Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge dismisses high-tax states' lawsuit against Trump tax deduction limits
foxbusiness.com ^

Posted on 09/30/2019 10:24:00 AM PDT by Conserv

A federal judge handed the Trump administration a win Monday, dismissing a lawsuit from states with high taxes.

The lawsuit asked U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken to block the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act's limit on how much people can deduct in state and local taxes (SALT). The provision effectively raised the tax burden on citizens of high-tax states.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; connecticut; incometaxes; interstatecommerce; judiciary; maryland; newjersey; newyork; obamajudge; statesrights; taxcutsandjobsact; taxreform; tcja; tenthamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last
New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Maryland brought the suit in July 2018, claiming the tax deduction limit was a way for the Trump administration to stick it to blue states. The judge ruled that the limit did not violate the 10th Amendment, which says that powers not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution are left to the states.
1 posted on 09/30/2019 10:24:00 AM PDT by Conserv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Conserv

LOL the left sued trying to use the 10th.

They’ve completely ignored the 10th until now.


2 posted on 09/30/2019 10:26:08 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conserv

I never understood the state income tax deduction. Why should people in high tax states pay less in federal taxes? Why should the federal government subsidize high tax states like New York and California? The imbeciles who voted themselves entrenched Democrat leadership are at fault here.


3 posted on 09/30/2019 10:34:40 AM PDT by Rinnwald
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conserv

Appointed July 20, 2011 by Barack Obama! Color me shocked. I think that’s the first time I guessed wrong about who appointed a judge.


4 posted on 09/30/2019 10:37:09 AM PDT by euclid216
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rinnwald

Gee, I thought all these rich people wanted to pay more taxes.


5 posted on 09/30/2019 10:37:23 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: euclid216
He is the first openly gay man to be confirmed as an Article III judge.

He certainly put it in The Resistance's pooper...

6 posted on 09/30/2019 10:39:27 AM PDT by kiryandil (The Media & the DNC tells you who you're gonna vote for. We CHOSE Trump.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rinnwald

>>I never understood the state income tax deduction. Why should people in high tax states pay less in federal taxes? Why should the federal government subsidize high tax states like New York and California? <<

The average NJ/NJ/CA/CONN person pays more in federal taxes than the rest of the country. How is the Federal government subsidizing them when they pay more to begin with?

Besides, what part of paying taxes on taxes do you not understand? Just because you are sending a check to two different places, still makes it a tax.

I get it, the grasping commie dems have raised taxes so high to begin with. That said...I’d be fine with eliminating SALT entirely. Make the rest of the country eat it as well. See who squeals more then.


7 posted on 09/30/2019 10:44:25 AM PDT by Malsua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rinnwald
Good.

Why should we, in New Hampshire, with no income or sales taxes be forced to subsidize rich folks in NY, etc., who, by electing leftists, have both taxes?

8 posted on 09/30/2019 10:47:29 AM PDT by Mogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rinnwald

“Why should people in high tax states pay less in federal taxes?”

The deduction propagates Plank #2 of the Communist Manifesto.

Two Communistic thieving governments can steal more than one.


9 posted on 09/30/2019 10:51:27 AM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Conserv

“The provision effectively raised the tax burden on citizens of high-tax states.”

A giant half truth amounting to a lie.

The provision forced the citizens of high tax states to recognize the effective high tax burden their politicians have raised on them.

Without the new federal tax provision the high tax states had federal taxpayers subsidizing their high state taxes with higher federal taxes on everyone, to fund the generous federal deductions allowed for state taxes.

In my book their should be either 1 of 2 things: Preferably no deductions for state taxes, or at the most deductions for state taxes set to be no more than what could be taken for state taxes in a state whose taxes were the median level of state taxes among all the states.

But my total preferred choice is a universal flat tax, with no deductions, no exemptions, no exclusions and no credits - just a flat tax everyone pays, period. The only exemption to it being universal is I would have an income floor below which the tax would not apply - for the very very poorest among us (but finding that level would count federal and state benefits as income).


10 posted on 09/30/2019 10:52:25 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conserv

This is how the fed-gov was “shadow-subsidizing” those states. Rather than just giving the states money, they were reducing the income tax burden on the citizens of those states, allowing the states to “tax more”.


11 posted on 09/30/2019 10:53:43 AM PDT by cuban leaf (We're living in Dr. Zhivago but without the love triangle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

WINNING!!!


12 posted on 09/30/2019 10:53:48 AM PDT by mplc51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Malsua

“...I get it, the grasping commie dems have raised taxes so high to begin with. That said...I’d be fine with eliminating SALT entirely. Make the rest of the country eat it as well. See who squeals more then.”
************************************************
Well, I suspect that “the rest of the country” would be tickled pink to eliminate the SALT deduction entirely. I know I would. Let’s all campaign with our representatives to do just that!


13 posted on 09/30/2019 10:57:37 AM PDT by House Atreides (Boycott the NFL 100% — PERMANENTLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mogger

Why? Because wonce they are done destroying their State they will move to yours and start again by damaging your State.


14 posted on 09/30/2019 10:59:57 AM PDT by Lockbox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rinnwald
I never understood the state income tax deduction. Why should the federal government subsidize high tax states like New York and California?

I never understood the mortgage interest deduction. Why should the federal government subsidize high home pricing anywhere?

15 posted on 09/30/2019 11:07:59 AM PDT by Roccus (When you talk to a politician...ANY politician...always say, "Remember Ceausescu")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
I agree with you about preferring a flat tax (rate). We must start to educate the LIV about the difference between a tax and a tax RATE. I know you mean a flat tax rate, but, believe it or not, some people are so ignorant about numbers that the left can convince them that everyone will pay the same amount of tax if we had a “flat tax”. These are often people who pay no income tax at all, but they do vote.

This is similar to the language involving lowering tax RATES which usually leads to increasing tax revenues (taxes). It may seem like a small thing, but is even more important in this second instance. Not educating the public about the difference between a tax rate and a tax(amount) is one of the main reasons that the left got away with claiming that Trump’s tax reform only reduced “taxes for the rich.” This falsehood was a big part of the reason we lost the House in 2018. Most people do not understand numbers and so can be easily fooled.

16 posted on 09/30/2019 11:09:40 AM PDT by Freee-dame (Best election ever! 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Conserv

“...The provision effectively raised the tax burden on citizens of high-tax states...”
*****************************
I was surprised that Maryland was among the states trying to advance this lawsuit. As a Maryland resident, if they REALLY cared about their taxpayers they would allow us to itemize on our state tax returns without a requirement to first itemize on our federal tax returns. The DemocRATS in our legislature blocked the needed changes to allow this,


17 posted on 09/30/2019 11:20:41 AM PDT by House Atreides (Boycott the NFL 100% — PERMANENTLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Gee, I thought all these rich people wanted to pay more taxes.

No, all those rich socialists(well they want the socialist life pushed on you but not them)want high taxes on the middle class people in the state so they can give the producers money to the non producers. Now since the actual taxpayers won't be able to write off a portion of those excessive taxes those states a rightfully afraid, as has been proven, that the producers will flee their states.

18 posted on 09/30/2019 11:21:23 AM PDT by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Malsua

The average NJ/NJ/CA/CONN person pays more in federal taxes than the rest of the country. How is the Federal government subsidizing them when they pay more to begin with?


How? By offsetting a portion of those taxes paid. Pay your fare share bro...


19 posted on 09/30/2019 11:23:19 AM PDT by Hotlanta Mike ("itYou can avoid reality, but you can't avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Freee-dame

I agree.

And yes, when I speak of “flat tax” I am speaking of a flat tax rate.


20 posted on 09/30/2019 11:28:50 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson