So they say, Trump’s Tax Cuts in 2027 were 87% for the benefit of the top 1%?
I heard this the other night and I gave my typical anecdote that I had received benefit by seeing a reduction in taxes as well as some of my friends. I pointed out, we are lower-middle and at the time we were a single-income family. He continued to protest. The conversation dove back into the 80’s with Reagan and his trickle-down economics and there were all kinds of factoids presented. The one source me mentioned was, “I heard it on NPR.” To which I was exacerbated and ended the conversation because the was no fruit.
This morning, as I almost always do, I reflect in conversations that I have to evaluate my thinking. Was I right in saying something? Should I reevaluate my perspective? What are actually the facts of the matter? Was the manner in which I communicated, friendly or even useful? What was I trying to accomplish?
I recognized the guy I was speaking with and I even knew his name. Very pleasant guy and we have had random chit chat conversations in the past. Started with primarily a conversation about interest rates, with him sharing some rates his family had experienced and I with my current house which I had bought within the last year. I’m rather not pleased with interest rates and expressed the resemblance to years long gone by where rates were going up up up. At the writing of this article, in prime real estate it’s high 7’s and even 8 and up, depending on the investment. My friend then said, yeah, we won’t see interest rates low like we did only a couple years ago, for a long time, or something to that effect. But this is where I revealed all my cards in one statement… “I bet if Trump were to be elected again, he would turn the interest rates back down.”. That’s what set the trajectory of our conversation to crap.
My mistake.
Be that at it may. I am still going to go through and evaluate the conversation…
First, I should have tested the waters for political leanings, without something as inflammatory as mentioning Trump’s name. Sets people off in a weird way sometimes. Short answer to myself, be patient and don’t assume that everyone in “small-town USA” is going to support former Republican presidents. Truth be told, I am less fond of some of the former Republican presidents now, than I ever was. But ironically, I voted independent, up until Obama. Fun fact. Also, another fun fact, Trump wasn’t who I voted for in the primaries, leading up to his initial presidency.
Back to how I responded… When my friend told me that NPR was his source, I responded very poorly. I didn’t start calling him names, but I scoffed for sure. That was a big woops moment for me. I owe him an apology for that, to be sure. I did go to shake his hand, to which he looked me in the face and shook my hand as well… But it was not the way I like to end conversations at all. I screwed up.
What was I trying to accomplish? Looking back, and for some odd reason, I just assumed the man I was speaking with would find it, at the very least, mildly humorous or entertaining to suggest that Trump could turn things around with interest rates. Nope. Conversation went tilt, from then on. I will need to address at some point.
Now to the meat of the factoids my friend presented… Beginning with the tax cuts mostly benefitting the tip 1%.
CNN reports (efn_note)https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/26/politics/fact-check-sanders-town-hall-tax-cuts/index.html
(Su_quote) Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont appeared at a CNN presidential town hall Monday night. After his first question from the audience, Sanders argued that President Donald Trump “said he’d have a tax plan to benefit the middle class, but 83% of the benefits go to the 1%.”
CNN states, (su_quote)Facts First: This isn’t true right now, but if certain tax cuts are not extended it will be the case in 2027, according to the Tax Policy Center.
2027. Ok. So, technically, Trump did Not cut taxes primarily for the rich. But let’s read more from CNN.
The tax reform passed in December 2017 included tax cuts for corporations as well as individuals – but while the benefits for business were permanent, the individual taxpayer cuts will expire by 2027. If Congress does nothing to extend them, the top 1% will at that point receive roughly 83% of the tax cut benefits, according to estimates from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.
The same study said that for the 2018 tax year, the top 1% would receive 20.5% of the benefits from the tax cuts.
Why the 10-year timeline? That’s thanks to Senate rules that allow tax cuts to pass with fewer than 60 votes if they won’t increase the deficit in 10 years – a necessity for Republicans to get the tax reform through.
But it’s possible that a future Congress and President would vote to extend Trump’s tax cuts – even if Democrats are in charge. A vast majority of the last major round of tax cuts passed by President George W. Bush were made permanent under President Barack Obama.
Who else was talking about Trump’s Tax Cuts for the 1%?
review https://www.factcheck.org/2023/03/bidens-one-sided-attack-on-republican-budgeting/
Simple evaluation is that this was a media and Dem false talking point.
What about