Tax Reform just got a lot harder

[Magox]

One of the unintended consequences of not passing the Ryan Bill.

 

via @WSJopinion "This lost opportunity now makes tax reform even more important as a growth driver, but the health-reform failure also hurt tax reform in another major way. The Ryan bill would have reduced the budget baseline for tax reform by some $1 trillion over 10 years. This means that suddenly Republicans will have to find $1 trillion more in loopholes to close or taxes to raise if they want their reduction in tax rates to be budget neutral"

 

 

[Nanker]

Yep. And the markets are going to have a correction right now.

[Tiberius]

Sort of adds proof to the fact the GOP was not trying to reform anything, they were just trying to cut taxes and throw people off of their insurance to pay for it

[TH3]

One of the unintended consequences of not passing the Ryan Bill.

 

 

 

The GOP and everyone else knew what the consequences are.

 

Comical - or telling - that the WSJ still thinks that tax cuts - especially the ones proposed - are a "growth driver"

[Tiberius]

______

 

On another note, looks like Trumpland is divided among itself over taxes:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/white-house-internal-battles-treasury-department-236476

 

The fight for the direction of Donald Trump’s presidency between the Goldman Sachs branch of the West Wing and hardcore conservatives is spilling into the Treasury Department, threatening Trump’s next agenda item of overhauling the tax code.

Conservatives inside and outside Treasury say the new secretary, former Goldman Sachs banker, movie producer and Democratic donor Steven Mnuchin, is assembling a team that is too liberal and too detached from the core of Trump’s “Make America Great Again” platform of ripping up trade deals, gutting the Dodd-Frank banking rules and generally rejecting “globalism” in all its forms.

 

[TakeYouToTasker]

Well then, I guess big government Republicans shouldn't have tied everything up with an unpassable piece of garbage then.

 

They have no one to blame but themselves.

[GG]

 

The GOP and everyone else knew what the consequences are.

 

Comical - or telling - that the WSJ still thinks that tax cuts - especially the ones proposed - are a "growth driver"

 

They're not?

[Magox]

 

They're not?

 

 

Of course not, what "conservative" could actually believe that tax cuts serve as a stimuli to the economy?

[boyst]

So Obama just upped the federal budget by increasing federal government and its the GOP's fault and responsibility to fix it?

 

Good liberal thinking.

[Magox]

So Obama just upped the federal budget by increasing federal government and its the GOP's fault and responsibility to fix it?

 

Good liberal thinking.

 

What does this post have to do with this thread?

[boyst]

 

What does this post have to do with this thread?

the generation of tax revenue to balance the budget. When the Republicans fail it will be touted as a failure of Republican ideology. It will be a result of a divided party that can't work together to pass a bill they created to address something they created. Americans are stupid enough to believe this is all on Republicans no

[Magox]

the generation of tax revenue to balance the budget. When the Republicans fail it will be touted as a failure of Republican ideology. It will be a result of a divided party that can't work together to pass a bill they created to address something they created. Americans are stupid enough to believe this is all on Republicans no

 

Still don't see how what you are talking about is related to a tax reform bill. This Tax reform bill has nothing to do with balancing the budget. What you are talking about would is more philosophical than what a tax reform bill would look like. Existing law is existing law, which is something that the previous Ryan bill tried to address by cutting close to a trillion dollars in Medicaid and subsidy expenditures under the ACA to help finance the cost of the tax cuts. What they are trying to do is make sure that the tax cuts are financed through reduced spending measures.

 

In order for them to have enough political cover that could actually pass both the Senate and the house for a tax reform bill, it would need to be deficit neutral or at least close to being deficit neutral.

 

To recap, the previous Ryan bill had over a trillion dollars worth of cuts which would have already financed about a Trillion dollars in tax cuts. Now, if they want to keep those tax cuts, they will have to find a trillion dollars elsewhere to finance them. Make sense?

Edited March 27, 2017 by Magox

[ExiledInIllinois]

Cut the military... "burp, burp, burp, flash, burp, burp, burp, flash." That's about 2 grand right there?

 

Or:

 

"Read my lips"-Daddy Bush

[Tiberius]

Interesting

 

https://www.axios.com/scoop-trump-wants-tax-reform-infrastructure-at-same-time-2332543336.html

 

 

The Trump administration is looking at driving tax reform and infrastructure concurrently, according to a White House source with direct knowledge.

It's a major strategic shift - infrastructure was likely going to be parked until next year - and is only possible because of last week's healthcare debacle.

President Trump feels burned by the ultra conservative House Freedom Caucus and is ready to deal with Democrats. Dangling infrastructure spending is an obvious way to buy the support of potentially dozens of Dems, meaning he wouldn't have to bargain with the hardliners.

Bill Shuster, the guy who would steer Trump's infrastructure package through the House, tells me he's optimistic Trump could get it done this year.

"It certainly changes the calculus of the timing with the defeat of healthcare," says Shuster, the chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, in an interview in his Capitol Hill office Monday.

Trump needs fast victories and infrastructure is something that's big, flashy, and potentially bipartisan. There's no solid plan yet, but Shuster knows how to appeal to Trump.