Government Tax Plan Will Be Good For Business

[Michael]

In order to get Senator Rubio's vote on the new tax bill, the language included tax breaks for families that use childcare. Increasing the refundability of the Child Tax Credit from 55% to 70%. If it passes, this expansion will be good for daycare/childcare businesses.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/15/us/politics/republican-tax-bill.html

Republicans’ $1.5 Trillion Tax Plan Appears on Track to Pass Next Week
"One of the biggest changes came on Friday, when lawmakers agreed to a demand by Mr. Rubio to expand the child tax credit by allowing families who owe no federal income taxes to still claim up to $1,400 of the $2,000 child tax credit, up from $1,100 in the original version. But that change was offset by limiting the bill’s benefits to some higher-income families, and by restricting it to children age 16 and below, down from 17 and below in the Senate bill. The net result was a credit that is more lucrative for lower-income earners but actually slightly less costly than the Senate bill."

[Sunchimes]

How?

I'm not trying to argue, but I don't see how this will help me. I don't have kids at home. It isn't going to make parents say, "Hmm, I think I will get a job and find daycare since they raised the child care credit." I'm almost 65, I think it is going to hurt us in ways I can't even begin to predict.

[Michael]

I'm not trying to argue, but I don't see how this will help me. I don't have kids at home. It isn't going to make parents say, "Hmm, I think I will get a job and find daycare since they raised the child care credit." I'm almost 65, I think it is going to hurt us in ways I can't even begin to predict.

It would seem that parents would have more money and options to spend on their childcare. I guess we will see if more businesses have an uptick on income as it plays out in the future.

[Josiegirl]

I haven't read much about the upcoming tax changes, ok, I haven't read any of it.
What other changes are happening that will affect us? Lower middle class, to be exact.

[Cat Herder]

Where will this tax break be funded from, though? :confused:

IME, giving young parents a break that equates to more available income does not change their priorities. How many of us have given free childcare to help out a family "in need" only to have them buy big screen TV's, gaming stations or I-Phones then post about it on Facebook? I have.

I don't think this will trickle to childcare providers. Maybe it will benefit the retail and service industry as a whole. That may benefit our local economy by association. Unless, of course, the source of the funding comes from our seniors of other groups who actually put in the hard work and deserve it.

[Michael]

Where will this tax break be funded from, though? :confused:

IME, giving young parents a break that equates to more available income does not change their priorities. How many of us have given free childcare to help out a family "in need" only to have them buy big screen TV's, gaming stations or I-Phones then post about it on Facebook? I have.

I don't think this will trickle to childcare providers. Maybe it will benefit the retail and service industry as a whole. That may benefit our local economy by association. Unless, of course, the source of the funding comes from our seniors of other groups who actually put in the hard work and deserve it.

This would be better answered by Tom Copeland or your accountant. In order to get the deduction, a parent would need to spend the money on childcare. Parents would have to spend money in order to get the money back. It offers parents the ability to now spend more on the childcare, since they can deduct more. That’s how I am reading it.

How we pay for it or any expenditure is in the model that is put forth by Congress. We added a extra $10 trillion to our debt the last eight years. You can decide if it was well spent or not. Our GDP was pretty stagnant during that time around 2 % per year. Every point that it goes up, adds $3 trillion into the economy per year (says Wilbur Ross, current United States Secretary of Commerce.). We were pretty well tapped out with $20 trillion in debt but with the current GDP rising per quarter, it should allow for more headroom to borrow and spend. The coming budget bill has to still be approved but I think the added money flowing into the economy will give Congress reason to approve and pass it.

GDP (Gross Domestic Product) Defined: https://www.thebalance.com/component...-chart-3306015

http://www.bushcenter.org/publications/articles/2013/03/what-4-growth-would-mean-for-america.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/26/tax-reform-wilbur-ross-sees-1-percent-gdp-jump.html

[Tigerlilly]

Well it might have some small benefits but the larger picture is that this is not good for the poor and benefits the wealthy by a large margin. I am not into kicking people when they are down.

[hwichlaz]

This hurts me. Kids suddenly become VERY expensive at 16. We should still be getting that tax credit...it should have been expanded until 18, not reduced to 16.

[nannyde]

I'm very anxious to hear Tom Copeland's view of it once he gets his highly experienced in child care issues paws on the final bill.

I'm particularly interested in deductions. Now that my son is nearly 18, I will be back to single instead of single head of household. I hope we are still able to deduct time space, payroll, and goods as we have in the past.

I agree the child tax credit should have extended to 18 instead of increasing the existing credit. They are way more expensive as they get older (and more annoying which we should be compensated for in some fashion).

[daycarediva]

I'm very anxious to hear Tom Copeland's view of it once he gets his highly experienced in child care issues paws on the final bill.

I'm particularly interested in deductions. Now that my son is nearly 18, I will be back to single instead of single head of household. I hope we are still able to deduct time space, payroll, and goods as we have in the past.

I agree the child tax credit should have extended to 18 instead of increasing the existing credit. They are way more expensive as they get older (and more annoying which we should be compensated for in some fashion).

:: hear hear!

Seriously, we have two kids left for the child tax credit and pay out the wazoo in taxes (both self employed, and our gross puts us in a higher tax bracket)

I would like to see special needs kids have a higher deduction, for instance, and for LIFE, if they're 100% disabled and will always be a dependent (like my 16 year old son)

[Cat Herder]

This would be better answered by Tom Copeland or your accountant. In order to get the deduction, a parent would need to spend the money on childcare. Parents would have to spend money in order to get the money back. It offers parents the ability to now spend more on the childcare, since they can deduct more. That’s how I am reading it.

Thanks That makes more sense.

[mommyneedsadayoff]

From what I read, it should benefit everyone, because it reduces rates. Of course, wealthier will be benefited more, because they pay more taxes, but I think it reduces the tax burden on the middle class as well, so hopefully everyone gets to keep more of the money they have earned.

As far as paying for it, they need to start managing things more efficiently, so our tax money goes farther. Although, I have read that our tax money actually just goes to pay the interest on our debt at this point, so it's not really aiding social programs or helping to fund the hundreds programs we have now, but regardless, the amount of money wasted is mind boggling. The defense budget is a huge portion of funds that are wasted and misused. Trillions have been spent on war and it looks to have no end in sight. There are numerous dept of the government that have been proven to be highly inefficient, yet they remain operating as usual. (The TSA is one recent one that comes to mind).

All in all, though, I wanted a reduce rate and the Obama care mandate to be gone, but until the tax code is simplified to the point of being like 5 pages ::, it's all kind of smoke and mirrors. You think you are saving, but you are paying more somewhere else, because I really don't think our government can afford to let us keep more of our own money.

[midaycare]

I'm a big fan of trickle down economics, I do think it works. Lowering the cost to do business in America was essential to make us competitive in the global market.

The thing about this kind of plan is it will take time to see how it affects us.

[Tigerlilly]

I'm a big fan of trickle down economics, I do think it works. Lowering the cost to do business in America was essential to make us competitive in the global market.

The thing about this kind of plan is it will take time to see how it affects us.

We'll, you're wrong. Trickle down did not work in the 80's under Reagan and was a miserable failure under Bush. The wealthy are a very small group of people. They do not have the purchasing power to grow or stabilize an economy. It doesn't matter how much money they have to put towards their businesses. If buyers do not have the money to buy goods and services companies do not grow.

[midaycare]

We'll, you're wrong. Trickle down did not work in the 80's under Reagan and was a miserable failure under Bush. The wealthy are a very small group of people. They do not have the purchasing power to grow or stabilize an economy. It doesn't matter how much money they have to put towards their businesses. If buyers do not have the money to buy goods and services companies do not grow.

Okay. I'm out of the conversation here. In my opinion it works.

I realize I'm a conservative (that doesn't mean Republican) and I enjoy the heck out of Trump. That doesn't make my opinions popular with many in this group, but it doesn't make me wrong.

I would spend the time, effort, and energy to back up my statements, but to what purpose? You don't sound like you're in the mood to have a kind debate.

This forum is for kind support of others.