Tornado Alley (PROG)

[BullNBear52]

Rushing a Tax Bill Through Congress
NOV. 28, 2017

To the Editor:

Re “Tax Wrangling Aims to Sweeten Gains of Wealthy” (front page, Nov. 28):

Setting aside the procedural and policy arguments against ramming a strictly partisan tax bill through Congress only a month after the first draft was introduced in the House, many Americans are still left wondering how the latest bill would affect their own bottom lines.

On Nov. 2, the G.O.P. promised an “online tax calculator” that Representative Chris Collins trumpeted would allow people to “take their numbers from last year and plug them in and see what their new taxes will be.” He assured us that “middle-income people whether they’re in New York or Alabama are going to save money.”

With a vote in the full Senate looming as soon as this week, no such calculator has surfaced. A skeptic might think that this is because middle-class Americans might not be quite so pleased with the way they fare after all.

ADAM B. GOTTLIEB, WASHINGTON

To the Editor:

Re “Religious Right Stands to Gain in Tax Debate” (front page, Nov. 27): Let the horse trading continue! No hearings on this reverse Robin Hood tax bill, but Republican leaders can openly bribe members of Congress for their votes. For example, getting rid of the Johnson Amendment prohibiting places of worship from advocating politically.

Churches are not required to pay taxes. In fact, by their not paying taxes to the communities and country they inhabit, you and I support them as we pick up their share. I don’t want them electioneering on my dime — separation of church and state, you know. If they want to take a stand on candidates and claim their right to free speech, let them pay taxes.

DEE BAER, WILMINGTON, DEL.

To the Editor:

“Will a Tax Cut Raise Wages? Some Doubt It” (front page, Nov. 24) clearly shows that despite Republican forecasts, the tax bill is being met with a lack of enthusiasm across the board, including from corporations. Will they gladly accept a lower tax rate? Yes, but when asked by Gary D. Cohn, President Trump’s top economic adviser, if they would increase wages and hiring, to his surprise few corporate heads indicated they would.

Tying tax relief to a formula that includes investing in plant and equipment, increased hiring and higher wages benefits the economy and gives the public a reason to support the plan.

This plan doesn’t do any of this, and history has shown that with more money, corporations will do little for their employees and more for shareholders.

A further condition should be that if corporations accept a tax cut, they should not be allowed to buy back their stock.

FRANK GUNSBERG
ENGLEWOOD, N.J.

To the Editor:

Your Nov. 26 editorial about the unrealistic Republican statements promising the moon from the proposed tax bill (“The Republican Tax on the Future”) prompts the question: Why hasn’t one public hearing been held by the House or the Senate before considering the most significant change to our tax code in 31 years?

The public does not really have a clue as to what changes are in store. We are being told of all the increased benefits and tax reductions coming our way, but this bill has been conjured up in the darkness of congressional meetings without observers, instead of in the light of day, with openness and transparency.

The rush to passage in order to give President Trump his Christmas present and bragging rights of having finally achieved something significant in his first year in office is nothing short of a disgrace and a slap in the face to a gullible public.

HARVEY GLASSMAN
BOYNTON BEACH, FLA.

To the Editor:

Re “This Tax Bill Is Now a Health Care Bill” (nytimes.com, Nov. 15):

David Leonhardt states that removing the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act will cause premiums to increase because we need healthy people to help pay the bills of sicker people. Since healthy people will eventually get sick, removing the mandate creates a far more important problem.

As long as insurance companies are required to cover people with pre-existing conditions at the same rates as their neighbors, it is both morally reprehensible and fiscally irresponsible to allow people to buy health insurance after they become sick. You cannot wait until your house burns down to buy fire insurance coverage, and you cannot wait until you have an accident to get auto insurance. Why should this be allowed for health insurance?

VICTOR ROBERTS, BURNT HILLS, N.Y.

To the Editor:

“Tax Code’s ‘Thank You’ to Teachers Puts House and Senate at Odds” (news article, Nov. 27):

Labeling a tax credit for school supplies a “perk” uses Orwellian doublespeak to discredit teachers and unfairly compare their tax credit to those of other groups. The teachers are spending a significant portion of their salaries to buy school supplies that directly benefit students, not the teachers themselves.

This is not similar to other professionals who deduct office, automobile or other expenses to benefit their businesses. We are taking a situation that is already unfair — expecting teachers to purchase supplies for their students — and making it even less so.

PETER GLICK, CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/opinion/republican-tax-bill.html?