On Sunday, U.S. President Donald Trump announced the possibility that, once the tariffs take effect, there could be a reduction or elimination of income taxes for individuals earning less than US$200,000 a year.

“When the tariffs cut in, many people’s income taxes will be substantially reduced, maybe even eliminated entirely. Focus will be on those earning less than $200,000 a year,” the Republican president wrote today on his social media platform, Truth Social.

“Also, massive numbers of jobs are already being created, with new plants and factories currently being built or planned,” he added.

“It will be a bonanza for America!!! The External Revenue Service is happening!!!” the U.S. President concluded.

This week, a coalition of twelve states, led by the attorneys general of Oregon and Arizona, filed a lawsuit seeking to block the tariffs imposed by Trump, arguing that the tariffs are “illegal.”

The lawsuit aims to block the imposition of a 145% tariff on most products from China and a 25% tariff on most products from Canada and Mexico, important trading partners of the plaintiff states.

It also challenges the 10% tariffs on most products imported from the rest of the world, as well as the Trump’s plan to raise tariffs on imports from an additional 46 trading partners starting on July 9.

  • dead [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is not the first time he has said this. He was saying this since before he was elected if I recall correctly.

    His plan is not getting rid of taxes. His plan is shifting taxes from income tax to sales taxes (tariffs). His plan is to further shift the tax burden onto working people. Corporation owners will offload their tax burden by including the cost of the sales taxes into the cost of the product. It will be even more difficult to tax capitalists.

    This could lead to complete government collapse.

    Income tax is not a bad thing. You should be getting services in return for the taxes that you pay.

    • WizardOfLoneliness [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      if the government is in control of the magic money printer then idk i would argue that yes not only are income taxes unnecessary and bad but also the only real point they end up serving is as pointless shit for people to argue over. It’s the Republican version of the Democrats holding the save abortion football like we’re Charlie brown. Oh, better vote for us, we’ll lower your tax burden, and if we don’t well The Democrat Party ™ will definitely raise them!

      also maybe it’s from a fever dream but i’m pretty sure i read a pretty convincing thing about how money taxes really originated to begin with to integrate soldiers into the economy i.e. if you pay your soldiers money, that’s worthless if nobody needs money, but if you charge a tax in money- woah, all of a sudden people start wanting to feed and shelter your soldiers

      so in summary, i don’t like paying taxes

      • dead [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        2 days ago

        A heavy progressive tax is explicitly one of the things that Marx calls for in the Communist Manifesto as a prerequisite for the conditions needed for developing a Communist revolution. Countries which are run by Communist parties have income tax. What you are saying is historically incorrect and nonsensical.

        Trump is also not calling for the end of taxation of working people. Read the article. Read the article. He says that he wants to shift the tax burden. He wants to tax the working class for things that they buy. Working class people will be paying more taxes overall. He believes in some absurd concept called the External Revenue Service where he believes that he can tax labor outside of the US.

          • dead [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            I did not say that income tax in the US will lead to communism.

            Both posts by Wizard say that income tax of laborers is never justifiable. “no amount of hand waving about how the government needs to take workers at the point of labor will make it true”.

            I mention Marx talking about progressive income tax, as an example of how income tax is not only justified by Communist Theorists but also beneficial to the working class.

            A progressive tax is a tax where wealthier people pay a higher percentage of taxes than poorer people. A regressive tax is a tax where wealthier people pay a lower percentage of taxes than poorer people. Income tax in the US is a progressive tax. Relying on tariffs to fund the government would be a regressive tax. Trump wants to replace a progressive tax with a regressive tax.

            A progressive tax is good because it makes it harder for capitalists to accumulate wealth. Trump wants to eliminate income tax because it is a progressive tax and he is a capitalist.

            The trickery of Trump in this situtation is not that “he doesn’t want to eliminate income tax”. The trickery is that he is saying he only wants to eliminate income tax for people earning less than $200k, but in reality, he wants to eliminate all income tax, including for people making over $200k. Then he wants to replace income tax with a new tax (tariffs) which taxes working people at a higher percentage than capitalists.

            • StillNoLeftLeft [none/use name, she/her]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              In Finland the bourge is doing exactly this by raising the VAT, creating all sorts of new regressive taxes (like a sweet tax) and disguising it as “taking care of the national debt” which for some reason still is able to fly as an argument for the libs.

              They are currently also trying really hard to dismantle the last parts of our very high progressive income taxation which I would argue is the last thing standing behind the remaining relative equality here. A tax cut that only benefits very high earners was just announced, along with further easing on taxes for capital.

              Income equality has been quickly eroding here since the early 90s (income inequality rose in Finland faster than in any other OECD country during the late 90s to early 00s) and one key development behind this was a tax reform. Capital income tax was decided to no longer be progressive and this along with austerity measures and capital accumulation is the nail in the coffin for the welfare state. The same reform was done in Sweden and Norway around the same time.

        • motherfucker don’t tell me to read a fucking article when I said what I said, I didn’t say shit because trump said this or that or waht the fuck ever

          I don’t care what Marx said either

          “it’s nonsensical” do you think “income tax” was a think for all of history? lick my whatevr and leave me alone, nerd

      • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 days ago

        if the government is in control of the magic money printer then idk i would argue that yes not only are income taxes unnecessary and bad but also the only real point they end up serving is as pointless shit for people to argue over.

        This is just not true. A government that employs 20% of the nation’s labor is taxing 20% of the nation’s economic potential. No amount of financial hand waving about money printing vs income taxes vs sales taxes will change this at all. You’re paying for the government no matter what.

      • CptKrkIsClmbngThMntn [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        Under the view you’re expressing, taxes are necessary for a number of reasons, the two most primary being 1) giving a value to the currency in the first place, and 2) controlling inflation.

      • GoodGuyWithACat [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        also maybe it’s from a fever dream but i’m pretty sure i read a pretty convincing thing about how money taxes really originated to begin with to integrate soldiers into the economy

        That sounds like David Graeber Debt: the First 5000 Years.

  • iamjackflack@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    2 days ago

    Don’t worry you will get a tax break, but like normal everything else will skyrocket to get that saved money and more into corporate and healthcare ceo hands like always.

  • Gerudo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 days ago

    Once the tariffs take effect…

    He already said we are making billions in tariffs…so which is it?

        • spectre [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          41
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s not really true unless you are wealthy enough to have an accountant shuffle your money around for you. Most states end up around the same amount once all is said and done cause that’s how much it costs to run a state.

        • Sulv [he/him, undecided]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Yes, we pay federal income tax and state income tax. Some states have variable income based rates, some are flat. Iirc there’s some state (North Dakota maybe) that has zero state income tax for lower income people.

          Don’t get me started on how sales tax disproportionately affects lower income people.

          • Acute_Engles [he/him, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            You don’t have to tell me, been working poor my whole life but i would like to get you started because i steal other people’s words for conversations in real life so my positions sound smarter i-love-not-thinking

            • Sulv [he/him, undecided]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              I’m sure you get the gist then

              For arguments sake let’s say someone making 100k a year and someone making 50k a year both consume the same amount of necessities. Therefore they are paying the same ~10% tax on groceries, gas, clothing, household items, etc. While they both pay the same amount of sales tax, in reality, the tax burden is doubled on the 50k earner. They have half as much money but are paying the same amount of sales tax.

              Personally, I think sales tax should just be abolished, but that’s in a world where that lost tax income is coming from taxes on high earners and the wealthy.

        • invalidusernamelol [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Yeah, State income tax is reduced in some places. My federal taxes are ~$250/wk while state taxes are ~$50/wk. That’s middle of the road for state tax. I know California and NY charge a lot more, but they also get a lot of that with higher property taxes. Which I wouldn’t have to pay because I don’t own property.

          Also it’s not technically a tax, but health insurance is another $100/wk for a plan that requires me to spend $8000 out of pocket before they even consider paying for anything. If I don’t take that employer offered health insurance, I have to pay an additional tax penalty at the end of the year that goes to the health insurance companies, so it’s kinda a tax.

        • LanyrdSkynrd [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          2 days ago

          No income or sales tax in NH, but it’s not a good thing. It actually makes taxes regressive because property tax has to be so much higher to pay for the schools. People in poor communities pay sometimes 10x the property tax rate for much worse schools.

    • IHave69XiBucks@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 days ago

      Rich people basically pay 0 taxes in America, people that work a job do pay taxes they just dont get anything for it. lol

        • TrustedFeline [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 days ago

          Don’t bother trying to understand American taxes. It’s fucking insane.

          The government withholds money from your paycheck for taxes. Makes sense, right? Except in most cases, they withhold more than you actually will end up owing the government. The IRS knows ho much money you’re making, and they know how much you owe or are owed. But instead of just sending a check or bill, they make you calculate it yourself every year.

          most low income americans end up paying very little in income tax (but only if they get their ducks in a row)

        • quarrk [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Just to pile on more info. There are dozens of minor taxes levied at the federal, state, and local (usually municipal) level. In some states with a flat tax rate, these are used to make up for the lost revenue which a progressive tax would have brought in.

          You can bet that someone has considered a lemonade stand tax. That’s the level of specificity

    • Dimmer06 [he/him,comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It can vary. The effective federal income tax rate is around fifteen to twenty percent for most earners. There’s another 7.5 percent or so for federal benefits (Medicare and Social Security). State income taxes vary from zero in a few states to thirteen percent on the highest income bracket in California, but probably average out to five or six percent. Most (or all?) states require employees to cover some burden of their unemployment insurance as well. Some municipalities also have income taxes.

      Americans also usually pay taxes on their homes, cars, and sales tax.

      • regul [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        And rather than just paying taxes for health care, your employer deducts the cost from your paycheck and gives it directly to a private company, but this is not considered a tax.

    • frogbellyratbone_ [e/em/eir, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      i’m not sure what your perspective is, might be true tbh, but paying Federal taxes pisses me off because i know i pay a shit ton more than assholes who make 5-30x my salary and it all goes to the war machine instead of social programs / welfare.

      living in california making $65,000 pays ~$16,000 of income taxes. income is the bulk of tax, but additional taxes are: sales tax (~10%), 1.2% property tax, vehicle reg, gas tax, state disability insurance tax, parcel taxes, etc.

  • trinicorn [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    “possibility”. uh huh. sure.

    but as a thought experiment, if he did somehow eliminate federal income tax for that many people (and presumably financed it by some combination of printing money, shutting down major federal programs like medicaid, etc)… Would he just be god emperor for life in the minds of like 70% of americans? I guess the high would wear off pretty quick and its not a trick you can pull twice, but idk, it feels like it might win some people over. maybe enough to overcome the “but the constitution” pleas of the libs (not that it takes much he’s already almost there)

    of course if he did it by making everything cost double which seems to be what he’s proposing then I feel like people wouldn’t react positively besides the usual rubes