Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(107,711 posts)
Tue Jul 31, 2018, 06:39 PM Jul 2018

Trump Administration Mulls a Unilateral Tax Cut for the Wealthy

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is considering bypassing Congress to grant a $100 billion tax cut mainly to the wealthy, a legally tenuous maneuver that would cut capital gains taxation and fulfill a long-held ambition of many investors and conservatives.

Steven Mnuchin, the Treasury secretary, said in an interview on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit meeting in Argentina this month that his department was studying whether it could use its regulatory powers to allow Americans to account for inflation in determining capital gains tax liabilities. The Treasury Department could change the definition of “cost” for calculating capital gains, allowing taxpayers to adjust the initial value of an asset, such as a home or a share of stock, for inflation when it sells.

Currently, capital gains taxes are determined by subtracting the original price of an asset from the price at which it was sold and taxing the difference, usually at 20 percent. If a high earner spent $100,000 on stock in 1980, then sold it for $1 million today, she would owe taxes on $900,000. But if her original purchase price was adjusted for inflation, it would be about $300,000, reducing her taxable “gain” to $700,000. That would save the investor $40,000.

“It is something that we’re going to consider; we’ve talked to Congress about it,” Mr. Mnuchin said. “There have been a bunch of letters to the president and I on Treasury doing this independent of Congress.”

Mr. Mnuchin emphasized that he had not concluded whether he had the authority to make such a move but that it was being studied internally, along with the economic costs and impact on growth.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-administration-mulls-a-unilateral-tax-cut-for-the-wealthy/ar-BBLhtZx?li=BBnb7Kz

Throw it at the wall and see if it sticks appears to be their strategy.

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump Administration Mulls a Unilateral Tax Cut for the Wealthy (Original Post) Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jul 2018 OP
I can't see that this is legal. Iliyah Jul 2018 #1
trying to bypass congress....looting the treasury spanone Jul 2018 #2
What a ripoff...what about all of millions who already sold their stocks and/or... SWBTATTReg Jul 2018 #3
What it is duforsure Jul 2018 #4
Clearly Double Dipping ProfessorGAC Jul 2018 #5

SWBTATTReg

(22,059 posts)
3. What a ripoff...what about all of millions who already sold their stocks and/or...
Tue Jul 31, 2018, 07:31 PM
Jul 2018

assets at inflated rates, and paid cap. gains already? This is a clear and fraudulent attempt to bypass Congress and the purse strings...since rump is having so much difficulty in passing anything, he's wanting to do it unilaterally.

Why do we have separation of powers? There must be a clear separation of power between the legislative, executive, and jurisdictional branches of government.

duforsure

(11,884 posts)
4. What it is
Tue Jul 31, 2018, 07:37 PM
Jul 2018

Its he's taking OUR money to bribe the super wealthy with to protect him , and help him get re-elected .

ProfessorGAC

(64,827 posts)
5. Clearly Double Dipping
Tue Jul 31, 2018, 07:39 PM
Jul 2018

One invests in equities for the very purpose of accumulating gains well in excess of inflation.

So, adjusting the original purchase price to index inflation is double dipping.

It also discourages speculation and futures because why take more risk to get 15% instead of 9, when the 9% gain only gets taxed to a point where it's the equivalent to a 12% gain. The extra risk is not worth 3%, but may have been if were an extra 6%

Only Mnuchin could have thought of something so stupid.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump Administration Mull...