Tax burden on low-income taxpayers will be reduced from $100-300
→
Tax reform is in the interest of low-income taxpayers
My initial thought is, just because it will have this one benefit does not mean that it will be in one's best interest. Maybe it will also have a slew of terrible consequences that will clearly not benefit the low-income taxpayer. Maybe it will lead to their unemployment, for example.
- (A) This sounds like a really good thing! It also doesn't distinguish between low-income taxpayers and otherwise so maybe this will actually help the low-income taxpayers - they don't need an accountant anymore! Yay!
(B) Uh oh, that isn't good. Sure, this tax reform will save the low-income taxpayers $100-300 a year but they will simultaneously have to pay about $500 more money because their rents are going up! In this case, it can be pretty much concluded that the tax reform actually is NOT in the best-interests of those low-income tax payers: they pay more money!
(C) Maybe they didn't vote for them because of their beliefs on taxes. Also, simply voting for someone who happens to want reform X doesn't say much about that voter's sentiment towards X or whether or not X is good for them.
(D) This looks like a good thing! Low-income families probably won't have to pay as much in taxes because of this!
(E) This sounds like an amazing benefit. Many low-income taxpayers won't have to pay taxes at all?! Those low-income taxpayers are like, "sign me up!"