Skip to comments.The Real Reason Democrats Hate Losing the State and Local Tax Deduction
Posted on 11/29/2017 10:53:22 AM PST by Boomer
Since state and local taxes can be deducted, the tax burden is shifted from those governments to the federal government, which in turn makes up for this lost revenue by keeping taxes higher on the rest of the country. In effect, taxpayers in low-tax states and cities, like those in the South, are forced to subsidize the lavish public spending of liberals in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and California, who have little incentive to reduce the local taxes that fund their pet projects. It is much like making charitable donations online using someone elses credit card. It does not make you Robin Hood. It makes you a charlatan, which is why rather than pay the bill, the millionaires who helped put these Democrats in power, would rather flee like cowards.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
If it’s so bad, why do Corporations get to keep these deductions?
>> In effect, taxpayers in low-tax states and cities, like those in the South, are forced to subsidize the lavish public spending of liberals in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and California
What a total crock of BS.
Household tax contributions from CA and NY exceed those from TX. And by much as 50% compared to other “Southern” states.
Top 3 corporate revenue contributors to the fed, in order, are TX, CA, NY differentiated by small percentages. The remaining states are practically off the map.
Hey, when Louisiana needs a few hundred billion to recover from a hurricane, you don't expect their citizens to pay for that - do you? NY, NJ, TX, and CA better pony up. Too bad we have to cut your deductions though - the hedge fund billionaires wrote the bill.
Corporations are not people. They are a legal fiction, so they do not really pay taxes. They just pass them on to others.
I agree. This is 100% B.S.
What's happening here is that the wealthiest taxpayers in "blue" states like California, New York and most of New England are effectively subsidizing the rest of the country at the Federal level ... and the rest of their own states at the state and local levels.
And too bad LA squandered the fed bulkhead funding it received previously.
One well known.
When you debate Freepers on this issue they know very well that people in states without state income tax subsidize residents in states financed by income tax. Those Freepers want every dime of my money they can pry from me.
Your numbers are meaningless without considering the size of the population and the amount of income per individual. the bottom line is that if someone in Wyoming makes $100k and some one in california makes $100k, both should pay the same amount in federal taxes. Otherwise, one is subsidizing the other.
indeed this is correct....and just try to stop the leftist D’s from using our tax money to pay for their campaigns and campaign supporters! Big swamp, I hate to say it but my bet is that DJT won’t be able to get Congress to drain this swamp
All that may be true ... but it pits states against each other and hurts our political chances in certain battleground states.
While I agree with tax simplification I care more about cutting spending and taxes across the board. Less political fallout.
The liberals fear the loss of high earners who will leave the state if they cannot deduct state and local taxes on their federal returns. This is the real reason why NY, CA, and other big liberal states want to keep the deduction.
Flat tax. 10% across the board. No deductions, no exemptions, no credits, and no refunds, regardless of what your earnings are.
Everybody plays, everybody pays.
It was intersting the first time it was posted also
It is never proper to feed the Federal pig more money than it ought to get to perform its Constitutionally mandated functions.
Not feeding the pig is perhaps the main reason to cut Federal tax RECEIPTS by the Feds, not to save each of us money, though that would be nice, but to STARVE THE BEAST, because the genius of Orthodox Americanism is LIMITED GOVERNMENT.
If you want to limit government, you MUST limit how much money you give it, damn it!
This proposed “tax plan” does not (especially in the long run) cut receipts.
And if the plan’s gyrations with what is deductible and what is not happen to swap around how much money the citizens of various states pay, I would rather the “progressive” states pay more than the good states, because that would put a damper on progressive garbage. We are in a battle for these USA, crap happens in a battle.
HOWEVER, I would rather the plan do the right thing and CUT RECEIPTS to limit the Fed government.
Then the SEVERAL STATES can do what we want, the good ones can keep taxes low and let their people build and grow, and the progressive states can tax their people and try to get their centralized control schemes to work, and they will learn from that experience when they see what the free states accomplish.
Cut Federal Taxes! Free Our States!
Yep. All that light rail, high paid public workers, overpriced crappy schools, etc.. etc.. is expensive.
But should I be forced to subsidize something I never had a voice in . NO
Nashville’s lib mayor talking outloud about light rail public transportation costing 9 BILLION dollars. The most absurd thing I have ever seen. This is a very expensive way to relieve traffic problems which it ultimately will not do.
Don’t like high taxes, heavy traffic and crime, being packed in like a bunch of sardines and paying 3 prices for the privilege?
Move out of the big city. Come to the burbs or even (ghast) the country. You will be happy
In places like suburban NY and NJ pols tell the taxpayers that their prop tax will be returned in part bt the federsl deduction. So for years school district voters have agreed to budgets and tax increases figuring they would get 25% to 33% back in deductions. Now the unions are terrigied that without the deduction the school districtz could face a tax revolt. Which would actually be meaningless since no mechanism really exists in these places to reduce spending
This is in many ways quite artificial.
NY and CA (and TX) residents include many of the largest corporate owners in the US, besides these states being the HQ’s of the largest national corporations.
They report income in these states based on their operations everywhere else. The money they make in South Carolina is (mainly)reported in New York or CA.
Add to that that they also are the home of the largest lenders and holders of debt, revenues from which are also reported there.
If each state were an independent country (a hypothetical), its tax laws would require reporting local operations income to be duly taxed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.