Donald Trump's Income Tax Calculator

[tmartens]

Here is a calculator to compare Donald Trumps Income tax rate with the current income tax rate:

http://money.savvythis.com/donald-trump-tax-calculator.php

[Boudicca]

Can you explain your methodology in creating this calculator?  In words we fiscally uneducated can comprehend, please.  Also, welcome to the Cave; please go over to the Introductions Forum and well, introduce yourself.

[tmartens]

Pretty simple. Just applied the various tax rates to the input income.

For example if you are single under Trumps plan you do not pay taxes on your first $25,000. You pay 10% taxes on $25,001 to $50,000 and then 20% on $50,001 to $150,000 ect...

My calculator simply does the calculations for you and then compare it's to the current 2015 tax rates.

Trumps plan saves everyone money....but may end up costing the government about 1 trillion a year at current spending rates.

While I would love a decrease in my taxes, I feel that Trump is using it to buy votes.

[txradioguy]

Trumps plan saves everyone money....but may end up costing the government about 1 trillion a year at current spending rates.

You do realize don't you that when taxes go down...money coming into the federal coffers gos up?

While I would love a decrease in my taxes, I feel that Trump is using it to buy votes.

Why?

[tmartens]

You do realize don't you that when taxes go down...money coming into the federal coffers gos up?

Yes, I believe tax cuts are in order to bring in more revenue. By how much is another question. There is a balance that needs to be met. I am all for forcing the governments hand in lowing and limiting spending. We need to pass a balanced budget for the federal government as well.

Why?

Trump knows how to play the game as well as any other politician. He know's he can buy votes.

[tmartens]

Here is what the Tax Foundation found when analyzing the plan Trump put forward.

http://taxfoundation.org/article/details-and-analysis-donald-trump-s-tax-plan

Static Revenue Impact (2015-2024) -$10,201
Dynamic Revenue Impact (2015-2024)  -$9,535

Even taking into account growth we will have nearly a trillion shortfall each year. If the government can cut spending by a trillion each year lets do it. They currently spend 3.5 trillion a year, but before Obama we were spending ~3 and before Bush 2.3.

So it may be viable to cut spending by $953.5 billion a year to have a balanced budget. I would love to see it!

[obumazombie]

Revenues doubled as a result of the Reagan tax cuts.
The problem really got out of hand when congressional spending went up threefold at the same time.

I have a real problem with someone saying that my vote is being bought by me being able to keep more of the money I earn.
That's not vote buying at all.

In fact it's the exact opposite.
Higher taxes paid by taxpayers to into the pockets of people who didn't earn it is the true form of vote buying.

The OP is either ignorant or dishonest to advance a lib meme that all money is the government's, and if the government allows us to keep some money we should be happy with whatever scraps they leave.

The OP seems blindly oblivious to the fact that one of the reasons real hard working Americans fought the revolution is that the practice of harboring of soldiers was once commonplace.
Soldiers were an arm of the British government and were allowed by British law to come into our houses, take what they wanted, stay as long as they wanted, and not compensate the owners for what was taken. They acted like everything was theirs.

By taxing exorbitantly the same effect is being imposed today.
I say no.
I say not everything is the governments in the first place and I get what's leftover.

[Boudicca]

You're here and gone in one day?  Tim, we hardly knew ye. 

[obumazombie]

You're here and gone in one day?  Tim, we hardly knew ye. 

Good call Boudicca, and good riddance to Tim. Good riddance to bad garbage.

[Lacarnut]

Just another lying liberal Trump hater that is full of sh!t.

[DumbAss Tanker]

It's an article of faith that cutting taxes will generate manifold economic activity increases, but I'm leery about overestimating this, it's more likely a bounded situation where it works to a point and then zeroes out or starts working the other way outside those bounds, i.e. there's probably a point where those curves cross above the origin point on the graph. 

There are a lot of real things that aren't taken into account by one-liners about Reagan's tax cuts.  Just to name a few, swings of the economic cycle, technological and cultural shifts in economic activity, demographic changes in the population that have real effects on economic activity, changes in economic strength of our trading partners, and last but not least the fact that our high corporate tax rates have virtually nothing to do with what corporations actually pay in taxes if they are big enough to influence government policy on deductions applicable to their business (I particularly have in mind megacorporation GE, which paid no net taxes the year its CEO was Obama's 'Job Czar' and who off-shored thousands of GE jobs in the same year).

[docstew]

It's an article of faith that cutting taxes will generate manifold economic activity increases, but I'm leery about overestimating this, it's more likely a bounded situation where it works to a point and then zeroes out or starts working the other way outside those bounds, i.e. there's probably a point where those curves cross above the origin point on the graph. 

There are a lot of real things that aren't taken into account by one-liners about Reagan's tax cuts.  Just to name a few, swings of the economic cycle, technological and cultural shifts in economic activity, demographic changes in the population that have real effects on economic activity, changes in economic strength of our trading partners, and last but not least the fact that our high corporate tax rates have virtually nothing to do with what corporations actually pay in taxes if they are big enough to influence government policy on deductions applicable to their business (I particularly have in mind megacorporation GE, which paid no net taxes the year its CEO was Obama's 'Job Czar' and who off-shored thousands of GE jobs in the same year).

There is a maxima to the Laffer curve, but as Milton Friedman said "If you cut taxes and revenues go up, you didn't cut them enough", implying that you would be on the back side of the curve.