Wait, was there ever any doubt about this?
Oh right, I forgot, half of the US has replaced their brains with ‘fell for it again’ awards they’ve been shoving up their noses and into their ears for the last 10 years… so you have to explain basic concepts to them over and over again for there to be any chance of them sinking in.
The claim in the bill is that it helps benefit small businesses. The data is a fact check: the deduction is predominantly beneficial to wealthy people. The fact that most of these “businesses “ have no employees is a strong indicator that they are not “job creators” and are quite likely artificial corporations created to take advantage of tax structure.
I… I know what it literally is.
I am just baffled that anyone would actually need this explained to them, but at the same time, I completely understand that most Americans are not capable of doing basic research and analysis on their own, and are propgandized all to hell.
Like… this was all easily discernible that this is what this particular tax cut would do, back in 2017.
Don’t get me wrong, its important to have this on the record… but its the exact same bullshit from Trump’s first term, just now they want it to be a 23% deduction instead of 20%.
EDIT: Maybe I am ‘biased’ as to how obvious this is, in that I have an Econ degree, and also a memory span that extends backwards in time far enough to remember a whole bunch of other people with Econ and Accounting degrees saying this is what this tax cut would do, on national television, in articles, being cited by online commentators, etc… back when this was being argued over 8 years ago.
The problem is the propaganda. Yes it’s obviously a tax break for the wealthy. However that may be fine according to the propaganda that “it’s to support small businesses, which are the job creators of our economy”. If I believed that, I might support this giveaway to the wealth, so it’s important to not just prove this is a break for the wealthy but that the purported benefit is just not there.
I guess this is somewhat analogous to “trickle down” economics in general where it may be worth it if the claimed benefits were there. However we have huge amounts of proof that’s it’s not the kind of trickling that we want on us
This is normally referred to as the “qualified business income” or QBI deduction. Not sure why they used “pass through deduction” here. Because that terminology is easily confused with a different tax break that some states enable called a “pass through entity tax” which lets a business owner pay state income tax from their business and deduct that amount on their (personal) federal return.
Won’t somebody please think of the poor millionaires!!