Under current law, taxpayers can claim the standard deduction as an alternative to itemizing deductions. In 2017, the standard deduction is $6,350 for single filers, $9,350 for head of household filers, and $12,700 for married couples filing jointly.
Details“Trump wants to bring that money back to the United States to spur jobs and growth, and he’s been aggressively pitching a plan to offer companies a large tax break if they bring all those dollars back to America soon. Under Trump’s proposal, companies would only have to pay a 10 percent tax on money they bring back — a process often called ‘repatriation’ — rather than the usual 35 percent. . . . The [George W. Bush] White House tried this once before, and the results were grim. . . . “
Details“[Alex] Brill estimated that of all the money saved by local and state taxpayers with this deduction, 89 percent comes from those with incomes of $100,000 or higher. “In other words, the policy itself is highly regressive,” Brill told the Senate Finance Committee in prepared testimony Sept. 14. “It is available only to the minority of taxpayers who itemize their taxes (generally higher-income taxpayers) and is more valuable to taxpayers in higher tax brackets.””
Details“[Alex Brill] emphasized that Congress’s tax reform timeline should not be dictated by attempts to ‘micromanage the quarter-by-quarter performance of the U.S. economy.’ Still, Brill acknowledged that it’s politically important to prioritize and maintain momentum on tax reform. ‘Moving slowly raises the risk that the process will never conclude,’ he said.”
Details“I see the speech yesterday as the president’s strongest commitment into engaging in this policy process…. We are eight months into the administration…. But I am hopeful this is the beginning, as the president said, the kick off I think of a concerted effort to move from the tax code we have to a kind tax code that republicans have been talking about for well more than a year now. One with a broader base and lower rates.”
Details“‘I’m an advocate of a revenue-neutral carbon tax if the revenue raised is used to reduce or eliminate taxes that are most harmful to the economy,’ said Alex Brill of the American Enterprise Institute. ‘That would be a great trade,’ he said before adding that it is not something that is about to happen. ‘As a matter of politics, the environment for a carbon tax has not matured to the point that a majority of lawmakers are ready to embrace it,’ Brill said. ‘It would be premature for those who think a carbon tax is a good idea to try to chase the next legislative train,’ he said. And while there is a risk of trying to rush a carbon tax into the political process, there is also a risk in believing that a carbon tax is always going to be a long-term project, he added.”
Details“Outside of the cost to local communities, experts have also linked the economic impact of the opioid crisis to rising insurance costs in both the private and public sector. A study by Matrix Global Advisors, a policy group based in Washington, D.C., shows that the cost of the opioid epidemic in Michigan costs every resident in the state about $84 a year. . . . ‘The healthcare costs associated with opioid abuse are the equivalent of an extra $84 in healthcare costs per Michigan resident every year,’ said Christy Robinson, Matrix Global Advisors director. ‘But determining who pays which part of the $84 is outside of the scope of our analysis.'”
Details“‘The PAVE award is an interesting and encouraging proposal geared toward shifting reimbursement towards value-based metrics,’ said Matrix Global Advisors founder and CEO Alex Brill. ‘This proposal might be further strengthened if in addition to the ‘carrot’ for improved reimbursement models for new products, a ‘stick’ to discourage inappropriate over-utilization of existing products was also included.'”
DetailsIn recent years, internet sales have grown by nearly 15 percent per year, compared to 4 percent per year for brick-and-mortar retail sales. Although e-commerce represents less than 9 percent of total retail sales, this shift in where we shop is eroding states’ sales tax base. Under the Supreme Court’s 1992 decision in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, sellers without a physical presence in a state cannot be required to collect and remit that state’s sales tax. As a result, online sellers have an artificial competitive advantage over local brick-and-mortar sellers, who must collect sales tax from their customers. Congress needs to end this unfair tax advantage.
DetailsWhile discussing middle class and corporate tax cuts, Alex Brill says, “The White House has not outlined a revenue neutral tax plan. That’s for certain.”
Details
