Posts tagged ‘Taxes’
Arizona’s largest utility company is seeking permission to cut rates to its more than one million customers as a result of the Republican tax reform bill passed last month. The public corporation joined one of New England largest providers — serving liberal Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s Massachusetts — in announcing it will do the same.
The news came as Walmart became another of a plethora of companies that will pay $1,000 bonuses and other benefits to its employees due to the windfall it will reap as a result of the corporate tax rate being lowered from 35 percent to 21 percent.
The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Arizona Power Service is seeking permission from regulators to cut bills by $119 million a year, effective on Feb. 1. Residential customers will see their monthly decrease by an average of $4.68 per month.
APS said more cuts could follow once the tax bill’s effects become more clear, according to the AP.
Meanwhile, the Massachusetts-based utility Eversource, which serves over 3 million customers, announced earlier this month it wants to lower its rates as well.
“We believe it’s important that our customers reap the benefit of a lower tax rate,” Eversource Massachusetts Electric Operations President Craig Hallstrom said in a statement, according to WBUR. “As a regulated power company our rates are based on our costs, including federal taxes, so if taxes are reduced ultimately costs are reduced and that benefits our customers.”
Eversource seeks to reduce its rates by $35.4 million in eastern Massachusetts and lower its recently approved increase for the western part of the state from $24.8 million to $16.5 million.
The Bay State’s Democrat Attorney General Maura Healey is calling on all utilities serving Massachusetts residents to do the same.
On Wednesday, Fox News host Bret Baier questioned Warren, an outspoken critic of the GOP tax plan and President Donald Trump, about the decision by Eversource to lower its rates.
“Good for them. I’m delighted to hear that,” she replied, but added that she would move to change the new tax law if Democrats take back Congress in November.
“You’ve got to take out the parts that are giveaways to big corporations that right now, the Republicans plan for hardworking families to eventually pay for,” Warren said. “It is a $1.5 trillion that the Republicans gave away to billionaires and to giant corporations.”
“I want those breaks to go to hardworking families, not to a bunch of rich folks,” she added.
At his first Cabinet meeting of 2018 on Wednesday, Trump touted the benefits Americans at all income levels are already experiencing as a result of the tax law, including some that were unforeseen.
“Since that tax cut was enacted more than one million workers have received a tax cut bonus. Something that frankly no one even thought about,” he said. “We just knew a lot of good things were going to happen.”
“I must say AT&T was the first one, and they did it, $1,000 per employee,” he added. “They have hundreds of thousands of employees. And many companies followed immediately thereafter. Millions of employees in this country are getting $1,000 and more in some cases. Tax bonuses because of the tax cuts.”
He also pointed out the plan specifically targets working Americans by nearly doubling the standard deduction, making the first $12,000 earned income tax-free for individuals, and the first $24,000 for married couples. Additionally, the law doubles the child income tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000.
On Thursday, Trump tweeted out the announcement by Walmart, the nation’s largest private employer, that it was raising its U.S. minimum wage to $11 per hour and issuing a bonus of up to $1,000 to employees as a result of the lower corporate tax rates.
Before the Republican tax bill was passed, the media narrative focused on how it would only benefit the wealthy. Once it was passed (after a bit of procedural drama for good measure), that narrative went into overdrive. No matter what statistics or examples the GOP may have pointed the media toward, that was the story, and they were sticking to it. However, as our second president pointed out, facts are stubborn things — even more stubborn than media outlets are.
CBS found out the timeless sagacity of Mr. Adams’ advice the hard way.
After the tax bill passed, the network decided to run a segment that looked at how three separate American families from three different parts of the country would fare under the Republicans’ new tax plan. The original idea, one would assume, was to highlight the inequality therein.
Instead of the hit job one assumes some were looking for, however, CBS found that all three families ended up saving money.
The first profile was of Marcie George, a single mother who rents a home in Cary, North Carolina.
“It didn’t seem as they were going along like it would really affect someone like me,” George said.
An administrative assistant, George makes under $40,000 a year. “Financially, I struggle,” George said. “I live paycheck to paycheck. I make things work, I readjust and rearrange, but we do get by.”
Remember that we were told incessantly by the left that Ms. George and her child were going to be the kind of people who would get the shaft under the GOP tax plan. So, how did things end up for her? Pretty well, we’d say: over $1,300 saved, in part thanks to the child tax credit doubling.
Amber and Jason Edwards, a couple from Providence, Rhode Island, are slightly higher up the tax bracket than Ms. George is. Homeowners who are married without children, the educators took in a combined $150,000. While the Edwardses would pay taxes on $12,000 more of their income, according to CBS’ accountant, they would end up saving money based on the lower tax numbers, saving the family $650. They would also switch to the standard deduction, meaning a simpler return.
“Honestly, I’m a little surprised,” Amber Edwards said, turning to her husband. “What you had said, initially, you thought we were going to have a higher tax bill.”
And he was wrong.
Meanwhile, Melissa and Layne Lev of Fresno, California have three children and own their home and a small business. They too thought their taxes were going to be higher, although Melissa had trouble explaining why she thought this was. They make roughly $300,000. Even though they’re from a high-tax state — one where most individuals likely think that they’re going to get hit hard by the reduced state tax deductions — they ended up saving money too.
They’ll be receiving $13,000 in tax cuts, thanks to receiving child tax credits and not paying the alternative minimum tax.
Can you imagine the tears in the CBS newsroom as the results poured in? It’s like a mini-election night all over again!
So, yes, as much as this is apparently just a tax cut for the rich, everyone — the Georges, the Edwardses and the Levs — will be seeing money back thanks to tax reform. And these are hardly modern-day Vanderbilts, either, meaning this is money that’s going to be going directly back into the economy.
Talk about a Christmas present for everybody. Unless you’re part of the Democrat caucus, of course.
H/T PJ Media
Since President Donald Trump took office, there has been a marked difference in the manner in which the federal government deals with illegal immigration, both on the border and within the country.
Deportations are reportedly rising, but liberals are intent on reversing that trend and allowing as many illegals to remain lawfully in the country as long as possible, and they appear to now be using taxpayer funds to do so.
The liberal New York City-based Vera Institute of Justice just announced via a press release the formation of a new program known as the Safety and Fairness for Everyone Cities Network.
The SAFE Cities Network provides publicly-funded legal representation to both legal immigrants and illegals involved in deportation and detainment hearings at no cost to the immigrants themselves. Some localities have begun similar programs on their own already.
The program is based on a study by the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project that was conducted in one particular New York City immigration court, the results of which the Vera Institute now intends to attempt to duplicate nationwide.
That study found that immigrants facing deportation hearings had only a 4 percent success rate of avoiding deportation when representing themselves, but that their success rate was about 48 percent when they were provided with legal representation — an estimated increase of 1,100 percent.
The organization touted, “Network members come from 11 politically, economically, and ethnically diverse jurisdictions that are united in their commitment to the belief that … a crucial way to keep our communities safe is to ensure legal representation for those whose future depends on it.”
Except that the 11 Network members aren’t exactly as “politically” diverse as the Vera Institute would have the public believe. Just check out the list of participating jurisdictions and see if you can spot the one thing they all have in common.
The 11 Network members are: Atlanta, GA; Austin, TX; Baltimore, MD; Chicago, IL; Columbus, OH; Dane County, WI; Oakland/Alameda County, CA; Prince George’s County, MD; Sacramento, CA; San Antonio, TX; and Santa Ana, CA.
If you noticed that all of those cities and/or counties are liberal-dominated and Democrat-controlled, even if they are in a “red” state, then you would be correct.
The Vera Institute proudly proclaimed that under their initiative, “[Eleven] jurisdictions are providing funding for trained legal service providers to represent immigrants facing deportation proceedings supplemented by a catalyst grant administered by Vera.”
What that means is that Vera provided some private funding up front to start the program, but that participant jurisdictions will continue the program with taxpayer dollars.
Were this initiative to be completely funded by private dollars, we would have no qualms with it whatsoever, as it would be nothing more than liberals putting their money where their mouths are and funding a venture to protect illegals by themselves. But this program will utilize taxpayer money, funds that will inevitably come from individuals vehemently opposed to the program who will nevertheless be paying for it. That is not right.
Furthermore, can we expect liberal organizations like the Vera Institute to formulate similar programs using taxpayer funding to provide for the “free” legal defense of American citizens facing hearings for violations of gun or tax laws or other government regulations? After all, wouldn’t that be “fair” to everyone?
We highly doubt it.
FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved controversial nuclear deal with Moscow
Reported By John Solomon and Alison Spann | 10/17/17 06:00 AM ED
URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/corporate-tax-cut-will-raise-middle-class-wages/?
Advertisement – story continues below
A study released Monday by Kevin Hassett, President Donald Trump’s chief economist, gives a boost to Trump’s proposed corporate tax cut. The study shows that if the tax cut is implemented, the average family could see an income boost in the thousands of dollars.
The tax cut would lower the current rate of 35 percent to 20 percent. Based on “conservative estimates,” this decrease would boost the average household income by $4,000, the paper said. But more “moderate estimates” reveal increases of $9,000 per family.
“Put simply, capital deepening, which brings additional returns to the owners of capital, brings substantial returns to workers as well,” said the paper, which studied evidence from other countries that have lowered their corporate tax rates.
But Democrats have disapproved of Trump’s proposed tax cut from the start. They believe it will not benefit ordinary families, but only business themselves.
The new study will allow Republicans to offer a rebuttal.
Hassett, the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, insists that American families would benefit the most from significantly lower corporate tax rates, more so than the companies themselves.
Advertisement – story continues below
“America’s broken corporate tax system creates incentives for firms to hold their money outside of our borders,” Hassett told reporters on Sunday, according to the Washington Examiner. “When firms hold their money overseas rather than invest them in America, they’re holding down the productivity of the American economy and the wages of American workers.”
The United States has one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, leading many companies to keep their profits abroad in lower-tax countries to avoid significant tax hits back home.
By cutting the tax rate, the idea is that companies would then invest more within the United States. This would cause a boost in productivity throughout the country.
This productivity would then boost wages, according to Hassett’s study.
“More assets like machines let workers produce more, and when workers can produce more, businesses can afford to pay their workers more,” Hassett said, as reported by The Hill.
But some economists and tax policy experts have voiced their concerns about the tax cut directly benefiting workers. Although they agree this would attract companies to invest more in the United States economy, they cannot predict how much money will bring back home. There is also concern over what corporations will do with their tax savings.
Trump announced his tax proposal during a September a speech in Indianapolis. Calling it a “revolutionary change,” he said it would boost wages to “levels that you haven’t seen in many years,” according to The New York Times.