagan. It’s the way it worked with Bush.

And it’s the way it’s working for Trump.

All of Trump’s critics on this bill pointed this out. We all know the history.

Republican Presidents have adopted reckless fiscal policies every time they got the reigns of power in my lifetime, and have multiplied the overall federal debt by a factor of six.

And neither Bush, nor Trump had the excuse of being able to blame the other party. Both enjoyed Republican control of Congress when they adopted these budget busting giveaways.

 

[Luther]

Talk to Congress.

I see, so Trump does anything a group of senators ask him to do?
It was trump who raised it?

I though he was concerned about our interest instead of foreigners interest?

 

[Luther]

What do you think happens when the money is put back into our economy?

Ultimately, tax revenue increases which will lower the "increase" of the national debt.

But the real solution to lowering the increase in our national debt is less federal spending.

You got to stop digging before you can fill the hole.

Ultimately, tax revenue increases which will lower the "increase" of the national debt.

well, going on 4 years in and Trump said(Not me) we will eliminate the national debt entirely?

Things better start moving quickly right?

 

[Mycroft]

As you have probably conveniently forgotten, the critics of Trump (Mnuchin)’s tax bill predicted that the lions share fo the windfall would go to corporations and the 1%. They also predicted that most of corporate America would fritter away the windfall on stock buy backs, designed to generate rich bonuses for CEO’s and Wall Streeters. They also predicted that the Trump tax bill would explode the deficit (as the Reagan and Bush tax cuts had done).

The critics were right on all counts.

As for what Apple did with its windfall.

You posted what they said they might do.

This is what they actually did.

Apple took the GOP tax cut and made it a $100 billion stock buyback - Vox

And what happens to that money that is used to buy back stocks? Do the stockholders put it in a mattress?

No. They put it back into the economy.

 

[Mycroft]

I see, so Trump does anything a group of senators ask him to do?
It was trump who raised it?

I though he was concerned about our interest instead of foreigners interest?

Seems he did in this case, doesn't it?

Perhaps there's an interest in it for us as well as for those foreigners.

 

[Mycroft]

well, going on 4 years in and Trump said(Not me) we will eliminate the national debt entirely?

Things better start moving quickly right?

Again...talk to Congress. Trump isn't King, you know.

 

[TomFitz]

What do you think happens when the money is put back into our economy?

Ultimately, tax revenue increases which will lower the "increase" of the national debt.

But the real solution to lowering the increase in our national debt is less federal spending.

You got to stop digging before you can fill the hole.

I know you have to keep things really simple and confine yourself to the lines they sold you on talk radio, but the reality is quite different.

The only predictions that have come true regarding the Trump tax bill were those of the critics.

Economic growth is actually slower than it was during the Obama years. Contrary to Trump’s empty claims, the economy has not exploded into 4% growth that was supposed to erase the deficit with higher tax revenue.

No one on Wall Street (or on the hill) actually believed any of that talk radio pablum. They all knew exactly where the money was going to go. Stock buybacks and bonuses. Which is where it went.

There was no explosion in capital investment (contrary to your claim). But a lot of people in the banking world got fat bonuses.

It isn’t as though Wall Street ever made any attempt to hide the fact that they were going to keep the money and conspire with Mnuchin’s Treasury Department to get an even better deal.

At least, you stopped short of reciting the long term right wing myth that lower taxes will produce revenue to erase deficits. That never happened. And it isn’t happening now.

 

[Luther]

Seems he did in this case, doesn't it?

Perhaps

there's an interest in it for us as well as for those foreigners.

Key word "perhaps"

Of course there's and interest for the foreigners. Their money leaves our economy and goes to their country of origin

Nice work

 

[Luther]

Again...talk to Congress. Trump isn't King, you know.

No, Trump is the guy who put his name on it after he said he wasn't

 

[TomFitz]

And what happens to that money that is used to buy back stocks? Do the stockholders put it in a mattress?

No. They put it back into the economy.

Do you understand what a stock buyback is, and why companies do them?????

 

[Ikari]

And those big corporations have brought over a trillion dollars back to the US from overseas. Sounds like a good thing to me.

Here's just one corporation...

That's the deficit.

30 billion over 5 years doesn't seem to come close to "over a trillion".

 

[yankintx]

Yeah, and the people who own those stocks are making money which will be invested

They don't have the $ to buy stocks, anything extra they gained by tax cuts have been swallowed up by increased goods prices due to Trumps trade policy.

Please, dont piss on our leg and tell us its raining.