Government Tax Plan Will Be Good For Business

[Miss A]

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.

I see CatHearders POV, and while this may seem like a logical thought process regarding $$, many low income families will not use it to their benefit.

I termed a family like this. They received their childcare credit, used a portion to pay their bills, but then instead of putting the rest into savings to pay future bills, they blew it. Big screen Tv's, New phones, name brand clothing for themselves, you name it. Then, August rolled around, and surprise surprise the family could not afford to pay their bills, they had fallen behind on loan payments for items they purchased with their tax money.

I just see this as a continuing cycle, one that having more expendable income at the end of the year will not solve.

[Michael]

I see CatHearders POV, and while this may seem like a logical thought process regarding $$, many low income families will not use it to their benefit.

I termed a family like this. They received their childcare credit, used a portion to pay their bills, but then instead of putting the rest into savings to pay future bills, they blew it. Big screen Tv's, New phones, name brand clothing for themselves, you name it. Then, August rolled around, and surprise surprise the family could not afford to pay their bills, they had fallen behind on loan payments for items they purchased with their tax money.

I just see this as a continuing cycle, one that having more expendable income at the end of the year will not solve.

I would imagine most "low income" families are on some type of subsidy anyway and would never have benefited from this provision.

Our only way of finding out if it helps will be in the way our businesses and livelihoods advance or not in the coming months and years. Just like the Legislative and Executive branches. If our lives are not better in 4 years, we get to change what is not working. If they pass this bill, at least we get to see if it works.

[TomCopeland]

New tax bill

I'm waiting for Congress to pass the bill before I write about it. I'll be posting an article about it shortly thereafter and how it affects family child care.

[daycarediva]

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.

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.

As a fellow trump supporter, I will stand up for you here. Trickle down economics WOULD work. Yes, they reduce the federal budget, but they have a multiplier effect on economic growth. Tax cuts put money back in business owners pockets- which they spend, right back into the economy. My dad owned a construction company and the 80's/under Reagan, he had over 100 employees and they had great benefits, solely because of his tax cuts. When those were rescinded, he had to let employees go.

It's not just little ole college educated, upper middle class, minority, small business owning trump supporters like me who agree- many economists concur.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-calls-it-fairy-dust-trickle-down-does-work-economist-art-laffer-says

I live in NY, and my husband and I are both small business owners. Nothing screams STALLED GROWTH more than New York State. Our businesses are so over taxed it's easier to just move out of state, or shut down, or hire a better accountant to get more tax loopholes than it is to hire more employees and advance our businesses. We tend to hoard money, not spend it, because the tax breaks aren't there and we always end up paying in, to both the state and the IRS, in addition to our quarterly tax bills- which alone could easily support a family of 4.

[daycarediva]

I would imagine most "low income" families are on some type of subsidy anyway and would never have benefited from this provision.

Our only way of finding out if it helps will be in the way our businesses and livelihoods advance or not in the coming months and years. Just like the Legislative and Executive branches. If our lives are not better in 4 years, we get to change what is not working. If they pass this bill, at least we get to see if it works.

Depends on the availability of subsidy. I have two families enrolled who certainly qualify- both work FT, but right around minimum wage. After childcare, they're scraping by. The waiting lists in our state are pretty harsh right now.

[Cat Herder]

I would imagine most "low income" families are on some type of subsidy anyway and would never have benefited from this provision.

I was referring to the working poor, like I was as a young parent, who make just enough to not be eligible for subsidy. Due to our own life choices. I have no experience of receiving subsidies or help finding resources in my youth. It led me to try harder, dig deeper. I also did not always make the best decisions at that age (18-25) . My post was not so much intended to be judgement as it is what I view as truth from experience. From my perspective.

All that to say I'd like to see more help for our seniors. A group I do not belong to, btw. :: That was my intent.

[Cat Herder]

Joint filers

12 percent: $19,050 to $77,400
22 percent: $77,400 to $165,000

[CityGarden]

I am not seeing any benefits from the plan to me (yet)..... I am waiting on others in this field like Tom to chime in.

• I am hopeful my business deductions will be the same or better as I cannot afford to not have those and stay in this business.
  
• I am also hopeful removing the individual mandate will not cause my insurance premiums to sky rockets. I already felt the increase in premiums under the ACA and do not see any incentive to insurance companies to reduce those premiums based on this tax bill. Health insurance is large monthly expense for the middle class.
  
• I am concerned about eliminating the deduction for state and local income taxes - I'm in California so one of the highest rates in the nation I believe. This can mean a great deal of money for me.
  
• Lastly I am concerned about repeal of several tax exemptions and deductions for higher education. To reach my career and professional goals I will need to get my Master's and possibly higher. Given the high cost of those programs I'm concerned...

I personally would be more supportive of taxes IF I felt they contributed to me personally (i.e. universal health care, high quality free public education Kindergarten - Phd, etc.). We have been a war my entire life, Sept. 11th, mass shootings by Americans on US soil, mass incarceration, outside countries hacking on US companies (Sony, etc.) and on our election process --- sorry but I do not feel "protected" to justify our massive defense spending.

Further, I do not understand why the Republicans would not be the party pushing for universal heath care --- based on my study of history in the past they would have been the party most likely to back something like it.

[Michael]

I am not seeing any benefits from the plan to me (yet)..... I am waiting on others in this field like Tom to chime in.

I am also hopeful removing the individual mandate will not cause my insurance premiums to sky rockets.

Yes, it will be interesting to hear what Tom says. He understands the childcare field and how tax deductions work in our favor.

Health insurance should be as easy as car insurance. Without the mandate you could choose catastrophic insurance and just pay for regular medicals bills yourself. That is what I have been doing anyways with the high deductible for insurance that I couldn't use. My high cost insurance never paid for anything. Currently in California, it is against the law to buy catastrophic insurance without having standard health insurance.

How about I just choose the insurance that I need. I don't need to pay for mammograms but I'm currently covered for them. As a a matter of fact, I don't go to doctors or take medication. I spend a fortune though on quality foods. I want to spend my money on what I need. I only pay a few thousand dollars on all my cars and I am covered to the max and can include a million dollar umbrella policy for a few extra hundred dollars. That is how health insurance should be.

I am concerned about eliminating the deduction for state and local income taxes - I'm in California so one of the highest rates in the nation I believe. This can mean a great deal of money for me.

Well you are right there. California along with states like New York and New Jersey are going to get hit. I believe its political payback to some extent in order to "feel the pain" of liberal policies and government in those states.

Further, I do not understand why the Republicans would not be the party pushing for universal heath care --- based on my study of history in the past they would have been the party most likely to back something like it.

Its too expensive. (BernieCare would cost roughly $13.8 trillion over its first decade of operation). If the government could keep the GDP at 4% or higher per year and get the federal deficit to single digits, it could be possible but with pharma and the medical fields charging such high costs, it makes it improbable IMO. I would rather everyone have free preventive care. That would be a medical insurance in itself.

[CityGarden]

Yes, it will be interesting to hear what Tom says. He understands the childcare field and how tax deductions work in our favor.

Health insurance should be as easy as car insurance. Without the mandate you could choose catastrophic insurance and just pay for regular medicals bills yourself. That is what I have been doing anyways with the high deductible for insurance that I couldn't use. My high cost insurance never paid for anything. Currently in California, it is against the law to buy catastrophic insurance without having standard health insurance.

How about I just choose the insurance that I need. I don't need to pay for mammograms but I'm currently covered for them. As a a matter of fact, I don't go to doctors or take medication. I spend a fortune though on quality foods. I want to spend my money on what I need. I only pay a few thousand dollars on all my cars and I am covered to the max and can include a million dollar umbrella policy for a few extra hundred dollars. That is how health insurance should be.

I have a SA child with allergies and I need full coverage but it should not need to cost me so much money. I can insure a high end car full coverage for less than I can insure my daughter and myself for health care ---- that is a shame. Sadly I make too much to get entitlements and too little to not feel the sting financially.

Well you are right there. California along with states like New York and New Jersey are going to get hit. I believe its political payback to some extent in order to "feel the pain" of liberal policies and government in those states.

Yes I do feel like perhaps we are being punished like naughty children, but I was trying to not be political in my post. Just sharing my concerns on the tax aspect.

Its too expensive. (BernieCare would cost roughly $13.8 trillion over its first decade of operation). If the government could keep the GDP at 4% or higher per year and get the federal deficit to single digits, it could be possible but with pharma and the medical fields charging such high costs, it makes it improbable IMO. I would rather everyone have free preventive care. That would be a medical insurance in itself.

I was not saying BernieCare (and honestly I don't know what that was... ) I am talking way prior to the ACA, prior to the Clinton's attempt at health care.... it just seemed like an initiative the Republicans would have owned in the past. Also "too expensive" is relative.... this tax bill shows the government is okay with the risk of expanding the debt, the amount of defense spending, etc. it is all a matter of priorities.

But I am going to try to remain hopeful...

[Mom2Two]

Does anyone know if the credit is refundable from business taxes owed? So many deductions don't apply to business taxes.

[Michael]

Does anyone know if the credit is refundable from business taxes owed? So many deductions don't apply to business taxes.

Tom Copeland is waiting for the tax bill to be signed and released to the public. He will then write an article and give us some answers.

[TomCopeland]

Health insurance

Yes, it will be interesting to hear what Tom says. He understands the childcare field and how tax deductions work in our favor.

Health insurance should be as easy as car insurance. Without the mandate you could choose catastrophic insurance and just pay for regular medicals bills yourself. That is what I have been doing anyways with the high deductible for insurance that I couldn't use. My high cost insurance never paid for anything. Currently in California, it is against the law to buy catastrophic insurance without having standard health insurance.

How about I just choose the insurance that I need. I don't need to pay for mammograms but I'm currently covered for them. As a a matter of fact, I don't go to doctors or take medication. I spend a fortune though on quality foods. I want to spend my money on what I need. I only pay a few thousand dollars on all my cars and I am covered to the max and can include a million dollar umbrella policy for a few extra hundred dollars. That is how health insurance should be.



Well you are right there. California along with states like New York and New Jersey are going to get hit. I believe its political payback to some extent in order to "feel the pain" of liberal policies and government in those states.



Its too expensive. (BernieCare would cost roughly $13.8 trillion over its first decade of operation). If the government could keep the GDP at 4% or higher per year and get the federal deficit to single digits, it could be possible but with pharma and the medical fields charging such high costs, it makes it improbable IMO. I would rather everyone have free preventive care. That would be a medical insurance in itself.

The problem with you saying that you only want to buy the type of health insurance you want is that you don't know what's going to happen to your health in the future. So, you buy a cheap policy now because your health is good, but next year you get a serious illness that will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Secondly, car insurance is not like health insurance. Yes, an umbrella policy will cover you for most car accidents, but there is no similar policy for health insurance because of the unknowable high cost of medical expenses. That's the point of requiring everyone to get basic health insurance. The healthly subsidize the sick. Then when the healthy get sick, they know that they will be covered.

And what about those, under the new law, choose not to be insured at all because the mandate is gone. When they get sick, who will pay? We all will pay. And it will be more expensive because the uninsured are less likely to seek preventative care and this will cost more in the long run.

Isn't it better that we all pay in for insurance knowing that we may not need every aspect of the coverage, but knowing that everyone will be covered. When everyone is paying something for insurance, the premiums are lower for all of us.

[Michael]

The problem with you saying that you only want to buy the type of health insurance you want is that you don't know what's going to happen to your health in the future.

Yes, that is why I have insurance. I don't go cheap on my car premiums either but I pay far less than my health insurance. One of my cars alone was covered in 2 accident for over $140k. I only pay $2000 a year on that car and my insurance company has not dropped me. Health insurance in this country is broken, even with the ACA.

That's the point of requiring everyone to get basic health insurance. The healthy subsidize the sick. Then when the healthy get sick, they know that they will be covered.

I understand the concept but it doesn't and hasn't worked, just ask the people that can't pay the high premiums for their $10k deductible insurance.

There are many things "Americans" can do to make our health better. When I was younger, I use to be on food stamps and welfare. It was embarrassing when, at the checkout counter, they had to tear off the food stamps in front of everyone. These days those stamps are replaced by a subsidized EBT card. Many of the people that I see using these cards are buying the most destructive foods for their bodies. Not only will it make them less healthy, but they are going to be worse off as they get older unless they change their lifestyle. The expense for bad personal health management only compounds over time. This is another part of our failed health-care system. If people can't manage their health, there is not enough money in the world to take care of them. Likewise, the unhealthy will be less likely to contribute to paying those costs.

And what about those, under the new law, choose not to be insured at all because the mandate is gone. When they get sick, who will pay? We all will pay. And it will be more expensive because the uninsured are less likely to seek preventative care and this will cost more in the long run.

Medical and pharmaceutical costs are out of control. One of the things I actually liked about paying my medical costs myself, was being able to negotiate that cost with different doctors. They wanted my cash and would charge me less in order to get immediately paid. That is empowering but in essence I only have catastrophic insurance covering me while my insurance premium is paying for someone else's insurance.

There should be cross-state competition, cross-country medication competition. There could be many ways to manage the costs better. Likewise, with over $20 trillion in debt, we can't afford to insure everyone totally, but we should totally insure everyone with preventative care. Whereas everyone gets basic care along with health/food/lifestyle education and management. Preconditions must be covered, but if younger citizens don't want full coverage or no coverage, that should be their choice with the consequences. Catastrophic insurance should be a stand-alone plan and not predicated on high deductibles and as a secondary insurance.

Isn't it better that we all pay in for insurance knowing that we may not need every aspect of the coverage, but knowing that everyone will be covered. When everyone is paying something for insurance, the premiums are lower for all of us.

Being benevolent is the American way, but as Americans, we get to try new policies to see if they work or not. Currently, I think those Americans that have their preconditions covered and that had never had health insurance and now do, are very happy. But we can't kill the economy over it. Then everyone loses. My hope is that the US can raise its GDP to 4% or more per year and in turn, create more tax revenue for the government. That will allow for universal health care and free college for all that want it. It comes down to money, which may seem insensitive but is the reality.

[TomCopeland]

Health insurance

Yes, that is why I have insurance. I don't go cheap on my car premiums either but I pay far less than my health insurance. One of my cars alone was covered in 2 accident for over $140k. I only pay $2000 a year on that car and my insurance company has not dropped me. Health insurance in this country is broken, even with the ACA.



I understand the concept but it doesn't and hasn't worked, just ask the people that can't pay the high premiums for their $10k deductible insurance.

There are many things "Americans" can do to make our health better. When I was younger, I use to be on food stamps and welfare. It was embarrassing when, at the checkout counter, they had to tear off the food stamps in front of everyone. These days those stamps are replaced by a subsidized EBT card. Many of the people that I see using these cards are buying the most destructive foods for their bodies. Not only will it make them less healthy, but they are going to be worse off as they get older unless they change their lifestyle. The expense for bad personal health management only compounds over time. This is another part of our failed health-care system. If people can't manage their health, there is not enough money in the world to take care of them. Likewise, the unhealthy will be less likely to contribute to paying those costs.



Medical and pharmaceutical costs are out of control. One of the things I actually liked about paying my medical costs myself, was being able to negotiate that cost with different doctors. They wanted my cash and would charge me less in order to get immediately paid. That is empowering but in essence I only have catastrophic insurance covering me while my insurance premium is paying for someone else's insurance.

There should be cross-state competition, cross-country medication competition. There could be many ways to manage the costs better. Likewise, with over $20 trillion in debt, we can't afford to insure everyone totally, but we should totally insure everyone with preventative care. Whereas everyone gets basic care along with health/food/lifestyle education and management. Preconditions must be covered, but if younger citizens don't want full coverage or no coverage, that should be their choice with the consequences. Catastrophic insurance should be a stand-alone plan and not predicated on high deductibles and as a secondary insurance.



Being benevolent is the American way, but as Americans, we get to try new policies to see if they work or not. Currently, I think those Americans that have their preconditions covered and that had never had health insurance and now do, are very happy. But we can't kill the economy over it. Then everyone loses. My hope is that the US can raise its GDP to 4% or more per year and in turn, create more tax revenue for the government. That will allow for universal health care and free college for all that want it. It comes down to money, which may seem insensitive but is the reality.

Our health care system is in much better shape than it was before the ACA. You fail to acknowledge all the positives of the ACA. Insurance premiums have risen at a slower rate than before the law. Health outcomes are better. People are using preventative care. Bankruptcies because of medical costs are a thing of the past. However, things can and should be improved. But, our country was worse off health wise before the ACA. Surely we can agree on that. For some people they do pay much more for health insurance now, than before, but is the exception, not the rule.

However, to focus on the lifestyles of some poor people is scapegoating. That's not what is driving up health care costs or raising insurance premiums. We certainly can afford to insure everyone if we change our nation's priorities. Dismantling the ACA will increase health care costs even more. To say that people should have the choice of whether or not to get health insurance and then suffer the consequences if they can't pay for their medical expenses is a terrible moral position to take. A twenty-one year old gets cancer and we tell her you're on your own? How about the one month old child who needs hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical treatments? Do we tell her parent she is out of luck because he parents didn't get insurance? The ACA is not bankrupting our economy.

There are ways to improve our health care system - for sure. Let's not leave people behind when we improve it.