The $6T Gap Between Trump’s and Biden’s Tax Plans | WSJ
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 тра 2024
- President Biden and Donald Trump have very different tax plans they’d like to implement if they win the 2024 presidential election.
WSJ’s Richard Rubin explains what makes up the $6 trillion rift between them.
Chapters:
0:00 Tax policy
0:40 2017 tax cuts
1:41 Baseline
2:16 What Trump wants
3:17 What Biden wants
5:05 What’s next?
News Explainers
Some days the high-speed news cycle can bring more questions than answers. WSJ’s news explainers break down the day's biggest stories into bite-size pieces to help you make sense of the news.
#Biden #Trump #WSJ
Tax cuts for corporations are permanent, tax cuts to individual will expire in 2026 ?
Why ? Because corporations spent more money lobbying?
That is exactly why sir!
The Trump tax cuts go mostly to the top 1% anyway, you are not benefitting
@@jaju123456 I'm in the bottom 2/3 of working people. I benefitted. Did you know that tax revenues have soared since the 2017 tax relief? I know what I'm voting for in 24.
@@jaju123456 Tax cuts will lower mortage rates and prices on everything.
@@24killsequalMOAB no. That is literally the opposite of how it works. The current inflation is due to both limited supply of goods and high demand. If you increase the money supply that people have by cutting taxes you increase demand further. That's inflationary and causes the federal reserve to raise rates, making mortgages more expensive. You don't know what you are talking about.
Last time Trump did a tax cut my company gave me a 2k+ dollar bonus directly because of it. Would be nice if more corps weren't evil.
That is great to hear. The 21% tax rate makes the US competitive with European and several Asian corporate tax rates (albeit labor costs are still likely lower in some Asian countries). A 28% rate would likely keep/ drive corporation production overseas. Large corporations have consultants and in-house departments that literally look at tax rate of production (as well as labor charges) and recommend moving factories/corporate headquarters etc. to where they have an advantage.
If they gave you 2k+, upper management made 20k+ each.
Corpos are never your friend.
@@user-jm7kc4bm8m or the uppers could have gotten 50k each and jmm could have gotten nothing
@@user-jm7kc4bm8m they also run the company it dosn't change the fact that tax cuts helps everyone
They gave you crumbs instead of a raise.
Decrease taxes, decrease government spending. Problem solved. Aka stop funding wars
youre onto it!
incl the one in Ukraine?
@@zeldamage001yes that’s not the United States business just the radical left wants to fund wars to put more money In there own pockets.
What problem would that solve, exactly?
Decreasing taxes IS government spending.
Yes its simple. Cut spending, cut taxes. The money is going to waste. Clearly.
its money well spent to maintain the quality of life in israel
@@currentcommerce4774 You misspelled illegal aliens
Our Ukrainian investment ain't paying off
@@SO-ud6ro
No, our investment in Ukraine has proven to be quite successful considering how foolish they’ve made the Russian strategists out to be.
@@ctwise12 Successful in what? Ukraine doesn't need US involvement.
lol they expected corporations to raise wages? Well did they raise wages?
Nope
No it didn't. Those promises by Trump was a scam
Who’s “ they” you are referring to? I assume you are talking about Biden?
@@The_North0 Trump
Yes
Six trillion OVER how many years? That's something to put in a title, not a graph stuck in the middle of the video. One thing is for sure... if you give the government more money, they will find a way to waste more money.
I wouldn't call it a "waste" but I generally agree with you. There's only so much that can be invested in government programs and agencies before hitting diminishing marginal returns.
One thing for sure, the extra revenue will not be going towards bringing down the deficit! I think it's over 4 years.
I don't understand, so the money should just sit in a rich person's wealth? That's your proposal?
@@snippyboons the government is also corrupt
@@snippyboonsdo economic research before making uninformed comments please
Who in their right mind is a proponent of MORE taxes?? Especially when the government is adding $1 TRILLION of debt every 100 days... The problem is not tax collections, the undeniable problem is the ridiculous and abhorrent government spending of taxpayers' dollars.
Especially for dumb wars. They actually dish that money out to super big companies like blackrock for the creation of more weapons of war, such as bombs, missiles, and guns, which they will then ship out to Ukraine and whatnot.
Leftists are a proponent of more taxes. But like you implied, they are not in the right mind.
Republicans: cut taxes
US government: goes in debt
Republicans: How could the democrats do this?
Like seriously. The national debt has UP significantly under every Republican president starting from Reagan, while it was even going down under Clinton.
the government does not "lose money" with lower taxes. and lower taxes do not increase the deficit. Reckless spending and unnecessary foreign aid is what the problem is.
Unnecessary Foreign Aid sounds about right, why give an excessive amount of Fund to other countries, it's insane and ridiculous. Those extra funds could us , legal citizens.
Yea? Then why has the deficit historically gone up whenever Republicans are in control and cut taxes to the wealthy and corporations?
Define unnecessary vs investment in US interests that would otherwise cost more later
@Tratios what are you talking about?? That money being sent to Ukraine is a money laundering scheme, and Biden and Obama are on the receiving end of it. It's simple, send a bunch of money over to Ukraine as a aid (that's what they want you to think), then Ukraine turns the money into Bitcoin or another untrackable method and they send it back into the pockets of these corrupt already rich men who run our government right now.
I guess you suffer from COVID brain fog. Cut spending, reduce deficit, GSA is the largest employer in the USA, world?. Take a look at USA CIVIL service, millions of workers, millions in military service. Wake up.
We do need minimum tax rates for the super wealthy and corporations. If you're that profitable, you can and should afford to pay at least as much tax as regular people.
how you pay more for everything & have no job ......your thinking is amazing
@@B86432 It's your thinking that is amazing. Way more "welfare" has been expended on the wealthy than on the poor. Just look at the subchapter-S giveway from 2017 as a start.
most super wealthy people have all their money in investments and you only pay tax when you sell those. only income is taxed not wealth
@@zjones9876 Then implement a wealth tax.
It should be illegal for any government worker or political figure use the stock market and exchange or hold and/or own any company assets.
In the history of corporate tax cuts have never resulted in more jobs or higher wages (except for the CEOs who have received enormous pay raises)
The trickle down theory never trickled down to the working class and never created jobs
interesting
It has never meant to either. It's just pure BS that owning class feeds you to make you vote for them and make them rich...
Take a look at european growth and wages and unemployment. Low taxes and low influence of politicians on economy are good things.
Trickle-down economics is not a real economic theory.
The 2017 TCJA, even though Trump and other promised it would pay for itself, also added 2 trillion to the defecit. Even without the effects of COVID, it was expected to add 1.5-1.8 trillion in defecit spending. What that means is, taxpayers, you and I, we paid for these tax cuts for the rich. We subsidized corporate profits.
And for what? What did we get out of it? Did they raise wages, as was promised? Did they bring back latent capital from overseas, like they promised? Did they supercharge GDP growth to "5% and beyond" like Mnuchin promised?
No. It was a dud. It had no positive effect on the economy, except for the richest people in America.
So, like a bunch of suckers, we dished out all this money on defecit spending, based on the same old promises that it would trickle down. Then, after they had their money, the corporations and 0.1%, predictably, kept it and spent it on themselves. If the TCJA worked at all, then why is everyone complaining about the economy? Why isn't the TCJA making everything wonderful?
There's this pervasive myth that businesses are job creators. They aren't. Businesses do not create jobs. _Demand_ creates jobs. And if you depress demand in the US economy, say, by choking off workers wages, or allow price gouging / antitrust for essential services (as in health insurance/Healthcare, or grocery store goods, or power generation, or a dozen other industries), then that depresses demand.
And if you don't have demand, then you're not going to have any businesses. You end up with the economy we have today, one where every industry has an oligopoly dominating the market. The whole conomy is titled towards meeting the demands of a few captains of industry and investor groups, while the middle class withers. Like idiots, we just keep handing these oligopolies money. Then we turn around and tell seniors and veterans, "Sorry, there's not enough money to pay for your retirement and your healthcare."
It doesn't matter how much they tax, because they will spend the same amount regardless.
they will not spend it as smart as you do.
You are responsible to your own money, but they don't.
@@r1_anon Yes I completely agree!
I hate when people call money the government takes "Revenue" or "Income". If it is taken by threat of jail, it is the same as extortion.
No one is forcing you to be a citizen and enjoy the privileges that come with it. If you dont want to pay taxes, then revoke your citizenship and live off grid. Dont call government services if something happens to you.
@@winzyl9546 Mafia logic, who needs the low quality government services? Ah, the voters who don't pay tax.
@@winzyl9546 Google ruby ridge mate to see what actually happens.
@@winzyl9546 If you'd like to pay more taxes than you have to, because you believe in the system, please do........ but you won't.
Since the 1950's wealthy individuals & corporations have very successfully reduced their tax exposure so dramatically that the US government can't run without a substantial deficit and wealth inequality has exploded to proportions not seen since the 1920's. In my view it's well time to reverse this!
No it’s cause theirs massive loopholes and massive tax burdens that forces them to take those loopholes.
They aren’t forced to take loopholes. If they paid their taxes, they’d still be super rich. These people have nothing to spend all their money on anyway in their lifetimes. They’re just horsing wealth for their kids
Right and me and anyone under 25 will have to flip the bill.Dude that was allways been the plan 😂
@@kordellswoffer1520 "Massive tax burdens....that forces them...." LOL, that´s a good one....
Stop spending
People need to realize that increased revenue for the government is only a good thing if you believe the government is spending the money correctly. I kind of got the feeling that the increase in revenue was being portrayed as a positive aspect, which again, can be viewed as a good investment based on government stewardship or a negative cost to American corporations
It's important to remember that corporations don't have to pay the full tax rate if they reinvest the money they make into the company instead of paying CEOs and shareholders. That means companies hiring more, paying employees more, putting money into making better products or higher quality service etc... aka, better for everybody except for the ultra wealthy who are the CEOs and who own all the stocks.
Investing more today means paying more in the future...unless you lose money... that just makes you a loser like Trump.
I’d even say, many factors excluded, that the stocks of companies that reinvest in the company are more stable. B/c they have a stronger work force retention, better maintenance of assets, and more RD.
I partially agree with your comment, however you fail to consider that the US is already running a huge deficit to the tune of $1T per year. We simply cannot keep this going forever. Carrying a national debt is fine, but the debt needs to grow SLOWER than the underlying economy (GDP). This is why economists prefer to look at the Debt/GDP ratio, instead of simply looking at the nominal debt (dollar amount). We are over 100% debt-to-gdp ratio and climbing. Something will have to give, or else what happened to the UK under Liz Truss will happen here in the US too.
@@Abe-qu9tl Yes the economy does WAY better when the corporate tax rate is high.
We need to cut federal spending…
Thank you! Someone with a brain
Have fun driving on dirt roads
According to the CBO.gov, revenues to the Treasury increased $1.63 trillion from 2016 to 2022, meaning that AFTER the tax cuts, the amount of taxes collected increased by almost 50%. Such Federal revenue increases also happened after the JFK, Reagan, & Bush reductions in tax rates. The chart presented assumes behaviors will not change, which history demonstrates is false.
If you really want to increase revenues, let people and companies do what they do best instead of trying to pit citizens against each other.
The US doesn't have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.
Linking the home page isn't a source but it is cute you thought that means anything, liar.
@@matt5721 That's just the name of the site, ma'am, Congressional Budget Office.
And if you look at the February 2024 Historical Budget Data spreadsheet, do the math on tab 1. Rev, Outlays, Surplus, Debt for the cited years.
@matt5721 That's the Congressional Budget Office website that contains the February 2024 spreadsheet Historical Budget Data. On tab 1. Rev, Outlays, Surplus, Debt, you can do the math for the cited years.
@matt5721 sir, you have not refuted his point only attacked him.
Not only that, Trump's deficits (pre covid spending) were ~700 billion, ~800 billion, and ~1 trillion.
Biden's (post-covid) deficits were ~1.36 trillion, ~1.7 trillion, and ~1.6 trillion (projected in 2024).
1:40 "if congress does nothing" ....
.... funny at so many levels.
We should be speaking in terms of "if Congress does something"
@@youtubeviolatedme7123 The ultimate threat to the average American's life.
New idea: members of Congress get paid the median (not average) per capita income. Then they'll have an incentive to increase the standards of living for most people.
Consider: the $400k household tax breaks limit they came up with is coincidental? 😂
can we make it the median income for their state? Because if their state is doing horrible from their lack of action maybe we have motivator
A few issues with this:
1. Politicans wont be able to afford residency in both their district and in DC. So their livelihood would have to be funded by tax payer.
2. Congress is in charge of setting the pay for congressmen. No way they are doing this
@@chevyjd2007There is also the problem that if they are financially struggling, they are more vulnerable to bribes (I know, they already take massive amounts of bribes, even if it's technically legal).
That would work well if they weren't, in large part, already wealthy before they ran for office.
@@chevyjd2007 Oh no they can afford it. They can live in condos or modest suburban homes like the rest of us.
The government doesn't need more tax money, it needs to start spending the stupid amount that it already gets in a practical manner.
Yup
The problem is how we get to a broad consensus on what a "practical manner" is. When you figure that out, please let us know.
@@WillDraco while we debate something that's been extremely well researched by policy experts/ status quo of rich people getting monies from uncle sam shall continue.. I love that "we must get consensus on a well researched topic." "we must do means testing on a well researched topic that has been put into practice by many municipal and state gov'ts."
gotta love it.
thats why I'm still glazing T for using the military budget on the wall project. There is more than enough money, just in the wrong fonds.
And the things that Republicans think are hurting the budget really aren't Food stamps and education make up a very small fraction of what we spend. Defence, healthcare and Social Security are our main expendatures.@@At0ThEb
Cut spending
Cut taxes
Simple as
Cut Spending
Raise Taxes
You're getting close ...
@@LuKiSCraft I do not want to pay more taxes.
Cut taxes.
Cut taxes.
Cut taxes.
@@CaptBuck neither candidate wants to raise taxes on anyone making under $400K. Do you make over $400K annually? If so, congrats. If not, your point is moot.
@@LuKiSCraftI said cut taxes.
@@CaptBuck if they wanted to cut taxes for sub-$100K income but raise it for over $400K income, would you support?
No, corporate profits only ONLY go to stock buybacks and executive bonuses.
As it should
@@tommyeschung Uh, stock buybacks have been proven to primarily benefit CEOs, whose compensation is tied to EPS. Fewer shares = higher earnings. It would be far better for most companies to put that money into R&D.
Not all corporations are on the stock exchange. Trumps tax cuts do actually help smaller Corps.
Agree, increased profits only go to the owners / shareholders (as they should). If you a fairer, more progressive society, do it through other legislation
That is the right of any such firm.
1:20 "lower taxes on their profits. . .to give people more money in their pockets." Hold on, go back to the part you skipped. How does letting corporations keep profits guarantee money in our pockets? We've seen this scam before. Sorry
If they try to take profit from corporations who do you think the corporations will make pay.
Spoiler. RIch people dont make 6 trillion a year doing hard labor. You will pay the 6 trillion. Tax the poor through the rich.
You get to pay the corps bills.
Taxing businesses more guarantees higher prices and lower wages. It's simple economics.
@@justinmiller7020 just hugely higher prices if minimum wage is observed.
Its actually better if wage goes down instead of price going up. Did you save your money. Whats it worth.
How did we go from a county that 250 years ago revolted over a 3 cent tax on a breakfast drink to talking about over half of people's income being stolen for taxes????? This is insane!
Corporations don't pay taxes. You pay them in increased prices
This is how competition works
Minimum price cap on product and increase taxes
@@brandonjablasone7544 They will just stop selling non profitable items Einstein
2018: Trump tax law slashed corporate taxes. Did what you pay as a consumer in 2018 go down? No. The corporations simply made more profit.
2024: Trump tax law still in effect for slashed corporate taxes. Still no lower prices and major corporations have been reporting record profits year-over-year. Have they lower what you pay as a consumer still? No.
Corporations are going to increase prices (negated some by competition) whether you increase taxes, lower taxes or keep the tax rate the same. They are greedy entities ran by and benefited by greedy people on backs of the middle and poor classes.
The fact that a $400,000 household needs a tax cut is crazy. Makes me wonder if the IRS should pay me for harassing me by auditing my return and for wasting my time. I make $65k a year, you’re going after the wrong people IRS!!!
Everyone should get tax cuts in an ideal world taxes wouldn’t be a thing but we need them and they should be very minimal to everyone
What do you mean "needs a tax cut?" It's their money. One could very well say no one needs to make $65k a year. That amount of money is in the top 10% of personal income in the world.
I'm still recovering from the realization that families earning 400k per year are upper class and not filthy rich, manwhile people earning 7.25 per hour make about 16k per year (or 32k for two earning adults).
@Pan_Z ok so....yes you kind of dive into the point that I make where Americans don't know what real poverty is and should be more appreciative of what we do have, but you must also understand that 65,000 here is not the same as it is in other places, that money doesn't go super far in this country. It's decent, it's livable, you can live a pretty comfortable life where as in Vietnam or the Phillipines you'd be living a SUPERB life off that money, it's kind of the minimum to be in the middle class here in American which is the goal.
@@sybrandwoudstra9236people earning this wage are making a choice keep that job for a reason. I worked a job in high school that made $9.50/hour 25 years ago. Not sure where you live, but Five Guys pays $18/hour by my house. There are plenty of opportunities out there.
Imagine a person deep down in Montana Idaho Wyoming, who gets below 400k a year.., still would prefer a politician who loves and minds the wealthy more than him, that's how and when I gave up on politics, every country and yes even the "exceptional US" is susceptible to great fallacies and political delusions...
exactly, tax the rich and huge companies. that's what Biden has been trying but keeps getting blocked
大家小心中国在大量平台媒体鼓动或纵容民粹主义，怂恿普通平民仇恨欧美，和平包容言论被大量封杀。，
Montana isn’t actually as conservative as your comment suggests. It is conservative but it’s like 55/45 not up/20 like Wyoming. I live here lol
You perfectly described my father in AR its so depressing because he's not stupid just acts stupid.
@@ISirSmoke And what? Fund the terrible government spending???
I’m still waiting for the trickle down economy that was promised…
Wow, a discussion on POLICY, how very rare.
It's interesting how they mostly agree on keeping taxes low for middle income people. I wonder why they differ so strongly on how higher earners and business are taxed?
Because Trump is a billionaire and only cares about the top 1%. The 2017 cuts did not improve wages and only increased the deficit.
@@atrailmckinley4786lol trickle down economic. It has nothing to do with his personal wealth. Revenue under Trump grew astronomically because people had more spending power. Look it up if you don’t believe me.
@@atrailmckinley4786it didn’t delete your first comment. Now you have 2. Happens to me all the time
@@atrailmckinley4786, if you know how the top 1% use offshore companies to avoid taxes, you wall know the raises top tier taxes is meaningless except they can go after the lower tier tax payers.
Because one side thinks leaving money to the private sector leads to better results than leaving money to the state. And they are probably right if you think about how much money is wasted into the military and other things. Rather have some businesses than another 150million missile.
Trump added $8 Trillion to the national debt in 4 years. To put that in perspective, before trump, the US gov't. was adding an average of $8 Trillion per 100 years! to the national debt.
So there shouldn’t have been any Covid relief for the American people?
His plan would double that.
Wrong
Love how you blame Trump for the actions of the Covid Congress. What party were they again?
And, why is it accelerating in a post-Covid administration?
Biden gave us the worst inflation numbers ever. I would take Trump's government any day.
We continue to overspend, more taxes only means more overspending
Lets take the BS politics out of Income Taxing and make it 10% across the board period. Everyday Joe will say yes and the Corporations and the politicians they have bought will say no.
Flat tax is a huge advantage for the rich... not so much for the rest of us.
10% is pretty low. With everything combined then it should be more like 30-35%.
Reaganomics was a disaster for the middle class. We need to increase the standard deductible.
Unemployment, inflation, GDP all improved massively under Reagan.
@@NoneOfYourBeesWax1 Incorrect, but it's funny you fell for that.
@@NoneOfYourBeesWax1 propaganda, do your own research.
@@GriftGuard??? Unemployment was at 8% when Reagan arrived and was at 5% when he left. He inherited 11% inflation and it was down to 4% when he left. GDP grew 150%
Maybe the federal government could just stop wasting taxpayer money.
love all your content!
Thank you for the clear cut and informative video. Surprisingly unbiased too which is rare currently. Thank you!
Thanks for spending the time to create and share this content perspective
The uniparty media WSJ strikes again. I'm a financial professional and cut the cord from these bozos a couple years ago when they lost their way. Every once in awhile I get sucked into one of these videos and it confirms why I left
Indeed, this report interviews just one ‘expert’ who is also WSJ.
@@FlightDoc The 'revenue line' analysis was cringeworthy. Clearly propaganda not designed for consumption by those with more than a skin deep understanding of the issues discussed.
Hardly suprising, even if dissapointing. Modern news media switched it's role from providing information to creating stories that confirm existing biases.
Except you arn't.
You just like to pretend that you are.
I guess troll is the more appropriate label. Sorry, still working out my social media skills.
The way to do it is to raise taxes on the wealthy but also offer tax deductions for investing in economic growth. This discourages hoarding while encouraging positive economic factors.
Tax deductions for corporations raising wages of regular workers seems like a good program, that’s what Eisenhower did.
None of the billionaires are hoarding cash.
@@meeraj-4774 You don't make $100 billion in one lifetime without ripping off people. They're hoarding assets.
@@coachtaewherbalife8817 then why people continue to buy from them if it's a rip off? Everyone who reached a threshold of 100 billion which are very few been in business for atleast 25 years. Nobody gets that rich by ripping people off.
@@meeraj-4774 How do billionaires help society? And would society be worse without them?
Pay your fair share. Say that to your son Hunter
Thank you very helpful
Worst part if that those taxes that were supposed to increase wages probably ended up closing factories with even more buybacks…
Not to mention corporations purchasing WAY MORE automation and therefore eliminating 10's of 1,000's of more once decent working class and lower middle class jobs - but this time further fueled by much more sophisticated Artificial Intelligence dominated managerial jobs! And these MAGA Mutated Remnant Republicans persist in falsely blaming "those immigrants" for America's exponentially DECREASING decent paying jobs! Am disappointed to say that this and lately all too many other WSJ articles are further and further shedding even the once thin pretense of "balancing" their slanted journalistic proclamations. And that's been totally apart from their longtime "right of right" opinion pieces! Tsk tsk, WSJ...
Thats the points tax everyone more. The govorment federalzes everything
If workers invest in the company they work for, they'll stand to gain from buybacks. It's a crooked system, but at least anyone can play the game.
@@youtubeviolatedme7123Or...don't allow corporations to get buybacks? It's supposed to be a free market economy, not a free vaccuum.
@@Patriot-Eaglehead But what if you have invested shares in a dying industry? Buybacks at least help you cut your losses.
Yea let’s cut taxes again…. Only 30+ trillion in debt and climbing…
So raise taxes so it can be misused and be sent overseas?
Worth noting that even Biden's full plan won't cut 50% of the deficit, assuming everybody pays their fair share and doesn't divest from American investments. Lends credence to the idea that taxes aren't for paying debt, they simply plan for the debt to increase ad infinitum.
Not that worried about the debt more worried about the economy
Of course and digital currency for all costs and reimbursement linked to Medicare. That's potential savings of 3% from skipping the credit cards and bank transfers. Everything will be instantly available to spend in seconds. If retirees want to skip the progressive taxes for progressive longevity. Hard choices for fast impact on faster liquidity
Dude who do you think we owe that too when they print it out of thin air?!?! We shouldn't even be having to approve these funds which are ALREADY promised like smh
Where can I find sources for this information?
This felt like a very bipartisan, informational video. Fantastic. Clearly laying out both sides without fluffing up one or slandering the other. Very refreshing. I'll subscribe as long as that is the norm.
Something to keep in mind: I run a small business (4 employees on payroll) my weekly payroll taxes are $1,000. Straight to to gov.
Plus businesses and corporations generate employees and wages which generate tax money for the gov, from experience if tax deductions weren’t a thing my business would probably have folded.
And common folk are aloud to deduct items as well. Majority of people let aunt pearl do their taxes instead of doing it the smart way and maximizing deductions.
If your business can't make a profit and the people aren't interested in your services, mabye the government shouldn't have to be your sugar daddy and foot the bill?
Pull yourself up by the bootstraps and provide a better service.
My business can and does, that was a time during start up. Your comment makes no sense, I haven’t received any grants from the government or freebies. Simply abiding by the designed tax code. And I’m now running a profitable debt free business by “pulling myself up by the bootstraps”. My point was business that are barely scraping by would not be able to operate without the legal tax deductions.
You have to admit there's a lot more deductions for you than w2 earners. I know because I file as both w2 and independent contractor.
@@austinsaltsman-gl6zventrepreuners and small businesses should have deductions, massive conglomerates should pay their FAIR share.
I'm a tax preparer, and it's hard to swallow seeing single people making 30K/year, having to pay over $3,600.00 in FEDERAL taxes...
They are paying about $1,700 worst case scenario. If they are going to college or have a child, they are very likely getting a paycheck from the government and not putting in.
Just wait for this 6 trillion dollar sales tax to pass from buisness to you.
@@MatchGrade08I'll be waiting 😂
@@Cwagganster if your out of money and cant pay the raised prices of everything that would be worse.
@@MatchGrade08 ok
It’d be interesting to see an in between of both these implementations.
Is painstakingly disappointing how WSJ completely ignores the reality of the Laffer curve, the fact that the rich don’t pay for corporate taxes, and the fact that lowering corporate tax in the TCJA increases revenue.
Then regulate them so they have to pay. Congress can do this
@@enolopanr9820 because it’s awful economics and would be an awful policy.
We also already sort of do in a more effective way, progressive taxation.
How about we don't give the government more money.
They would put tolls on all the roads and infrastructure and if you had a fire at your house you'd have to pay to put it out, want a policeman put a down payment on him. Yep makes perfect sense to me Duh.
The government has landed itself in trillions of dollars in debt, and now it's asking for MORE?
I’m down, everyone else here thinks the government is the holy oracle that needs to purge ant progress and tax everyone down to the same level.
They will always spend more when they raise tax anyways. Will never work
I think what we should think about is where is money going in our society in a structural sense. Not a moral question of whether someone is entitled to every single dollar they've ever touched, or if taxation is "good or evil", but where does money tend to naturally allocate and what is it used for in our modern economy?
Lots of people would argue it's ending up in the hands of too few and - government involvement or not - it would be better used elsewhere.
I am not a fan of Trump or Biden, I am quite in the middle politically. I am studying my undergrad in economics. One important thing to realize is that taxes for the top 1% and companies is always just passed down to the consumer (depending on the competition in the market depends on how much of that tax is passed down, high competition companies will try to increase prices as little as possible, low competition companies will try to raise prices as much as possible put in simple terms). The reason for this is that the lost revenue due to tax increase will result in higher prices for the customers to pay off the lost revenue due to taxes. So looking at this from an economic standpoint trumps tax plan would overall help consumers and the economy better. Higher taxes almost always result in an inefficient market where it will hurt both the consumer and the company and WILL NEVER result in a win for the consumer. Higher taxes in any part of the chain will always hurt consumers.
This is pretty much spot on.
Yup, very true! I intend to vote Libertarian this fall, and you should consider doing the same!
Ask yourself this, who you trust more with money? A company that can grow bigger and created more jobs for people, or the government that likes giving itself raises every week and to foreign countries?
Keep studying, kiddo. Companies raise their prices regardless, and use any windfall profits on buybacks and bonuses. Neither helps their employees or customers.
@@TheAureliac Why have prices for Teslas been coming down and why did gas prices come down under Trump if companies only raise their prices?
The issue AIN'T taxes. The issue is out of control SPENDING.....
Trump spend the most of all presidents.
The government needs to manage the money better. PERIOD and stop laundering money and giving it away to suit “personal” agendas.
If the US government doesn't stop cutting spending, paying for illegals, and not start auditing states for where they use their money, we are doomed. Politicians left and right are stealing the budget money intended for infrastructure, education, and services!!
When they can print it that ain't happeing.
And their plans to reduce spending?
WSJ wont report on that silly goose! lol
Cynics know the lettuce of everything and the value of nothing
Neither side has any such plans.
You know what is expensive for society: medical bankruptcy, polluted air and water, contaminated food etc…All things that corporations and businesses could improve that would save money at the federal level. Often called externalities. Is there wasteful spending sure, but in the grand scope of things a more efficient and competitive market place would benefit consumers more.
Yeah, the poor need to bare the brunt of any cuts. We can’t increase taxes on the wealthy because CEO Bob needs his precious super yacht. Maybe 11 year old Jimmy won’t get school lunch anymore and go home with an empty stomach, but screw Jimmy. His parents can barely afford rent because Bob’s friends bought out the entire neighborhood in 2018, then used RealPage to colkue with other landlords to raise rent by 60%. Only Bob and his rich buddies matter.
Bob has been working with other wealthy individuals to effectively siphon what previously went to worker wage growth prior to Reagan, and send it to the mega wealthy via stock buybacks/executive compensation. We conservatives love this form of wage theft because we either hope to get rich some day, or already are and like savages, our society that made it possible to become wealthy can go screw itself. We will continue to lie to the public that everybody can become rich, even though that’s not true, because we already got ours and the Jimmy’s of the world can have a growling stomach all day for all we care about. 😈
Here’s an idea, let’s cut the unnecessary spending!
Fine. First no childcare policy. The state is not a parent and the state job is not to take care of peoples economy.
For major reasons the childcare is a criminal act as it promote misery to the mothers who are exploited by evil men.
Instead promote low wage jobs to the needed and reinvest the childcare to jobs which secure our children will not be working in the coalmines who are shut down.
No industry is permanent shut down instead someone has to do the task for free. The industry may change shape but the goal is the same.
If the job is too complicated find out who made it complicated and fire them. Anyone who want to hire specialists, hire teachers.
Grade School changed to tech school and grade school teachers turned into preschool teachers. Grade school shut down and fusion with preschool and will have a vaccum between 10-15 years to ensure when they enter highschool the lazy will not be enforced to school like donkeys. The vacation if so thinking is to teach the value of knowledge. But as well give the parents a chance to be parents.
The grade school teachers has to choose either be downgraded or step up. The nation is not lazy. The teachers have told the students and they are the example. For same reason as the student has a vaccum the teacher must follow their student into the 5 year vacation where they have to learn. The main reason behind it is that each 4th year a new president is voted. It takes too long to change the teachers that by the time the president is re-voted the rest of the world try to cope with the previous doctrine.
By creating cycles the government can cut down the biggest expenses of them all = education. It is not a permanent station of life to be a teacher because themselves need to be students to teach. The politicans can take these positions as they know that it is not far from schooling and ruling. If you can be president for 4 years why can't you be a teacher. Because the job is not waiting for you after 4 years and the need of cycles is what ensure the future of the economy. You have created a new demand of security.
@@robertagren9360 You're argument is scatter brained. I don't even know what you're saying!
Why do we need more taxes and federal income…they literally just spend even more. We could have a 100% tax and they would still spend it.
Raising corporate tax is a tax on everyone as the corporations will just raise prices to cover it…why is this hard to understand?
You have a simplistic view, my friend. You can't just increase prices to retain the same profitability. Demand has varying levels of elasticity, but always decreases with price hikes.
“Far reaching overhaul” the wording lol
honestly, if the government wants its people feels major savings are not thru tax. they should help lower insurances such as house insurance, car insurance, Health insurance and etc. They all skyrocketed in the past few years. that's a big chunk in our monthly expense if lower it's instant relief to us.
Did the govt ever have any luck with lowering tuition
You are good never thought of that .
Why not just stop US involvement in international wars
@@rlife7853 we tried that in the 1920s and 30s and look what happened
Or just bypass the insurance middlemen and actually provide healthcare and a proper social security system.
Tax cuts for people making 400k a year? Jesus, no wonder there is a deficit.
A dollar saved in your wallet is a dollar that has been spent into existence by the US government and not taxed back. That’s called a “deficit”.
The deficit is driven by the irresponsible and indiscriminate federal government spending. Both parties have been guilty of this though Democrats have been particularly egregious
fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/national-deficit/
The amount of people that make over $400K a year is about 1%, so even if you were to raise their taxes by 10%, the effect on the deficit would be negligible. Furthermore, even if you were to raise taxes on the billionaires as Biden suggested during his latest SOTU address, it'd raise $500B over 10 years... Sounds like a lot of money until you realize last year ALONE his administration spent over 3x that amount. Add to that absurd deficit the fact that he wants to keep expanding government programs, and there's the answer for why the deficit and debt are such.
Actually that tax bracket was the ONLY one that didn't see a cut.
for EVERYONE under 400k. tax the rich and big corporations, that's what Biden wants to do, but democrats keep blocking him
There is no tax deficit. There is overspending into pointless stuff.
Great Job Laura
It might cost the government 4 trillion but not if we are treating the country like a business and producing a product we can sell.
The key here is we have to produce something to sell.
Truth. I'd be ok paying more taxes if I actually got something useful out of it!
Biden's plan sounds more sense and fairer. Getting corporations to pay more taxes by increasing corporate tax from 21% to 28% would be good. The corporate tax rate has averaged 32% since 1909 so increasing the rate would be getting it back closer to the norm if anything.
Why even tax corps?
@@mikehlee69you want us to give handouts to the rich?
The big question is what is the government doing with the taxes? Just wasting it?
@@jesualdocortez6426 The "rich" are the ones who create jobs. Without a healthy business environment there isn't a middle class. Tax the rich is just another excuse for them to to shenanigans and move offshore.
The U.S. would have the highest average corporate tax rate in the world at 28%. Why would you want us to be uncompetitive? We need to lower expenses, like cutting Medicare and social security and other wealth transfer payments, rather than raise taxes.
How about reigning in spending! It's out of control.
Sure, cut on military spending.
@@user-vh8gs1sw1jDefense is like 14% of the budget. Social Security, and Healthcare take up a larger portion of the federal government spending
Like which spending?
@kdhemingo look at the recently passed spending bill and the over 1,000 earmark expenses added onto it adding up to over 12 billion dollars. 3.5 million for Detroits Thanksgiving parade. Paid for by US citizen taxes.
@@The77Voice are people from Detroit not US taxpayers?
Also, what are the ear marks for? Jobs or projects in districts? Sounds like good use of tax payer money
What a sharade. They debate "extending our tax cuts". Why do we need tax cuts? Why isnt tax at an affordable level? Is it because we keep borrowing more than our GDP?
Permanent tax cut for corporations… tf. Cut military and social security tax.
very articulate and unbiased Journalism watching from 🇰🇪
no its not. what happened when joe biden passed his tax increases, and what happened when Trump passed tax cuts? When trump passed tax cuts the government raised more money in taxes because the lower rates meant that people took money out of the stock market, hired people, and invested in businesses. When Joe biden passed his tax increases, everything slowed down.
It's actually very biased journalism. They're reporting only data they want to support their narrative. They've excluded all small business cuts Trump gave out, assistance to specifically small black community businesses. They've left out that Biden is increasing the national debt far worse than Trump ever did, Biden is sending money to other countries, printing money to forgive the insane college debt he and Obama created by FORCING schools and banks to accept any and all college loans tricking tens of thousands of people into unmanageable debt. His taxation on select large companies/industries is going to drive business away from the US, attempt to appease his political allies. Such as his attacks on "non clean" energy like fossil fuels. This isn't to help the nation, we're not even ranked in the top 100 most polluted countries in the world! (102). This is just to appeal to his allies in the climate change industry. Go and do some quick research. The economy was better under Trump, inflation wasn't as high under Trump, we weren't involved in any wars or conflicts, houses were cheaper, interest was lower, the border was more secure. Dig into Bidens tax policies and you'll see favoritism in who he targets and you may figure out that the "help" he offers in tax cuts is a double sided sword that will make your cost of living outpace any taxes you thought you'd pay under Trump.
Hey you forgot to mention that the big corporations were able to buy back some of their stock and make even more money 💰💰💰
And at the same time those corporations started to down size their workers.
raising corporate and wealthy taxes will have what kind of effect to economics and people’s wages? You can lower our taxes but if you lower our wages then what good does that do?
Federal revenue has climbed steadily for the last decade. More spending is the issue. Not more taxes
Low tax rates are important right now because we are getting absolutely nothing out of the increased tax rates. When we actually get something out of increased tax rates, then increase it. Period.
We, the citizens, might not be getting anything out of the taxes, but the migrants seeking asylum are.
You missed one thing from 2017. Yes the standard deduction doubled from 6K to 12K, but they took away the personal exemption which was worth about 6K. So it was a wash. But it wasn't really even that; the higher standard deduction makes it harder to claim charitable deductions and other credits.
And with Biden again, you'll see the standard deductions cut by 1/2 starting January 2025 and you still won't have any personal deductions.
The majority of Americans dont donate 6-12k a year.
@@danielblair6952 It was charitable donations and other reductions that were eliminated. Not just charities.
@@danielblair6952 He wasn't talking about donations. DEDUCTIONS
People paying more than 6k in state taxes and interest on a home are wealthy. The tax break was for the poor AND to make it easier to file. Itemizing deductions is a waste of time.
I would increase corporate taxes. All they did with the money was share buy backs and layoffs.
then have fun when they raise their prices on all their products, you really think these big corps aren't gonna retaliate
Remarkably neutral reporting here. Good stuff. Thank you!
The chasm between haves and have nots is growing too. People who have money increasingly want to make more money and would love to hoard their wealth like dragons. I'm in favor of raising the taxes on wealthy corporations and individuals because people do not need to make extravagant sums of money to afford living . A single mom working 2 jobs with 2 kids needs the help more or retirees on fixed income it's hard to feel bad for someone who owns 3 houses a yacht and makes 23 million a year.
Wealthy people pay a higher absolute and percentage of their income than poorer people. About 50% of Americans have a $0 or negative net tax bill.
@@kcfreedomI still stand by my argument that people don't need hundreds of millions of dollars to afford existing at that point those same people while they may have a 0 tax bill are still struggling because they can't afford basic items. The inequality between the haves and have nots in most places in the world is astonishing.
@@chrisaycock5965 So what do you propose? The lowest income individuals are already receiving much more in benefits than what they pay in tax. I am obviously sympathetic, but you are offering no actual solution.
@@kcfreedomThat's just not true... Where did you get this information from? I think you made it up
@@kcfreedomPay a fair wage if you look back 50 years ago people made fair wages in conjunction for work our country did relatively well with that model. The rate of people in poverty is increasing and it means more people will need assistance.
One for rasing taxes and other to lower taxes.
Simplified for you.
I'd much preferred lowering taxes given how well they(gov) spent our money.
Giving it away while footing the bill to us.
sadly, people like you vote.
Can you really predict federal revenue like this? How would you do that?
just because the nominal percentage paid in taxes is lower does not necessarily mean revenues for the government will be lower, and vice versa.
Why didnt trump make the tax cuts permanent in the first place?
it massively increased national debt to pay for it
@@pearcake ... No. SPENDING increased the national debt. Cut spending.
@@tobinkern5389 Don't talk about things you don't understand. Age adjusted spending means the natural budget spend for the federal government is going to be nearer to 20% of GDP until the generational die offs hit.
The Trump and Bush administrations taxed closer to 15% of GDP their entire tenures.
The historic mean for taxation is 18% of GDP. You want a balanced budget you need to tax 20% of GDP.
It's not a spending issue, it is 100% of taxation issue.
Same thing with Social Security, medicare.
@@tobinkern5389 Tax revenue and spending affects the deficit and so affects the national debt. What Trump did was give out a trillion dollar tax cut that increased the deficit which was paid for by borrowing money which increased the national debt. So, his tax cut was deficit funded and increased the national debt. The tax cut still hasn't paid for itself via tax revenue. So, his tax cut did increase national debt.
Trump made some tax cuts permanent, wanna guess which one?
If you want to cut taxes fine. But you can't keep spending the same if you reduce revenue. If you cut taxes you must also cut spending. This is why Trump added so much to the deficit. He kept on blowing money while cutting taxes for his buddies.
Just wait until all the rich go to raise prices on items for you. We will see who gets taxed.
@@MatchGrade08 LOL as if they aren't ALREADY doing that, you can keep licking corporate boots🤣🤣
@@kv9016 yeah thats the point. An increase in high income tax is 100% a tax for you to pay. What is there not to get about you being the one paying for the taxes for the rich.
@@MatchGrade08 Ah yes "companies raise their prices on products just to raise money for the increase in income tax their rich owners have to pay" LOL you don't make any sense whatsoever.
@@MatchGrade08 Unless you can prove a statistical relation between prices increasing resulting from an increase in income taxes for high income individuals, you're just yapping nonsense
Corporations don’t even pay taxes tbh while all these loopholes continue.
Very good journalism. You laid out the facts but were neutral about it this should or shouldn’t be done.
I don't care how corporations are taxed. Just leave me and my money the F alone!
Whenever corporations are taxed, their employees, shareholders, and customers all take a hit, too!
You'll care when your $ loses half it's value and the markets crash 50% because the federal government defaults right before you were about to retire.
The customers only get hurt if the owners and share holders want more money for themselves. You pay taxes off the profit you make. If you overcharge your customers you won't make more for very long.@@ledzeppelin1212
@@LuKiSCraft the USA has crossed the tipping point of no return in that regard. There is no viable solution at this stage to turn the ship around...debt is too big, revenue cannot be raised enough to counteract it.
@@Ziegfried82 The debt is becoming quite the burden, yes. But it's not too late quite yet. Annual interest payments are now $870B, while the federal revenue is about $4T (~5X the interest payments). Imagine spending 20% of your take-home pay on interest... ouch! That's the situation Uncle Sam is in right now but it is technically manageable if we simply STOP the debt from growing faster than GDP. It shouldn't be that hard, but ever since 1980 we've struggled. If we keep on this path eventually investors will stop buying US treasury bonds and yields will go so high that the US will be compelled to close the deficit or else face default. This is what happened to the UK under Truss. They raised taxes instead of defaulting. Good move.
Really cool video :) it would be interesting to see a visualization of how Wikipedia grew or is growing
Gee, tax cuts for the rich and corporations that already pay a lower rate than most citizens, OR some billionaire shareholders and CEO's don't get quite as big of a windfall, but still make a TON of money, and the government has a more effective budget to provide needed services. I wonder...
Aka funding blackrock so they can churn out weapons to send to Ukraine and not invest money into the US at all
The word fairness would translate in American English as Socialism for those uneducated.
No it wouldn’t you Buffalo.
@@kordellswoffer1520only thing different in socialism definitely on the business side of things is profits is shared that’s it. CEO and shareholders wont make millions a year while the workers make 50k. But no most of America sees themselves as being able to make CEO to make millions 😂 (which is laughable) so they’ll never agree
Socialism for the wealthy , capitalism for the rest of you.
@@jaymack8182😅
It would translate as Socialism for the educated especially. The rhetoric changes. The policies remain the same.
Abolish the personal income tax. Consumption tax is the way to go.
That's a terrible idea because it won't come anywhere close to raising enough money.
@@philipthecow That's a selling point. The government would have to do what we do when our resources are limited. Adhere to a budget.
Big corporations that get hit with more taxes don’t pay them. They find new cuts or offload that cost into their customers. Thus the reason we are seeing this much inflation. Big corporations are not going to let the government affect their pockets.
Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, I think we can all agree that the WSJ YT channel is pretty solid.
Think most Trumpers would call the WSJ fake news
Most moderates think this is leftist propaganda. Broaden your information intake to more independent media, not massive mainstream services. Msnbc, CNN, NBC, Wallstreet journal, NY times, fox, they are all terribly biased. These people word their videos in such a way that makes it looks like it's unbaised information, but after basic scrutiny and comparison with the actual facts of what has occurred their lies are obvious. I recommend a leftist journalist called Micheal shellenberger and Matt tiaiby(might have misspelled his name)
I think it is universally agreed by mega republicans that news stations all started lying about started going down about 30 years agon and now it is at its lowest. Republicans dont want any taxes. They want to be the highest earners. Cant do that when the governemnt runs away with all the money and expects everyone else to work for them. It costs millions to fix million dollar machines and its pretty obvious that taxing food industry and oil industry is taxing food and oil. Thats a low and middle class tax.
Nah
@andrb8945 😂 it is
How about instead of focusing on the loss in tax revenue, we focus on all the money lost through bureaucracy and poor management of the budget. We have a spending problem, not a tax revenue problem.
It's interesting to see talks about one or the other. Why not both?
Any sensible person during financial troubles would try to both cut spending and make more money.
You can only cut so much before it impacts life, and you can only realistically make a certain amount of money.
Dems and Republicans are never gonna cut spending properly. But at least the Dems are willing to fix the deficit more than the republicans. I mean just look what Trump did... he made the corporate tax cut permanent but the individual tax cuts temporary... if that doesn't scream inequality to you than I don't know what does. Dems wanting to increase the tax cut from 21% to 28% puts it in line with the average corporate tax rate of 32% since 1908.
A huge amount of money is wasted on top users of Medicare / Medicaid.
@@philipthecow Social security is also unaffordable the longer it goes on. Medicare/Medicaid just puts the spending into overdrive.
I would like to say I appreciate this video for being pretty unbiased!
Big business should have different standards for state taxes regardless of the state they reside in.
Shout out to the postal worker at the end, from branch 187 bay city mi, keep up the good work!
Imagine a world where wanting to keep your own money is greedy, but taking other people's money is just.
Funny how that’s frowned upon these days.
How do you make the money?
@@isaacnikolic5895 obviously by stealing from the poor and engaging in slavery. Us evil capitalists are just diving into our vault of gold coins like Scrooge McDuck!
imagine a world where robber barons control every aspect of your daily life, and there are no consumer protection regulations on anything they shovel out to the public. That's the world the anti-tax Republican wants.
Sure keep your own money, just dont call the police or any government services if you need help, also dont use public roads.
What are the consequences of raising corporate taxes? Is it possible that we’ll see higher prices on goods and services? What’s stopping the corporations from passing the cost of taxes to the consumers?
Interesting
"Would cost the government 4 trillion dollars" That is an interesting way to say we keep more of our money.
Taxing corporations creates incentives to put money back into business.
...and move jobs overseas and import the products
@@ledzeppelin1212 Cell Phones with Trump tariffs and cars with 100% tariffs, stable genius boinks the USA.
I think this did a fair job of representing both sides of the argument. Well done.
i need more information
Now do a video on the difference in spending... makes the difference in the tax bill more understandable
Trump blew up the deficit, often using federal money to compensate for the economic harms of his other policies (e.g. tariffs).
Over 100M+ will pay trump properties where he golf's all year round. Go cry about that
Don't stop at spending, look at the over all debt effect. The previous Trump plan cost the US government $8.4T, which was just shy of the $10T cost that was estimated at the time. His new plan is estimated to double that. Biden's plan will reduce the debt by $3T according to the OMB and the Brookings Institution.
I don’t think they can do that video. Neither of their official websites have anything on them except a donations link. No issues pages, no plans. I guess they figured policy no longer changes any votes?
True. And there are only two buckets that make any difference: defense and safety nets. Everything else is in the noise. Reducing Medicare and Medicaid spending is probably not going to be a vote getter. Same with raising retirement age for Social Security beyond the current 67 years of age. And any weapon system that is built in a politician's district is awfully hard to cut.
The difference is it isn't even Biden's policies. The guy is long gone, he is merely a figure head at this point. The policy was most likely written by an advisor with Biden's signature on it since he can't even properly find the way off the stage most of the time. So I'd pick someone with his mental faculties intact over a figure head any day of the week.