Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




Pages : [1] 2

iahflyr
12-19-2017, 06:05 AM
It seems like airline pilots may be the group hurt the most if the GOP passes their tax reform. I compiled a list of things that will hurt us the most:

Currently you can write-off your union expenses (Roughly 2% of your total income) as well as your diem. If you fly a trip to London for instance, and London's per diem is $182/day, and your airline rate is $2.50/hr ($60/day), you can write-off that difference. Those deductions add up to a lot of money (Roughly 7k a year for me). They will be eliminated if GOP tax reform passes.

Anyone claiming these deductions will lose the personal exemption as well ($4050 write off).

If you are single and make more than $157,500, your new Federal tax rate will be 32% (It's currently 28%).

Not to mention those of us who live in either a state with state income tax (43 states) OR high property tax (Texas, New Jersey, Florida, etc...), you're likely losing a good chunk of your State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction if you make 100K+ and own as house as it would be capped at 10k total for all SALT.

As a personal example, I'm a 757/767 FO and I make roughly 200k and own a house. I would lose 7k write-off from union expenses/per diem write off going away, 4k write-off from personal exemption going away, roughly 5k from SALT tax being capped. And now my top tax rate goes up from 28% to 32%, That's easily an increase of 5-10k a year in taxes for me. And I'm just a middle of the road FO. I cannot imagine how much money some of our captains will be losing.


At first I thought "Well maybe we will get more in profit sharing" due to the lower corporate tax rate, but then I remembered that most profit sharing formulas are based off PTIX (Pre Tax Income), so that won't change anything.

Did the GOP craft this tax bill primarily to screw pilots??


itsmytime
12-19-2017, 06:38 AM
No personal bias against pilots, but the "tax reform" was designed to benefit corporations and the mega-rich. Pilots are well off, not mega rich.

freezingflyboy
12-19-2017, 06:49 AM
Don't we all know that those most in need of tax breaks are the ones who already have lots of money? That's econ 101, isn't it? :rolleyes:

Wish I could figure out how to do the embedding, but either way, this seems apt.

https://youtu.be/tO5sxLapAts


deadseal
12-19-2017, 06:52 AM
But Fox News told me itís good for me so you must be a dirty snowflake antifa Democrate liberal hippy. There is no middle ground in the war against the dems, and vice versa

EWRflyr
12-19-2017, 06:52 AM
I read the entire bill myself to see what nuggets are in there. Of further interest to many of our pilots: alimony payments will no longer be deductible. Doesn't apply to me but to the couple of pilots I've flown with who have two or more divorces under their belts, watch out.

I, too, am affected by all the various provisions and caps. Gone are the $18,000 in SALT and work itemized deductions I take, excluding mortgage interest and charitable deductions as they do remain.

Have no fear though because with the lower corporate tax rates I'm SURE the corporate profit windfall will "trickle down" to workers in the form of huge, I mean YUGE, pay raises out of the kindness of corporate responsibility and plain goodness in their hearts. :rolleyes:

Pilots and most workers are NOT in the "class" of citizen this bill is meant to help.

GogglesPisano
12-19-2017, 07:12 AM
And it will fit on a postcard.:rolleyes:

Qotsaautopilot
12-19-2017, 07:27 AM
The brackets are lower so hopefully your effective rate drop makes up for the loss of deductions. That’s what I’m hoping for.

Not a fan of the plan mainly because it blows up the deficit.

MacrossJet
12-19-2017, 07:28 AM
Pilots and most workers are NOT in the "class" of citizen this bill is meant to help.

And yet, there are many pilots that are Republican. Voted for Trump, and continue to sing his praises. Talk about voting against your own interest. Ya'll been had.

SonicFlyer
12-19-2017, 07:32 AM
Can you cite where in the bill it does away with per diems not being taxable? :confused:

SpeedyVagabond
12-19-2017, 08:48 AM
The funny part is most of the pilots I fly with are conservatives. All of you deserve what you voted for. I only feel bad for those off us shanghaied along for the ride. It’s only going to get worse for the next three years.

742Dash
12-19-2017, 09:03 AM
And yet, there are many pilots that are Republican. Voted for Trump, and continue to sing his praises. Talk about voting against your own interest. Ya'll been had.

Fred Trump, Donald's older brother, was considered by the family to be a failure and was repeatedly told so by his father and siblings.

Fred Trump was a pilot for TWA.

Xtreme87
12-19-2017, 09:38 AM
And yet, there are many pilots that are Republican. Voted for Trump, and continue to sing his praises. Talk about voting against your own interest. Ya'll been had.

LAWL. You funny. You actually think Democrats have your own interest in mind? Just as corrupt, if not worse. Sorry, canít vote your way out of this mess.

ShyGuy
12-19-2017, 10:06 AM
The funny part is most of the pilots I fly with are conservatives. All of you deserve what you voted for. I only feel bad for those off us shanghaied along for the ride. Itís only going to get worse for the next three years.

+1

This needed to be said

Slaphappy
12-19-2017, 10:35 AM
Sorry but it's not up to the rest of us to subsidies the blue state tax payers that are charged too much in their states. The best thing about this bill is the lowering of the corporate tax rate that was one of the highest in the world. With that said everyone will see a cut but the real benefit is the economic growth we will get.

Slaphappy
12-19-2017, 10:36 AM
No personal bias against pilots, but the "tax reform" was designed to benefit corporations and the mega-rich. Pilots are well off, not mega rich.

Then why is everyone getting a cut?

iahflyr
12-19-2017, 11:29 AM
Can you cite where in the bill it does away with per diems not being taxable? :confused:

Unreimbursed employment expenses are currently deductible. That includes Per Diem when staying in expensive cities. That deduction will go away. That is the same deduction that has allowed us to write off our union dues.

freezingflyboy
12-19-2017, 11:32 AM
Then why is everyone getting a cut?

A temporary cut. Read the fine print: unless you're a large corporation, your tax "cut" expires in eight years. And as the OP and others have pointed out the term "cut" is used very loosely (incorrectly?) when applied to the majority of the middle class, most on this board included. Wake up, you're being bamboozled.

iahflyr
12-19-2017, 11:33 AM
Sorry but it's not up to the rest of us to subsidies the blue state tax payers that are charged too much in their states.

Remeber, Most blue states already give way more money to the federal government than they get back, and it will only get worse if this bill passes...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/amp/

CBreezy
12-19-2017, 12:10 PM
Remeber, Most blue states already give way more money to the federal government than they get back, and it will only get worse if this bill passes...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/amp/

This. It's the red States who take more they put in and that's funded by... The blue states. Hate that welfare until you need it.

jcountry
12-19-2017, 12:11 PM
Who cares?

Iíd rather have 12k added to the standard deduction (plus a lower tax rate) than have a couple thousand more in deductions.

Much more money in my pocket. Not very tough math

Slaphappy
12-19-2017, 12:28 PM
A temporary cut. Read the fine print: unless you're a large corporation, your tax "cut" expires in eight years. And as the OP and others have pointed out the term "cut" is used very loosely (incorrectly?) when applied to the majority of the middle class, most on this board included. Wake up, you're being bamboozled.

That's because they need 60 votes to make those cuts permanent. The Democrats never cut taxes only raise them. I will get about a 2000 dollar tax cut and most on here will get one as well. People need to actually read what's in the reform bill and not just parrot talking points.

Remeber, Most blue states already give way more money to the federal government than they get back, and it will only get worse if this bill passes...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/amp/

This. It's the red States who take more they put in and that's funded by... The blue states. Hate that welfare until you need it.

Those numbers are that way because of things like Medicare and social security. Those stats ignore the money that was paid into the system by those people and only calculates the payout. This is why you don't use blog posts. Remember it's still Republican voters who lay the most taxes.

Remember who the 47% vote for, Mitt Romney was spot on.

itsmytime
12-19-2017, 12:36 PM
[QUOTE=Slaphappy;2486094]Sorry but it's not up to the rest of us to subsidies the blue state tax payers that are charged too much in their states. The best thing about this bill is the lowering of the corporate tax rate that was one of the highest in the world. With that said everyone will see a cut but the real benefit is the economic growth we will get.[/QUOTE&

If you believe that big corporations will do anything with that money besides hoard it, buy their stock back, and give their execs big bonuses, then you haven't been paying attention to the way corporate America operates.

Slaphappy
12-19-2017, 12:41 PM
Remeber, Most blue states already give way more money to the federal government than they get back, and it will only get worse if this bill passes...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/stonesoup.wordpress.com/2011/06/07/federal-funding-received-by-state-per-dollar-sent/amp/

[QUOTE=Slaphappy;2486094]Sorry but it's not up to the rest of us to subsidies the blue state tax payers that are charged too much in their states. The best thing about this bill is the lowering of the corporate tax rate that was one of the highest in the world. With that said everyone will see a cut but the real benefit is the economic growth we will get.[/QUOTE&

If you believe that big corporations will do anything with that money besides hoard it, buy their stock back, and give their execs big bonuses, then you haven't been paying attention to the way corporate America operates.

You don't think repatriation of 2 trillion will have a positive effect on the economy? At the very least not having one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world is good thing. Paying out dividends will great benefit the economy, much more so than taxing it.

rickair7777
12-19-2017, 12:56 PM
MOD INPUT: No partisan political discussions on APC. You can talk about the direct specifics of the new tax law as it applies to individual tax returns but no economic politics.

Qotsaautopilot
12-19-2017, 01:06 PM
Who cares?

Iíd rather have 12k added to the standard deduction (plus a lower tax rate) than have a couple thousand more in deductions.

Much more money in my pocket. Not very tough math

Do you rent?

BZC17
12-19-2017, 01:26 PM
Saw this link on another pilot forum. Itís updated as of 15 December with the current plan.
http://taxplancalculator.com/

English
12-19-2017, 01:40 PM
Couldnít vote for Trump, but I am trying to keep politics out of this. I am benefiting from the tax bill in these ways:

I am 36, married with 4 kids, and a 4 year narrow body FO.

- Lower tax rate in new bill; 10%, 12%, 22% and 24%
Compared to; 10%, 15%, 25%, and 28% (and 33% in a good year ($233k)

- Child tax credit infinitely better. I was phased out in the current bill and basically got nothing. Now I get a credit of $2k for each of my kids and the phase out doesnít start until $400k. Thatís $8k back already. Credit not deduction.

- AMT exemption raised. We should all be out of that now.

- Personally I am not getting hurt by the $10,000k SALT cap or the $750k mortgage interest cap.

- Charity still deductible

- 401k unchanged.

Losing the personal exemption, per diem and union dues is sad, but for my situation itís a good trade. Iím happy with the bill.

Pogey Bait
12-19-2017, 02:01 PM
Saw this link on another pilot forum. Itís updated as of 15 December with the current plan.
Tax Plan Calculator by Maxim Lott (http://taxplancalculator.com/)

If that info is correct on said website, then thank you mexican federales.

Planetrain
12-19-2017, 02:12 PM
Couldnít vote for Trump, but I am trying to keep politics out of this. I am benefiting from the tax bill in these ways:

I am 36, married with 4 kids, and a 4 year narrow body FO.

- Lower tax rate in new bill; 10%, 12%, 22% and 24%
Compared to; 10%, 15%, 25%, and 28% (and 33% in a good year ($233k)

- Child tax credit infinitely better. I was phased out in the current bill and basically got nothing. Now I get a credit of $2k for each of my kids and the phase out doesnít start until $400k. Thatís $8k back already. Credit not deduction.

- AMT exemption raised. We should all be out of that now.

- Personally I am not getting hurt by the $10,000k SALT cap or the $750k mortgage interest cap.

- Charity still deductible

- 401k unchanged.

Losing the personal exemption, per diem and union dues is sad, but for my situation itís a good trade. Iím happy with the bill.

To iahflyr;
If your itemized deductions are less than $24k, the new plan is looking better. If they are more, AMT starts to reduce that benefit of big itemized deductions under our current plan. (Wait till captain pay, you wont be 757FO forever.)

Should AMT be exempted for us, this may be a good deal. I haven't seen the final bill, just read the highlights. I think its too early to call if this is a bad deal for our income situations.

Silver02ex
12-19-2017, 02:15 PM
Do you rent?

I don't know of any home owner who pays more than $10,000 in interest and property tax say, "I rather take the standard deduction"

jcountry
12-19-2017, 02:55 PM
Do you rent?

Nope.

And Iím not silly enough to have a huge mortgage.

The tax benefit of a mortgage deduction is extremely overrated. I wish more people really understood how expensive mortgages really are. You wind up paying for a house at least twice.

deadseal
12-19-2017, 03:04 PM
Nope.

And Iím not silly enough to have a huge mortgage.

The tax benefit of a mortgage deduction is extremely overrated. I wish more people really understood how expensive mortgages really are. You wind up paying for a house at least twice.

Interesting comment.
Iíll just magically come up with all the cash?
Or Iíll pay someone elseís mortgage for 30 years and have no equity to show for it?
Iím not saying the rate is fair or anything, there just arenít a whole lot of better options if you want to own your house and paint it pink with purple polka dots

jcountry
12-19-2017, 03:17 PM
Interesting comment.
Iíll just magically come up with all the cash?
Or Iíll pay someone elseís mortgage for 30 years and have no equity to show for it?
Iím not saying the rate is fair or anything, there just arenít a whole lot of better options if you want to own your house and paint it pink with purple polka dots

A mortgage is a necessity these days.

But a large one is not.

I know way too many people who have mortgages 2 or 3x (or more) their annual income.

Just be smart. The bank really owns the damned thing until the last payment clears. Until that day, we are all renters.

Many people never figure this out. Some even get a crazy large mortgage just for the tax deduction. Thatís very dumb.

Some folks sleep very well in a bigass home in which they have 3% equity. A home they think they own. Those people are very likely to lose it if they have any kind of complications.

And we all know the airline industry has complications with regularity

pause
12-19-2017, 03:20 PM
Nope.

And Iím not silly enough to have a huge mortgage.

The tax benefit of a mortgage deduction is extremely overrated. I wish more people really understood how expensive mortgages really are. You wind up paying for a house at least twice.

This.
$3500 savings for me.

jcountry
12-19-2017, 04:08 PM
Are you talking about the Blue states that subsidize the Red States. Every. Single. Year. Those Blue states? Red states are the takers.

Blue states might just get smart and stop confiscating so much in taxes.

I can think of people who pay 10x what I do for property tax and they get nothing for all that money that I donít have.

busbusbaby
12-19-2017, 05:11 PM
[QUOTE=itsmytime;2486151]

You don't think repatriation of 2 trillion will have a positive effect on the economy? At the very least not having one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world is good thing. Paying out dividends will great benefit the economy, much more so than taxing it.

The rate that the they are talking about is the statutory rate but what the corps are actually paying is far less. Really a bad comparison and huge lie https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/actual-us-corporate-tax-rates-are-in-line-with-comparable-countries
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/07/541797699/fact-check-does-the-u-s-have-the-highest-corporate-tax-rate-in-the-world

SonicFlyer
12-19-2017, 05:18 PM
Unreimbursed employment expenses are currently deductible. That includes Per Diem when staying in expensive cities. That deduction will go away. Cite your source. :confused:

sailingfun
12-19-2017, 05:22 PM
A mortgage is a necessity these days.

But a large one is not.

I know way too many people who have mortgages 2 or 3x (or more) their annual income.

Just be smart. The bank really owns the damned thing until the last payment clears. Until that day, we are all renters.

Many people never figure this out. Some even get a crazy large mortgage just for the tax deduction. Thatís very dumb.

Some folks sleep very well in a bigass home in which they have 3% equity. A home they think they own. Those people are very likely to lose it if they have any kind of complications.

And we all know the airline industry has complications with regularity

You completely leave out appreciation in your discussion of home ownership. I am sitting on well over a million in equity by maintaining medium size mortgages over the last 30 years. In fact appreciation has made home ownership essentially free. Had I rented I would have made payments almost the same as my mortgage payments and have nothing to show for it. The key to successful home ownership is avoid cash out mortgages and use 15 year loans.

SonicFlyer
12-19-2017, 05:23 PM
Blue states might just get smart and stop confiscating so much in taxes.No, they will go bankrupt. What you'll see is an expansion of the migration of people out of blue states in to red states... which is a problem because it means the red states won't continue to be red for very long. :mad:

SonicFlyer
12-19-2017, 05:26 PM
You completely leave out appreciation in your discussion of home ownership. I am sitting on well over a million in equity by maintaining medium size mortgages over the last 30 years.A home is not an investment, it is a consumer item (assuming you're not in the business of real estate/ flipping / renting/ etc). Those that treat it as an investment do so while accepting very high risk and questionable returns. The same money would go a lot farther over 30 years in a well diversified stock portfolio.

RomeoHotel
12-19-2017, 05:46 PM
You completely leave out appreciation in your discussion of home ownership. I am sitting on well over a million in equity by maintaining medium size mortgages over the last 30 years. In fact appreciation has made home ownership essentially free. Had I rented I would have made payments almost the same as my mortgage payments and have nothing to show for it. The key to successful home ownership is avoid cash out mortgages and use 15 year loans.

I agree...20 years ago a real estate professional that I trusted told me that I should buy the best home I could afford in the best location. With over 8% annual growth I have about a million in equity as well... and my monthly ppi is now laughably low...
As for the mortgage and interest...I often consider paying down principal with savings but then I realize that I can put the savings to work... if it can beat 3.75% Iím ahead ...

Also.. that tax calculator neglects to ask the source of the itemized deductions...Since many of us are using job related expences to itemize ...the calculator is in error to assume the itemized value would remain the same....
It appears that the tax reform will be very painful....especially for those making over 200k in a state with significant income tax and property tax..

Typhoonpilot
12-19-2017, 07:31 PM
Cite your source. :confused:

I started writing my representatives a month ago to protest some of the changes introduced in this tax plan. All I got back was a form letter saying how great it is going to be for America, blah, blah, blah.

It's a ****ing disaster for pilots and the quoted part below only deals with the pilot allowed exemptions, not SALT and alimony deductions. Overall it is crushing to many pilots and other upper middle class employees.

Hi everyone Ė A disaster is about to happen. Flight crew are being punished in this new tax bill.

Iíve waited to email you all because I couldnít imagine that this terrible tax bill would go through, but it seems like it may. On the new bill there are no more employee business expense deductions. If it passes, you will not be able to deduct any flight crew expenses anymore. That includes uniforms, union dues, per diem for every city where you overnight Ė everything. Some of you will owe thousands more each year and all of you will need to change your allowances on the W4 at work so that you donít owe on your 2018 tax return. (Note Ė this doesnít change anything on your 2017 return Ė it only affects 2018 and later)

We are shocked that all union members are not in the streets protesting this!

This proposed bill is a nightmare.

You will be forced to take the standard deduction, because there will be no more itemizing of flight crew expenses.

The big lie theyíre telling is that the standard deduction will double. That is not really true.

Currently the standard for single is $6,300, but every person on your return also gets a $4,050 exemption. So a single person currently gets $10,350.

The standard deduction will change to $12,000, but the exemption is being lowered to $300 (no longer $4,050). So, the total deduction a single person will be able to get is $12,300.

That is only $2,000 more (not double) Ė at a 15% tax rate that is $300 extra in refund. But once your deductions are removed from your tax return that $300 and more, is going to be eaten up:

There will be no deduction for student loan interest.

If you sell your home before living in it for 5 years you will be taxed.

You can no longer deduct a loss if someone breaks into your home and steals jewelry, etc.

There are a ton more ridiculous addendums, but the point is, for 90% of you this is going to be a loss. And for some of you this will be a crushing tax burden.

If you have a republican Senator or Congressman please call them today! The republicans are planning on rushing this through a vote as early as next week, even though many of their constituents are going to be hurt by this. Tell them that the Form 2106 Employee Business Expense Deductions is your reimbursement for all you spend to do your job. Tell them that the airlines do not reimburse you for everything you spend Ė luggage, cell phone data plan to check your schedule, food and incidentals while you are on duty helping the people of this country as they fly for business, vacations, etc. Removing this deduction makes it so that your salary will effectively be lower. This bill robs middle class flight crew of the deductions that you deserve for waking up while itís still dark, schlepping bags around and dealing with ornery people (you do so much more than that, but you need to tell them your story). It is not fair. Call as soon as you can. The best website/app is https://5calls.org/ They will connect you with the right people for your district.

Clients that have been with us forever Ė you know weíve never asked you to call congress or try to reshape policy, but this is such a loss for hardworking flight crew, truckers, sales people Ė that deduct mileage, per diems, and other work-related expenses.

Also, anyone who starts a small business will take a hit from the automatic 20% tax rate on your business. (Most small businesses pay between 10 and 15%).

The only winners on this bill are large corporations and people making over $250k. Please lodge a complaint with your senator and congressman that this is not fair to you.

Tim and I will be out of town from the 16th to the 21st. Weíll be in the DEN SW Lounge on Dec. 20th! So say hi if youíre there.

Since there are 800 of you and 2 of us, we are not able to quickly run scenarios on how this will affect each of you, but we will be offering tax planning appointments that you can book in 2018 to see its impact on you personally and make sure youíre withholding enough during 2018.

If you have a short question don't respond to this email. Just compose a new email to us at [email protected]

--
Website: AirlineTaxes.com

flyguy94
12-19-2017, 08:02 PM
There will be no deduction for student loan interest.

Perhaps this was sent out before the change but student loan interest deduction made it into the bill.

PRS Guitars
12-19-2017, 08:20 PM
It will effect everyone a little differently on a personal level. You have to run your own numbers. For me it’s close to a push, I’m probably better off by about $1500 under the new plan (married FO and USAFR TR, household income about $210k) The real ball kicker is the loss of exemptions of $4050 per dependent. So for a family of 5 that’s a $20k reduction in taxable income that is not available anymore (about a $6000 value)...however the child tax credit is now phased out at $400k so for the above family of 5 that makes up the $6k.

Personally, I’m not a fan of child tax credits & mortgage deductions. I’d love to see them all gone. It’s attempted behavior control by the Govt. what you incentivize you get more of...what you tax you get less of. SALT deductions are a just redistribution of wealth.

The greatest thing about this bill is the lowering of the corporate tax rates. I hear some of you claim this will be hoarded by greedy corporations. That’s not how it works, corporations already simply pass the cost of theses taxes on to the consumer. We will see lower consumer costs and probably some pretty good economic growth (finally).

Twin Wasp
12-19-2017, 08:56 PM
Couldnít vote for Trump, but I am trying to keep politics out of this. I am benefiting from the tax bill in these ways:

I am 36, married with 4 kids, and a 4 year narrow body FO.

- Lower tax rate in new bill; 10%, 12%, 22% and 24%
Compared to; 10%, 15%, 25%, and 28% (and 33% in a good year ($233k)
Iím happy with the bill.

You might want to check that. The final plan has a marginal rate of 22% for earnings under 82k, a rate of 24% for earnings under 157k, a rate of 32% for earnings under 200k and a rate 35% for earnings under 500k. For comparison the current rates are 25% for earnings under 93k, 28% for earnings under 194k and 33% under 425k. So dollars earned above 157k are taxed at a higher rate. Whether the adjustments in the marginal rates below 100k will make make up for it is too much math for me but it's a lie to say rates are going down.

cactusmike
12-19-2017, 09:33 PM
No corporation that makes over 500 million is paying anywhere close to the top tax rate now. Most corporations pay closer to 10to 15% so by lowering the rate and not closing loopholes the net revenue will be lower.

Many corporations are paying close to zero in taxes now. The new tax code still sees companies keep profits overseas, incentivizes overseas investments in factories and does nothing to prevent offshoring. Not exactly ďAmerica FirstĒ.

A wage earner is taxed higher than an investor or business owner making the same amount of income. Guess what, pilots are wage earners, we get hit.

Many flaws in the bill, the biggest being that the deficit rises over 1.5 trillion dollars. So much for fiscal conservatism. That concept got lost in the special tax breaks for the Wall Street crowd and property developers.

742Dash
12-20-2017, 01:45 AM
...
A wage earner is taxed higher than an investor or business owner making the same amount of income. Guess what, pilots are wage earners, we get hit...

Don't forget trust fund babies. The town that I live in is infested with them. They do not "earn" anything, nor do they create anything. They just exist off of old money and pay very little taxes while doing so.

I encourage everyone to try this experiment. Before you close Turbotax for the last time, delete your W2. Replace it dollar for dollar with a 1099 that has qualified dividends and long term capital gains. -0- earned income. In short, pretend that you are living off of a trust fund. See what happens to your federal taxes owed.

Then consider the difference between your children inheriting 1 million dollars in the form of your retirement accounts and your hypothetical trust fund neighbor's children inheriting 10 million dollars in stock from great grandpa's chemical company. Guess how pays a lot of taxes and who does not pay anything.

The last two major tax law changes have been all about the interests of old money.

742Dash
12-20-2017, 02:02 AM
...Hows that 401k/ IRA/personal account treating a these days? Most index funds are up about 20+% this year alone! ...



The United States is actually under performing the rest of the developed world. The EAFE index (developed world minus the United States) is up 24.07% YTD, compared to only 20.24% for the S&P 500.

But Germany is doing even better. EWG is up 27.97%.

Flyinhigh
12-20-2017, 03:50 AM
You might want to check that. The final plan has a marginal rate of 22% for earnings under 82k, a rate of 24% for earnings under 157k, a rate of 32% for earnings under 200k and a rate 35% for earnings under 500k. For comparison the current rates are 25% for earnings under 93k, 28% for earnings under 194k and 33% under 425k. So dollars earned above 157k are taxed at a higher rate. Whether the adjustments in the marginal rates below 100k will make make up for it is too much math for me but it's a lie to say rates are going down.

I believe the rates you are quoting (22% under 82K, 24% under 157,500, etc.) are single rates. The married rates are 22% under 165,000 and 24% under 315,000 as opposed to the 2017 married rates of 28% under 153,100 and 33% under 233,500.
Everyone is going to have to crunch your own numbers and see where you land.

Han Solo
12-20-2017, 05:40 AM
I started writing my representatives a month ago to protest some of the changes introduced in this tax plan. All I got back was a form letter saying how great it is going to be for America, blah, blah, blah.

It's a ****ing disaster for pilots and the quoted part below only deals with the pilot allowed exemptions, not SALT and alimony deductions. Overall it is crushing to many pilots and other upper middle class employees.

Imagine that, a guy who makes a living doing complicated taxes coming out against a tax plan that simplifies preparing your taxes.

akulahunter
12-20-2017, 06:16 AM
How about we all put this on hold for 14 months. Then come back and post actual numbers instead of political BS.

I get it... if you are red it's great, if you are blue it's terrible.

Just come back after taxes 2018 and post your difference then. The rest is just assumed BS until your taxes are done next year.

Planetrain
12-20-2017, 06:22 AM
Depending on your income, google "pease limitations" that limit high income earners from fully realizing itemized deductions. Some call it a back door surtax. This aspect is eliminated in the new bill.

Onfinal
12-20-2017, 06:47 AM
FYI.

Beware of the "withholdings" bait and switch. For 12 months you see a few hundred dollars more in your paycheck. Awesome! My taxes are lower.

Then circa April 2019, the day of reckoning comes, and the piper demands his payment.

I've seen it happen several times in the past, and notably the proponents of this plan's talking points has changed from, "People will pay lower taxes" to "People will see more money in their paycheck and less witholdings".

Larry in TN
12-20-2017, 06:53 AM
Interesting comment.
Iíll just magically come up with all the cash?
Or Iíll pay someone elseís mortgage for 30 years and have no equity to show for it?
It's not that difficult. Don't buy the largest house you can qualify for then make paying it off a priority.

We paid off our first house in just over five years; lived in it for nine. Paid off our second house in seven years; lived in it for sixteen years and counting.

For most folks in the middle-class, the only reason they can itemize is because of their mortgage deduction. That means that they aren't getting the full benefit of deducting the full amount of mortgage interest because some of it is used matching the standard deduction that they would have gotten anyway.

The idea of tax reform is to have lower marginal rates and a larger standard deduction so that far few need to itemize. Last I looked, the standard deductions were set to nearly double, though I haven't kept up on the changes in reconciliation. That will result in far fewer being able to itemize, because they're already getting a bigger savings from the standard deduction--even if mortgage interest were still deductible.

greaser
12-20-2017, 07:04 AM
My taxes will go up in 2018... and will go WAY up once the brackets sunset.

There's no assumption about it, I wanted to make some educated decisions about when to pay my property taxes, so I built a spreadsheet and figured it all out. Most of the online calculators I have seen are not comprehensive enough to give an accurate answer: you must do this for yourself.

Most of this comes from living in a high cost area and owning a normal/relatively modest house which was still quite expensive. The buy/rent analysis came out pretty even because of the tax breaks.... at least that was the case prior to the tax reform bill.

And that was before I found this thread and discovered that union dues and travel/per diem deductions are going away.

BUT HEY - at least they're increasing the deficit! :mad:

EWRflyr
12-20-2017, 07:09 AM
Can you cite where in the bill it does away with per diems not being taxable? :confused:

No problem, since I downloaded and read it after it was released on Friday night.

Page 93 of the "Conference Report" has what you are looking for:

SEC. 11045 SUSPENSION OF MISCELLANEOUS ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS

(a) IN GENERAL. - Section 67 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(g) SUSPENSION FOR TAXABLE YEARS 2018 THROUGH 2025. - Notwithstanding subsection (a), no miscellaneous itemized deductions shall be allowed for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. - The amendment made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.

It is also spelled out on pages 95-99 of the expanded explanation section located after the bill.

Mesabah
12-20-2017, 07:37 AM
Airlines are about to receive a multi-billion dollar windfall tax shift on new equipment purchases, in addition to the reduced corporate rate, which us pilots will not see one penny of. Since airlines don't hoard cash, all of this will go to shareholders. Wall Street has already priced this in, so no gains to be had in buying in now.

badflaps
12-20-2017, 07:55 AM
Airlines are about to receive a multi-billion dollar windfall tax shift on new equipment purchases, in addition to the reduced corporate rate, which us pilots will not see one penny of. Since airlines don't hoard cash, all of this will go to shareholders. Wall Street has already priced this in, so no gains to be had in buying in now.

I remember them saying that when AMR, UAL, DAL were 15-20.:eek:

NotMrNiceGuy
12-20-2017, 08:32 AM
How about we all put this on hold for 14 months. Then come back and post actual numbers instead of political BS.

I get it... if you are red it's great, if you are blue it's terrible.

Just come back after taxes 2018 and post your difference then. The rest is just assumed BS until your taxes are done next year.

Voice of reason?

There is no room on these boards for this kind of civility and measured response. Back from whence you came!

StrykerB21
12-20-2017, 08:39 AM
It works for me and my family, we're getting a cut. I guess that makes me rich?

sailingfun
12-20-2017, 09:15 AM
A home is not an investment, it is a consumer item (assuming you're not in the business of real estate/ flipping / renting/ etc). Those that treat it as an investment do so while accepting very high risk and questionable returns. The same money would go a lot farther over 30 years in a well diversified stock portfolio.

Had I put the money in stocks I would have been homeless. Instead of paying rent I paid a mortgage payment. When I retire I will sell the house, pay cash for a smaller home and bank over a million. Or since I will have it paid off I can stay. If I ever need the equity I can do my own reverse mortgage with a Heloc or do a reverse mortgage.
I am curious how you call a home a high risk investment. Do you have anything to back that up? The big housing downturn 10 years ago sent properties down about 15%. Stock market does that often. Like the market property quickly recovered. Show me a 10 year span where properties other than crazy stupid stuff like waterfront FL condo's ever tanked. Property is a extremely safe long term investment.

sailingfun
12-20-2017, 09:27 AM
No problem, since I downloaded and read it after it was released on Friday night.

Page 93 of the "Conference Report" has what you are looking for:

SEC. 11045 SUSPENSION OF MISCELLANEOUS ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS

(a) IN GENERAL. - Section 67 is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

(g) SUSPENSION FOR TAXABLE YEARS 2018 THROUGH 2025. - Notwithstanding subsection (a), no miscellaneous itemized deductions shall be allowed for any taxable year beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2026.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. - The amendment made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017.

It is also spelled out on pages 95-99 of the expanded explanation section located after the bill.

Are not food and lodging incurred as work business expenses? There is no change in deductibility of those items.
Edit: just checked my taxes, deducted as business expenses not miscellaneous!

Name User
12-20-2017, 10:25 AM
The per diem thing was always a BS deduction. We made money off the deal and it was like manna from heaven for the intl guys.

iahflyr
12-20-2017, 10:34 AM
Don't forget that tax brackets will now grow at the chained CPI rate instead of regular CPI. That means that tax brackets will grow at a rate slower than inflation, increasing your effective tax rate every year. This little gem effects everyone.

Twin Wasp
12-20-2017, 11:27 AM
Are not food and lodging incurred as work business expenses? There is no change in deductibility of those items.
Edit: just checked my taxes, deducted as business expenses not miscellaneous!

Unreimbursed employee expenses are deducted as part of the "miscellaneous" category. If you used form 2106 to claim the deduction you won't be able to do that for the 2018 tax year.

EWRflyr
12-20-2017, 12:21 PM
Are not food and lodging incurred as work business expenses? There is no change in deductibility of those items.
Edit: just checked my taxes, deducted as business expenses not miscellaneous!

Unreimbursed employee expenses are deducted as part of the "miscellaneous" category. If you used form 2106 to claim the deduction you won't be able to do that for the 2018 tax year.

Thanks, Twin. You beat me to the reply. Schedule A Itemized Deductions Line 21 has "Business Expenses" which are calculated using Form 2106. Deductions subject to the 2% AGI rule are going away for 2018-2025, sailingfun. This is spelled out in the summary document at the end of the bill that explains the Conference Committee decision.

So, yes, gone will be deductions for M&I, union dues, FAA medicals, uniforms, tax preparation and a host of other items.

Still allowed on that form starting for Tax Year 2018: SALT/property taxes ($10,000 cap), mortgage interest deductions ($750,000 mortgage cap for homes under contract after 12/15/17), charitable deductions, medical expense deductions (a lower threshold now).

Some above the line deductions are going away as mentioned before: alimony payments made and moving expenses (except for uniform military members) are two I can think of off the top of my head.

English
12-20-2017, 12:23 PM
You might want to check that. The final plan has a marginal rate of 22% for earnings under 82k, a rate of 24% for earnings under 157k, a rate of 32% for earnings under 200k and a rate 35% for earnings under 500k. For comparison the current rates are 25% for earnings under 93k, 28% for earnings under 194k and 33% under 425k. So dollars earned above 157k are taxed at a higher rate. Whether the adjustments in the marginal rates below 100k will make make up for it is too much math for me but it's a lie to say rates are going down.

You quoted me the single rates. I put in my post that I am married. The rates I put down are accurate for me. It might not turn out as well for a single filer.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/15/news/economy/gop-tax-plan-details/index.html

SonicFlyer
12-20-2017, 01:14 PM
Airlines are about to receive a multi-billion dollar windfall tax shift on new equipment purchases, in addition to the reduced corporate rate, which us pilots will not see one penny of. Since airlines don't hoard cash, all of this will go to shareholders. Wall Street has already priced this in, so no gains to be had in buying in now.Do you own company stock, or even mutual funds? Then you are likely getting the benefit of this. :rolleyes:

Mesabah
12-20-2017, 02:38 PM
Do you own company stock, or even mutual funds? Then you are likely getting the benefit of this. :rolleyes:
My taxes will probably go down with my business, it's too early to tell. However, companies should pass on a percentage of those savings to employees.

Happyflyer
12-20-2017, 03:43 PM
I'am glad there doing it. Most people who itemize save money because they cheat.
That's why they made it this way with most people using the now double standard deduction, the itemize guys will be fewer and the IRS can audit a smaller pool of people.

People make grey things white and black things grey and justify their cheating.

The IRS is mostly black and white.

It's sucks if you are going to take an honest hit, but you'd be in the far minority.

Bedsides now you can pay off your house, claim the standard and save all that interest you pay to justify itemizing.

StrykerB21
12-20-2017, 03:56 PM
Seems a few businesses are already raising pay and benefits for their employees. Nice.

pause
12-20-2017, 04:40 PM
#MAGA
I donít really care what others think.

akulahunter
12-20-2017, 04:41 PM
Voice of reason?

There is no room on these boards for this kind of civility and measured response. Back from whence you came!

Thanks! I know... We would all rather complain about what we THINK will happen... So sad. Aren't we all the smartest people in the room? You would think that we would deal in absolutes, not conjecture.

akulahunter
12-20-2017, 04:56 PM
FYI... AT&T and Fifth Third Bank have already announced they are giving their employees a bonus because of this tax plan and Fifth Third and Wells Fargo are raising the minimum wage at their respective companies as well. Tell me more about these evil corporations. The ink isn't even dry on the senate side yet...

Also, I will bet my April check next year that if you ACTUALLY do lose money because of this tax plan that your 401k gain will double or triple (or more likely significantly eclipse) what you lost... So you tell me, did you REALLY lose anything? Because I guarantee that growth will be much higher than it has been over the last 10 years.




*One caveat, the first quarter next year will probably suck because people will sell off their big gains from this year after taxes are done. Then Second quarter will likely start a solid climb... YMMV

Slaphappy
12-20-2017, 05:11 PM
Tax cuts are already haveing the desired effect.

https://mobile.twitter.com/FoxNewsResearch/status/943628833625751552

AT&T: Invest $1B in US; $1,000 employee bonus
ēBoeing: $300M investment
ēCVS: Hire 3,000 workers
ēFedEx: Increase hiring
ēFifth Third Bancorp: Minimum wage to $15; $1,000 employee bonus
ēWells Fargo: Minimum wage to $15; $400M to nonprofits

pilot0987
12-20-2017, 06:23 PM
It seems like airline pilots may be the group hurt the most if the GOP passes their tax reform. I compiled a list of things that will hurt us the most:

Currently you can write-off your union expenses (Roughly 2% of your total income) as well as your diem. If you fly a trip to London for instance, and London's per diem is $182/day, and your airline rate is $2.50/hr ($60/day), you can write-off that difference. Those deductions add up to a lot of money (Roughly 7k a year for me). They will be eliminated if GOP tax reform passes.

Anyone claiming these deductions will lose the personal exemption as well ($4050 write off).

If you are single and make more than $157,500, your new Federal tax rate will be 32% (It's currently 28%).

Not to mention those of us who live in either a state with state income tax (43 states) OR high property tax (Texas, New Jersey, Florida, etc...), you're likely losing a good chunk of your State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction if you make 100K+ and own as house as it would be capped at 10k total for all SALT.

As a personal example, I'm a 757/767 FO and I make roughly 200k and own a house. I would lose 7k write-off from union expenses/per diem write off going away, 4k write-off from personal exemption going away, roughly 5k from SALT tax being capped. And now my top tax rate goes up from 28% to 32%, That's easily an increase of 5-10k a year in taxes for me. And I'm just a middle of the road FO. I cannot imagine how much money some of our captains will be losing.


At first I thought "Well maybe we will get more in profit sharing" due to the lower corporate tax rate, but then I remembered that most profit sharing formulas are based off PTIX (Pre Tax Income), so that won't change anything.

Did the GOP craft this tax bill primarily to screw pilots??

Just start yourself up a consult business, pay yourself a salary of what you lost and call it a day. lolz

SonicFlyer
12-20-2017, 06:25 PM
This bill doesn't go far enough.

Taxation is theft!

SonicFlyer
12-20-2017, 06:27 PM
I am curious how you call a home a high risk investment. Do you have anything to back that up? The big housing downturn 10 years ago sent properties down about 15%. Stock market does that often. Like the market property quickly recovered. Show me a 10 year span where properties other than crazy stupid stuff like waterfront FL condo's ever tanked. Property is a extremely safe long term investment.In terms of growth potential to minimized risk, there is nothing better than owning thousands of stocks in diverse asset categories. Putting your life savings in to a house is a really bad idea, not only because the house isn't going to always be on the upward trend, but you won't make as much as you would have made if it had been properly invested in the market. Look at places like Detroit, Gary Indiana, etc. There are many safer and more profitable places to put one's money than in one's house.

742Dash
12-20-2017, 07:00 PM
This bill doesn't go far enough.

Taxation is theft!

Then your use of infrastructure is theft from the commons.

StrykerB21
12-20-2017, 07:10 PM
Whatever happened to the constitutionally mandated middle ground? Ya know the 18 enumerated powers of congress? Remember that? What the federal government is allowed to spend tax money on? Taxation is necessary to fund whats legally mandated by the constitution, all other taxation is theft.

Name User
12-20-2017, 07:16 PM
I'am glad there doing it. Most people who itemize save money because they cheat.
That's why they made it this way with most people using the now double standard deduction, the itemize guys will be fewer and the IRS can audit a smaller pool of people.

People make grey things white and black things grey and justify their cheating.

The IRS is mostly black and white.

It's sucks if you are going to take an honest hit, but you'd be in the far minority.

Bedsides now you can pay off your house, claim the standard and save all that interest you pay to justify itemizing.
I actually mostly agree with this. Buddy of mine takes the per diem expenses from the previous year and adds 10%. Every year. Never figures them out. He also doesn't report the company paid per diem so he deducts everything.

I'm not sure how many are out there like him but I remember when I had my taxes done professionally by pilot-tax, I was going to owe money. They called me and prodded me looking for "deductions" for things like irons, alarm clocks, etc. I was like no, I don't buy jack for this job! But anything under $75 doesn't need a receipt. So there you go.

Think of how much money and (mostly) time is spent preparing for our yearly taxes now. All of that will go away. This is wonderful. No need to keep yearly flying summaries, pay checks, receipts etc.

Grumble
12-20-2017, 07:18 PM
I love how everyone thinks the erasure of write offs is some how a screw job. The standard deduction is DOUBLING and your total tax rate is going down. Iíve done the math. At $200k a year Iím actually getting a sizeable tax break and my tax return is going to take 15 minutes. Mortgage, two kids, per diem, dues, etc donít add up to the $24k deduction. When coupled with the new tax rates itís itís significantly less Iíll be paying. If you make enough for the old AMT thresholds to be a player, those are going up and your tax burden is going down there too.

OP, try doing math before you lose your mind.

Name User
12-20-2017, 07:23 PM
I love how everyone thinks the erasure of write offs is some how a screw job. The standard deduction is DOUBLING and your total tax rate is going down. Iíve done the math. At $200k a year Iím actually getting a sizeable tax break and my tax return is going to take 15 minutes. Mortgage, two kids, per diem, dues, etc donít add up to the $24k deduction. When coupled with the new tax rates itís itís significantly less Iíll be paying. If you make enough for the old AMT thresholds to be a player, those are going up and your tax burden is going down there too.

OP, try doing math before you lose your mind.
It's doubling but you lose exemptions.

Two people used to get $12k standard plus another $8k in personal exemptions. Or $20k. This is an increase of $4k, hardly a doubling.

Happyflyer
12-20-2017, 08:23 PM
@OP,

Do you currently get caught by the AMT? I hear plenty of captains complain about it. Did this plan raise it?

Grumble
12-20-2017, 08:53 PM
It's doubling but you lose exemptions.

Two people used to get $12k standard plus another $8k in personal exemptions. Or $20k. This is an increase of $4k, hardly a doubling.

Do the math on the new tax rates. That coupled with a 24k deduction right off the top.

Decide what your time is worth too not having to wade through filing.

tunes
12-20-2017, 09:04 PM
So much fake outrage

Rama
12-20-2017, 10:56 PM
It's not fake outrage. It's real outrage based on the lack of facts.

StrykerB21
12-21-2017, 01:14 AM
I dont know what you guys are so mad about. I'm hardly the super rich I've been hearing so much about and I'll be keeping an additional three grand of my money because of this. Oh the humanity...

crewdawg
12-21-2017, 04:33 AM
Imagine that, a guy who makes a living doing complicated taxes coming out against a tax plan that simplifies preparing your taxes.

LOL, right!

Flyinhigh
12-21-2017, 05:46 AM
I just did the math and the best feature of the new law is the increased range of the tax brackets and the lower rates across these extended brackets. I am retired and don't have a lot of exemptions or deductions. In 2016 (the last year I have tax forms) we did itemize deductions due to large charitable contributions and paid an effective tax rate of 16.29%. In 2018, thanks to the 14.9% run up we have enjoyed since the election, we are taking an additional $20K out of our 401(K) to avoid increased RMDs down the road. Using the new brackets and rates with only the standard deduction we will pay an effective tax rate of 15.96%.
Everyone's situation is different so take a breath, do the math, and see what your individual situation is. The expansion of the brackets and the lower rates makes a huge difference.

Andy
12-21-2017, 06:46 AM
I just did the math and the best feature of the new law is the increased range of the tax brackets and the lower rates across these extended brackets. I am retired and don't have a lot of exemptions or deductions. In 2016 (the last year I have tax forms) we did itemize deductions due to large charitable contributions and paid an effective tax rate of 16.29%. In 2018, thanks to the 14.9% run up we have enjoyed since the election, we are taking an additional $20K out of our 401(K) to avoid increased RMDs down the road. Using the new brackets and rates with only the standard deduction we will pay an effective tax rate of 15.96%.
Everyone's situation is different so take a breath, do the math, and see what your individual situation is. The expansion of the brackets and the lower rates makes a huge difference.

If the money's not needed right now, you may want to consider doing a Roth conversion on that additional 401k drawdown. That way you won't have RMDs. You can do a Roth conversion at any age.

Andy
12-21-2017, 06:58 AM
I'm absolutely OUTRAGED (fake newz) by this new tax bill. I ran our 2016 tax numbers through a tax calculator and our federal taxes only go down by ~$16,000. I want MOAR! Oh, the inhumanity!

Tax calculator: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-new-trump-tax-calculator-what-do-you-owe-2017-10-26

OK, pull out your 2016 taxes and run the numbers. If your taxes increase, your problem is that you're like the federal government. You've got a spending problem. Too much house, too many deductions; too little financial restraint.

I doubt many of those whining here have run actual/correct numbers.

urinmyseat
12-21-2017, 07:01 AM
I just used the CNN tax calculator, since they are very left leaning, and would not sugar coat the tax bill. I put in $265K married + kids, it only allows a max of 2 kids. I put in mortgage interest and charitable giving. I will see an average of 4.7% reduction in taxes over the next 8 years, then it goes back to where I am now.

I think all the nay sayers should go to the "most trusted news source":rolleyes: and plug in your numbers.

I'll keep 4.7% year over year for 8 years! That works out to about a new car every 4 years with money the government used to waste.

Andy
12-21-2017, 07:14 AM
I just used the CNN tax calculator, since they are very left leaning, and would not sugar coat the tax bill. I put in $265K married + kids, it only allows a max of 2 kids. I put in mortgage interest and charitable giving. I will see an average of 4.7% reduction in taxes over the next 8 years, then it goes back to where I am now.

I think all the nay sayers should go to the "most trusted news source":rolleyes: and plug in your numbers.

I'll keep 4.7% year over year for 8 years! That works out to about a new car every 4 years with money the government used to waste.

Funny how that works. This is fake news; very few are going to see higher taxes.

I didn't even bother to mention how cutting corporate taxes are going to benefit my investments.

Andy
12-21-2017, 09:21 AM
Looks like 80% will see a tax cut.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2017/12/19/leftleaning-scorekeeper-so-the-gop-tax-bill-cuts-taxes-for80-percent-of-americans-n2424201

emersonbiguns
12-21-2017, 10:02 AM
Interesting how everyone is only concerned about the personal effects. Anyone want to discuss the effects on the country?

sailingfun
12-21-2017, 10:11 AM
In terms of growth potential to minimized risk, there is nothing better than owning thousands of stocks in diverse asset categories. Putting your life savings in to a house is a really bad idea, not only because the house isn't going to always be on the upward trend, but you won't make as much as you would have made if it had been properly invested in the market. Look at places like Detroit, Gary Indiana, etc. There are many safer and more profitable places to put one's money than in one's house.

Again you overlook that you most of us want to have a place to live. You either pay rent or pay to own. It's not a matter of owning verses investing in the market. My house payments have always been in line with renting and after 4 or 5 years in a house usually cheaper than renting as rents are always on the rise. My house payment today is 40% of the cost to rent a equal house. I can invest the difference in the market. Both the house and market are doing very well! In a few more years the cost of renting will be 100% more as I will have no payment.

ugleeual
12-21-2017, 10:14 AM
AMT threshold going up so it will not negatively impact most pilots earning less than 300K... if you havent heard, currently most Major WB captains and FOs, as well as NB Capts are getting whacked with AMT which makes writeoffs like dues, per dime, etc etc null and void... so think this tax bill is a win for most pilots not living in CA, NY or othe socialist states. :cool:

ugleeual
12-21-2017, 10:16 AM
Interesting how everyone is only concerned about the personal effects. Anyone want to discuss the effects on the country?

It’s making America Great Again... so what’s not to like? IRS still has the ability to accept donations from citizens to pay down the national debt... always had that option... don’t see these rich actors, athletes, politicians or CEOs whining about this Apocolyptic tax bill lining up for that contribution.

DarinFred
12-21-2017, 10:19 AM
My taxes are going down, my 401k is up 22%. Now, if we could pull our heads out of our asses and realize our employers are getting a YUGE tax break, we find a way to get a cut of that.

tomgoodman
12-21-2017, 10:54 AM
Interesting how everyone is only concerned about the personal effects. Anyone want to discuss the effects on the country?

Caution: Such discussions frequently morph into political arguments, violate Forum rules, and cause Mods to close the thread. :(

Slaphappy
12-21-2017, 11:26 AM
Interesting how everyone is only concerned about the personal effects. Anyone want to discuss the effects on the country?

Grow the economy and lift up everyone's economic situation?

StrykerB21
12-21-2017, 11:29 AM
Interesting how everyone is only concerned about the personal effects. Anyone want to discuss the effects on the country?

Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution lists the 18 enumerated powers of Congress. It's a list of what the government is allowed to collect taxes on in order to fund programs on a federal level. Things like the military, post roads, rules of naturalization, etc. Outside of that list any spending our government does on a federal level is really unconstitutional. Both republicans and democrats have sacred cows that are funded by our taxes that need to be eliminated. Over four trillion dollars in federal spending? It's obscene and needs to be stopped. American strength and influence isn't measured by how much the federal government spends so let's get it under control.

Mesabah
12-21-2017, 11:29 AM
Interesting how everyone is only concerned about the personal effects. Anyone want to discuss the effects on the country?
No, because ultimately everyone is a hypocrite. "Do as I say, not as I do", yeah, I don't think so.

Andy
12-21-2017, 12:56 PM
AMT threshold going up so it will not negatively impact most pilots earning less than 300K... if you havent heard, currently most Major WB captains and FOs, as well as NB Capts are getting whacked with AMT which makes writeoffs like dues, per dime, etc etc null and void... so think this tax bill is a win for most pilots not living in CA, NY or othe socialist states. :cool:

Pease and PEP (personal exemption phaseout) have been whacking me. Glad to have those surtaxes gone.

This is definitely a better use of tax dollars than Cash for Clunkers. Fleece less from the sheeple; most will spend it more effectively than .gov.

We're taking 4 or 5 years' worth of tax savings and blowing it on a beeuteeful swimming hole. It will even have some of them fancy water features that shoot a stream of water up in the air about 10 feet and into the pool, complete with alternating mood lighting. I'm spending this money on a shovel ready project and helping Make America Great Again. :D

PressOff
12-21-2017, 01:05 PM
This bill doesn't go far enough.

Taxation is theft!

Then kindly stay off public roads, out of public airports, don't ever rely on police nor firefighters, and don't send your kids to public university.

Chupacabras
12-21-2017, 01:13 PM
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution lists the 18 enumerated powers of Congress. It's a list of what the government is allowed to collect taxes on in order to fund programs on a federal level. Things like the military, post roads, rules of naturalization, etc. Outside of that list any spending our government does on a federal level is really unconstitutional. Both republicans and democrats have sacred cows that are funded by our taxes that need to be eliminated. Over four trillion dollars in federal spending? It's obscene and needs to be stopped. American strength and influence isn't measured by how much the federal government spends so let's get it under control.

We should start by limiting the President's use of airforce one for his multiple vacations.

N311JB
12-21-2017, 01:23 PM
This bill doesn't go far enough.

Taxation is theft!


Funny how you fail to realize that our precious constitution that allows this forum or right to carry a gun, does the same with taxation via the 16th amendment. Its our constitutional right to may Federal income tax
Granted it was implemented to pay for war and originally only 3%! Food for thought. Its never been about Left vs Right but the Haves vs Have-nots IMO

hilltopflyer
12-21-2017, 01:36 PM
Funny how you fail to realize that our precious constitution that allows this forum or right to carry a gun, does the same with taxation via the 16th amendment. Its our constitutional right to may Federal income tax
Granted it was implemented to pay for war and originally only 3%! Food for thought. Its never been about Left vs Right but the Haves vs Have-nots IMO

Flat tax. No loopholes. Wouldn't that be nice

SonicFlyer
12-21-2017, 07:33 PM
Then kindly stay off public roads, out of public airports, don't ever rely on police nor firefighters, and don't send your kids to public university.Government shouldn't be in the business of doing most of those things anyhow. The free market could do all of the above at a lower cost and higher quality product.

SonicFlyer
12-21-2017, 07:33 PM
Funny how you fail to realize that our precious constitution that allows this forum or right to carry a gun, does the same with taxation via the 16th amendment.Actually the Constitution doesn't grant any rights, it merely sets up and limits the federal government.

And the 16th Amendment was never lawfully passed.

Karnak
12-22-2017, 04:32 AM
Actually the Constitution doesn't grant any rights, it merely sets up and limits the federal government.

That sort of semantic wrestling is unnecessary. It most certainly does. e.g. Amendment VI: "...the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,"

Challenges based upon the differences between granting of, and infringement of, rights have been many. Thankfully, the Constitution contains an Article (Art III) that establishes a group to settle those challenges. Fun fact: The Constitution never defines "cases" which initiate judicial review.

And the 16th Amendment was never lawfully passed.

Amendments aren't "passed"...they're "ratified", as was the 16th. (semantics matter, right?) Why don't you stop paying taxes and add your name to the long list of folks thumped for using the lame arguments that assert it wasn't?

Let us know how that goes.

Now, back to the new tax regs. It's refreshing to be rid of all that bleating about deficits. As long as my individual taxes go down, why should I care?

FL370esq
12-22-2017, 05:09 AM
The bank really owns the damned thing until the last payment clears. Until that day, we are all renters.

Ummmm....even after that last mortgage payment clears you are still a renter. Go a couple of years without paying property tax on your home and you'll see who really owns it. 😁

FL370esq
12-22-2017, 05:29 AM
Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution lists the 18 enumerated powers of Congress. It's a list of what the government is allowed to collect taxes on in order to fund programs on a federal level. Things like the military, post roads, rules of naturalization, etc. Outside of that list any spending our government does on a federal level is really unconstitutional. Both republicans and democrats have sacred cows that are funded by our taxes that need to be eliminated. Over four trillion dollars in federal spending? It's obscene and needs to be stopped. American strength and influence isn't measured by how much the federal government spends so let's get it under control.

You might want to re-read Article 1 Section 8 again. Two non-specific concepts are found within that clause which have given rise to the federal behemoth - "provide for...the General Welfare" and the "necesaary and proper" clause.

The founding fathers would likely be floored at the role reversal that has occurred between the power of the states and the power of the federal government since the Constitution was ratified. I doubt they had any idea how far the necessary and proper clause and (arguably to an even greater extent), the interstate commerce clause have been stretched to facilitate federal expansion...at the expense of state power.

rickair7777
12-22-2017, 05:43 AM
We should start by limiting the President's use of airforce one for his multiple vacations.

Airforce one is not a presidential perk. It is a military command and control system and a key piece of hardware in our strategic deterrence capability. Needs to be four engine because they don't necessarily abort if they lose one on the roll. There are a limited number of long range four engine jets available [which are made in America], and the 707 was too old.

President (of any party) goes where he wants, Airforce one has to go with him.

TransWorld
12-22-2017, 05:57 AM
Airforce one is not a presidential perk. It is a military command and control system and a key piece of hardware in our strategic deterrence capability. Needs to be four engine because they don't necessarily abort if they lose one on the roll. There are a limited number of long range four engine jets available [which are made in America], and the 707 was too old.

President (of any party) goes where he wants, Airforce one has to go with him.

Spot On. Just like having the Secret Service is not a presidential perk. It protects the country from people would would otherwise be able to decapitate the head of government (regardless of who it is), with all the ramifications with it. There are plenty of people who would take advantage of that opportunity.

BobZ
12-22-2017, 06:04 AM
Yeah. Like maybe the fbi.

tomgoodman
12-22-2017, 06:14 AM
Ummmm....even after that last mortgage payment clears you are still a renter. Go a couple of years without paying property tax on your home and you'll see who really owns it. 😁

Then go a couple of years without paying income taxes and youíll see who really owns you! :p

cliffnd
12-22-2017, 06:15 AM
...if they lose one on the roll.


Hoping your source is your own piloting assumptions and not classified information, but SOP sure seems like FOUO at least. Iíd be careful with posting possible sensitive info.

Needs to be four engine...

Just a point of clarification, AF1 is the AF plane used by the president, not necessarily a B747. Check out the video below.

https://youtu.be/cfvo1zrhu74

Airforce one has to go with him.


Source? If youíve followed previos presidential movements, you would know this isnít always the case...and Iím not talking about a motorcade or walks on the south lawn.

Bottom line, you can have your own opinions, but they sure seem based on absolutes and incorrect info.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FL370esq
12-22-2017, 06:23 AM
Then go a couple of years without paying income taxes and youíll see who really owns you! :p

But..but...the collection of income tax is unconstitutional so I shouldn't be paying one in the first place. 😁

tomgoodman
12-22-2017, 06:38 AM
But..but...the collection of income tax is unconstitutional so I shouldn't be paying one in the first place. 😁

So Al Capone was ďrailroadedĒ to Alcatraz? (In fact, thatís exactly how he got there.). :D

FL370esq
12-22-2017, 07:08 AM
So Al Capone was ďrailroadedĒ to Alcatraz? (In fact, thatís exactly how he got there.). :D

Of course the poor guy was railroaded. Obviously his attorneys had never heard of the highly "successful" Section 861 argument which worked so well for the Browns of New Hampshire and Wesley Snipes.
🤣

Mesabah
12-22-2017, 07:53 AM
Income and property taxes are theft, however, sales, capital gains, services, value added, are all fair taxes.

galaxy flyer
12-22-2017, 08:38 AM
Itís a constitutional amendment, pretty hard for income taxes to be unconstitutional.

GF

ELAC321
12-22-2017, 09:04 AM
Itís a constitutional amendment, pretty hard for income taxes to be unconstitutional.

GF


Some people believe the 16th amendment wasnít passed properly after reading or watching documentaries and thus becoming experts. These people (who act on their false beliefs) typically end up in jail or slapped with huge fines. Unfortunately you canít get them to acknowledge reality. Similar to flat earth believers.

SonicFlyer
12-22-2017, 09:47 AM
Income and property taxes are theft, however, sales, capital gains, services, value added, are all fair taxes.Actually all taxation is theft and unfair... however the items you mentioned above are slightly less damaging than income and property taxes.

SonicFlyer
12-22-2017, 10:02 AM
You might want to re-read Article 1 Section 8 again. Two non-specific concepts are found within that clause which have given rise to the federal behemoth - "provide for...the General Welfare" and the "necesaary and proper" clause.
And neither were an expansive grant of power, both clauses were limitations.

The GWC means that anything the government does has to be for the general welfare of everyone (as opposed to the specific welfare of nobility)

And the N&P clause means that the government can take steps to enact the tasks listed in Art I, Sec 8.

SonicFlyer
12-22-2017, 10:06 AM
That sort of semantic wrestling is unnecessary. It most certainly does. e.g. Amendment VI: "...the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial," Incorrect. That right already existed and predated the Constitution. The document is merely saying that the federal government cannot violate a preexisting right... just like the 2nd and the 1st.



Amendments aren't "passed"...they're "ratified", as was the 16th. Yes, you are correct, that was a slip on my part. The 16th was never properly ratified, neither was the 14th.

galaxy flyer
12-22-2017, 10:44 AM
Incorrect. That right already existed and predated the Constitution. The document is merely saying that the federal government cannot violate a preexisting right... just like the 2nd and the 1st.



Yes, you are correct, that was a slip on my part. The 16th was never properly ratified, neither was the 14th.

Where did you get that zircon of knowledge regarding 14th and 16th ratification? It would be news to the SCOTUS.

GF

FL370esq
12-22-2017, 11:01 AM
Itís a constitutional amendment, pretty hard for income taxes to be unconstitutional.

GF

It is pretty easy if the amendment itself was unconstitutionally ratified.

Granted it is a small population who holds onto that belief but they do exist. (Many of them have addresses with a Federal Bureau of Prisons somewhere in the adress) Probably inhaled too many chem-trails. 😁

FL370esq
12-22-2017, 11:27 AM
And neither were an expansive grant of power, both clauses were limitations.

The GWC means that anything the government does has to be for the general welfare of everyone (as opposed to the specific welfare of nobility)

And the N&P clause means that the government can take steps to enact the tasks listed in Art I, Sec 8.

I didn't say they were an expansive grant (from the drafters' perspective anyway) but they certainly have been used to expand federal power exponentially along with the commerce clause. Drive around DC, Bethesda, MD and Arlington, VA and tell me how that Article 1, Section 8 limited federal government thingy is going.

The courts love to hang their hat on the N&P and interstate commerce clauses when upholding federal reach. Congress finally went too far when the Supreme Court struck down Joe Biden's Gun-Free School Zone Act which was enacted under the provisions of the interstate commerce clause. The Court found that an act criminalizing the possession of a firearm in a school zone just didn't have a substantial impact on interstate commerce which was the basis for enacting the law. Other than that case, very few limitations have been put on Congress by the Court when it comes to legislation enacted under the provisions of the interstate commerce clause. The same goes with legislation under the N&P clause. Do we really need a federal Department of Education? It's creation was certainly not enumerated under the U.S. Constitution and school education at the time of ratifying was a local issue, certainly not a federal one. Just one example of many. Makes for good discussion though....and a heck of a thread creep. 😁

SonicFlyer
12-22-2017, 12:10 PM
Where did you get that zircon of knowledge regarding 14th and 16th ratification? It would be news to the SCOTUS.It's called reading history, something SCOTUS doesn't actually do.

SonicFlyer
12-22-2017, 12:11 PM
I didn't say they were an expansive grant (from the drafters' perspective anyway) but they certainly have been used to expand federal power exponentially along with the commerce clause. Drive around DC, Bethesda, MD and Arlington, VA and tell me how that Article 1, Section 8 limited federal government thingy is going.

The courts love to hang their hat on the N&P and interstate commerce clauses when upholding federal reach. Congress finally went too far when the Supreme Court struck down Joe Biden's Gun-Free School Zone Act which was enacted under the provisions of the interstate commerce clause. The Court found that an act criminalizing the possession of a firearm in a school zone just didn't have a substantial impact on interstate commerce which was the basis for enacting the law. Other than that case, very few limitations have been put on Congress by the Court when it comes to legislation enacted under the provisions of the interstate commerce clause. The same goes with legislation under the N&P clause. Do we really need a federal Department of Education? It's creation was certainly not enumerated under the U.S. Constitution and school education at the time of ratifying was a local issue, certainly not a federal one. Just one example of many. Makes for good discussion though....and a heck of a thread creep. 😁Exactly. The vast majority of what the federal government does is unconstitutional.

tomgoodman
12-22-2017, 12:16 PM
What if the Constitution itself were unconstitutional, having been implemented without the unanimous ratifications which the Articles of Confederation clearly required? :p

galaxy flyer
12-22-2017, 03:38 PM
Exactly. The vast majority of what the federal government does is unconstitutional.

As I said in another thread, I donít disagree with that sentiment, Sonic Flyer, but we live in the real world where are governmental processes were followed and the results are what live by. You want to change the process, fine, vote, start a revolution or move to more a hospitable nation.

GF

N311JB
12-22-2017, 06:20 PM
Wow, didn't realize we'd all go down this rabbit hole. But the 16th, and this new tax bill, IMO just shows how it really doesn't matter about Left/Right stances but how far the government is removed from its citizens that in theory are supposed to have the power. So disappointing we squabble about our politics, defend these knuckleheads and don't realize its just a big ruse, and we're all getting screwed

SonicFlyer
12-22-2017, 06:43 PM
What if the Constitution itself were unconstitutional, having been implemented without the unanimous ratifications which the Articles of Confederation clearly required? :pActually, yes that is true too. The Constitution is not legal in and of itself because the delegates were only given a commission to amend the Articles of Confederation, not create a new document. Madison and Hamilton pulled a fast one and George went along with it for whatever reason.

tomgoodman
12-22-2017, 07:11 PM
Furthermore, the Declaration of Independence contains errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling. This invalidates the document, which means that ... weíre still British! :eek:

badflaps
12-23-2017, 05:29 AM
Furthermore, the Declaration of Independence contains errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling. This invalidates the document, which means that ... weíre still British! :eek:

That explains my extensive dental bills.

METO Guido
12-23-2017, 05:41 AM
https://s9.postimg.org/ftnte99cf/Senior_Member.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

"that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedomóand that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Remarkable covenant. Required remarkable commitment to carry it forward.

busdriver12
12-23-2017, 07:02 AM
I ran my taxes through both of the tax calculators posted on this thread and they said I would have paid $18K less on my taxes for last year on the new tax plan. However, it doesn't account for additional medicare taxes (which were not dissolved in the plan), so it's about a 13-14K break. Never got much of a writeoff for the union dues/travel expenses before anyways.

In addition, if you own rental property, it could be a significant amount taxed at a much lower rate.

However, I see how some people in our demographic are going to get completely screwed. If you live in a high tax state, the loss of SALT and business expense deductions are going to be painful. I wonder how many pilots are going to end up moving to lower tax states, as it will just be too expensive to stay there.

trip
12-23-2017, 08:18 AM
However, I see how some people in our demographic are going to get completely screwed. If you live in a high tax state, the loss of SALT and business expense deductions are going to be painful. I wonder how many pilots are going to end up moving to lower tax states, as it will just be too expensive to stay there.

That's an issue that needs to be resolved at the local/state level.

OldFlyGuy
12-23-2017, 08:29 AM
I just did the math and the best feature of the new law is the increased range of the tax brackets and the lower rates across these extended brackets. I am retired and don't have a lot of exemptions or deductions. In 2016 (the last year I have tax forms) we did itemize deductions due to large charitable contributions and paid an effective tax rate of 16.29%. In 2018, thanks to the 14.9% run up we have enjoyed since the election, we are taking an additional $20K out of our 401(K) to avoid increased RMDs down the road. Using the new brackets and rates with only the standard deduction we will pay an effective tax rate of 15.96%.
Everyone's situation is different so take a breath, do the math, and see what your individual situation is. The expansion of the brackets and the lower rates makes a huge difference.

I'm expecting a small cut and the rates/rules may help me as I near retirement in a year or so with low state taxes and no deductions. THE big problem is if the deficit blows up and forces reductions to Medicare and Medicaid it may take more out of my pocket than the tax changes put in. I doubt the projections on a wildly expanding economy will occur. I'm optimistic, but I don't believe them. I think it is far more likely extra corporate funds will go to dividends, buybacks, and M&A. Oh, and Exec Bonuses. In the end I think the GOP will attack Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security in some fashion to fill the deficit hole. There is nothing else in the budget except DOD with which to fix our ever expanding deficit. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not optimistic on this. OFG

Andy
12-23-2017, 09:22 AM
I ran my taxes through both of the tax calculators posted on this thread and they said I would have paid $18K less on my taxes for last year on the new tax plan. However, it doesn't account for additional medicare taxes (which were not dissolved in the plan), so it's about a 13-14K break. Never got much of a writeoff for the union dues/travel expenses before anyways.

In addition, if you own rental property, it could be a significant amount taxed at a much lower rate.

However, I see how some people in our demographic are going to get completely screwed. If you live in a high tax state, the loss of SALT and business expense deductions are going to be painful. I wonder how many pilots are going to end up moving to lower tax states, as it will just be too expensive to stay there.

The increase in medicare taxes would have happened without this being passed so it's irrelevant with respect to the tax cut.

The increase in medicare taxes is a feature of Obamacare.

busdriver12
12-23-2017, 09:32 AM
The increase in medicare taxes would have happened without this being passed so it's irrelevant with respect to the tax cut.

The increase in medicare taxes is a feature of Obamacare.

I agree with that. The point I was trying to make was that these calculators (and others that I've run) don't reflect the Obamacare taxes. So if one was trying to compare past tax returns to the new tax reform taxes, it doesn't include Obamacare taxes, leading one to think they are getting more of a tax reduction than they actually are.

METO Guido
12-23-2017, 01:56 PM
The additional medicare tax of .9% for married filing jointly above 250K/200K single went into effect 5 years ago. Will be interesting to see what if any HCTC changes will be tacked on to ACA negotiations next session.

joepilot
12-24-2017, 06:56 AM
I read the entire bill myself to see what nuggets are in there. Of further interest to many of our pilots: alimony payments will no longer be deductible. Doesn't apply to me but to the couple of pilots I've flown with who have two or more divorces under their belts, watch out.

I, too, am affected by all the various provisions and caps. Gone are the $18,000 in SALT and work itemized deductions I take, excluding mortgage interest and charitable deductions as they do remain.

Have no fear though because with the lower corporate tax rates I'm SURE the corporate profit windfall will "trickle down" to workers in the form of huge, I mean YUGE, pay raises out of the kindness of corporate responsibility and plain goodness in their hearts. :rolleyes:

Pilots and most workers are NOT in the "class" of citizen this bill is meant to help.

Alimony payments on FUTURE divorces will no longer be deductible. If you are currently paying alimony, that remains deductible.

Joe

Bellanca
12-24-2017, 07:46 AM
Just remember that the 2018 tax year is the best case scenario for everyone. After 2018, because of inflation, you will find yourselves with more income in your highest bracket (or in a higher bracket altogether). Somewhere around 2023-2024 the current standard deduction + personal exemption combo would have surpassed the new higher standard deduction because of how the 'old' one is tied to inflation. (not to mention what losing out on personal exemptions for dependents will do to people). When 2025 hits our taxes are going up 3%.

I make $60k at a regional and I'm taking a hit with the loss of work related expense deductions in 2018. This is affecting people across the whole income spectrum, not just people at the very top.

Andy
12-24-2017, 07:48 AM
Alimony payments on FUTURE divorces will no longer be deductible. If you are currently paying alimony, that remains deductible.

Joe

Hmmm. Doesn't apply to me and won't apply to me but I was listening to a discussion about tax changes on the radio and the alimony topic was covered fairly indepth. I was under the impression that there would be a one year grace period and after 2018, alimony will not be deductible.

Too lazy to research it because it doesn't apply to me. (Not my problem)

PRS Guitars
12-24-2017, 12:14 PM
Just remember that the 2018 tax year is the best case scenario for everyone. After 2018, because of inflation, you will find yourselves with more income in your highest bracket (or in a higher bracket altogether...

I make $60k at a regional and I'm taking a hit with the loss of work related expense deductions in 2018. This is affecting people across the whole income spectrum, not just people at the very top.

If you make more after 2018 you might have found yourself in a higher bracket anyway...

Are you married? Kids? How much is your mortgage interest and property taxes? I’m having trouble believing that you’re going to pay more under the new bill, at your rate of income. Your work deductions would have to get you to far exceed the standard deduction for you to be taking a hit on this.

Andy
12-24-2017, 01:54 PM
Just remember that the 2018 tax year is the best case scenario for everyone. After 2018, because of inflation, you will find yourselves with more income in your highest bracket (or in a higher bracket altogether). Somewhere around 2023-2024 the current standard deduction + personal exemption combo would have surpassed the new higher standard deduction because of how the 'old' one is tied to inflation. (not to mention what losing out on personal exemptions for dependents will do to people). When 2025 hits our taxes are going up 3%.

I make $60k at a regional and I'm taking a hit with the loss of work related expense deductions in 2018. This is affecting people across the whole income spectrum, not just people at the very top.

So what you're saying is the new tax code isn't indexed for inflation. I find that extremely hard to believe.

Where's the guy that claims to have read the entire bill? Is this true or false.

BrewCity
12-24-2017, 02:30 PM
So what you're saying is the new tax code isn't indexed for inflation. I find that extremely hard to believe.

Where's the guy that claims to have read the entire bill? Is this true or false.

He's confused but on the right track. The bill indexes the tax brackets to the "chained CPI" which increases more slowly than the standard CPI, effectively pushing more people into higher brackets over time.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-20/why-chained-cpi-has-links-to-u-s-tax-debate-quicktake-q-a

Bellanca
12-24-2017, 11:14 PM
If you make more after 2018 you might have found yourself in a higher bracket anyway...

Are you married? Kids? How much is your mortgage interest and property taxes? Iím having trouble believing that youíre going to pay more under the new bill, at your rate of income. Your work deductions would have to get you to far exceed the standard deduction for you to be taking a hit on this.

single, 0 kids, no mortgage

What it comes down to was per diem, union dues and misc job expenses allowed pilots, like myself, with lower income to have a relatively high amount of deductions. We don't make enough to buy an expensive enough of a house to get a meaningful deduction in real estate taxes and mortgage interest haha.

Last year I had about $5k of perdiem deduction + ~$1100 union dues + another $2000ish of uniforms, luggage, part of a cellphone plan, headset, dry cleaning, medical, etc. Over $8000 of deductions that area no longer deductible.

Add in another $3k of state and local taxes + $850 personal property tax. =$3,850

Job hunting expenses doing the job fair circuit really added up.. Conference fees + hotel + mileage + resume printing, etc to two job fairs was almost $2000. Plus airline apps account + interview prep/app/ resume review was a few hundred more. =~$2500

Plus another $1000+ of charitable contributions.

I don't have the exact figure of what I was able to itemize, but it was over $14,000 + $4050 personal exemption... my first $18000-18,700 of income wasn't taxable.

Then there's the regional pilot 'mortgage' aka student loans lol. The student loan interest deduction was the best one out there. :rolleyes:

On top of all of this, I live in a state where federal itemizations carry over to the state retuen, so I will likely pay more state taxes as well. :eek:

You better believe quite a few regional pilots are getting hit really hard with the lack of work related expense deductions, student loan interest and losing the personal exemption. And most of our salaries are well under $100,000. :mad:

C130driver
12-25-2017, 02:27 AM
I ran my taxes through both of the tax calculators posted on this thread and they said I would have paid $18K less on my taxes for last year on the new tax plan. However, it doesn't account for additional medicare taxes (which were not dissolved in the plan), so it's about a 13-14K break. Never got much of a writeoff for the union dues/travel expenses before anyways.

In addition, if you own rental property, it could be a significant amount taxed at a much lower rate.

However, I see how some people in our demographic are going to get completely screwed. If you live in a high tax state, the loss of SALT and business expense deductions are going to be painful. I wonder how many pilots are going to end up moving to lower tax states, as it will just be too expensive to stay there.

For the last few years, many folks have abandoned Cali or New York due to their inordinate taxes and rightfully so. It wonít be long before many of the towns in those states look like Detroit.

Andy
12-25-2017, 04:41 AM
He's confused but on the right track. The bill indexes the tax brackets to the "chained CPI" which increases more slowly than the standard CPI, effectively pushing more people into higher brackets over time.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-20/why-chained-cpi-has-links-to-u-s-tax-debate-quicktake-q-a

I'm in favor of the chained CPI being used for all inflation adjustments. It's more accurate and has been unjustly vilified by the press and Dems.

As for 'effectively pushing more people into higher brackets over time,' you're making an assumption that wages are going to outpace the chained CPI. You might want to backtest that theory - it's something that opponents to chained CPI will not talk about in their argument that it pushes people into higher tax brackets over time.

An alternate point of view: http://www.crfb.org/papers/measuring-case-chained-cpi

From the conclusion (my link):
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has said that the
chained CPI provides a closer approximation to a
cost of living measure than other CPI measures, a
judgment shared by economists and statisticians
across political and ideological spectra.

METO Guido
12-25-2017, 05:54 AM
Inflation, few here can recall a time when that was the only topic of economic discussion. The deficit trajectory has a tipping point this electorate (L & R) appears hell bent to reach. Even still, there's something shamelessly satisfying to watch Schumer & Pelosi disdainfully protest opposition motions after they pass, triumphantly mocking the sanctimonious glow of their own short memory halos. Ho, ho, ho.

Name User
12-25-2017, 09:31 AM
single, 0 kids, no mortgage

What it comes down to was per diem, union dues and misc job expenses allowed pilots, like myself, with lower income to have a relatively high amount of deductions. We don't make enough to buy an expensive enough of a house to get a meaningful deduction in real estate taxes and mortgage interest haha.

Last year I had about $5k of perdiem deduction + ~$1100 union dues + another $2000ish of uniforms, luggage, part of a cellphone plan, headset, dry cleaning, medical, etc. Over $8000 of deductions that area no longer deductible.

Add in another $3k of state and local taxes + $850 personal property tax. =$3,850

Job hunting expenses doing the job fair circuit really added up.. Conference fees + hotel + mileage + resume printing, etc to two job fairs was almost $2000. Plus airline apps account + interview prep/app/ resume review was a few hundred more. =~$2500

Plus another $1000+ of charitable contributions.

I don't have the exact figure of what I was able to itemize, but it was over $14,000 + $4050 personal exemption... my first $18000-18,700 of income wasn't taxable.

Then there's the regional pilot 'mortgage' aka student loans lol. The student loan interest deduction was the best one out there. :rolleyes:

On top of all of this, I live in a state where federal itemizations carry over to the state retuen, so I will likely pay more state taxes as well. :eek:

You better believe quite a few regional pilots are getting hit really hard with the lack of work related expense deductions, student loan interest and losing the personal exemption. And most of our salaries are well under $100,000. :mad:

He did you get a $5k per diem deduction? In order to get something close to that your company would've had to underpay you $6200. Are you sure you calculated it correctly? As an RJ guy mine normally was in the $2500 range.

Personally I've always disagreed with it, it was a BS deduction. Same as most of our other ones. Uniform? My wife was never able to deduct buying work clothes or a suitcase. Yet we could? Hmm. Cell phone? Not required. Dry cleaning? I don't know a single person who does it weekly yet everyone deducts it. Even so, again, not required. You can wash them yourself.

Personally I'm thankful for cleaning up the tax code. Hope it gets even cleaner.

BrewCity
12-25-2017, 11:05 AM
As for 'effectively pushing more people into higher brackets over time,' you're making an assumption that wages are going to outpace the chained CPI. You might want to backtest that theory - it's something that opponents to chained CPI will not talk about in their argument that it pushes people into higher tax brackets over time.



Ok, fine. If want to look at things that way, we can say that using traditional CPI measurement would push more people into lower tax brackets over time compared with indexing to the chained CPI.



He did you get a $5k per diem deduction? In order to get something close to that your company would've had to underpay you $6200. Are you sure you calculated it correctly? As an RJ guy mine normally was in the $2500 range.

Personally I've always disagreed with it, it was a BS deduction. Same as most of our other ones. Uniform? My wife was never able to deduct buying work clothes or a suitcase. Yet we could? Hmm. Cell phone? Not required. Dry cleaning? I don't know a single person who does it weekly yet everyone deducts it. Even so, again, not required. You can wash them yourself.

Personally I'm thankful for cleaning up the tax code. Hope it gets even cleaner.

If you count all of your per diem as taxable income and then deduct the government m&ie expense amount for each individual city you stayed in itís pretty easy to hit $6,000 of deductions.

Secondly, legally you are only allowed to deduct uniform items that cannot be used as regular clothes (blazer, hat) and not things like shoes and navy pants, which is why your wife canít deduct dress clothes. Secondly, most pilots are required by their contracts and/or policy manuals to have a phone number for contact (land line or cell, either works) and to keep their uniforms clean.

Pyro
12-25-2017, 11:14 AM
For the last few years, many folks have abandoned Cali or New York due to their inordinate taxes and rightfully so. It wonít be long before many of the towns in those states look like Detroit.

They bring their politics with them unfortunately, and I fear the low tax states will just start voting to raise taxes on themselves.

Lakeaffect
12-25-2017, 12:07 PM
single, 0 kids, no mortgage

What it comes down to was per diem, union dues and misc job expenses allowed pilots, like myself, with lower income to have a relatively high amount of deductions. We don't make enough to buy an expensive enough of a house to get a meaningful deduction in real estate taxes and mortgage interest haha.

Last year I had about $5k of perdiem deduction + ~$1100 union dues + another $2000ish of uniforms, luggage, part of a cellphone plan, headset, dry cleaning, medical, etc. Over $8000 of deductions that area no longer deductible.

Add in another $3k of state and local taxes + $850 personal property tax. =$3,850

Job hunting expenses doing the job fair circuit really added up.. Conference fees + hotel + mileage + resume printing, etc to two job fairs was almost $2000. Plus airline apps account + interview prep/app/ resume review was a few hundred more. =~$2500

Plus another $1000+ of charitable contributions.

I don't have the exact figure of what I was able to itemize, but it was over $14,000 + $4050 personal exemption... my first $18000-18,700 of income wasn't taxable.

Then there's the regional pilot 'mortgage' aka student loans lol. The student loan interest deduction was the best one out there. :rolleyes:

On top of all of this, I live in a state where federal itemizations carry over to the state retuen, so I will likely pay more state taxes as well. :eek:

You better believe quite a few regional pilots are getting hit really hard with the lack of work related expense deductions, student loan interest and losing the personal exemption. And most of our salaries are well under $100,000. :mad:

A lot of your expenses like job fares and headsets arenít gonna be every year. And writing off 18k$ of expenses and being taxed under the old tax brackets vs. standard deduction of 12k$ in trump tax brackets is probably a wash and a lot less work. Also, if money is an issue, itís a much better deal to not spend $ on dry cleaning and other unnecessary expenses just so you can write it off.

Andy
12-25-2017, 01:12 PM
Ok, fine. If want to look at things that way, we can say that using traditional CPI measurement would push more people into lower tax brackets over time compared with indexing to the chained CPI.

The same people who argue that chained CPI causes bracket creep also argue that wages are not keeping up with inflation. Of course they use CPI indices that overstate inflation. Those same indices (CPI and CPI-U are most commonly used) are used to adjust government payment programs (social security, military pensions, income tax brackets, etc).

I'll be happy when I see anyone use C-CPI or C-CPI-U with respect to inflation.

The bottom line is that CPI needs to be adjusted down in order to properly account for inflation. Chained CPI does that.

pause
12-25-2017, 01:22 PM
They bring their politics with them unfortunately, and I fear the low tax states will just start voting to raise taxes on themselves.

A prime example of this is Austin, TX

galaxy flyer
12-25-2017, 01:27 PM
If you count all of your per diem as taxable income and then deduct the government m&ie expense amount for each individual city you stayed in it’s pretty easy to hit $6,000 of deductions.

Is per diem that much less than IRS M&IE rates? As a actual expenses corporate guy, I’m amazed. We were gonna go to per diem, but it turned out to be way more money to the individual than actual expenses. And that’s at expense account restaurants, let’s just say, we didn’t pass on dessert or drinks.

GF

Name User
12-25-2017, 02:05 PM
If you count all of your per diem as taxable income and then deduct the government m&ie expense amount for each individual city you stayed in it’s pretty easy to hit $6,000 of deductions.

Secondly, legally you are only allowed to deduct uniform items that cannot be used as regular clothes (blazer, hat) and not things like shoes and navy pants, which is why your wife can’t deduct dress clothes. Secondly, most pilots are required by their contracts and/or policy manuals to have a phone number for contact (land line or cell, either works) and to keep their uniforms clean.

Your per diem is not taxable income. It's reimbursed expenses.

As far as a contact number goes those can be had for free. So again a moot point.

I have kept my uniform clean for decades by washing it in a washing machine. Not by "paying" $2/shirt (ie writing it off).

They were BS deductions...no pilot I ever met even came close to spending the M&IE rates to eat. Most of us at the regional level packed our food for Pete's sake and didn't spend a dime.

SonicFlyer
12-25-2017, 02:56 PM
The same people who argue that chained CPI causes bracket creep also argue that wages are not keeping up with inflation. Of course they use CPI indices that overstate inflation. Those same indices (CPI and CPI-U are most commonly used) are used to adjust government payment programs (social security, military pensions, income tax brackets, etc).

I'll be happy when I see anyone use C-CPI or C-CPI-U with respect to inflation.

The bottom line is that CPI needs to be adjusted down in order to properly account for inflation. Chained CPI does that.The CPI understates inflation. Hell, the Fed doesn't even publish M3 anymore which is a scam.

The current CPI is a joke as well, it doesn't take in to account food, energy, or housing. Granted all 3 are manipulated by the Fed.

Google for "Shadow Stats" if you want more insight.

SonicFlyer
12-25-2017, 02:56 PM
They bring their politics with them unfortunately, and I fear the low tax states will just start voting to raise taxes on themselves.Exactly... that's the problem with having such a big disparity between the states, all the people who made the high tax states the way they are will flee to the low tax states and then still vote for the same nonsense.... like locusts :mad:

Twin Wasp
12-25-2017, 03:09 PM
Your per diem is not taxable income. It's reimbursed expenses.

The difference between the per diem you are paid and the government rate for that city is deductible under the 2017 tax law. If your company pays you 57 a day but you are in Hong Kong where the State Department rate is 150 a day there is a 93 dollar difference. In order to deduct the difference you have to declare your per diem as income but if you spend half the month overseas it is worth it.

As far as a contact number goes those can be had for free. So again a moot point.

Some airlines require you to be contactable while on reserve. Unless you are going to spend your entire trip in a hotel or crash pad you're going to need a phone. If you can get one for free let me know.

I have kept my uniform clean for decades by washing it in a washing machine. Not by "paying" $2/shirt (ie writing it off).

Some uniform plants are dry clean only. And if you are on a two week trip your fellow crew members will appreciate you doing laundry.

They were BS deductions...no pilot I ever met even came close to spending the M&IE rates to eat. Most of us at the regional level packed our food for Pete's sake and didn't spend a dime.

Can you live for less than 150 a day in Hong Kong? Yes, but sometimes you want to eat a real meal. Some countries get very upset if you bring food into them.

Larry in TN
12-25-2017, 03:22 PM
The current CPI is a joke as well, it doesn't take in to account food, energy, or housing.
Sure it does.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.t01.htm

You'll see the "All Items" figure, which is what is commonly reported, and a separate "All items less food and energy" figure.

The latter is not used to estimate how much the cost of living has increased; it is used to compare the economy at different times (i.e. this year compared to last year, etc.) without the influences of the highly volatile food and energy prices. This is useful because the big spikes, up and down, in food and energy will overshadow other, often smaller, changes in the overall economy. This is often called the "core rate" when reported.

You'll also see that shelter, rent of primary residence, and owner's equivalent rent of residences are each included and cover housing.

Name User
12-25-2017, 03:57 PM
The difference between the per diem you are paid and the government rate for that city is deductible under the 2017 tax law. If your company pays you 57 a day but you are in Hong Kong where the State Department rate is 150 a day there is a 93 dollar difference. In order to deduct the difference you have to declare your per diem as income but if you spend half the month overseas it is worth it.



Some airlines require you to be contactable while on reserve. Unless you are going to spend your entire trip in a hotel or crash pad you're going to need a phone. If you can get one for free let me know.



Some uniform plants are dry clean only. And if you are on a two week trip your fellow crew members will appreciate you doing laundry.



Can you live for less than 150 a day in Hong Kong? Yes, but sometimes you want to eat a real meal. Some countries get very upset if you bring food into them.
I don't doubt the international per diem is up there. But the person I am quoting works for a regional. Your post isn't applicable.

And actually only 80% of the difference is deductible.

In no way do you declare your per diem as income. That is incorrect. You input your per diem as business expenses that were reimbursed. That goes against your total M&IE deduction. Tax software calculates the difference and assuming you check the transportation worker box will carry over 80% if the difference as a business expense deduction.

As far as phones go I'm sorry but like I said, no one uses a phone specifically for the company and if they do it's a $10/month burner flip phone. And even then they already have another phone that they could use if they wanted too.

The vast, vast majority of our deductions were profitable for us because we would never spend that kind of money especially the M&IE deduction. You are given a choice, deduct the standard rates or add up actual expenses, how many years did you submit actual expenses? Yep that's what I thought.

I'm sure some guys will pay more in tax losing these but that doesn't detract from my point.

If the company per diem isn't covering actual meals and incidental expenses that is something to address come contract time, not using taxes to recapture a portion of it. Same with medical reimbursement, etc.

Just be careful what you wish for, my regional actually issued beepers to reserves (still do AFAIK).

BrewCity
12-25-2017, 04:04 PM
Is per diem that much less than IRS M&IE rates? As a actual expenses corporate guy, I’m amazed. We were gonna go to per diem, but it turned out to be way more money to the individual than actual expenses. And that’s at expense account restaurants, let’s just say, we didn’t pass on dessert or drinks.

GF

It’s not a huge difference anymore domestically. The m&ie rate for most large US cities is between $64 - $79, and at the majors pilots earn $55 or so per day in per diem ($2.35 or so domestic). International m&ie can be much higher.

Your per diem is not taxable income. It's reimbursed expenses.

As far as a contact number goes those can be had for free. So again a moot point.

I have kept my uniform clean for decades by washing it in a washing machine. Not by "paying" $2/shirt (ie writing it off).

They were BS deductions...no pilot I ever met even came close to spending the M&IE rates to eat. Most of us at the regional level packed our food for Pete's sake and didn't spend a dime.

I don’t think you’re understanding. To take this deduction you’d add your $5k in per diem to your $100k of wages to create a total income of $105k. You then deduct the GSA m&ie expenses for each individual overnight city (IRS form 2106) and you’ll generally wind up deducting more than $5k. So while yes, per diem pay for multi-day trips is not subject to tax withholding, there are multiple ways to account for expense reimbursement. Nontaxable per diem is the simplest method but for many is not the best way.

I’d like to know where (aside from the lifeline assistance program, something almost all pilots don’t qualify for due to income) one can get a free telephone line. Yes, Google Voice is free, but you’d still need to pay for an internet connection. In that case, I’d wager a guess that you’d be allowed to deduct a portion of your internet bill instead.

The fact that you don’t utilize some of these deductions doesn’t make them inherently “BS.” Obviously it’s both unethical and illegal to falsely deduct things like uniform cleaning if one doesn’t actually pay to have his uniform cleaned (some of us, by the way, do take our uniforms to the cleaners, and correctly utilize the deduction).

Name User
12-25-2017, 04:05 PM
The same people who argue that chained CPI causes bracket creep also argue that wages are not keeping up with inflation. Of course they use CPI indices that overstate inflation. Those same indices (CPI and CPI-U are most commonly used) are used to adjust government payment programs (social security, military pensions, income tax brackets, etc).

I'll be happy when I see anyone use C-CPI or C-CPI-U with respect to inflation.

The bottom line is that CPI needs to be adjusted down in order to properly account for inflation. Chained CPI does that.

Chained CPI is a BS way of calculating inflation. It assumes people will substitute products for another as costs creep. Example, over time people will sub beef for chicken for turkey for beans/rice as prices continue to rise. Same thing for rent, they will downsize or take on roommates over time to avoid rent creep.

Name User
12-25-2017, 04:16 PM
It’s not a huge difference anymore domestically. The m&ie rate for most large US cities is between $64 - $79, and at the majors pilots earn $55 or so per day in per diem ($2.35 or so domestic). International m&ie can be much higher.



I don’t think you’re understanding. To take this deduction you’d add your $5k in per diem to your $100k of wages to create a total income of $105k. You then deduct the GSA m&ie expenses for each individual overnight city (IRS form 2106) and you’ll generally wind up deducting more than $5k. So while yes, per diem pay for multi-day trips is not subject to tax withholding, there are multiple ways to account for expense reimbursement. Nontaxable per diem is the simplest method but for many is not the best way.

I’d like to know where (aside from the lifeline assistance program, something almost all pilots don’t qualify for due to income) one can get a free telephone line. Yes, Google Voice is free, but you’d still need to pay for an internet connection. In that case, I’d wager a guess that you’d be allowed to deduct a portion of your internet bill instead.

The fact that you don’t utilize some of these deductions doesn’t make them inherently “BS.” Obviously it’s both unethical and illegal to falsely deduct things like uniform cleaning if one doesn’t actually pay to have his uniform cleaned (some of us, by the way, do take our uniforms to the cleaners, and correctly utilize the deduction).

I won't address your method of calculating the deduction because I don't have the forms in front of me and am not going to bother to look it up. But it's not how it's done in tax software. I can't fathom why you are adding untaxed per diem to income?!?

How many years did you submit ACTUAL meal expenses over and above the standard rates?!? I will answer for 99.999% of pilots. ZERO. That means we are making money off the deductions.

Again, and I'm still wondering why you refuse to acknowledge this fact which was my point with the cell phone deduction too. It doesn't matter if the company requires a contact number. You already have a phone you pay for regardless of if they require it or not.

We all made money off these things especially per diem. I'm happy it's gone and we can forget all this nonsense. Most of us will pay less due to the tax bracket reductions so it is good for the majority.

joseolay
12-25-2017, 04:16 PM
Nope.

And Iím not silly enough to have a huge mortgage.

The tax benefit of a mortgage deduction is extremely overrated. I wish more people really understood how expensive mortgages really are. You wind up paying for a house at least twice.


It's wise to have a mortgage on your home and take advantage of the mortgage interest tax write off. Mortgage your home, pull out that equity and put it into something with a return and cash flow such as a rental property. Own the rental property free and clear and use the cash flow to pay the mortgage down on your home. You get much better rates on your primary home over investment property.

BrewCity
12-25-2017, 04:40 PM
I won't address your method of calculating the deduction because I don't have the forms in front of me and am not going to bother to look it up. But it's not how it's done in tax software. I can't fathom why you are adding untaxed per diem to income?!?

How many years did you submit ACTUAL meal expenses over and above the standard rates?!? I will answer for 99.999% of pilots. ZERO. That means we are making money off the deductions.

Again, and I'm still wondering why you refuse to acknowledge this fact which was my point with the cell phone deduction too. It doesn't matter if the company requires a contact number. You already have a phone you pay for regardless of if they require it or not.

We all made money off these things especially per diem. I'm happy it's gone and we can forget all this nonsense. Most of us will pay less due to the tax bracket reductions so it is good for the majority.

Ok, another way to look at it is that you can deduct your m&ie expenses but you must then offset that deduction by the amount of untaxed per diem you received. Either way the effect on your taxable income would be the same.

I have never submitted actual expenses because the IRS permits me to use the m&ie rates instead of saving a year’s worth of receipts. I’m not seeing your point here. It’s the same as using average passenger weights for weight and balance.

Again, the IRS considers a phone “ordinary and necessary” for an airline pilot and allows you to deduct a justifiable portion of your bill.

galaxy flyer
12-25-2017, 04:42 PM
won't address your method of calculating the deduction because I don't have the forms in front of me and am not going to bother to look it up. But it's not how it's done in tax software. I can't fathom why you are adding untaxed per diem to income?!?

You might read the Form 2106 instructions and the form, it very specifically calls for entering all your employer’s reimbursements (per diem) received for the expenses claimed as a deduction. Doesn’t matter how the software runs, that’s the method.

I doubt anyone spends the difference between the per diem and the M&IE rate. The IRS expects records, too. Live thru an audit!

I also loved actual, nothing feels better than a $200 laundry bill in Moscow! Especially when you’re a little ****ed off at the boss.

GF

Name User
12-25-2017, 05:14 PM
You might read the Form 2106 instructions and the form, it very specifically calls for entering all your employerís reimbursements (per diem) received for the expenses claimed as a deduction. Doesnít matter how the software runs, thatís the method.

I doubt anyone spends the difference between the per diem and the M&IE rate. The IRS expects records, too. Live thru an audit!

I also loved actual, nothing feels better than a $200 laundry bill in Moscow! Especially when youíre a little ****ed off at the boss.

GF

Actually please go back and reread my posts. I stated explicitly that you enter the reimbursed expenses. There is a special section for that. You don't however add it to your income.

My wife travels and uses a Corp card. Actual expenses are definitely nice - you eat well and drink a lot. Spending other people's money is fun!

But in the airline world that doesn't happen very often. How often are guys buying $50+ lunches and $14 beers? Yeah not happening. They spend maybe $8 at Chipotle. It's even better at the major level where you get per diem and get fed on the plane.

pause
12-25-2017, 05:26 PM
My head hurts.
*beer please*

galaxy flyer
12-25-2017, 07:10 PM
name user,

Understood, my apologies.

GF

Name User
12-25-2017, 07:12 PM
Ok, another way to look at it is that you can deduct your m&ie expenses but you must then offset that deduction by the amount of untaxed per diem you received. Either way the effect on your taxable income would be the same.

I have never submitted actual expenses because the IRS permits me to use the m&ie rates instead of saving a yearís worth of receipts. Iím not seeing your point here. Itís the same as using average passenger weights for weight and balance.

Again, the IRS considers a phone ďordinary and necessaryĒ for an airline pilot and allows you to deduct a justifiable portion of your bill.

I'm not disputing if it is/was deductible or not. I've never written that.

Name User
12-25-2017, 07:13 PM
name user,

Understood, my apologies.

GF

No worries

joseolay
12-26-2017, 03:02 AM
Airforce one is not a presidential perk. It is a military command and control system and a key piece of hardware in our strategic deterrence capability. Needs to be four engine because they don't necessarily abort if they lose one on the roll. There are a limited number of long range four engine jets available [which are made in America], and the 707 was too old.

President (of any party) goes where he wants, Airforce one has to go with him.

Then why do they let him hop in the airforce 757 sometimes to make a tee time up in new jersey? If it was so important, why wouldn't he take the 747? Why does almost every other president and head of state in the world travel in a two engine jet while we use a 747?

PRS Guitars
12-26-2017, 06:46 AM
Then why do they let him hop in the airforce 757 sometimes to make a tee time up in new jersey? If it was so important, why wouldn't he take the 747? Why does almost every other president and head of state in the world travel in a two engine jet while we use a 747?

The 747 is a much more capable aircraft for the job. Do you really think the fuel costs (4 engine vs 2) are what makes presidential travel expenseive? Seriously, itís nothing.

galaxy flyer
12-26-2017, 06:48 AM
The reason for four engines is simple, you can continue on three, you canít on one and just showing up isnít how it works for the President. Think of GWBís surprise visit to Baghdad and having an engine failure enroute.

GF

joseolay
12-26-2017, 11:09 AM
The 747 is a much more capable aircraft for the job. Do you really think the fuel costs (4 engine vs 2) are what makes presidential travel expenseive? Seriously, itís nothing.

My post said nothing about costs. The guy I quoted mentioned the 747 goes everywhere the president goes for a reason. But that's not true, as I pointed out he sometime takes the 757 to his tee times. I'm well aware of how expensive presidential travel is and the fact that engine/fuel costs on the 747 make up a tiny percentage of the overall costs.

METO Guido
12-26-2017, 11:33 AM
Then why do they let him hop in the airforce 757 sometimes to make a tee time up in new jersey?

POTUS doesn't need a tee time, hops on anything he wants & doesn't pay tax.

Yours is due April 17.

galaxy flyer
12-26-2017, 11:49 AM
Note, every outside the US trip is on the 747, with the back-up flying the hangars-on and press. Thereís quite a hierarchy of flyingówith the President, on the back-up, on a chartered plane, invited but going on airlines. Usually the NECP E-4 with its cast of hundreds is in the area, too. A flock of C-5s or C-17s will position the ground equipment; often with tanker support.

Yes, going to WRI or EWR, the C-32s are fine; headed overseas, it will the Whales.

GF

CAirBear
12-26-2017, 12:38 PM
Not sure why there is so much confusion here. Here is my situation.

Last year I overnighted 130 nights or so. I used EZPerDiem and inputted my overnights. According to EZ Per Diem the amount I should have been given, had I been a government employee, was nearly $12k. Now my airline provided around $3.8k in Per Diem.

That is a difference of $8,200. You can take 80% (maybe itís 70% canít remember ATM) of the difference and deduct it from your taxable income.

When doing this, plus using other legally allowed IRS deductions for being a pilot, (EZ Per Diem has the entire list) I was routinely exceeding the standard deduction of $6k (single) by $1.5-2k the last 3 years or so.

My refund increased an average of $800. Anyone not doing this is seriously leaving money on the table.

galaxy flyer
12-26-2017, 12:48 PM
It’s not “the amount you should have been given, it is the maximum the IRS allows and is government employees are reimbursed for travel. You still have to be able to present records in an audit, according to the instructions. It just isn’t you get to deduct the difference. Similarily, if the per diem exceeded the IRS amount, that is regular income.

That was one of the problems I had with going “per diem”, my company’s reimbursement sometimes exceeded the IRS limits and it would have to tracked as income.

GF

Dolphinflyer
12-26-2017, 01:50 PM
Note, every outside the US trip is on the 747, with the back-up flying the hangars-on and press. Thereís quite a hierarchy of flyingówith the President, on the back-up, on a chartered plane, invited but going on airlines. Usually the NECP E-4 with its cast of hundreds is in the area, too. A flock of C-5s or C-17s will position the ground equipment; often with tanker support.

Yes, going to WRI or EWR, the C-32s are fine; headed overseas, it will the Whales.

GF

Add it the costs for sunup to sundown armed Fighter cover.

galaxy flyer
12-26-2017, 01:53 PM
And the consequential costs of TFRs, closed airports, itís beyond ridiculous!

GF

Std Deviation
12-26-2017, 02:35 PM
. Dry cleaning? I don't know a single person who does it weekly yet everyone deducts it. Even so, again, not required. You can wash them yourself.


Unless you’re at JetBlue. Then your skinny jean looking uniform pants with the stretchy waistband designed by a guy that’s known for pajamas are marked, “dry clean only.” So yeah, I’ve got 10 pair and 5 rotate every week to the dry cleaners. They’re so cheaply made that my washing machine would cause them to dissolve. This way I have nice pants and a higher probability of cancer. :)

Name User
12-26-2017, 07:02 PM
Not sure why there is so much confusion here. Here is my situation.

Last year I overnighted 130 nights or so. I used EZPerDiem and inputted my overnights. According to EZ Per Diem the amount I should have been given, had I been a government employee, was nearly $12k. Now my airline provided around $3.8k in Per Diem.

That is a difference of $8,200. You can take 80% (maybe itís 70% canít remember ATM) of the difference and deduct it from your taxable income.

When doing this, plus using other legally allowed IRS deductions for being a pilot, (EZ Per Diem has the entire list) I was routinely exceeding the standard deduction of $6k (single) by $1.5-2k the last 3 years or so.

My refund increased an average of $800. Anyone not doing this is seriously leaving money on the table.

You must fly international. The highest M&IE rate in the US IIRC is SFO, about $75 and that is best case. Yours averaged $92/night.

It was 80% for the most recent tax years.

And AGAIN, I never said it wasn't advantageous. But did you spend $92/night on food? Ok no I didn't think so.

Our std deduction went up and rates have come down. Most calculators are showing a reduction in taxes paid and the bonus is no more per diem calculations need to be made or other records kept.

It's a win-win.

Name User
12-26-2017, 07:03 PM
Unless youíre at JetBlue. Then your skinny jean looking uniform pants with the stretchy waistband designed by a guy thatís known for pajamas are marked, ďdry clean only.Ē So yeah, Iíve got 10 pair and 5 rotate every week to the dry cleaners. Theyíre so cheaply made that my washing machine would cause them to dissolve. This way I have nice pants and a higher probability of cancer. :)

I wash my dry clean only pants all the time. They look fine.

tomgoodman
12-26-2017, 07:27 PM
I wash my dry clean only pants all the time. They look fine.

What?!! Anyone who disobeys a pants label will someday remove a mattress label, under penalty of law! :D

Andy
12-27-2017, 11:57 AM
The CPI understates inflation. Hell, the Fed doesn't even publish M3 anymore which is a scam.
`2009
The current CPI is a joke as well, it doesn't take in to account food, energy, or housing. Granted all 3 are manipulated by the Fed.

Google for "Shadow Stats" if you want more insight.

Wow, I can't believe Shadow Stats is still around. There were a ton of flaws on that website back in ~2009 and I doubt it's changed ... especially if it's still preaching that inflation is understated.

Chained CPI is a BS way of calculating inflation. It assumes people will substitute products for another as costs creep. Example, over time people will sub beef for chicken for turkey for beans/rice as prices continue to rise. Same thing for rent, they will downsize or take on roommates over time to avoid rent creep.

You know how to avoid rent creep? But a house. And from that point forward, the CPI will be overstated because your payments will be fixed. You'll be paying approximately the same for your mortagage after 20 years as you do the first year.

It sounds like you aren't very familiar with hedonic quality adjustments. They're logical; your example misstates what actually happens. If there were no hedonic adjustments, the basket of goods and services would include out of date items.
Can you tell me how much a cathode ray tube television is selling for lately?

SonicFlyer
12-27-2017, 07:14 PM
Wow, I can't believe Shadow Stats is still around. There were a ton of flaws on that website back in ~2009 and I doubt it's changed ... especially if it's still preaching that inflation is understated.




http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/charts/alt-cpi-home2.gif?hl=ad&t=1513188102


You know how to avoid rent creep? But a house.You must have never heard of property taxes?

Name User
12-27-2017, 07:16 PM
http://www.shadowstats.com/imgs/charts/alt-cpi-home2.gif?hl=ad&t=1513188102


You must have never heard of property taxes?

And insurance.

30 years ago folks in HCOL areas are paying more in property tax alone than their mortgages were.

Pretty crazy.

iahflyr
12-27-2017, 07:52 PM
Who else is pre-paying their union dues for 2018?

Who else is pre-paying their property taxes for 2018?

My hope is that almost everyone answered yes to #1 and most of you answered yes to #2. If not, you are throwing away free money.

Union dues are no longer a tax write off in 2018, so pre-pay as much of your 2018 dues as possible.

State income tax (or sales tax if in one of the 7 states that doesnít have state income tax), property tax, and local tax (car registration) are capped at 10k in 2018. My guess is most anyone at a major after year one (making 150k+) will be very close to that cap from state income tax alone. If you own a house, I would almost guarantee you will hit that 10k cap. So you should be pre-paying your 2018 property taxes in 2017 if you can.

Anyone who thinks these tax cuts will ONLY cost $1.5 TRILLION Dollars is dillusional. Accountants and tax lawyers are already finding loop holes left and right to take advantage of. Also, thereís the very simple concept that when you raise peopleís taxes (and roughly 30% of people are having their taxes raised), they donít end up paying more, they just find more ways to cheat.

akulahunter
12-27-2017, 08:17 PM
Anyone who thinks these tax cuts will ONLY cost $1.5 TRILLION Dollars is dillusional. Accountants and tax lawyers are already finding loop holes left and right to take advantage of. Also, thereís the very simple concept that when you raise peopleís taxes (and roughly 30% of people are having their taxes raised), they donít end up paying more, they just find more ways to cheat.

I bet you one adult beverage that 30% of people don't pay higher taxes (as compared to what they would pay under current rules) in 2018...

METO Guido
12-28-2017, 05:55 AM
Was advised by a CPA to make sure any pre-paids come attached to an itemized statement or invoice & that estimates may not be ruled adequate. Of course, he also mentioned I can pay him for next year's filing now.

EWRflyr
12-28-2017, 06:22 AM
Who else is pre-paying their union dues for 2018?

Who else is pre-paying their property taxes for 2018?

My hope is that almost everyone answered yes to #1 and most of you answered yes to #2. If not, you are throwing away free money.

Union dues are no longer a tax write off in 2018, so pre-pay as much of your 2018 dues as possible.

State income tax (or sales tax if in one of the 7 states that doesnít have state income tax), property tax, and local tax (car registration) are capped at 10k in 2018. My guess is most anyone at a major after year one (making 150k+) will be very close to that cap from state income tax alone. If you own a house, I would almost guarantee you will hit that 10k cap. So you should be pre-paying your 2018 property taxes in 2017 if you can.

Anyone who thinks these tax cuts will ONLY cost $1.5 TRILLION Dollars is dillusional. Accountants and tax lawyers are already finding loop holes left and right to take advantage of. Also, thereís the very simple concept that when you raise peopleís taxes (and roughly 30% of people are having their taxes raised), they donít end up paying more, they just find more ways to cheat.

The IRS issued guidance yesterday that says in order to write off your 2018 property taxes on your 2017 return you must have a printed assessment provided by your local government. Just prepaying some estimated amount won't cut it according to the IRS. Most municipalities simply will not have the 2018 assessments ready by December 31, 2017.

The same would then logically apply to the aforementioned ALPA dues. Since ALPA dues are assessed as income is earned, it's hard to prepay something that hasn't happened yet.

galaxy flyer
12-28-2017, 08:04 AM
Considering rates have gone DOWN and the standard deduction has gone UP; anyone paying more Federal income taxes next year either (A) live in a high-cost state or (2) were worthy of an audit for Tax Year 2016 or (III) are is the wage earning top 3%, doctors, lawyers and airline pilots.

GF

ceelo
12-28-2017, 09:38 AM
The funny part is most of the pilots I fly with are conservatives. All of you deserve what you voted for. I only feel bad for those off us shanghaied along for the ride. Itís only going to get worse for the next three years.

exactly! lmao i love it when people that voted for trump ***** about the decisions he made... like get over it y'all voted for him

Twin Wasp
12-28-2017, 10:11 AM
Considering rates have gone DOWN and the standard deduction has gone UP; anyone paying more Federal income taxes next year either (A) live in a high-cost state or (2) were worthy of an audit for Tax Year 2016 or (III) are is the wage earning top 3%, doctors, lawyers and airline pilots.

GF

Not for everyone. For single filers between 157k-200k the rates go up. (A)Texas isn't a high cost state. (2)I'm just using the system as set up by the government. Candidate Trump said it was smart to do that. (III) Looks like I'm in the top 7%.

Finally home and looking at my numbers. Given taxes and charitable contributions I'll still be itemizing next year. No post card for me.

f10a
12-28-2017, 10:15 AM
I wonder how this tax bill will effect the full time contract pilot segment of corp aviation. The ones I know deduct their recurrent training (some types are 50-90k) and associated expenses. My understanding is that won't be allowed anymore.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

ugleeual
12-28-2017, 10:40 AM
exactly! lmao i love it when people that voted for trump ***** about the decisions he made... like get over it y'all voted for him

I'm getting a decrease of 10K... tax plan looks pretty good from where I sit... everyone else will need to do their own calculations. I live in a mid-tier tax state (VA)... and the tax computer models from two independent sites (CNN and MSNBC) said that I should not need to itemize next year.

f10a
12-28-2017, 11:39 AM
Does anyone realize these tax cuts get phased out in the next few years and we will be paying more when they do? Only corp income taxe cuts don't expire.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

WhiskeyDelta
12-28-2017, 12:46 PM
Does anyone realize these tax cuts get phased out in the next few years and we will be paying more when they do? Only corp income taxe cuts don't expire.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk



Much like the demonization Rs have taken for trying to eliminate Obamacare, this will be the same thing for Ds should they regain power. It will be political suicide to raise taxes on the millions that just got a cut.

Slaphappy
12-28-2017, 02:19 PM
exactly! lmao i love it when people that voted for trump ***** about the decisions he made... like get over it y'all voted for him

I'm very happy with him so far. No regrets.



Anyone who thinks these tax cuts will ONLY cost $1.5 TRILLION Dollars is dillusional. Accountants and tax lawyers are already finding loop holes left and right to take advantage of. Also, thereís the very simple concept that when you raise peopleís taxes (and roughly 30% of people are having their taxes raised), they donít end up paying more, they just find more ways to cheat.

The 1.5 trillion figure is only at current GDP growth over 10 years. If the predictions of 4% gdp come true they will more than pay for themselves.

Andy
12-28-2017, 03:14 PM
Does anyone realize these tax cuts get phased out in the next few years and we will be paying more when they do? Only corp income taxe cuts don't expire.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Do you realize that the reason why this isn't permanent is that it would have required 60 votes in the Senate? Did you further realize that not a single Dem voted for the tax cuts? My guess is NO, you didn't know that, or you'd be blaming the Dems for not making this permanent.

Andy
12-28-2017, 03:15 PM
I'm very happy with him so far. No regrets.



The 1.5 trillion figure is only at current GDP growth over 10 years. If the predictions of 4% gdp come true they will more than pay for themselves.

Ditto. And agree with second statement.

Andy
12-28-2017, 03:30 PM
You must have never heard of property taxes?

And insurance.

30 years ago folks in HCOL areas are paying more in property tax alone than their mortgages were.

Pretty crazy.

Thanks, guys. That was really, really funny stuff.

f10a
12-28-2017, 08:45 PM
Do you realize that the reason why this isn't permanent is that it would have required 60 votes in the Senate? Did you further realize that not a single Dem voted for the tax cuts? My guess is NO, you didn't know that, or you'd be blaming the Dems for not making this permanent.I know not a single dem voted for this. What's your point? Mine was that I see everyone jumping up in joy that they think they're getting a massive tax cut next year but haven't read the fine print or looked further down the road.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

akulahunter
12-29-2017, 06:20 AM
I know not a single dem voted for this. What's your point? Mine was that I see everyone jumping up in joy that they think they're getting a massive tax cut next year but haven't read the fine print or looked further down the road.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

If the Ds would have given up on the us vs them mentality, you wouldn't have to look down the road. All of the cuts would be permanent...

detpilot
12-29-2017, 06:57 AM
If the Ds would have given up on the us vs them mentality, you wouldn't have to look down the road. All of the cuts would be permanent...Ah... From the party of "fiscal conservatives." 2 years ago, it was "but the DEFICIT though!! Arrrrgh!"

Now, this...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

galaxy flyer
12-29-2017, 07:28 AM
Does anyone realize these tax cuts get phased out in the next few years and we will be paying more when they do? Only corp income taxe cuts don't expire.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

Most of them have set up pass-thru LLCs, so it will be a business expense

GF

Slaphappy
12-29-2017, 10:05 AM
Ah... From the party of "fiscal conservatives." 2 years ago, it was "but the DEFICIT though!! Arrrrgh!"

Now, this...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

If gdp gets above 3.8% then there will be no deficit. The 1.5 over 10 years is only at less than 3.0 gpd. Either way you can't complain, Obama added 10 trillion in 8 years that's more than ever president combined.

Andy
12-29-2017, 10:38 AM
Ah... From the party of "fiscal conservatives." 2 years ago, it was "but the DEFICIT though!! Arrrrgh!"

Now, this...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

I gave up on the possibility of a fiscally responsible government a few years ago. Now, I just want to starve the beast.

CBreezy
12-29-2017, 01:51 PM
If the Ds would have given up on the us vs them mentality, you wouldn't have to look down the road. All of the cuts would be permanent...

HAHA. Come on man. You mean the same mentality the Rs used for the last 6 years? "Hey, I know we blackballed every major piece of legislation during the Obama years, but you guys need to quit being babies and work with us. We actually care about America. You don't." BOTH sides need to work together and that should have started when the Ds lost the super majority after the fiscal collapse.

iahflyr
12-29-2017, 01:57 PM
If the Ds would have given up on the us vs them mentality...

When Bush did his temporary tax cuts in 2001/2003, they were across the board rate cuts for everyone. The rich got a large chunk of the benefit, but at least everyoneís taxes went down. Obama then made them permanent for 99% of tax payers through the fiscal cliff deal of late 2012.

Trumpís tax plan created winners and losers. If Trumpís plan was just an across the board cut, people might want them permanent. But the 30% of people whose taxes are going up do not want them. And even though several people got some form of tax cut, look at the cost on the deficit. $1.5 TRILLION divided by 100 million tax paying working adults is 15k per person. Most people arenít getting that amount of tax cut.

I remember when I used to vote Republican... Tha GOP used to be the party of lower taxes and less debt. Not anymore. No wonder I switched to being a Democrat about 10 years ago.

iahflyr
12-29-2017, 02:01 PM
Republicans have become so hypocritical it is insane.

They used to be the party of lower taxes and lower debt. Now they are the party of higher taxes and higher debt.

Republicans used to cry about ďdouble taxation.Ē The estate tax was unfair because it was double taxation. Now they are allowing double taxation (Through SALT no longer being deductible) for the first time in over 75 years. Oh, but the estate tax exemption got boosted to $22 million dollars for people with very rich parents.

Iím over their hypocrisy.

Grumble
12-29-2017, 02:09 PM
Republicans have become so hypocritical it is insane.

They used to be the party of lower taxes and lower debt. Now they are the party of higher taxes and higher debt.

Republicans used to cry about ďdouble taxation.Ē The estate tax was unfair because it was double taxation. Now they are allowing double taxation (Through SALT no longer being deductible) for the first time in over 75 years. Oh, but the estate tax exemption got boosted to $22 million dollars for people with very rich parents.

Iím over their hypocrisy.

Why did the debt do between 2009-2016?

Have you actually done the math? Theyíre going to steal about $10k/year less out of my pay check. They can have those write offs.

crewdawg
12-29-2017, 02:28 PM
Republicans have become so hypocritical it is insane.

They used to be the party of lower taxes and lower debt. Now they are the party of higher taxes and higher debt.

Republicans used to cry about “double taxation.” The estate tax was unfair because it was double taxation. Now they are allowing double taxation (Through SALT no longer being deductible) for the first time in over 75 years. Oh, but the estate tax exemption got boosted to $22 million dollars for people with very rich parents.

I’m over their hypocrisy.

I don't claim either party, but you're kidding yourself if you think the Republicans have the market cornered on hypocrisy.

Also, even with the SALT deduction gone, I still come out ahead under the new tax plan.

SonicFlyer
12-29-2017, 02:51 PM
I gave up on the possibility of a fiscally responsible government a few years ago. Since 1913 and the Fed was created to be able to inflate the currency, there was zero chance of having a fiscally responsible government.

tunes
12-29-2017, 03:18 PM
I'm very happy with him so far. No regrets.



The 1.5 trillion figure is only at current GDP growth over 10 years. If the predictions of 4% gdp come true they will more than pay for themselves.

in on this crew.

tunes
12-29-2017, 03:20 PM
Ah... From the party of "fiscal conservatives." 2 years ago, it was "but the DEFICIT though!! Arrrrgh!"

Now, this...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

pot meet kettle. For the last 8 years zero care was given to the deficit for the Dems....now apparently it's an issue.

f10a
12-29-2017, 03:37 PM
For those of you saying you're getting a nice tax cut now, but what will happen to your situation in 2025 when they expire?

tunes
12-29-2017, 04:31 PM
For those of you saying you're getting a nice tax cut now, but what will happen to your situation in 2025 when they expire?

I'll be in AMT in 2 years anyways.

CAirBear
12-29-2017, 05:05 PM
Mods - why in the hell is this thread not closed already?

Itís absolutely comical that people are arguing about this.

Newsflash - neither party gives a single sh!t about you. They care ZERO about you or anyone.

I encourage you all to watch the most honest monologue you will ever hear regarding this BS. Carlin, god rest your soul my man.

https://youtu.be/rsL6mKxtOlQ

poor pilot
12-29-2017, 06:15 PM
Anyone who voted for him don't complain now. Silly Rabbits.

tunes
12-29-2017, 06:44 PM
Anyone who voted for him don't complain now. Silly Rabbits.

still not complaining.

akulahunter
12-29-2017, 07:21 PM
I remember when I used to vote Republican... Tha GOP used to be the party of lower taxes and less debt. Not anymore. No wonder I switched to being a Democrat about 10 years ago.

lol So you left to go to the party of HIGHER taxes and MUCH larger debt? That seems like great logic...

akulahunter
12-29-2017, 07:29 PM
Like I said... IAH, I bet you a beverage that 30% of people don't have higher taxes. Great to speculate on what you THINK will happen. Let's see what happens in 2019 when 2018 taxes are due.

It's ridiculous to hear anyone who supported the last president complain about the deficit. Newsflash! He doubled the deficit from the beginning to the end of his presidency (yes, 1789-2009). 43 presidents to get to the start of his presidency and he doubled it in 8 years. What were you saying about the deficit?

I would much rather put this on hold and see what the actual FACTS are for tax year 2018...

detpilot
12-29-2017, 07:56 PM
Like I said... IAH, I bet you a beverage that 30% of people don't have higher taxes. Great to speculate on what you THINK will happen. Let's see what happens in 2019 when 2018 taxes are due.

It's ridiculous to hear anyone who supported the last president complain about the deficit. Newsflash! He doubled the deficit from the beginning to the end of his presidency (yes, 1789-2009). 43 presidents to get to the start of his presidency and he doubled it in 8 years. What were you saying about the deficit?

I would much rather put this on hold and see what the actual FACTS are for tax year 2018...From factcheck.org:

"Deficits ó Under Obama, annual federal deficits fell, but then turned up again.

The deficit hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal year 2009. As weíve documented elsewhere, Obama inherited most of that deficit and signed spending measures that contributed as much as $203 billion to FY 2009ís red ink.

After that, the yearly deficits declined markedly for several years. In fiscal year 2015, the deficit was $438 billion, a drop of 69 percent from FY 2009.

But deficits were again on the rise as Obama left office. "

He inherited a huge deficit, from who exactly? He reduced it substantially. Yes, it did start rising again in the end... But to blame the doubling of debt on him alone is misrepresenting facts.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

SpeedyVagabond
12-30-2017, 08:50 AM
From factcheck.org:

"Deficits ó Under Obama, annual federal deficits fell, but then turned up again.

The deficit hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal year 2009. As weíve documented elsewhere, Obama inherited most of that deficit and signed spending measures that contributed as much as $203 billion to FY 2009ís red ink.

After that, the yearly deficits declined markedly for several years. In fiscal year 2015, the deficit was $438 billion, a drop of 69 percent from FY 2009.

But deficits were again on the rise as Obama left office. "

He inherited a huge deficit, from who exactly? He reduced it substantially. Yes, it did start rising again in the end... But to blame the doubling of debt on him alone is misrepresenting facts.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

The conservatives I meet arenít big thinkers. In fact most choose to be astonishingly ignorant.

akulahunter
12-30-2017, 10:06 AM
From factcheck.org:

"Deficits ó Under Obama, annual federal deficits fell, but then turned up again.

The deficit hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal year 2009. As weíve documented elsewhere, Obama inherited most of that deficit and signed spending measures that contributed as much as $203 billion to FY 2009ís red ink.

After that, the yearly deficits declined markedly for several years. In fiscal year 2015, the deficit was $438 billion, a drop of 69 percent from FY 2009.

But deficits were again on the rise as Obama left office. "

He inherited a huge deficit, from who exactly? He reduced it substantially. Yes, it did start rising again in the end... But to blame the doubling of debt on him alone is misrepresenting facts.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

So by your logic, in 8 years the best he was able to do was negative $400 Billion in a year, but the the big talking point now is 1.5 trillion over 10 years (based on low economic growth). Just doesn't make for a compelling argument.

I'm not a Republican, I'm a person. (With an extensive business background). I would blow the whole system up and institute a consumption tax (that will make the rich pay for sure) or at a minimum a flat tax with no deductions. Screw both parties, none of them care about you...

I just find it hilarious that the party known for huge spending is worried about the deficit NOW that they aren't driving the ship anymore.

Also, vagabond... You shouldn't paint with such a broad brush...

Slaphappy
12-30-2017, 10:52 AM
When Bush did his temporary tax cuts in 2001/2003, they were across the board rate cuts for everyone. The rich got a large chunk of the benefit, but at least everyone’s taxes went down. Obama then made them permanent for 99% of tax payers through the fiscal cliff deal of late 2012.

Trump’s tax plan created winners and losers. If Trump’s plan was just an across the board cut, people might want them permanent. But the 30% of people whose taxes are going up do not want them. And even though several people got some form of tax cut, look at the cost on the deficit. $1.5 TRILLION divided by 100 million tax paying working adults is 15k per person. Most people aren’t getting that amount of tax cut.

I remember when I used to vote Republican... Tha GOP used to be the party of lower taxes and less debt. Not anymore. No wonder I switched to being a Democrat about 10 years ago.

Once again you don't even have a clue what is in the tax bill. The 1.5 trillion figure is at current gdp over 10 years. The cuts are going to those that have the greatest impact on the economy which is where it should go.

Republicans have become so hypocritical it is insane.

They used to be the party of lower taxes and lower debt. Now they are the party of higher taxes and higher debt.

Republicans used to cry about “double taxation.” The estate tax was unfair because it was double taxation. Now they are allowing double taxation (Through SALT no longer being deductible) for the first time in over 75 years. Oh, but the estate tax exemption got boosted to $22 million dollars for people with very rich parents.

I’m over their hypocrisy.


The rest of us shouldn't have to pay for the high taxes of the blue states. If you don't like paying so much in taxes maybe fix your state government.

For those of you saying you're getting a nice tax cut now, but what will happen to your situation in 2025 when they expire?

Helps hope the gop is in power and extends them.

Anyone who voted for him don't complain now. Silly Rabbits.

I'm very happy. I'm more than satisfied.

The conservatives I meet aren’t big thinkers. In fact most choose to be astonishingly ignorant.

Nice projection.

From factcheck.org:

"Deficits — Under Obama, annual federal deficits fell, but then turned up again.

The deficit hit $1.4 trillion in fiscal year 2009. As we’ve documented elsewhere, Obama inherited most of that deficit and signed spending measures that contributed as much as $203 billion to FY 2009’s red ink.

After that, the yearly deficits declined markedly for several years. In fiscal year 2015, the deficit was $438 billion, a drop of 69 percent from FY 2009.

But deficits were again on the rise as Obama left office. "

He inherited a huge deficit, from who exactly? He reduced it substantially. Yes, it did start rising again in the end... But to blame the doubling of debt on him alone is misrepresenting facts.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk


Debt and deficit are two different things and his reduction of the deficit is largely because of the republican majority he had since 2010. Same with clinton.

The debt was increased with his things like the 700 billion stimulus package.

Happyflyer
12-30-2017, 11:26 AM
The conservatives I meet arenít big thinkers. In fact most choose to be astonishingly ignorant.

Most that you've met, or your generalizing all of them? I'd say Obama saved a lot of money winding down Iraq, problem is he didn't retain the sayings. He spent it on a larger more social government.
If you didn't agree with Iraq, with or without deficit spending, than you shouldn't agree with Obama maintaining that deficit though social spending.
At least when Bill slashed Regan's Cold War spending he tried to balance the deficit.

Slaphappy
12-30-2017, 11:55 AM
Most that you've met, or your generalizing all of them? I'd say Obama saved a lot of money winding down Iraq, problem is he didn't retain the sayings. He spent it on a larger more social government.
If you didn't agree with Iraq, with or without deficit spending, than you shouldn't agree with Obama maintaining that deficit though social spending.
At least when Bill slashed Regan's Cold War spending he tried to balance the deficit.

He also created the vacuum that let ISIS flourish.

Grumble
12-30-2017, 12:17 PM
For those of you saying you're getting a nice tax cut now, but what will happen to your situation in 2025 when they expire?

Weíll be back to where we are now.

So youíre saying because they expire we shouldnít enjoy 7 years of lower taxes between now and then?:rolleyes:

SpeedyVagabond
12-30-2017, 12:23 PM
He also created the vacuum that let ISIS flourish.

You prove my point. We invade another country under false pretenses, hunt down and execute it’s leader, and reduce the place to shambles. That’s the mess Obama inherited. I agree with his choice. Bankrupt America or pull out? Thank you for securing my nieces and nephew’s futures Obama. Well, we’ll see about that after all anyway considering the Bozo at the reins currently. A big thinker never would have gotten us into Iraq in the first place. ISIS is the direct result of our foreign policy under the Bush’s and was going to arise no matter what.

SpeedyVagabond
12-30-2017, 12:43 PM
Nevermind, no sense debating people that don’t even “believe” in science.

tomgoodman
12-30-2017, 01:04 PM
Nevermind, no sense debating people that donít even ďbelieveĒ in science.

No sense debating people on the internet, period. :p

SpeedyVagabond
12-30-2017, 01:05 PM
No sense debating people on the internet, period. :p

Tom, as usual, with the sensible reply.

Happy New Year all! Even to you conservatives.

Andy
12-30-2017, 02:35 PM
Tom, as usual, with the sensible reply.

Happy New Year all! Even to you conservatives.

I, for one, will have a VERY HAPPY New Year with the extra cash in my pocket rather than being wasted by politicians of both parties.

SpeedyVagabond
12-30-2017, 03:04 PM
Enjoy your paltry gains while you can. When a much brighter administration cut taxes in the early eighties it didn’t last for long before they realised their folly. Who knows though, the new guy is so dim and has done such a complete job of surrounding himself with nothing but untalented sychophants, that perhaps these cuts will stick. To the ruin of us all in America. That’s what will trickle down. Enjoy.

CAirBear
12-30-2017, 03:19 PM
No sense debating people on the internet, period. :p

Yet again - Moderators - why is the thread NOT CLOSED? 🙄

Slaphappy
12-30-2017, 03:25 PM
You prove my point. We invade another country under false pretenses, hunt down and execute it’s leader, and reduce the place to shambles. That’s the mess Obama inherited. I agree with his choice. Bankrupt America or pull out? Thank you for securing my nieces and nephew’s futures Obama. Well, we’ll see about that after all anyway considering the Bozo at the reins currently. A big thinker never would have gotten us into Iraq in the first place. ISIS is the direct result of our foreign policy under the Bush’s and was going to arise no matter what.

Nice revisionism. The 2010 Obama pullout directly led to the rise of the Islamic state. In 2008 there were less deaths in Iraq than in Chicago. I know that you hate to hear it, but Iraq was a success contrary to the wishes of those who wanted in to fail.

Enjoy your paltry gains while you can. When a much brighter administration cut taxes in the early eighties it didn’t last for long before they realised their folly. Who knows though, the new guy is so dim and has done such a complete job of surrounding himself with nothing but untalented sychophants, that perhaps these cuts will stick. To the ruin of us all in America. That’s what will trickle down. Enjoy.

It worked, we've had a constant and steady GDP growth since the 1980s. Maybe thats why every president since has kept those policies going.

SpeedyVagabond
12-30-2017, 03:39 PM
It worked? With the exception of a handful of years, we’ve had gdp growth since the mid-30s. Long before failed Reaganomics. So you can’t really say that particular strategy is what is responsible. In fact, some of our biggest gdp gains were during Roosevelt’s socialist New Deal. Lol. What do you conservatives say to that? Iraq was a stable and peaceful place seven years ago? Um sure. Whatever you say. Sort of like biggest inaugeration crowd ever, right? Whatever spews forth is truth.

Slaphappy
12-30-2017, 03:48 PM
It worked? With the exception of a handful of years, weíve had gdp growth since the mid-30s. Long before failed Reaganomics. So you canít really say that particular strategy is what is responsible. In fact, some of our biggest gdp gains were during Rooseveltís socialist New Deal. Lol. What do you conservatives say to that? Iraq was a stable and peaceful place seven years ago? Um sure. Whatever you say. Sort of like biggest inaugeration crowd ever, right? Whatever spews forth is truth.

Roosevelt had a war and recovery from the great depression. He also grew the debt by more than any president in History. The facts show supply side economics worked and continue to work. You can regurgitate the same talking points over and over that doesn't make them true. Yes Iraq was stable and peaceful till the pullout.