2018: Feds Collect Record Individual Taxes

Not on the individual side, which is what the OP is about.

 

But it did reduce total revenues.

 

Not on the individual side. If you're talking about the corporate tax reduction, something had to be done to make the US competitive again.

 

I am talking about total tax revenues which does include corporate tax revenue and individual tax revenue.

The US has been, and remains, competitive for a whole host of reasons that has very little to do with the corporate tax rate. And the attempt to make the listed (as opposed to the effective) tax rate competitive is that the US still double digits higher than other countries, corporate assets remain overseas, hiring has not increased significantly, wages have not increased significantly, and capital expenditures have not increased significantly.

 

From the OP article about the corporate tax revenue
""A Treasury spokeswoman said the administration has been clear the tax law would reduce revenues in the near-term “due to the front-loading of certain provisions, such as the immediate expensing of capital expenditures to encourage investment in U.S. businesses.”"
That will factor out this year.

As far as Amazon, they take the legal deductions allowed to them, this for their 2017 filing but the same applies

"
$220 Million in Tax Credits
SEC filings do not require a company to list the specific credits they utilize, but there are several avenues Amazon would likely have pursued. Annette Nellen, a professor and director of the Master of Science in Taxation program at San Jose University, said that Amazon’s write-offs likely include credits for research and development, domestic production, and equipment depreciation. And according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute, Amazon receives myriad tax incentives from state and local governments as well:"

And

$917 Million in Stock-Based Compensation
Publicly-traded corporations can list the stock options they grant to employees as a business cost in their accounting, and if an option-receiving employee makes over $1 million a year in salary, the profits from the sale of those stocks can be then counted as a federal income tax deduction for the corporation (primarily due to a Clinton-era compromise over how to cap executive pay). Stock options allow an employee to purchase stock in their employer’s company at a set price, regardless of its current market value:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/amazon-federal-taxes-2017/

 

Do you have anything besides alarmist RW conspiracy blogs to support your claim about anchor babies? Because if it's true, we would expect to find evidence that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are here with U.S. born children and are living off welfare checks and not working.

 

I'm sure you can go back and repost some of your post back in 2006 thru 2012 showing the same concern when Obama was making historic deficit spending
because you wouldnt show a double standard would you?

 

and those that aren't are from high taxed states because now they cant write off their local and state taxes

 

I did not post any links to RW alarmist blogs because I don't know of any. Maybe I don't fit in the box you made for me! You are welcome to research the percentage of illegal immigrant households pulling from Welfare compared to citizens.

Meanwhile, it looks like our government is still raking in the dough.

 

It can be hard to get concrete numbers regarding illegals because they're not exactly rushing to "out" themselves for the sake of polls and statistics.

This study though, for example, estimates nearly 300,000 babies born to illegal immigrants from 2012-2016. The children of illegal immigrants are vastly more likely to have mothers living in poverty, and they're almost 4x more likely to have mothers with less than a highschool education, compared to American natives. They were less likely to be on Medicaid than legal immigrants or natives, but vastly more likely to simply be uninsured entirely.
https://cis.org/Report/Births-Legal-and-Illegal-Immigrants-US




This study shows the number of anchor babies has dropped since 2007, but also states "around 5 million U.S.-born children younger than 18 were living with at least one unauthorized immigrant parent in 2016, up from around 4.5 million in 2007, according to the new estimates" and "an additional 975,000 U.S.-born adults ages 18 and older were living with at least one unauthorized immigrant parent in 2016. That’s up more than threefold from about 300,000 in 2007."
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...ized-immigrant-parents-has-fallen-since-2007/



Personally I think ending birthright citizenship could be part of the overall immigration overhaul. The lure of free citizenship and guaranteed welfare programs for children born in the US has got to be a monumental temptation to pregnant women living in "shithole" countries.

 

Trump is always one step ahead.

 

So no evidence for your bogus claim?

 

Yeah, they're right next to your posts showing that you care as much about this issue when Republicans are blowing the budget as when the Democrats were doing it.

 

The study you cite shows that illegal immigrants are far less likely to have children on Medicair than U.S. citizens. It disproves the other poster's theory. If you really want to save money, stop worrying about birthright citizenship and impose greater restrictions on Medicair. According to your study, the immigrant parents - 40% of whom live in poverty - show that you don't need it to go about raising children.

 

Non-citizen households are twice as likely to access Welfare. Most non-citizen households have access to Welfare.

Would they still come here if we didn't offer this incentive? If having an "anchor baby" was uncommon, why is there a term for it?

 

Did you miss the part where they are vastly more likely to simply be uninsured entirely? Meaning........who do you think pays when they get ill or injured? And since they are vastly more likely to have mothers living in poverty, and they're almost 4x more likely to have mothers with less than a highschool education, what do you think the odds are that those mothers are able to support their children on their own without welfare?

 

Not to mention what they cost for our schools, hospitals and prisons, while our veterans go wanting. Crazy.....

 

Please back up that statement with valid sources. Not opinion pieces or blogs, please.

 

Disgraceful.

Former Texas rep Ron Paul posted a video wherein he stated we wouldn't even need to spend billions on a wall if we just stopped extending benefits and services to illegals. Cut off the benefits and many, if not most, will stop coming. That's hundreds of billions of dollars a year that could be dedicated to the VA, raising servicemen and women's pay and other things.

 

Tax cuts were a typical Donald Trump scam that shifted the taxes from the wealthy to the middle class and poor.

 

people did not plan this, as they did not make any changes to their withholding as they thought would just be same as previous year as they made no changes - Trump should of made this clearer

that and of course on top of that, they no longer got to write off their state taxes

"Tax refunds are lower for second week in a row"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tax-refunds-are-lower-for-second-week-in-a-row-irs-reports/

 

The clowns in Congress from both parties AND the president don't give a shyt about cutting any budgets....

 

The RW call those veterans lazy, drunken drug addicts. Enough with the faux outrage.

 

yes, but people budget based on the previous year, when they are told they are getting a huge Trump tax cut, they expect their refund will be bigger next year, not smaller

 

So.... record individual tax collection...combined with record deficits.... how could this happed? Possibly record tax cuts for non-individuals