Considering the tax is on Profit/INCOME, likely very little more than they get now.
You say “US federal government revenues increased after those tax cuts”, but offer no evidence that TCJA had any role in increased federal revenues.Again, the fact remains that US federal government revenues increased after those tax cuts.
US federal government tax revenues have been going up since 2009.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/GettyImages-591478749-fb686ce4aa5c4dc1b2ef76949bb8ea81.jpg)
U.S. Federal Government Tax Revenue
The federal government generates tax revenue through sources like income and corporate taxes. Learn how much tax revenue the U.S. generates each year.www.thebalancemoney.com
Nearly double in the time span shown.
Are you trying to tell me that the government's obligations have similarly grown?
If so, then it's time to start looking at those 'obligations', as I rather doubt that some of them really are obligations.
(Now waiting for the baseless sob story of 'it'll kill children' )
Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
Again, the fact remains that US federal government revenues increased after those tax cuts.
Further, since when government fraud, waste and abuse (that no one in DC wants to do anything about) any sort of justification for increasing taxes on those who work?
Sorry, but, no, the US federal government needs to get on a harsh and strict money diet to squeeze out the fraud, waste and abuse, and gross largess spending.
Well, the government is definitely on their side.
In my industry we need to keep our personal gear current. So I need a new laptop every few years.
Drilling down into this data, as can be done here:Again, the fact remains that US federal government revenues increased after those tax cuts.
US federal government tax revenues have been going up since 2009.
taxfoundation.org
Isn't that what DOGE did--rather recklessly, one might add--and found that they could cut only a very small percentage?
No, that's what you are reading in.
Didn't thwart increasing government revenues, apparently.
www.grassley.senate.gov
www.wsj.com
taxfoundation.org
taxfoundation.org
taxfoundation.org
A good point. The TCJA gave in some ways, and took away in others.
Such withholdings only come from earnings. So those same segments of the income spectrum had increased earnings. Everyone working in the private sector, so that'd be a good thing then.Drilling down into this data, as can be done here:
SOI Tax Stats - IRS Data Book | Internal Revenue Service
Look here for the IRS Data Book (Publication 55B), with links to prior IRS Data Books. The tables shown in these publications contain statistics for IRS collections and refunds, as well as number of returns. There's also information on examination activities, taxpayer assistance, chief counsel...www.irs.gov
and here:
SOI Tax Stats - Collections and refunds, by type of tax - IRS Data Book Table 1 | Internal Revenue Service
IRS Data Book Table 1 - Collections and Refunds, by Type of Tax
We see that the majority of the increase was due to personal income taxes paid.
View attachment 67569132
Drilling down further, looking at where the increases are, the overwhelming majority comes from income taxes withheld--i.e. withheld by employers on their employees' pay. That means the majority of the increased revenue came from payments from working people, and while that can include the wealthy, it mostly includes the middle and lower classes.
For example, in 2012 income tax withheld was 1.038 trillion, while by 2022 that figure had risen to 1.769 trillion.
These assertions doesn't match the graph you posted, which shows relatively flat collections prior to 2020 and a fairly sharp, and continuing, increase between 2020 & 2021.
I'm reading the above as an interpretation to support a demanded conclusion.So yeah, it's not difficult to believe that the tax "cuts" increased revenue, because they were actually tax increases on the middle and lower classes. Now, some people are going to argue that it's the "wealthy" that are paying this tax increase. For example, taxfoundation.org says that the top 50% of earners paid 97% of income taxes in 2024:
Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2025 Update
New IRS data shows the US federal income tax system continues to be progressive as high-income taxpayers pay the highest average income tax rates. Average tax rates for all income groups remain lower after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA).
Presumably, to make the case that the wealthy already pay too much in taxes. But when we look at the income floor to be included in that top 50%, as can be found here:
SOI Tax Stats - Individual statistical tables by tax rate and income percentile | Internal Revenue Service
Statistical tables classified by tax rate and income percentile.
We see that the floor to be included in the top 50% of earners in 2022 was only $50,339. So, again, it looks like the increase in revenue (which peaked in 2022) came from the middle class having an increased tax burden.
All that DOGE has made public is what was already known and reported in various Inspector General's reports, promptly buried by, and ignored by, Congress.
Overall. I rate this as false.
No, that is not what has happened. Wages for the top 1% have grown substantially over the last few decades, while wages for everyone else have stagnated:
www.epi.org
Again, this is obviously not the case. You're ignoring the possibility that a greater percent of income is withheld from those earners' paychecks, and more is kept at the end of the FY when middle class folks file their returns--and that's what the data indicate has happened. That's certainly what has happened to me since 2018, my colleagues who have talked about it say the same.
The 2017 bill did not affect 2017 taxes. It affected 2018 taxes, which would have been accounted for in 2019. As I recall, something pretty big happened early in 2020 that zapped a lot of people's income pretty hard, and there were a number of options to delay payment of taxes owed. We didn't return to normal until late 2021.
If it is, then you should be able to say what is wrong with it and post facts that the interpretation cannot handle. Have at it, if you can. That said, there's not much interpretation going on in what I posted. It's a fact that to be included in the top 50%, you only need an income of about $50k. You can look at that table and calculate a difference in revenues paid in by income bracket and quickly see where the biggest increases were coming from--it's in the earners who are making between $50k to $90k. Back in the 70's and 80's, that'd have been upper middle class. Now, it's just middle class.
You miss the point--DOGE had an ostensible mission to investigate "waste, fraud, and abuse" in federal spending, and they seem to have--again, pretty recklessly--done just that. What they found that could be cut was pretty small in comparison to total federal spending. When you have a bunch of zealots for cutting spending try to cut spending and manage to do only a little, that's a really good indication that cuts aren't nearly as easy as advertised.
Actually, a large part of why Dems lost was that They were focused on trans issues and other such trivia, rather than speaking to the economic issues the voters were interested in. Now: Has T.Rump drifted away from the things his voters were actually interested in? Absolutely. This gives Dems an opportunity, but only if they swear off their social issues fixation, and concentrate on what the voters want.
You got it. The left is carefully distorting that fact. This is just the required (because dems back then set a drop dead date) refused to make the cuts permanent. Yes they are "tax cuts for billionaires - all 565 of them - and for EVERYONE ELSE.
I'm all for a tax I crease on the rich but is all for naught if he doesn't close the loopholes made for the rich. Their Effective Tax Rate is what matters.
Awww, you're jealous of Sarah..
I had not reached the point where I felt the need to itemize. But a bunch of people I know took it up the ass. Real problem, not just a gripe. 3-5000k.
taxpolicycenter.org
Amazing how fast loyalists change their mind when the cult leader does a 180 isn't it?
If he does this, which I highly doubt.
Notice he's not raising capital gains tax which is where many many many of the mega rich hide their actual incomes.
Typical LW NAH-UH nonsense. True and facts are such inconvenient thinks to the left.
No. We won't.
But he got it in the headlines which is all that he wanted out of it