http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6251211/

Per the article it still needs Bush to sign it into law, but this would be GREAT for me as I bought 2 cars this year and I can deduct an extra 4~5k on sales tax on just that!

 

I like it and it doesn't do anything for me. Why do they always have to include "The measure does nothing to help the millions of low-income Americans who do not earn enough to pay federal income tax" ???

If you don't pay any taxes you've none to deduct. This is a case where I wouldn't mind seeing them get a refund for the sales taxes they've paid but that should come from the state where they paid it IMO.

 

since the name "Bush" was included in this thread, I think it only fair to include my respectful reply (and I do respect you Mingster, this is just a counter-point)...



reducing taxes... though great and exciting in the short term... while running up massive (by any economist's measure) debt... which we don't feel currently...

is short-sighted and makes for great politics. see... he only has to get in there for 4 more years... heck, he only has to get in there on Nov 11th, then it's free reign on the coffers of the US of A... for the next sucker to fix, with our earnings in a few years, and the earnings of our children. and... we may not feel it today... but we will... as will our kids... BIG TIME... (see graph) ... that's real dollars that our kids will not have... they are born into that debt...

that's the thing about being massively in debt... it's insidious... we'll never know what we should've had... what could have been... had our hard-earned tax savings not been squandered...

the US of A, with our present leader at the helm... has run up a MASSIVE VISA BILL... there is no filing for bankruptcy protection either. we're just f*cked.

but giving us a little bit of money back... is like NOT paying that bill and buying an ice cream sundae. yummy for sure right now... we'll wish we had it later when we're too broke to eat... (just an analogy mind you)... and the funny and sad thing is... many people will then look back and remember the good ol time they had that ice cream sundae... and think to themselves "back then with him as our leader, I was eating... maybe if I re-elect someone he supports... I can have another sundae?"

it's a deception. the money in your wallet, really isn't yours. you're borrowing it. we're all borrowing our own money. because we are so massively in debt. and much of this debt, like a HUGE CHUNK of it... is held by foreign nations... in the form of Treasury bills... do you not think that that buys some significant influence? of course it does.

and the sad thing is... 4 yrs ago... it was fixed (see graph)


mods-- if this response is overly political... PLEASE JUST DELETE MY POST AND DO NOT LOCK THREAD. I'm not here to pooh-pooh on mingster's comment. but this is my honest opinion regarding this tax cut subject... and many others...

$.02 <-- for what it's worth

EDIT: in all fairness and honesty, this isn't exactly a direct reply to the article. sorry mingster.

 

Wow! Didn't Reagan eliminate the sales tax deduction back in 1986?

The thing was 4 years ago we had a booming stock market (which was ridiculously overinflated with these dot coms), many people in the late 90s were making a killing in the stock market but also had to pay capital gains tax which was a substantial contributor to the surplus. On top of that, in 2000 Bush decided to phase out the estate tax which would have helped about now and would help reduce the defecit a bit (not a lot). Bringing back the sales tax I don't agree with at all. Too costly.

 

in all fairness, my reply wasn't in direct response to the specific article. if it's a hijack, pls delete my post and I'll shuffle off... I just had to vent that out... flame me or delete my post... agree or disagree... I'm a big boy I can take it.

 

tritium: i think you have a valid point. but since as an average joe, i feel pretty helpless with what those clowns (most of the lot anyways) in DC decide to do, i go with the ride. i'm sure we all have to pay for it at one point or another in the future.

 

I'm going to have to agree with you, but also I have a question. First off, some key states that tax cut will affect are Florida and Nevada. According to electoral maps these 2 states are in the "swing state" or "swaying" category. This tax cut can give a better leaning toward Bush for those states.

So my question, what exactly is the problem with a defeceit as long as it is being bought up by foreign countries? I have heard people say that it doesn't really matter because other countries are buying our debt.

 

Mingster - read the wording........... see the bold (below)..

here in PA we pay 3.07% "state income tax".... if I made $100k, i would need to have over $3070 of sales tax payments just to be back to even with the current way of itemizing......at that point anything beyond would create some tax savings. usually dual income people make more than $100k too.

Not sure what your income level is, or what the state income tax amount is in california, but i would guess it will exced the amount you paid on your cars....but i could be wrong.


At least they did put some thought into how the people are going to keep track of the sales tax....

[QUOTE]And don

 

[QUOTE=Docent,Oct 16 2004, 08:44 AM] I'm going to have to agree with you, but also I have a question.

 

Here's my take:

In states where there is a state income tax (and no sales tax) the taxes are deductible.

In states where there is a sales tax and no income tax the taxes are NOT deductible.

It's only fair if the latter were reversed.

remember, this is NOT, NOT a sales tax REBATE, it is a DEDUCTION. For example, if someone made $100K and paid $3K in taxes, their taxable income would be $97K rather than $100K.

Also, tax cuts are a great economic stimulus, and they have worked (except in those states that are hostile to business development...cough, michigan, ohio, cough). On the deficit, we are in a WAR. Once tax revenues increase, though economic growth, they will probably be partially rolled back.

Also, on those saying the tax cuts benefit primarily the rich...HUH? The highest bracket was cut 1%, the lowest 5%. These are facts and are not twisted in any way. Of course somone who pays $1M in taxes deserves a bigger break than someone who pays $1K. IMO Kerry's biggest strategy is inciting class envy and warfare...hardly a platform. With his national health care proposal, he looks like an ass criticizing the deficit

On docent's question, debt matters and it doesn't. If worse came to worse, the government could simply print more money and pay the debt in full...of course the consequence is significant inflation

on foreign governments buying it, it means that they are taking the repayment risk (which is the lowest really). We still pay interest. Of course, with a recession plus a war, some investment (tax cuts) were necessary. Even Greenspan has said that short term deficits are not a problem and in real terms (the ONLY way to compare $ over time) they are no where near record recessions.