Back in 1982, Republicans and the Reagan administration determined that they needed to raise taxes on average working people to pay for part of the massive tax break they were giving billionaires (they dropped the top income tax bracket from 74% to 28%). Reagan imposed income taxes on elderly people...

This is worth a read if you’re unfamiliar with how Trump’s “no taxes on tips” proposal has been used by organized crime, corporations and the wealthy in the past to skirt massive amounts of taxes.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    12·
    1 month ago

    I think the author’s concern about social security is a load of hogwash. It’s classic fear-mongering, the script people always raise when they want to get rid of social security. If we want to stabilize the social security, all we need to do is raise the contribution cap.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.worldOP
      2·
      1 month ago

      How do you mean? He’s just stating a fact about Social Security benefits and how they work. The benefits you get are based on what you pay in, so if, say, half of that is no longer recorded, then your social security benefits will be reduced as compared to how it (sort of) works now.

      In the US, I think it’s known that most people who get cash tips don’t record a fair amount of those to the IRS, but it’s not worth going after those folks. All he’s saying is that if ALL tipped income is no longer accounted for, then the line item for your future benefits from this system would obviously be reduced. That’s not fear mongering, just noting something that might not normally be considered when people get excited about the idea of non-taxed income.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        11·
        1 month ago

        It sounds like you’re arguing that the formula needs to be recalculated, which may or may not be true, but that’s not what I understood when I read the article.

        What I understood is there was an overall amount of money problem, and this latter problem can easily be solved by changing the payment threshold. But if I totally misinterpreted the article, then I appreciate your correction. :-)

        • just_another_person@lemmy.worldOP
          1·
          1 month ago

          …nope. Not misunderstanding the article at all. It’s written quite plainly and is easy to read:

          One possible concern with either plan is the impact on Social Security retirement income if workers who earn most or even much of their income from tips no longer pay payroll taxes. Those both fund Social Security and determine, over the top earning years of a person’s lifetime, how much they get every month after they turn 67 years old (Reagan raised the retirement age from 65 to 67), so cutting the tax could also cut retirement benefits.

          So either your not from the US and don’t understand what this means, or you’re just a less informed troll. Which is it?