41–50 of 116 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The standard deduction doubling will mean that most people will be able to use a simple form rather than itemizing.
Regardless of what the standard deduction is, don't you still have to first itemize in order to figure out whether you should itemize?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These grandfather clauses irk me... if the policy is not good enough to stand on its own then it should not be policy.
Not at all. It's a recognition that the people who made long-term arrangements under the old law shouldn't be punished for that. The safer people feel making commitments, the more we can pursue things that take time to pay off, which has broad societal benefits. And in practice, laws are much harder to change if you piss off a lot of people who didn't do anything wrong but now suddenly stand to lose big. As an exampl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but for later-stage startups I can certainly imagine average employees hitting the exercise cap.
Most companies move to RSUs by the time typical employees would hit the exercise cap.
My arguments exactly mirror what he/she has said.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
there is a section in the document called "Grandfathering of Compensation Earned Prior to 2018" =)
These grandfather clauses irk me... if the policy is not good enough to stand on its own then it should not be policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These grandfather clauses irk me... if the policy is not good enough to stand on its own then it should not be policy.
New laws shouldn't, in general, be retroactive. The fact that a grandfather clause is necessary to specify that a law isn't intended to be retroactive is bothersome.
It is, therefore, the exact opposite of retroactive.
EDIT: phrasing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, it's talked about very negatively by the president because it creates a lot of extra work, both for the IRS and tax attorneys.
Surely, the fact that $31M of the $38M of tax he paid in 2005 was AMT had nothing whatsoever to do with it... https://www.marketwatch.com/story/read-this-to-see-if-you-ow...
This trend of going "whaa, but Trump!!!!!!" every time anything happens in government makes for lazy debating.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, which is sort of a shame. Frankly if you were serious about simplifying the tax code and reducing unfairness and asymmetry, you'd keep the AMT and throw out the existing income tax. But whatever: the AMT is an issue for upper middle class taxpayers, and particularly ones (like tech employees, and most particularly startup employees) who see lots of their income in big chunks like stock grants and option exercise…
> These are relatively modest tax cut bills arriving at a time where the economy is growing and deficits are shrinking, which is exactly where you'd want them. So you want to cut taxes and increase deficits during growth times? This is, of course, not just different but exactly the opposite of Keynesianism. What is it that you plan to do during recessions? Cut spending and increase taxes to close your deficit? This i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The standard deduction doubling will mean that most people will be able to use a simple form rather than itemizing.
Regardless of what the standard deduction is, don't you still have to first itemize in order to figure out whether you should itemize?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These grandfather clauses irk me... if the policy is not good enough to stand on its own then it should not be policy.
Without speaking to this particular grandfather clause, I think in general these kinds of clauses deal with the fact that a new policy, good or bad, might cause people to design their incentive structures differently, and they want to avoid screwing over people who in good faith designed their structures to work best under the old system, and instead give them time to make adjustments.