Thread by @maltymeatia

Arguably the most substantial example of what Donald Trump has done to shape the economy can be found in the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017—an act that he, the GOP, and many Trump voters credit with the "booming" economy. But are they right to do so? Is the TCJA good for the U.S.?

congress.gov/115/bills/hr1/… To start, here is a full PDF of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017 (or TCJA), just for reference. Fair warning: it is about 450 pages long.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_…
A bit more groundwork here. I know, I know, I'm breaking the cardinal rule not to use Wikipedia as a source-- but I'm only using it for summarizing and quick reference. For example, we ought to note how not-so-popular the legislation was on arrival...

“House passed the bill on a mostly-party line vote of 227–205. Not a single Democrat voted for the bill, while 13 Republicans voted against.” “4 winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics have spoken out against [it]: Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman, Richard Thaler, and Angus Deaton.”

businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-… When economic experts read the whopping 450 pages of the TCJA, they initially noted, dismayed, that it would “raise taxes on half of Americans,” won’t grow the economy, and “cause a massive increase in the federal debt.”

bloomberg.com/news/articles/… "Twenty-one of 26 economists surveyed by Bloomberg News after Trump and Republican congressional leaders rolled out their tax plan this week predicted it will widen the budget gap over the next 10 years."

But, in fairness, this conclusion wasn’t a 100% consensus view—it was made when the act was fresh and malleable. And of course, a grim prediction does not a grim economy make.
But it has now been nearly a year since the act passed. Did critics' predictions come true?

taxpolicycenter.org/publications/d…
"On average, in 2027 taxes would change little for lower-and middle-income groups and decrease for higher-income groups. Compared to current law, 5 percent of taxpayers would pay more tax in 2018, 9 percent in 2025, and 53 percent in 2027."

brookings.edu/wp-content/upl…
"If it is financed with spending cuts or other tax increases, TCJA will, under the most plausible scenarios, end up making most households worse off than if it had not been enacted."
That is, modest tax cuts for now-- sharp tax increases for later.

epi.org/publication/th…
"Evidence from past changes in federal taxes, from cross-national comparisons, and from the experiences of individual U.S. states all argue strongly that wages for typical Americans will not benefit from the TCJA."

Just a (large) side note here—that “experiences of individual U.S. states” segment of the quote above is referencing states including Kansas and its recent tax cut "experiment" under Gov. Brownback.

The now infamous “experiment,” looking very much like Trump’s TCJA, was considered a failure by Kansans and soon repealed, leaving Brownback disgraced and evidently eligible for his current job as the “U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom.” But anyway...

taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/tax-cut… "Participants at a May 23 event on the effects of the (TCJA) on economic growth broadly agreed that the tax law falls short of ideal reform because it increased the fed. debt and is likely to have only a relatively modest impact on long-run econ. growth."

forbes.com/sites/beltway/… This article basically takes the view that the jury is out on whether or not the TCJA helps. "And that, in sum, is the story so far for the TCJA. If it has provided 'rocket fuel' for the economy, you can’t see the take-off, at least not yet."

itep.org/there-is-no-ev… Like the Forbes article, the most tweet-fitting quote is the title of the article itself: "There Is No Evidence That the New Tax Law Is Growing Our Economy or Creating Jobs"

nbcnews.com/business/econo… “The Republican tax reform package that was supposed to raise wages and spur hiring has instead funded a record stock buyback and dividend spree, benefiting investors and company executives over workers.”

thehill.com/policy/finance… A recent assessment of our current debt: “The federal deficit hit $895 billion in the first 11 months of fiscal 2018, an increase of $222 billion, or 32 percent, over the same period the previous year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).”

Bear in mind, most of these weigh-ins on the TCJA are from non-partisan sources (or rather sources known for being non-partisan). They represent the best that the U.S. has to offer in the way of economic analysis—and they conclude that the TCJA isn't really helping the public.

That consensus has budged very little from where it started-- and for good reason. The debt has raised, the “record” numbers set by the economy are modest at best when put back into context with where they came from and, of course, you probably haven’t gotten rich yet.

But we also more or less covered many of these crucial points in the last thread by using them to contrast Trump’s bragging campaign. So what are we learning now? Namely, that Trump's economy isn't just "not what it's cracked up to be," but that it is going to get worse

Where we are now is more important than the projections themselves, but the fact that the projections predicted where we are now (and that where we are isn’t ideal) makes a strong case for the validity of the criticism that has come up against the TCJA: it didn't work as promised

In the next thread, we’ll be taking a closer look at wages, prosperity, and opening up the really personal aspect of this study. We’re going to find out who’s making money, who’s taking money, and where it has gone before and after Trump came into office and passed the TCJA.

@threadreaderapp unroll please