Did I hear right? Trump wants to drop income taxes on tips?

Great idea!

I tend to think of a tip as a reward or incentive for being treated well. And unless I'm having a deductible business meal the $$ I'm paying as a tip is being paid with money I already pay income taxes on, so if I leave a $2 tip, both me and the person that I'm tipping are being taxed on that $2, and one of us being taxed for that $2 should be enough.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@SandWitch

I marked Hippyjoe as best answer because I thought it was the best answer.

Taxes are a millstone around he neck of freedom. They undermine the people's choice of what they want to do with their money, which in many cases are superior to what government does with that money.

I just a few weeks ago watched a city commission meeting regarding the need for better workforce housing where it was needed, It was pointed out that apartment buildings funded by federal agencies cost twice as much as the same building would cost if developed by private developers. The cost difference is regulatory agency constraints. The money taxpayers send to Washington DC that come back to local communities lose 50% of their value in that transition, starting with cities that have to spend taxpayer monies just to compete and beg for DC to give them their money back.

For a simple cut to the chase, look at cities that are turning blighted areas into places where people want to live, look at cities that are bringing employers back to their core communities that were were abandoned 15+ years ago with the rush to the suburbs. The lure is tax incentive financing. They turn abandoned factories into workplaces by erasing the real estate tax burden so that new employers can focus on their business rather than on how they can pay their taxes. Tax policies that let businesses and individuals keep what they earn grows the economy. Those waiters and waitresses whose tips would go untaxed in turn get to put that money into other people's pockets, create more jobs, rather than go to Washington where that money loses 50% of its value. That's the essence of why repeated taxation on pass through monies is a horrible policy. It's why sales taxes are paid by retail establishments, and not the wholesalers, distributors and manufacturers. Make all of the above pay the sales tax and everything would be 30%+ more expensive, and with every entity along the chain having to pay that tax they would all be less able to afford it.

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

@Heartlander I sometimes wonder about some posts here. Do you pose rhetoric questions on purpose, or do you really not understand how a democratic republic works nor how taxation works. First, if private equity invested in infrastructure and housing, there would be less need for governments to support such. But, private equity does not see enough return on its investment. Often then, government offers to ac abatements which do tend to lower the cost and make the investment more attractive.

As to the money returning from government, to OU realize that some states and local government do levy their own taxes, which are controlled totally locally. Part of the tax law passed by the Trump administration limited the tax deduction for local and state taxes essentially making many taxpers pay taxes on already taxed dollars. As to the fund, aka taxes, paid to the feds, a significant does get returned to the state of taxpayer. A big "problem" is that it is dold out unequally. Some states get more than a dollar back for every dollar paid, some less. You would be surprised at the distribution.

As to the regulations involved, most are for health and safety of the building workers and then occupants. For example multiple family houses now must have both fire, smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, but also fire suppressing systems. True, those add costs, but improve safety exponentially. It is finally illegal to use asbestos in buildings, that protects the worker while building construction, and occupants later. Who should decide what regulations to enforce? Left to itself, we know the history of private industry.

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@samueltyler2 :) God Bless you, but you are 180 degrees off target. The world we enjoy is more because private equity has to keep the return on investment in focus while the government can continue to shoot itself in the foot with quick draw mistakes because they can bale out of mistakes by raising taxes or printing more money. Few things that define modern civilation were conceived or given birth by government. Automobiles? Radio? Television? Airplanes? Computers? All things we can thank creative people for bringing forth. People who understood the importance of the return on investment for the time, effort and money they invested in their dreams.

You missed it on government regulations. Private developers have the same responsibility for worker safety, safe building codes, etc., etc. They actually have greater restraints than government funded projects because private investors have THEIR money on the line, not the taxpayers money.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@samueltyler2 The best government is the most limited government. Why don't the private investors invest? Because of too much government whether because of too much taxes or too much red tape or both. I was talking to a fellow who was investing in a gold mine. He said it took over 10 years just to get all the permits before he could even dig one shovel full of dirt. Why? Too Much Government. How is there too much government? Taxes are so high the government grew too big. He showed me a picture of the paperwork he had been though. It was in binders that could stack over 10' high. All so he could extract some gold from the ground. One of his conditions was that he had to count the number of fish in a stream that ran near his gold mine. The fish were not an endangered species and the stream was not in any danger from his work but the government. I honestly don't know if he made any money or not. Gold mining does not have a high rate of return.

samueltyler2 · 80-89, M

@Heartlander i am sorry you misr and my comments. But, with rare exceptions, most innovations started with government assistance.

That is true in every field. Most basic medical research is not done in private industry, but in universities and and NIH , both funded by federal.money.b the results are turn transferred to industry for their continued development. The cost of medication n is really more related to marketing, not research. Where did computers originate? Look at the history, most started at big educational institutions with government funding.

You only have to look back to 2008 to see direct infusion of government funds to bail out many industries,financial, automobile,etc. as to regulations, you attacked them in general, i simply gpointed out how important they are. Read Upton Sinclair's The Green Jungle and see how government agencies helped improve food safety.

True private investors like st follow regulations, but that does increase cost. Look at the rise in insurance now, particularly home owners. The rise is attributed to increasing damaged from increased severe weather, arguably related to pollution and climate change. Yet, there is argument about regulations limiting pollution as too expensive.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@samueltyler2 There is no evidence that government is the cause of innovation. In fact the exact opposite is most often true. Here in Canada we have government run medicine. Guess how that is working out. My wife can't find a doctor to take out a few stitches. All the innovations are coming from the US not Canada.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@samueltyler2 The gold mine and the oil mine and the gas well and the farm that raises beef and the farm that grows wheat. Within my life time I have seen the expansion of government into all aspects of life and not in a good way. Medicine, farming, industry, mining, pensions etc etc etc. None of which has helped us in any way. What it has done is grown the unproductive sector to the point that the economy is shrinking on the vine as inflation runs amok and investors find a more friendly place to put their money.

SandWitch · 26-30, F

@Heartlander

I marked Hippyjoe as best answer because I thought it was the best answer.

I think if the options were made available here on SW, I would have marked his answer as either "Most Entertaining Answer" or "Most Likely to Succeed in the Real World", but I would have only chosen "Best Answer" if nobody else participated in my post! 🤣

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@SandWitch It completed the circuit. Relentless taxes are driven by government spending, or overspending. The need to relentlessly tax the same money, over and over, every time it moves is kind of like shaving the edges of gold and silver coins. Eventually there is nothing left.

SandWitch · 26-30, F

@Heartlander
Did you know that copper wire was invented by two pilots on a layover? As legend has it, they were both fighting over the same copper penny they simultaneously spotted on a sidewalk outside an English pub.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@SandWitch So what great good do you see coming from the government. What has the government done that improved your life?

SandWitch · 26-30, F

@hippyjoe1955
The government funded the construction of highways and secondary roads through taxation and they maintain those same highways through funding from gasoline taxation. Without government taxation, you'd be living a Third World standard of living.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@SandWitch The tax payers funded it. Not the government.

Heartlander · 80-89, M

@SandWitch I knew all about the "throw a nickel in the grass" thing but my first awareness of the copper pennies being streamed into wire.

I believe there are/were a handful of restaurants in the US that have floors paved with big British pennies. One in Seattle as I remember; also frequented by layover flight crews. The image of two pilots wrestling on the floor to get those pennies flashed through my mind :)

SandWitch · 26-30, F

@hippyjoe1955

The tax payers funded it. Not the government.

That is correct and you are repeating the essence of what I stated, but you are not understanding what I wrote.

I said...."The government funded the construction of highways and secondary roads through taxation and they maintain those same highways through funding from gasoline taxation".

The government doesn't have any money of it's own. The government gets money from taxation. Those who pay taxes to the government are called "tax payers".

The government then uses a percentage of total tax dollars collected annually to contract the building of those highways which WE as taxpayers then use to serve our needs.

Without taxation, your standard of living would be akin to that of a Third World nation.

hippyjoe1955 · 70-79, M

@SandWitch the government took the tax payers money likely without permission. Governments are not Robin Hood and dilybteits like you have difficulty grasping that the less government the more freedom.

SandWitch · 26-30, F

@hippyjoe1955
You sound like a typical right-wing hard-liner with an axe to grind hippyjoe, but clearly you have no real purpose in life on which to grind that axe you carry to make things right for yourself and better for the world at large.

Instead, you attack government because they are the likely cause of your dysfunction in this lifetime, or at least they'll do as your fall-guy, for now at least, until you have more information supplied to you from your right-wing media sources who keep you informed.

Someone other than yourself must always be held responsible for your shortcomings in life hippyjoe and anyone will do, even the government will do, as long as the focus of your microscope doesn't ever come back to you.