Republican big bill breaks promise on ending tax on soc. security but does something better

[Jingthing]

As many know, one of Trump's very loud campaign promises was to end federal tax on social security benefits.

 

This was a stupid and damaging promise for a number of reasons --

 

Most social security recipients don't make enough total income to owe tax on it already!

So cutting taxation out for all would help ONLY higher income people and do absolutely nothing for the majority lower income people. 

These taxes are put into the FUNDING for social security benefits so cutting all taxes for all accelerates the time when the entire program will need to make a major cut to benefits for all.

Currently estimated at about ten years from now unless there is a reform bill passed.

Instead of the broken promise the big bill proposes to increase the standard deduction for elderly people.

This is MUCH BETTER because it helps more lower income people stay in the no SS tax bracket and does not cut out the vital funding source entirely.

Higher income people will still owe SS tax even with the higher standard deduction.

Of course the congressional bill with this new provision needs to pass first. However, it seems clear to me that the total elimination of federal taxes on SS will not happen. A broken promise that is GOOD NEWS.

[TheAppletons]

7 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Most social security recipients don't make enough total income to owe tax on it already!

 

  According to ssa.gov, approx 56% of beneficiary families will pay tax on their benefits.  

 

  https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/research-summaries/income-taxes-on-benefits.html

[jimmybcool]

19 minutes ago, TheAppletons said:

 

  According to ssa.gov, approx 56% of beneficiary families will pay tax on their benefits.  

 

  https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/research-summaries/income-taxes-on-benefits.html

 

Well that put a damper on the talking points JT  got from his far left echo chamber.  🤣

[gamb00ler]

47 minutes ago, jimmybcool said:

 

Well that put a damper on the talking points JT  got from his far left echo chamber.  🤣

Obviously spoken by someone who has never done their own taxes and is completely unfamiliar with the details of the interaction between a higher standard deduction and net tax payable.

 

Remember to periodically alternate which foot is in your mouth so that you don't end up hobbling around permanently.

[Mike_Hunt]

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

As many know, one of Trump's very loud campaign promises was to end federal tax on social security benefits.

 

This was a stupid and damaging promise for a number of reasons --

 

Most social security recipients don't make enough total income to owe tax on it already!

So cutting taxation out for all would help ONLY higher income people and do absolutely nothing for the majority lower income people. 

These taxes are put into the FUNDING for social security benefits so cutting all taxes for all accelerates the time when the entire program will need to make a major cut to benefits for all.

Currently estimated at about ten years from now unless there is a reform bill passed.

Instead of the broken promise the big bill proposes to increase the standard deduction for elderly people.

This is MUCH BETTER because it helps more lower income people stay in the no SS tax bracket and does not cut out the vital funding source entirely.

Higher income people will still owe SS tax even with the higher standard deduction.

Of course the congressional bill with this new provision needs to pass first. However, it seems clear to me that the total elimination of federal taxes on SS will not happen. A broken promise that is GOOD NEWS.

There should be no taxes on Social Security. 

[Jingthing]

32 minutes ago, Mike_Hunt said:

There should be no taxes on Social Security. 

The trouble with that is that those taxes help fund the program.

Speaking of unfair things.

Minority groups die younger so disproportionately never live to claim a penny after paying in for decades.

[Jingthing]

To clarify 

Trump's promise was popular but bad policy.

The republican congress not Trump is working on an alternative policy that is better.

There is no perfect policy possible in human affairs  

[Jingthing]

4 hours ago, TheAppletons said:

 

  According to ssa.gov, approx 56% of beneficiary families will pay tax on their benefits.  

 

  https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/research-summaries/income-taxes-on-benefits.html

Thanks for the correction.

It doesn't change the fundamental situation at all except for number of people impacted.

Relatively lower income people already pay no.tax on SS.

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

The trouble with that is that those taxes help fund the program.

Speaking of unfair things.

Minority groups die younger so disproportionately never live to claim a penny after paying in for decades.

Essentially the tax on SS benefits makes the SS program slightly more progressive in that the taxpayers with lower incomes get to keep more of their benefits than those with higher incomes.

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, Mike_Hunt said:

There should be no taxes on Social Security. 

When you pay the FICA taxes that fund SS.... you don't pay tax on what essentially are the premiums that fund your retirement benefits.  The money that employed people pay into SS Trust funds was not taxed when earned.  All my FICA taxes came from self-employment but I'm sure that employers also don't pay income tax on the 50% of the FICA taxes that they send to the government on behalf of the employees.

[John Drake]

Big Beautiful Bill. Why does everything Trump creates sound gauche, vulgar, and childish?

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, John Drake said:

Big Beautiful Bill. Why does everything Trump creates sound gauche, vulgar, and childish?

He's crap on just about everything else, but he is a genius marketer and propagandist. Fitting for a corrupt cult leader.

[gamb00ler]

1 hour ago, John Drake said:

Big Beautiful Bill. Why does everything Trump creates sound gauche, vulgar, and childish?

He knows who he's talking to.

[John Drake]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

He's crap on just about everything else, but he is a genius marketer and propagandist. Fitting for a corrupt cult leader.

 

Like the $100K Chinese made watches he sold the license to use his name on. Sleaze just oozes out of everything this slug does.