Welcome to LoudounTimes.com
Loudoun Times-Mirror

Report: Most Loudoun residents to benefit from new federal tax law

Loudoun County homeowners are expected to benefit from the new tax plan out of Washington, according to the county's lobbying firm.

The Ferguson Group, a bipartisan government relations consulting firm, analyzed the potential impacts to Loudoun residents based on several scenarios and came back with estimates as to how the new law affects a range of people living in Loudoun County. The analysis did not include the impact on business owners or businesses.

Loudoun County Supervisor Tony Buffington (R-Blue Ridge) asked for the county administrator's office to compile figures showing how the new tax code will impact Loudouners.

“Overall, with all of the reforms considered, will the average (making median income, average valued home, average number of vehicles, average number of children, etc.) Loudoun County resident pay more or less in annual federal taxes?” Buffington asked.

The impact of the changes were estimated for four types of households who own their residence, which represents 79 percent of all households in Loudoun, according to the county. The four household types were distinguished by marital status – married versus single -- and by the presence or absence of children, which will materially impact the tax bill due to the Child Tax Credit.

The first scenario looked at the impact on a family of four with two adults and two children living in a single-family detached home with an annual income approximately equal to the median value reported by the Census Bureau for families of that type in Loudoun in 2016. Thirty four percent of households in Loudoun are families with children under 18 years of age who own their own residence, according to the Census Bureau's 2016 American Community Survey (ACS).

It's estimated the family of four will realize tax savings of $1,782 under the Tax Cut and Jobs Act (TCJA), according to county documents. The adults in the family were estimated to be joint filers with a gross income of $150,000. Their household's state and local taxes of almost $12,800 exceed the $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deduction, and the TCJA eliminates the personal exemption in calculating taxable income, the increase in the child tax credit and the lower tax rate more than offset these changes.

Under scenario two, two adults earning $150,000 with no children living in a single-family detached home and filing jointly would realize a tax savings of $516 under the new tax plan. The household’s state and local taxes also exceed the $10,000 cap on this deduction. They lose the personal exemption in calculating taxable income but still benefit from the full deduction on their mortgage interest and from the reduction in the federal tax rate. Twenty four percent of households in Loudoun County are home to married couples with no children who own their property.

The third scenario envisioned a single parent homeowner living with a child in a townhouse or condo with an annual income equal to a weighted average of the single female and single male median incomes reported by the Census Bureau of $83,500. The single parent is not affected by the $10,000 cap on the deduction for state and local taxes and sees an estimated $823 in tax savings due to the lower tax rate and to the more generous child tax credit implemented under the TCJA. Only four percent of households in Loudoun are single parents who own their own residence.

A fourth scenario estimates a single, childless homeowner living either alone or with unrelated individuals in a townhouse or condo with an annual income equal to a weighted average of the single female and single male median incomes reported by the Census Bureau of $83,500. The single filer with no dependents is not affected by the $10,000 cap on the deduction for state and local taxes and receives an estimated $763 in tax savings largely due to the lower tax rate implemented under the TCJA.

“With the high cost of living in northern Virginia, I was pleased to learn that most Loudouner’s should see a reduction in their federal taxes,” Buffington said.

The review suggesting most Loudouners will be better off was welcomed by Congresswoman Barbara Comstock (R-Va.-10th), who voted in favor of the measure.

“The review done by the independent group hired by Loudoun County demonstrates that The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act will put more money in the pockets of hardworking Loudoun County taxpayers, especially middle class families,” Comstock said in a prepared statement. “Doubling the child tax credit and making it refundable for low income families, lowering tax rates, creating more jobs and bringing more jobs back to the U.S., will result in tax savings for families and create a healthy economy."

The new law isn't without its critics. The act lowers the top tax rate for top earners, a provision that has come under fire from opponents as a giveaway to the rich. The highest rate of 39.6 percent for married couples earning over $470,700 is dropped to 37 percent, and the threshold at which the top rate kicks in is raised to $600,000 for married couples and $500,000 for individuals.

The new tax law is also expected to add $1 trillion to the federal debt over the next decade, according to analysts.

Comments


SGP. behave! My comment was in response to “It is also about not incentivizing needless spending money on a larger house, something that doesn’t help the productivity of the US.” Federal funding to states should not be dependent on how much that individual state charges in taxes. Like I said, if you prefer to have the amenities provided by a higher taxed state then live there. I guess I disagree with you, It’s the states liken S.Car, N. Dak, Fla, that suck up federal funds which allows them to keep their own taxes artificially low taxes that irk me, we subsidize them.  They grab the most $’s from the government. States like CA, and VA, are donor states, we get less back than we pay in so other states can live cheaply at our expense. 
As far as real-estate, not everyone trusts the markets, looking at recent activities I can see why. Since Trump over turned the DOL fiduciary rule your investors don’t have to have your best interest at heart or even transparent with you about your own money, investing has gotten scarier. You can wake up one morning and lose everything, but if you invested in real estate, it will still be there. Or I guess you could always bury money in the back yard. But I do agree that there should be a reasonable limit.
As far as social security, we pay 1.45% our employers pay 1.45% bringing the total to 2.9%. But 2010 was the first year they had to pay out more than they took in that since 1983. As a result, the program had to tap its $2.5 trillion trust fund., but has used the interest it received on borrowed monies since 2010 to close the gap. It is the same funding used for Medicare. It should stay solvent, according to most studies through 2029, the SS trustees report only goes through 2026.  Parts A, B,C, D are paid into by the recipient as premiums. The SMI Trust Fund pays specifically for outpatient health care expenses under Part B and Medicare Part D prescription drug benefits, not our taxes. I read the SS trustees report (boooooring) and found just the opposite. There was a negative for last year, if the effects of past trust fund cash flows on interest payments from the Federal Government to the public are NOT taken into account, but still plenty of funds in the trust. From the trust fund perspective, OASDI had an annual surplus.
I had the deficit correct. Please tell me where you are getting these figures.
I see you don’t like the ACA. To me people are more important than money. So, if people pay what they need to have insurance then I’m happy. We have let too many Americans die so we can make a buck. They have been lied to by their reps to think the ACA is evil and many have died from that decision. A decision made purely on politics. Entitlements are just that, things you are entitled to because you have paid into them. Maybe the federal govt. should be forced to pay all the interest it owes to SS, then growth in entitlements may not force the issue.

 


amerigirl, it seems you have contracted Trump derangement syndrome with the disconnected comments.  I recall you previously (before Trump) making very rational arguments.

1. I think you misunderstood my comment about the feds “giving” money to the states and locales.  This is not about the feds spending money on military bases or roads.  This is about subsidies via tax breaks.  For example, if I pay 25% in federal taxes but can deduct my state taxes, an 8% Virginia income tax really only costs me 6%.  That is because I need not pay the 25% federal tax on the 8% I paid in Virginia tax.  For a 2-earner household making $200K, that is a $4K subsidy to Virginia - they pay $46K in fed taxes instead of $50K because of the Virginia tax deduction (not insignificant).  In CA where the income tax is 2x, the same couple would only pay $42K in taxes as they get an $8K subsidy to CA.  That is a direct subsidy to states.  The same is true for Loudoun property tax or local bonds.  The same applies for subsidies for hybrid vehicles (if I get a $10K fed refund/credit, the $40K Prius only cost me $30K).  Most simply don’t think the feds should be subsidizing state/local spending in any way.  Do you disagree?  Do you really think states who consume 15% in income taxes should have 1/4 of that subsidized by the federal taxes you and I pay?

2. I own a townhouse because I think single family houses are unnecessary, waste energy, etc.  But when I see a great big McMansion, I say more power to them and the workers they employ.  But the fact is that you can only live in 1 house and it only benefits you.  Americans don’t care if you buy a $1M house or a $250K house as they don’t get to live in it either way.  You simply should not be subsidized (by being able to deduct mortgage interest) for buying a huge home.  One of the reasons this deduction was removed is that virtually nobody who owns a modest home (say $300K or less) ever benefited from it.  The std deduction was larger than any itemized deductions they might take.  And that is one reason the standard deduction is going up.  Plus, the deduction didn’t previously apply to mortgages above $1M.  Thus, it was simply a subsidy to the McMansions.  We are not talking about a “Cadillac” or medical devices tax (extra punitive taxes over and above regular taxes), simply getting rid of subsidies that don’t help anyone else.  Just as you don’t get to deduct a meal at Morton’s, citizens shouldn’t be able to deduct $25-40K/yr in interest on massive mortgages from which only they receive any value.  Do you really disagree on this? 

3. Virtually nobody in the US understands how SS and Medicare actually are funded.  The fed gov’t has never taken enough in SS taxes to pay for what you will receive in benefits.  That is one reason it’s a Ponzi scheme even though you were led to believe you “paid your fair share”.  Medicare is much worse.  Two large parts (part B covering doctor visits and part D covering drugs) are funded by general federal taxes, not any Medicare taxes.  A senior’s co-pay only covers 25% of the cost of parts B/D while our federal tax bill covers 75%.  So I’m not sure where you think that they should give your contributions back since you never made any for much of Medicare.  Each year, the SS trustees issue a report detailing how much of a hole SS is in.  Just like an insurance company who has no assets is in the hole if it is required to cover hurricane damages over the next 20 years (a certainty that damage will occur), SS and Medicare have expected future payouts $47T more than it will receive in payroll taxes or premiums (see recently released reports).  In fact, during the Bill Clinton “surplus” years, the country was really running a $1T/yr deficit because we were going deeper in the SS/Medicare hole by over a $T each year.  Between 2015 and 2016, that hole got $5T (with a T) bigger.  Thus, our real deficit last year was $5.5T, not just $0.5T.  They keep that debt off the books a la Enron so the public doesn’t know.  When Obama took $100B’s/yr savings from Medicare and dedicated it to new ACA handouts, that put us in the hole by $T’s more.  We could have used those Medicare changes to pay down the deficit by $T’s, but now folks are so dependent on the ACA, you will never get that permanent spending back.

I will be the first to say that the spending caps on domestic/defense spending are mainly for show.  Those are the trees whereas the entitlements are the forest.  If you don’t fix the latter, you could slash domestic spending and it will not save you from bankruptcy.  Neither party will address the entitlements.  Paul Ryan wants to address them but folks like Barbara Comstock have no intention of doing any heavy lifting.  Thus, we inch toward a dreadful fate with everyone living in NeverNeverLand.  Entitlements must be fixed (lower payouts). Higher economic growth and more high-skilled immigration helps (they actually pay lots of taxes), but eventually the $T’s/yr growth in entitlements will force the issue.


Virginia SGP |, What is your idea of wasteful spending? A larger house? Maybe you don’t consider your house an investment, I do. If that is what Trump meant then you should take a look at his abode, gold plated and all. Spending tax payer’s money and a third of his presidency golfing is wasteful spending. We live in America, and if you want to invest in a large house, vacation property, clothing, or whatever makes you happy, and you can afford it, then do it.
Productivity is great, but at what cost? The tax bill is mostly for the rich but it would have never passed without giving something to us poor smucks. But that will also expire in 6 years and our deductions won’t be coming back. The rich have permanent tax breaks. As Trump himself said to his friends “you all just got a lot richer”.  Why would you think that the amount the federal gov. gives states should be determined by their state taxes? It is not subsidizing when the states have met the requirements for the funds.  It is up to the people who live there, if they don’t think the amenities are worth the higher taxes they can move. Yes, the tax bill does accomplish those things by ripping-off those people.Have you looked at your paycheck? Where is that big chunk of money?  Sure, we get 6 years of tax benes, but now they want to take away social security, which I have paid into for almost 50 years, and Medicare, which is also taken out of paychecks. Will they return the money they took from me? They also want to borrow $955 billion this year (2 times last years) and $1.1 trillion in 2020. So are we a country that lives off our children now, they will have to take care of us with SS and Medicare gone and try to pay off our debt.
Obviously, Wall street doesn’t agree with this expected inflation, check out the market! Down 666 on Friday, down over 900 so far today.
Ugandan President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni only said that he likes Trump because he speaks frankly, he also thinks he may have been misquoted. He is a president that rules, which is what Trump wants to be. He has been in over 30 years, and recently raised the age limit for his office, and is training his son for his position. That’s not how we do it in this country. BTW you won’t find anyone else on his staff or running other African nations with that view, just one crazy person.
It is not just unskilled laborers that come here, the number that overstay visas 416,500 people overstayed their visas in 2015, and they are mostly from Canada. Many others are fleeing war torn areas, they are much more willing to break laws then to die or see their children suffer.
Try Russian interference and gerrymandering, those are more accurate.


Virginia SGP |, What is your idea of wasteful spending? A larger house? Maybe you don’t consider your house an investment, I do. If that is what Trump meant then you should take a look at his abode, gold plated and all. Spending tax payer’s money and a third of his presidency golfing is wasteful spending. We live in America, and if you want to invest in a large house, vacation property, clothing, or whatever makes you happy, and you can afford it, then do it.
Productivity is great, but at what cost? The tax bill is mostly for the rich but it would have never passed without giving something to us poor smucks. But that will also expire in 6 years and our deductions won’t be coming back. The rich have permanent tax breaks. As Trump himself said to his friends “you all just got a lot richer”.  Why would you think that the amount the federal gov. gives states should be determined by their state taxes? It is not subsidizing when the states have met the requirements for the funds.  It is up to the people who live there, if they don’t think the amenities are worth the higher taxes they can move. Yes, the tax bill does accomplish those things by ripping-off those people.
Have you looked at your paycheck? Where is that big chunk of money?  Sure, we get 6 years of tax benes, but now they want to take away social security, which I have paid into for almost 50 years, and Medicare, which is also taken out of paychecks. Will they return the money they took from me? They also want to borrow $955 billion this year (2 times last years) and $1.1 trillion in 2020. So are we a country that lives off our children now, they will have to take care of us with SS and Medicare gone and try to pay off our debt.
Obviously, Wall street doesn’t agree with this expected inflation, check out the market!


KenMasters, let me say that overall the tax bill is about increasing the % of each extra dollar that you earn that the gov’t will not confiscate for more wasteful spending.  It is also about not incentivizing needless spending money on a larger house, something that doesn’t help the productivity of the US.  And it’s definitely about not subsidizing high tax states/counties with federal dollars, an implicit result of the state/local tax deductions.  The tax bill accomplishes both of these things by capping deductions.

That said, I’m almost positive you will benefit by $K’s.  Each of the tax brackets have lower rates.  And the child tax credit of $2K is no longer denied to middle class workers (previously phased out at $115K in income).

Let’s assume you file as a married couple with 1 child that earns $190K.  You state that previously you could report $40K in deductions so your taxable income would be $150K.  Under the new plan, you would still get your $15K in mortgage deductions and $10K in state/local taxes for a taxable income of $165K.

In 2017, using the brackets up to 25%, your taxes owed would be ~$28,977.  In 2018, your taxes owed would be $28,179.  It’s already lower because each bracket is lower (12% vs 15%; 22% vs 25%, etc.).

But it gets better.  You then get a $2K child tax credit which drops your total bill to just $26,179 or a whopping $2800 less than in 2017.  If a family had 2 kids, they would get another $2K back or a $4800 lower tax bill.  And there is NO AMT, something that often hit the high deduction families.  As your income rises from $190K, you get an even bigger tax cut.  Ultimately, it’s not about what helps any one person individually, but virtually every individual in Loudoun will make out.  And that doesn’t count the $10K’s (or even $100K’s) your investments have increased due to the market rise.

None other than the President of Uganda (a close US ally who has never fancied African corruption) thanked Trump for telling Africans like it is.  His point is they need to clean up their countries themselves rather than looking for scapegoats.

A big problem in Africa (and in the Democrat party and RINOs in the US) is they are tribal.  It doesn’t matter what policy is best but rather can they get their friends/cronies in power and give them sweetheart deal (see Clintons worth $100M’s despite never owning a business).  This is why the FBI abused the FISA court and let Hillary bleachbit hard drives with impunity, after being told to save the files by a court, despite such an action clearly constituting obstruction of justice.  At the highest levels of gov’t office (or even here in most Loudoun offices), it’s all about protecting your friends, not following the rule of law.

But your doctor friend is a perfect example of why the immigration policy needs to change.  Currently, the least skilled workers illegally come to the US because they have nothing to lose and are perfectly willing to break laws.  More talented foreigners have opportunities in their home countries so they rarely break the US laws but would love to come.  Your doctor almost certainly came to the US legally.  If the US went to a merit-based system, more like her could come in.  Immigrants like her have (1) higher avg incomes than native born Americans, (2) create more jobs/businesses than native born Americans, and (3) acquire more education than native born Americans.  Illegal immigrants from Latin America have just the opposite in all 3.  So do their children.

If you asked the immigrants themselves why they come to the US, they will describe their own countries as *#$&#*$.  That is WHY they came here to begin with.  Speaking the truth is not bad.  The Dems, RINOs and the media trying to use the truth as propaganda and imposing PC gag orders is why Trump won the Presidency.


  Kaz661, it’s not so much that I hate Trump, but the man is a proven liar and I think he thinks more about himself than the people of this country. I don’t think he has a true understanding of what he is suppose to be doing for the country or how to do it. He doesn’t respect the constitution or hasn’t read it, don’t know which. A lot of his words and actions make me question his mental stability. If he does have a problem such as beginnings of dementia or a mental issue then that is not his fault. If there are people who know things that we don’t and are doing nothing to help him just to forward their own agenda, then shame on them.


Trump isn’t just targeting the laws that protect us – he’s targeting the very idea that we are all worthy of protection.  For Trump, dignity isn’t something you’re born with but something you measure.

By your net worth, your celebrity, your headlines, your crowd size.

Not to mention, the gender of your spouse. The country of your birth. The color of your skin. The God of your prayers.

I went to a doctor the other day who literally saved my wife’s life.  As we were talking and I thanked her for her expertise and winning manner, she said, “and to think, I am from what the President calls a s*itball country.”

I’m so sick of what this incurious reality TV has-been is doing to my country.


I will not be seeing a tax benefit.  Lets assume a married couple with 1 child and a mortgage.  With 10K max state/prop taxes and a 400K(550K home value) mortgage@3.75%.  Thats around 25K in deductions.  Just barely over the standard deduction. 

Last year that would have 40K in deductions. ~13K in state/prop+15K mortgage+ 12000 in exemptions. 

I dont see how the tax plan benefits most people in loudoun.


Workhardgetahead , How much is minimal? If you are using government resources then why would you not pay for them just as you would for groceries? Do you use roads, libraries? appreciate law enforcement? Happy that planes are not falling on your house? Thankful that there are bodies of government to create laws to protect your rights? Glad that the military is there to protect us? Make sure that your kids get a good education? Keep the food safe? Create drugs to stop illnesses? There should be somethings must be paid for to secure the right to the lifestyle that we, as Americans, have become accustomed and complacent to. In a way we agree on some things, such as that we deserve transparency and accountability for those using our money.


Kaz661 wow guess you think you’re funny, consider saving it for when you won’t have your personal deduction. Or you can save it and give it to me in 6 years when the tax break is over.
golden, what are you talking about? You made that up, I didn’t question anyone wanting to keep tax cut money. I would love to have it last forever if it was fair and paid for. Taking away social security that I have paid into for most of my life is just juggling it around, with me getting less in the end.


amerigirl. Maybe you should give your tax cut back since you hate Trump so much. LOL!


It’s a shame some on here are so brainwashed into thinking our govt knows how to best spend our tax money. And that every member of Congress/Senate is paid very well, too well, with great benefits and Million dollar pension….Yet they do so little.


amerigirl - It is amazing how you are willing to question someone about wanting to keep money from a reduction in taxes.


People fail to realize that’s it’s our money!! We re the ones that work for it. We should be able to hold on to as much as possible and give a minimal to the government.


Kaz661, I bet you’ll be spending all that tax money right away and be boo-hooing when it stops.


You really have to ask about a study that does not give a long-term outcome on a tax plan that changes over time. So what is the prognosis when the individual tax cuts are scheduled to go away after 2025. Republicans opted to make tax cuts for families temporary and reductions for businesses permanent running the debt up to $1.5 trillion. So, after 2025 you won’t have your cuts and you will have lost your $4,050 personal exemption. Has anyone done an analysis on that time frame? Ryan is talking about cutting our social security and other benefits that we have been paying into for years to help cover the cost. But somehow, I don’t think this is going to affect them like it will affect us. 
Virginia SGP, are you serious? Newsflash, you really are not an expert on what the democratic party wants and you don’t seem to have much of an understanding of it at all. There are as many diversified ideas among democrats as there are among republicans. People in these and other political parties are just that, people, not sheep.  First, can we cut down on the hatred? Second There really is a point to national taxes, like funding the military, CDC, HUD, capital projects, CIA, FBI, and other law enforcers. We also have debt which needs to be paid. Do you really think that your existence in this country doesn’t cost others? Do you drive on streets, use libraries, count on doctors to know what they are doing?
Even if Mexico has a higher tax rate, the land is cheaper for building factories and the wages are much lower. I’ll believe that jobs will return when I see it. They have people who figure the best ways to protect their assets working for them and with this tax law they will pay 21%, the old way they averaged between 11 – 12 % using loophole that are no longer available. 


Fairmont, you might very well be right. You may not pay it in taxes but Paul Ryan wants to get cut social security, medicare, and medicaid to pay for the tax cuts. He wants to do it this year, or so he said at the town hall in Herndon. My guess id that he hasn’t invested as much money into it as older people have.


Osborn, I must admit you too are consistent, with deception of course.

The tax rates on the rich individuals expire just like the tax rates of lower income individuals. But we know that the cut for lower income Americans won’t go away just as the W Bush tax cuts didn’t expire under Obama. Hopefully everybody’s tax rates will remain low (what right does the gov’t have to confiscate greater than 50% of one’s earnings?)

None other than progressive authors in the Atlantic have called for the end to corporate taxes. Corporations are nothing more than collections of investors. It makes no sense to tax a gov’t employee’s pension at 35% along with Buffet, which is what the corporate rate did. Loudouners’ 401ks, teacher and law enforcement pensions, entrepreneurs, etc. these are the “corporations” that Osborn talks about who benefit from the bill.

Folks don’t understand that LCPS’ portion of the underfunded teacher pensions is $1B (with a B). Yes, we owe $1B, just look at their annual audit. The increase in stock market value from these tax cuts shrink LCPS debt via VRS since their pension assets are invested in .... CORPORATIONS. So I am not sure why you attribute the benefits to the “rich” when so much accrues to everyday workers.


Matthew Osborn - If this bill helps out most people in Loudoun why does that bother you so much? How much time/money/goods do you donate on a years basis?


Nothing to see here, I suppose, as long as the rich get a little richer


@SGP - At least you’re consistent. I assume you know, but don’t care, that the bill ONLY adds $1.5T to the debt because those lower/middle-class friendly benefits expire in 2025…at which point ONLY the rich get a break.


Maybe democrats will give their tax cut back since they hate Trump so much. LOL!


ruralviews, don’t follow.  Median income shows the middle wage earner.  “Average income” would be higher than the median values as the very high earners skew the average.  That’s just math.

Were you trying to suggest that the analysis be conducted based on income groups (e.g. quintiles)?


On its face I’d say this “analysis” is by its nature skewed. A truer comparison would not be median income, but average income. This site of census data provides some food for thought on how this narrow analysis is skewed:
Look at all the classes of employees who don’t make close to the median income.


The Dems have a knowledge problem.  They never really research anything they discuss here in the comments section.

Of the $1.5T cost of the tax law, $640B were due to higher child tax credits.  I guess giving parents a bigger tax break is allowing the “rich [to] get a little richer”, eh Osborn?

Obama jacked up taxes significantly on the affluent.  The affluent are the only group (quintile) to pay a higher share of federal taxes than their share of federal income.  The bottom 50% don’t pay ANY net federal taxes.  So how exactly do you “cut” taxes for the low-income workers when they aren’t paying any federal taxes to begin with?

In fact, this tax law does exactly that by giving low-income workers even bigger handouts (they have negative tax bills due to the refundable credits -> they get money back with no tax due).  But that is not enough for the Dems.  Unless they take ever more from the working folks and give it to those in the bottom 50%, any reform is “unfair”.

What workers need is a booming economy and an end to open borders so that wages will RISE.  We are about to see that under the current policies.  Dems are just aghast that their charade of allowing illegal (future voters) immigrants to suppress wages while making low-income workers ever more dependent on gov’t is about to be “unmasked” (they just love to unmask, now don’t they).


to me $1,782 is a lot of money, Thank you Mr. President! #winning


I am very happy to keep more of the crumbs that I have earned….Thank you President Trump—what a fantastic, upbeat, and positive SOTU address the other night….the Dems looked angry, somber and downright depressed…someone should please check on Sen. Schumer’s posture, he has an issue…


WINNING!! But I guess “1,782” are just “crumbs” to   Americans.  Regarding the comment of why the richest county lags in charitable giving, it’s very simple.  Loudoun and Fairfax are the Liberal counties and it’s proven that they give less.

P.S Where’s the story on the State of Union address?  I’m seem to recall the local paper of record breathlessly reporting about it in the past.


Making America Great!!


@golden - No, you didn’t hear me complain much during Obama’s Administration. Not sure the comparison you’re trying to make though. Significant portions of the debt incurred under Obama was the result of legislation aimed at preventing a catastrophic economic crash, and then rebuilding a country mired in an historic recession. Helping folks pay their mortgages, afford insurance, find jobs, buy their medication.

You’re equating that to debt incurred by cutting taxes for the rich?

@SGP - When you intentionally conflate civil comments with hate, you expose yourself as part of the problem.


Thanks Mr. Trump. And Loudoun County voted for Hiilairy who would have raised taxes. That is too funny. LOL!


When not collecting tax is considered to add to the debt there is clearly a problem with the thinking. When there is a loss of income there should be an equal cut in spending.  We never seem to get to that second step.


Not sure I ever heard Matthew complain when Obama was President.

Barack Obama—Under President Obama, the national debt grew the most dollar-wise. He added $7.917 trillion, a 68 percent increase, in seven years. This was the fifth-largest increase percentage-wise. Obama’s budgets included the economic stimulus package. It added $787 billion by cutting taxes, extending unemployment benefits, and funding public works projects. The Obama tax cuts added $858 billion to the debt in two years.

Obama’s budget increased defense spending to between $700 billion and $800 billion a year. Federal income was down, thanks to lower tax receipts from the 2008 financial crisis. He also sponsored the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. It was designed to reduce the debt by $143 billion over 10 years. But these savings didn’t show up until the later years.


How about a flat tax 10% on income. So if you make $10K, you owe $1K, if you make $100K, you owe $10K and if you make $1M, you owe $100K. and add a federal sales tax of 2% on certain purchases, like homes, cars, boats….the rich still pays the most. In addition, we need to shutdown certain govt agencies that are not needed, Dept of Education, IRS, HUD…..


These comments pretty much sum up the Democrat party these days.

1. They hate the fact that citizens can keep more of their own money - “why the government ‘owns’ everything in the US, why are we allowing the people to keep more of it?!”

2. They hate the fact that the US now has a lower corporate tax rate than Mexico (30% vs 21%) and jobs will be returning to US soil.

3. They hate the fact that virtually EVERYBODY will be getting a tax break.  The increased child tax credits and increased standard deductions ensure low-income folks will benefit as virtually none of them itemized taxes to begin with.

Newsflash to Democrats: the US is not founded on socialism where the gov’t has the right to your money.  Citizens should keep every penny they earn unless the gov’t has a verified need (not want) for the taxes.  This does not include taking from some and giving to others.


Hmmm, I have a gut feeling I will pay more.  Sooner or later I always, do and I have dealt with taxes for 57 years.


the last sentence is what will be the story in a few years, not the short-term little bump that individuals see for a few years. 

Glad to see Barbara Comstock’s pleased.  She has so little to look forward to this year.


Please tell me we did not pay for this “study” Buffington!!!  There are FREE calculators online.


Did we really pay a consulting firm to confirm that this tax bill, with it’s transparent goals of cutting taxes for the wealthy, would lower the taxes of the majority of residents in the wealthiest County in the Country? Nice work.

I look forward to the study to establish why it is that the richest County in the Country lags behind the rest of Virginia in charitable giving.

Nothing to see here, I suppose, as long as the rich get a little richer—> “...The new tax law is also expected to add $1 trillion to the federal debt over the next decade.”

Post a comment

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments express only the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of this website or any associated person or entity. Any user who believes a message is objectionable can contact us at ltmeditor@loudountimes.com.

More News

As Seen IN PRINT
The Loudoun Times-Mirror

is an interactive, digital replica
of the printed newspaper.
Click here for all e-editions.
Email UPDATES