Taxes and population control?

[JohnsonJones]

So, I've heard quite a bit about Trump's new proposed Tax Plan (or is that some of the Republican in Congress along with Trump?).  On the face of it, the media has made it sound all nice and dandy, but there is a hidden thing in it (or not so hidden if you've heard all about it) that is very political, and in fact could hurt Mormon and Catholic families more than most.

Before getting to that, let me talk about Red China briefly, from what I understand.  For years, China, in an effort to curb their population growth had a one child policy.  In essence, you were allowed one child.  If you wanted a second child, you had to pay a lot more taxes.  A third child was illegal without government approval, but if you were allowed, you better be filthy rich, because your taxes would be excessively high.  IN essence, they utilized taxes on families with children as a way to control the population.

So, how does that lie in the Tax proposals of the administration now.  Their proposal would allow families a double deduction.  That sounds good on the surface...right?  Except, as I understand it, if you have more than two children...that deduction stays the same.  You do not get any more of a deduction.  Therefore, you will have higher taxes after this supposed tax reduction, than you did previously.  Now, of my kids, all of  them (which are married, one son isn't, he'd actually benefit from this tax change) have at least four kids themselves.  Some have more than four children.  This means, this new tax, will hit my family much harder than most.  It actually could be seen as penalizing them, simply because they have more children.  In essence, this new tax will hit Mormon and Catholic families (which tend to have more children than most others from what I've seen) very hard.

If we relay back to the China principle, basically you use taxes to control how many children your families are having.  I see that this tax can accomplish the same thing in the US, it means that it's trying to restrict the US to a two child principle (which is, ironically, the same principle China now has, as it loosened the strictures on it's child policy recently).  How is this a Republican ideal?  In fact, I'd think this was antithetical to Republicans and Conservatives in general.

Now, the tax itself, could be seen as a political move in other ways.  It proposes cutting out the state tax reduction.  Now these taxes are typically higher in liberal states...which are seen as not having voted for Trump or Republicans in general.  This means, they gain more taxes from these people, without supposedly hurting their base.  At the same time, there is an idea that lower income families tend to have more children, as well as those one welfare and those in the ghetto areas of major metropolises.  These are also seen as not having voted for Republicans...and hence, they gain a LOT more money from these individuals (if they can, I don't believe welfare is normally taxed, but those who are just low income, but high enough to pay taxes still, will be punished by a higher tax) without actually hurting the Republican voting base as well...at least in theory.

In reality, from what I saw, a majority of Clinton's votes came from five urban areas (which also are some of the biggest cities in the US).  The rest went to Trump, which means that Trump actually WILL be hurting his base (and he barely won last time, it was closer than most Trumpites would admit).  I also don't think it's going to be benefiting the Republicans as much as they think it will.  Mormons are very Republican, as are the more devout catholics (the ones that tend to have larger families, those that disregard Catholic dogma and doctrine tend to lean more democrat from what I've seen).  In addition, there are some evangelicals that also have larger families, and he would be punishing these, which are also his base.   However, I think overall, they are not looking at this aspect but still thinking that these new taxes will hurt those who would not vote for them anyways, but help those that do vote for Republicans and conservatives.

Overall, I think the tax is going to cause many Mormons to pay higher taxes, as well as evangelicals and devout Catholics.  I also see it as the same idea that China established with it's higher taxes if you have more children...a form of population control...just no one (that I've seen) has come right out and stated this yet.

Edited October 25, 2017 by JohnsonJones
Trying to clarify on my children and that one isn't married right now

[zil]

11 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Their proposal would allow families a double deduction.  That sounds good on the surface...right?  Except, as I understand it, if you have more than two children...that deduction stays the same.  You do not get any more of a deduction. 

Does this mean:

1 child = 2 deductions

2 children = 4 deductions

3 children = 4 deductions

4 children = 4 deductions

5 children = 4 deductions

etc.?

If so, then folks with 1-3 children are better off; folks with 4 children are the same; folks with 5+ children are worse off.  If no, I don't understand what you're saying.

13 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Now, the tax itself, could be seen as a political move in other ways.  It proposes cutting out the state tax reduction.

Reduction?  Or deduction?  If deduction, hooray, more "double taxation" (not that we're not already paying taxes umpteen times over on the same dollar).  (If reduction, I'm not sure what you're referring to.)

[JohnsonJones]

No, it means that each family gets a standard deduction in addition to those earning the wage.  From what I understand from various news sources (and it's still a little hard to work out)  The wage earner gets one deduction, from what I understand, then the household itself gets an automatic dual deduction, which means for a family of two workers, they would get a total of four deductions.  That's it and standard across the board.

If you have one child, but both work, you still get a bigger deduction.  IF you have two children, you'll hit even with what happens now in taxes.  If you have three children, your taxes will go up.

One worker + spouse = 3 deduction

Two workers = 4 deductions

Two workers + one child = 4 deductions

Two workers + 2 children = 4 deductions

Two workers + 3 children = 4 deductions

Two workers + 4 children = 4 deductions

Two workers + 5 children = 4 deductions

Two workers + 6 children = 4 deductions

Thus, those with few children will have a higher reduction in their taxes, but those with more than two children will see their taxes go up. 

Bascially, its very similar to the China's population control plan, but phrased differently, probably to appeal to US citizens or something.

Edited October 25, 2017 by JohnsonJones

[zil]

Government is full of crooks.  They pretend to make proposals that will "benefit" people, but the reality is it's just a different way to obscure the facts so that no one can figure out what's really going on, while making it look like something a majority of voters will like - you can bet that if you got extra votes based on number of dependents, the scheme would be inverted.

I'd sort of agree with the population control thing, except I don't think tax deductions are the deciding factor for the number of children Mormons and Catholics have (at least, I hope it's not).  (I also think the Lord is fully capable of helping the obedient past changes in the tax code.)  Those for whom money is the deciding factor are on welfare and aren't paying taxes, so maybe they ought to take this and use it to limit welfare benefits instead of tax deductions...

Meanwhile, us single people are still going to be subsidizing y'all's existence.   (There used to be philosophical reasons why that was OK with me, but those reasons are fast disappearing and I'm moving gradually over into the "take care of yourselves" camp.)

[JohnsonJones]

to clarify, though there is a significant difference between the Chinese and Us plans in one area. China, as opposed to the US, is communist, so even though they have some capitalism allowed these days, they are still very much communist and hence, those who would get a third child normally are those who have higher government connections and hence higher benefits and may be able to afford the penalties.

In China, they would start losing the deductions they have already in regards to the family if they have more than one child (two children now if you qualify for that) in the past, while also having a stiff penalty added.  The proposed US plan doesn't have a penalty attached at least.

The Chinese plan HAS been seen as something that has adversely affected those who are religious still (not an easy thing to do in Red China, but there are pockets, and at times there have even been LDS service missionaries there). 

To those you single people, thanks already...you are already subsidizing our large families (7 kids), and theirs as well if you analyze the tax system today.  AS kids left the house I seemed to pay more and more, though overall, my food expenses and such went down.  (paying off a home and NOT getting another mortgage on it is ALSO a big plus in finances, probably a much bigger impact than taxes have been to be honest).

[zil]

Meanwhile, did you know that if you invert the vowels in "Taxes" you get "Texas"? 

:: running for cover ::

[Vort]

6 minutes ago, zil said:

Meanwhile, did you know that if you invert the vowels in "Taxes" you get "Texas"? 

:: running for cover ::

Eno taxes sex at one.

[zil]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

Eno taxes sex at one.

Are you allowed to say things like that on this site!?

[Vort]

Just now, zil said:

Are you allowed to say things like that on this site!?

Specifically, he taxes men at one and women at one-thirty.

What did you think I meant? Man, some people and their gutter minds...

[Guest MormonGator]

19 minutes ago, zil said:

Are you allowed to say things like that on this site!?

You are surprised?!Seriously, once @Vort and I went to dinner and I had to tell him to watch his mouth-he was offending the mechanics and sailors in there!  

For people like @mirkwood and I who have never sworn in our lives (or even heard such language!) , it was quite offensive. In fact, poor @mirkwood cried all night on the way home. 

Edited October 25, 2017 by MormonGator

[omegaseamaster75]

The proposal is to eliminate the personal exemption, and double the standard deduction. so MFJ would have a standard deduction of 24k regardless of the number of kids you have, this is an advantage for all but the largest of households, Under current law if you are MFJ and have 4 kids your deduction would be (assuming no itemization) $36,600.00.

Really they are trying to eliminate the itemization of deductions. 

Considering that the average family unit in the US is 3.14 persons most people will come out ahead or break even. 

This is all speculation and proposals at this point who knows if they are going to really accomplish anything. 

 

[zil]

1 hour ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Really they are trying to eliminate the itemization of deductions. 

That would suck big time.  It might turn out to be cheaper to quit my job.

[NeuroTypical]

Meanwhile, in tax land, I plod slowly through my yearly training, getting ready for the FY'18 tax season.  Crap the government pulls will be rolled into the training somewhere in December (or after tax season starts if they're slow).

Guess how worried my peers the professional tax preparers, with all their years and years of experience, are?  They're not worried at all.  They've seen crap like this before.  Like, every year.  Although this may be the first year your average or better person of average or better intelligence, so utterly fell for the fake news tsunami, they actually believe Trump's opening tax reform notions are akin to China's population reduction efforts. 

I take that back though - I remember Newt Gengritch's Contract With America - the comments back then were how "the poor would die and be stacked like cordwood in the streets". 

Honestly, people, take a breath.

Edited October 25, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[Just_A_Guy]

3 hours ago, zil said:

That would suck big time.  It might turn out to be cheaper to quit my job.

I’ve heard some rumblings about the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable interest deduction remaining.  

Haven't really been following the child deduction discussion; but are they also talking about eliminating the child tax credit?  That would smart a little. [Reconsidering impending birth of sixth child . . . ]

[JohnsonJones]

9 hours ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

The proposal is to eliminate the personal exemption, and double the standard deduction. so MFJ would have a standard deduction of 24k regardless of the number of kids you have, this is an advantage for all but the largest of households, Under current law if you are MFJ and have 4 kids your deduction would be (assuming no itemization) $36,600.00.

Really they are trying to eliminate the itemization of deductions. 

Considering that the average family unit in the US is 3.14 persons most people will come out ahead or break even. 

This is all speculation and proposals at this point who knows if they are going to really accomplish anything. 

 

I think the average LDS family is a little bigger than that though.  I'd say the average is 3 kids over the US, and probably around 4-5 kids in the Utah/Idaho areas.  Devout Catholics have similar dynamics, but all over the US.  Evangelicals, probably are more in the large numbers in the Southern US.  California's and the North East's one kid or no kid families do a lot to balance that out, but I'd say almost all those who have large families that are religious, are going to be Republicans that are going to wonder...what hit them.

If I were a Congressman from Utah or Idaho...I'd actually look at my constituents and put my foot down and say no way, no how, am I going to vote to allow that to take place.

[JohnsonJones]

3 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I’ve heard some rumblings about the mortgage interest deduction and the charitable interest deduction remaining.  

Haven't really been following the child deduction discussion; but are they also talking about eliminating the child tax credit?  That would smart a little. [Reconsidering impending birth of sixth child . . . ]

What's been discussed is that they will delete the deductions for larger families, but at the same time, perhaps increase the child tax credit (thoughts are around $500) to compensate a little.  The big difference is that while deductions supposedly are changed in regards to inflation (for example, last year it was supposedly around $4050, this year it would be $4150), the Child Tax credit does not.  So while it may make up the difference for one year, if they change it, that will quickly lose value the rest of the time.

The other alternative, is that some are looking to completely eliminate the Child tax credit, as well as change the existing 401K rules and/or traditional IRAs (basically, the idea would make 401K's a lot more useless, but in exchange they might make it so you can donate a lot more to a Roth IRA...which means they get tax money immediately rather than having to wait until you retire and cash out).

Personally, I can't believe you have Conservatives that are actually considering some of these moves.  I might not be a liberal compared to people here, but knowing somewhat how some conservatives think (I am Mormon...you know...and they are full of Conservatives in the church)...it seems incredible how they aren't throwing a massive row at their congressmen right now.

This does NOT punish those on welfare in regards to taxes so much from what I can tell, it is targeted almost completely at the working class.  Some states have already done assessments (I believe Florida figured it would actually raise taxes on it's general working populace somewhere between $700 and $900 rather than actually be a tax decrease) on how this actually would affect individuals.

Single individuals who take standard deductions are not actually going to be hit that hard (but I don't gather they are really going to see any huge tax return that's massively larger than what they saw before) from it either, UNLESS they itemize.  Those who itemize are actually going to be hit even harder than those who take the standard deductions.

The funny thing, from what I've seen thus far, they aren't "simplifying" taxes as they claim, they actually are making it a little tougher for the middle class in many of the things they are doing, but it's going to end up being a HUGE tax cut for anyone who makes over 2 million a year (they are going to get rid of the Minimum Tax Rate, which is something which can affect someone making over 400K to 500K, but normally the ones who it REALLY  hits are those who are making multi millions.  Of an interesting note, of what we know of Trump...almost 90% of his taxes were paid because of the MTR...if he gets that taken away, he would have actually paid a 3.5% tax rate, despite what he says, this tax "break" is all about for the mega wealthy and not anything really about the middle class, or even those who are not making a million dollars a year (in fact, if you make over 150K, it starts to hurt even worse the more you go up until around that million dollar mark).

Even the media, which is normally anti-trump seems to be eating it up and loving it and trying to convince the middle class that this is going to give everyone a bigger tax return.  I asked my loving spouse why she thought it was, and she said simply...most of them are owned by really wealthy people...they probably want that mega tax break themselves no matter what the political affiliation, even if it means it will hurt anyone who is not rich.

The more I hear about the plan, the more I can't believe the American people aren't outraged at what they are hearing...or maybe they are just so tired of it all at this point they've given up being outraged.

Edited October 26, 2017 by JohnsonJones

[Just_A_Guy]

I appreciate the explanation, @JohnsonJones.  My own view on tax rates is that while losing some of these deductions would hurt, I’m not really a fan of government trying to incentivize particular behaviors through a cat’s cradle of tax exemptions, deductions, rebates, etc.  I think the shock of doing away with everything all at once could be disastrous; but I’m OK with incrementally phasing out most of them eventually.  

Nor does the idea of tax cuts for the “wealthy” bug me too much; since they’re paying most of the taxes.  (My limited understanding is that Trump’s rates were artificially deflated in the years his campaign reported, because he was allowed to amortize and carry forward most of the billion-odd business losses he suffered some years back.  So I’m disinclined to get too worked up about his tax rates.) ( @anatess2, you’re seeing this; right?  )

Am I unhappy about personally paying more taxes?  Sure.  Would I rather see government slash spending and administer real-dollar, across-the-board tax cuts?  You betcha. But realistically, compared to other taxpayers—I’m probably not paying my fair share.  I’ll take my deductions as long as they’re available, of course; but I won’t squeal too loudly if they disappear.

[omegaseamaster75]

12 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I think the average LDS family is a little bigger than that though.  I'd say the average is 3 kids over the US, and probably around 4-5 kids in the Utah/Idaho areas.  Devout Catholics have similar dynamics, but all over the US.  Evangelicals, probably are more in the large numbers in the Southern US.  California's and the North East's one kid or no kid families do a lot to balance that out, but I'd say almost all those who have large families that are religious, are going to be Republicans that are going to wonder...what hit them.

If I were a Congressman from Utah or Idaho...I'd actually look at my constituents and put my foot down and say no way, no how, am I going to vote to allow that to take place.

The Average family unit is 3.14 persons total not kids.

As LDS we tend to extrapolate our small world view and apply it to everyone. I live in CA and aside from the LDS families, I don't know anyone who has 3 kids let alone 4 or 5 most have 1 or 2.   There are only 6.3 Million LDS living in the USA, and 70 million Catholics. You can throw the LDS number out we are so small as to not even count. There are 326 million people in the US and  Catholics are 21% of the population.  If they were organized they could make a real stink, but they have lower levels of activity than we do.

 

[anatess2]

On 10/26/2017 at 2:54 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

I appreciate the explanation, @JohnsonJones.  My own view on tax rates is that while losing some of these deductions would hurt, I’m not really a fan of government trying to incentivize particular behaviors through a cat’s cradle of tax exemptions, deductions, rebates, etc.  I think the shock of doing away with everything all at once could be disastrous; but I’m OK with incrementally phasing out most of them eventually.  

Nor does the idea of tax cuts for the “wealthy” bug me too much; since they’re paying most of the taxes.  (My limited understanding is that Trump’s rates were artificially deflated in the years his campaign reported, because he was allowed to amortize and carry forward most of the billion-odd business losses he suffered some years back.  So I’m disinclined to get too worked up about his tax rates.) ( @anatess2, you’re seeing this; right?  )

Am I unhappy about personally paying more taxes?  Sure.  Would I rather see government slash spending and administer real-dollar, across-the-board tax cuts?  You betcha. But realistically, compared to other taxpayers—I’m probably not paying my fair share.  I’ll take my deductions as long as they’re available, of course; but I won’t squeal too loudly if they disappear.

I'm seeing this.  And I agree with you.  Thank you.

 

@JohnsonJones sounds like the standard liberal.  No matter how good something is for the entire country, ii it is bad for  him, it must be some government conspiracy to squash the middle class and throw grandma off the cliff.  This is why Tax Reform cannot pass in the USA.  Tax Reform has been reduced to CLASS WARFARE.  The 5% of the population who pay 60% of the taxes can't possibly get even $1 of tax reduction in a Tax Reform plan because... "the rich...".  Which is super idiotic because your standard liberal thinks that the tax deduction of the rich is somehow supposed to end up in the poor's pockets.  You know, like the poor deserves to get the money that the rich earned.  Meanwhile, 51% of the population (who are also the ones with the most kids) are not paying any income taxes at all.   So, if they all vote, they could vote themselves out of the Tax Rolls year after year after year reducing their incentive to compete in the marketplace.

And let's review.  The tax brackets are getting smashed DOWN.  The itemized deductions are getting eliminated.  This makes it so your taxes "will fit in a postcard".  But, somehow, that equates to liberals as a Tax Increase.  So, if the taxes you paid before was $10K after deductions and it got reduced to $8K in the Tax Reform even without a single deduction that's a tax increase because if they didn't eliminate deductions you would have ended up paying only $6K.  

See how government math works?