threeseed 2 days ago

And how does this all get paid for ? It doesn't.

It massively increases the deficit and debt which in turn will have a raft of knock on consequences for the economy and the reputation of the US.

1
graycat 1 day ago

Clearly "Section 174" is now, currently, an issue.

And vaguely I seemed to remember some Trump campaign statements that in taxes some business spending could be deducted instead of amortized (spread over several years) or some such.

I'm deliberately no expert on taxes or business taxes.

Some of the Internet discussions seemed to suggest that some of the worst of 174 were to be implemented, continued, canceled, whatever, so for more information on the background, status, future, etc. of 174, did a little Google search and came up with the discussion I posted here. That discussion seems to say that the "Big Beautiful Bill" may get rid of 174, and that would seem to be in the collection of deduction changes Trump discussed.

About the economy, growth, the Fed's Prime rate, deficit spending, interest payments on Treasury bonds, tariffs, inflation, the balances of trade and payments, R&D, AI, foreign investment in the US, 174, etc., to me the MSM (mainstream media) is short on enough credible information for me to have much in opinions.

In addition, for politics, mostly it looks like noise for some manipulation, effect, or other and a reason to follow "Always look for the hidden agenda."

So, about 174, the information I have looks no more credible and a lot less fun than an old Bugs Bunny cartoon! But maybe Bugs Bunny or Elmer Fudd would guess that getting rid of 174 would help R&D, new businesses, factories, business revenue, and even, net, tax revenue. Or did Elmer repeat "To make money, have to spend money."?

I'd scream at the junk -- drama -- in the MSM, but it won't do any good.

Summary: For the main issues here in the US, I just don't have good information. The stuff I posted above seems to suggest that the future of 174 is still in doubt.