Posted on 01/10/2017 10:32:52 AM PST by mikelets456
The two preferences are among the most expensive provisions in the tax code. They are also viewed as disproportionately benefiting upper-income people. Of the two, the state and local tax deduction, which tends to benefit areas that lean Democratic, looks to be more endangered.
A 2015 paper from the Tax Foundation found that the 10 counties that benefit the most from the deduction are located in New York, New Jersey, California and Connecticut.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
When it comes to Hill reporting, I’ll wait to see it to believe it. Otherwise, this is just them trying to stir the pot and generate opposition to the Republican agenda.
AMT wipes out local tax deductions for the wealthy, why would they focus on the middle class?
Sorry, Paul Ryan has a history of this type of stuff.
AMT wipes out local tax deductions for the wealthy, why would they focus on the middle class?
Think of the tens of millions of man hours saved by making tax preparation easier. For example, the August 15th extension was eliminated in 2005. IIRC, the IRS estimated that 20+ million man hours were saved by that one simple step.
I am thinking “this is going to flip a whole lotta states from blue to red faster than you can say ‘H&R Block’.”
This seems like a no-brainer.
Create a fairer flatter tax code with fewer deductions, and screw the Blue States while you’re doing it? Win-WIn
Why should lower income families get preferential treatment? Progressive taxation is a foundation of socialism/communism.
The wealthy do not pay AMT. It mostly hits two-income couples with incomes between $150K and $400K.
The wealthy are hit by the Pease phaseout, but that does not have a big effect in high-tax states.
This is clever way to raise taxes on Democrats in blue states, without doing much harm to GOP voters.
I live and work in one of the counties that get huge benefit from this, and I’m fully in favor of eliminating this deduction, assuming basic rates are lowered so that the change is (at least) revenue neutral.
Why should middle-class taxpayers, and taxpayers in general from low-state-tax states, subsidize the profligate state governments of NY and California? If taxpayers in NY and California felt the full cost of their state governments, maybe they’d push to have those state taxes reduced. In any case, there is no reason why taxpayers in Alabama or Iowa or Texas should “contribute” to Albany and Sacramento.
It would hit my family personally, but I’ll take the hit as it will lower somewhat the “subsidies” flowing to the deep blue state of Maryland where I live.
No one peep on eliminating inheritance tax.
And it taxpayers were deprived of the deduction, more of them might just get off their butts and raise holy hell at the local and state levels. There are no atheists in foxholes.
Get rid of all deductions and go to a flat tax.
You have to look at the whole picture. Even with these deductions, the high-income taxpayers in these states are still paying the bulk of the Federal taxes. The red states, where incomes are much lower, get a lot of payments into their economy from these taxes relative to what they pay out.
Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and food stamps in these states are large covered by high-income blue state taxpayers. This allows these states to have lower state income taxes than they otherwise would. Over in the rich blue states, the total tax burden is higher because they’re paying both for their own social benefits, and for everyone else’s too.
Now suppose we reverted to the original Constitution, where help for the poor and other benefit programs were solely the responsibility of the states. Everything would be very different. In the red states, they would have to have higher tax and their benefit recipients would get fewer benefits. In the blue states, they could cut taxes.
Say around 6%. Everybody pays....everybody has skin in the game.
This way everyone is paying their "fair share".
See my second post. Maryland, as a wealthy blue state, is still a net payer rather than a subsidy recipient.
Remember, most Federal tax is paid by the top 10% in income, and Maryland has a relatively large number of these people.
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.