The Wall Street Journal reports today that Trump plans tax cuts for everyone but the biggest cuts go to those in the 1%. To see the graphs, buy today’s WSJ.
“Nearly half the benefits of the plan, and a higher proportion of savings, would go to the top 1%
Steven Mnuchin, the likely next Treasury secretary, this week said rich U.S. taxpayers won’t get “an absolute tax cut” under President-elect Donald Trump. But that is not what Mr. Trump says in his taxation plan. In fact, under his approach the wealthy would receive an average tax cut of about $215,000 per household, experts say.
“In Mr. Trump’s plan, Americans in different income ranges would divide up several hundred billion dollars of revenue cuts for 2017. As a result, Americans would, on average, receive a lower tax bill for 2017 compared with current law.
“The way to think of the plan is this: The overall tax pie will shrink, and as it shrinks, the amounts owed by various taxpayers will shift, too. So while everyone will pay less, their relative contributions may change.
“The top 1% will benefit, as they would contribute a smaller percentage of total tax revenue under Mr. Trump than they do now. The group, which consists of about 1.1 million households and earns 17% of total income, would owe 25% of federal taxes for 2017 under Trump’s plan compared with 28.7% under current law.
“Mr. Mnuchin said these high-income households won’t get an “absolute” cut, because reductions for high earners “will be offset by less deductions.” Notably, Mr. Trump’s tax plan currently limits “itemized” deductions on Schedule A, such as those for mortgage interest, charitable donations, and state taxes, to a maximum of $200,000 per couple and half that for singles.
“But these limits don’t fully offset the effects of income- and estate-tax cuts for high earners proposed by Mr. Trump, according to experts.
“Trump’s current plan doesn’t identify sufficient offsets for high earners to pay for their rate reductions,” says Eugene Steuerle, a economist with the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington who as a member of Ronald Reagan’s administration helped formulate the major tax reform of 1986.
“According to the Tax Policy Center’s analysis, nearly half the benefits of Mr. Trump’s tax plan would go to the top 1%, households earning more than about $700,000 annually.
“Compared with the highest earners, the share of total taxes of the next-highest income group—those earning between $143,100 and $699,000—would rise to 41.2% under the Trump proposals from 39.4% under current law. Their average tax cut would be about $6,900. For the lowest income group—those earning less than $24,800—the average tax cut would be $110.
“The uneven benefits of the Trump plan reflect the difficult nature of tax changes for policy makers who, like Mr. Mnuchin, say they don’t want to benefit the wealthy disproportionately.
“Cutting tax rates for the middle class not only costs a great deal of revenue, it also lowers taxes for high earners because they benefit as well,” says Roberton Williams, an economist with the Tax Policy Center.
Another complication is that tax breaks for individuals are unevenly distributed. For example, high earners are often more able than lower earners to reap long-term capital-gain income, which is now taxed at a top rate of 23.8%. Under current law, 78% of long-term gains go to those in the top 1%.”

More trickle down voodoo economics. Slash taxes mainly benefiting the rich, revenues are lost, massive revenue loss and the deficits go through the roof. It’s deja vu all over again, Bush, Reagan redux with disastrous results. Why does the GOP and Trump hate America so much?
LikeLike
It’s not that they hate America, Joe, it’s that they love the rich way, way more. They think that the rich ARE America (or at least, the only Americans who count).
LikeLike
“those earning less than $24,800—the average tax cut would be $110.”
That’s me and it’s not enough to make an iota of difference in my daily struggle to survive.
This report says nothing about what Trump claimed at Carrier the other day regarding his plan to lower corporate taxes from 35% to 15%…
http://time.com/4588027/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-carrier-corporate-tax/
LikeLike
During the 1950s, the top marginal tax rate was 91%, after the loopholes the effective tax rate was about 51% (according to Robert Reich). Kennedy lowered the rate to 70% but closed some of the loopholes. As of today, the top marginal tax rate is 39.6% and there seem to be abundant loopholes. With Trump, we will return to robber baron days. HRC would not have lowered taxes on the rich and the corporations.
LikeLike
The president can only propose a tax change (increase or decrease). ALL money bills must originate in the House of Representatives. And all tax bills must clear the Ways and Means committee. (This is where the congress figures out the ways to get the means from us).
I suggest we forget about what HRC would have done. It’s only speculation.
LikeLike
I am not forgetting about HRC and what she probably would have done because people come into this web site everyday and bash Hillary as a war monger, demon from hell and claim she’s just as bad as Trump. Hillary lost but the demonizing continues every day. I voted for Bernie and I am certainly troubled by Hillary’s link to the oligarchs like the Waltons but she would have done far less damage than Trump.
cema: The GOP controls everything so it’s a fair guess that Trump will get his way which is after all, the GOP way.
LikeLike
Only because democrats are spineless. Remember Obama had a supper majority in 2008 . Currently republicans have a two seat majority. soon to be three. They could regret the day they killed the filibusterer..
LikeLike
Is it possible to get the title and link to the WaPo article, please?
LikeLike