How Trump could impose his massive tax increase w/o Congress
-
I made the much under-discussed point that, while Harris’ bad economic ideas would require Congressional approval, Trump could foist his on us more or less at will. Here’s how.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/01/trump-universal-tariff-threat-00176746
-
-
You and I would pay far more with the tariffs than with the expiration of the tax cuts give that we are individuals not corporations. I would in fact be a net beneficiary of the expiration since I’d get SaLT deduction back.
-
The above is moot because, again, congress is involved. It’ll be some sort of bipartisan compromise regardless of who wins. Again contrast that with the huge consumption tax Trump has proposed for all of us. He can implement it at will.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
-
So Trump proposes tariffs that the consumer has some choice in by deciding to purchase the goods or not. Kamala, on the other hand, will let the current tax rates expire (requiring no Congressional approval) resulting in an effective tax increase to 80%of taxpayers with no choice or control. And the increase in corporate taxes will impact consumers as much as the proposed tariffs.
-
-
You and I would pay far more with the tariffs than with the expiration of the tax cuts give that we are individuals not corporations. I would in fact be a net beneficiary of the expiration since I’d get SaLT deduction back.
-
The above is moot because, again, congress is involved. It’ll be some sort of bipartisan compromise regardless of who wins. Again contrast that with the huge consumption tax Trump has proposed for all of us. He can implement it at will.
@jon-nyc said in How Trump could impose his massive tax increase w/o Congress:
- The above is moot because, again, congress is involved. It’ll be some sort of bipartisan compromise regardless of who wins. Again contrast that with the huge consumption tax Trump has proposed for all of us. He can implement it at will.
Compromise is not necessary on her part. Any effort to extend the cuts by Congress could simply be vetoed. If the R’s take Congress, it will not be a supermajority.
And a 10% tariff on foreign made goods vs a 14% increase in Corporate Tax Rate? Which costs the consumer more.
-
-
By far and away the tariffs, even without the effects of retaliatory tariffs on exports, which would come as surely as night follows day. The corporate tax rate is just on profits. The tariffs are above the line.
And in practice there will be a bipartisan compromise in tax cut extension because most to all democrats want to keep some parts of it, which will require a new bill, which will require both parties.
I stand by the original post.
-
But there are positive effects in imposing tariffs.
- It helps to keep other countries from engaging in deceptive trade practices. Dumping steel, for example.
- For strategic industries, it assures that some very important components are manufactured in the U.S. and not subject to supply chain disruptions by potentially hostile nations.
-
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/goldman-sachs-sees-biggest-boost-us-economy-harris-win-2024-09-04/
U.S. economic growth would likely get the biggest boost in the coming two years from the Democrats, headed by Kamala Harris, winning the White House and Congress in this November's elections, according to Goldman Sachs.
Under a Republican sweep, or even with a divided government led by Donald Trump, economic output would take a hit next year, mostly from increased tariffs on imports and tighter immigration policies, Goldman said in a note late on Tuesday.
and
Under Harris, job growth would be 10,000 a month higher than if Trump wins with a divided government, and 30,000 higher than with a Republican sweep, Goldman estimates.
A Trump win would likely led to increased tariffs on auto imports from China, Mexico and the European Union that would raise core inflation, Goldman says.
and
The Goldman Sachs economists are not alone in their assessment about Trump’s policies. In June, a group of 16 Nobel Prize laureates wrote an open letter saying they are “deeply concerned” about the risks a second Donald Trump presidency would have for the U.S. economy.
They said that Trump returning to the White House would threaten the stability of relationships with other countries and the United States’ global standing. The economists called political certainty one of “the most important determinants of economic success.”
as @jon-nyc points out
And the Tax Foundation last month estimated that if Trump imposes the 10% universal and 60% Chinese tariffs, they would be met “with in-kind retaliation from all trading partners” and “would more than offset the entire benefit of the major tax cuts for economic output and jobs, resulting in a net loss for the US economy.”
-
Sure am glad to read this analysis coming from an organization that has absolutely no history of manipulating data, the markets, and the public. That has never been in trouble for illegal shorting of various bonds and stocks and has never had extremely close relationships with dictatorial 3rd world governments.
