Posted on 09/29/2017 9:59:24 AM PDT by rktman
As President Trump prepares to sell his tax plan to the nation's manufacturing lobby on Friday, his best-laid tax plans have already drawn objections from some fellow Republicans who are fuming over the decision to end deductions for state and local income taxes.
The situation will pit the White House against members of Congress from states that pile high income taxes on top of what the federal government takes from paychecks.
High-income Californians, for instance, pay as much as 13.3 per cent of their income to the state in addition to their federal taxes. New Yorkers can pay up to 8.82 per cent.
Just seven U.S. states have no personal income taxes, including Texas, Florida and Nevada
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
That too
“By giving a blue state domicilary at tax deduction that means taxpayers in Florida are subsidizing the overspending blue states.”
For a street lawyer you don’t know jack sh!t.
For those that itemize, in every state, the state SALES tax, property taxes and excise taxes are all deductible.
People in FL who itemize deduct the FL state sales tax...if they’re smart enough to do so.
Why should the Fed be subsidizing high tax states?
“Why should the Fed be subsidizing high tax states?”
After all that’s been posted on this thread refuting that contention I can only deduce you are a paid GOPe operative, or just plain stupid.
Draining the swamp in D.C. and in the states too.
If it wasn’t for the extreme stupid in your last sentence I would have agreed with you.
Someone else saving taxes does not equate to YOU paying for it, any more than letting anyone else keep their own money means that it comes out of your pocket.
That is a liberal-type argument.
“What it does is put pressure on states with high rates to lower them.
Draining the swamp in D.C. and in the states too. “
You need to click the link in post #69 to improve your knowledge in this matter, but you are both looking like you have a severe knowledge deficit.
These “high tax states” are subsidizing the state YOU live in, allowing them to have artificially lower state taxes.
Because the state YOU live in seems to not be able to support itself. And therefore has become a parasite on the rest of us.
“That is a liberal-type argument.”
thanks for the assist.
Fighting off the Social Justice Warriors on Free Republic is becoming as difficult as Democratic Underground.
Well, then maybe those states should lower their fricking taxes.
“Well, then maybe those states should lower their fricking taxes.”
In CA and NY, not only do we pay our own way, we subsidize the freeloaders in other states.
That’s how they are able to keep their state taxes artificially low.
Check the link at post #69.
Yeah, same here in TX. I fear my effective tax rate is going higher.
I live in SoCal. Save your rage for someone who doesn’t have a front row seat.
Maybe these states should remove the state taxes.
The states benefit but not the Feds.
Maybe folks in the 7 states without state taxes should be given a “no state tax” exemption, of an average of what NY & CA taxpayers get to exempt. To make it all even of what we’re all actually sending to Feds.
Agree 100%
BTTT!
A socialist answer if I’ve ever seen one.
Excepting constitutional restraint or power delegated to the feds, states are sovereign and independent from the feds and from each other. Anything that has deviated from that is unconstitutional and should be done away with.
Jane, please pay attention and read this thread.
State income OR Sales taxes, in addition to all property and excise taxes are deductible for anyone who itemizes and files a schedule A.
Of the seven states that have no income tax, they ALL have a sales tax and often a very high one.
High income earners in those states who are able to itemize will benefit to a great degree when they deduct their sales taxes, along with their mortgage, property tax, excise tax etc.
Why would you want to punish them?
What is the reason behind that emotion?
Is that how you answer the accurate accusation that your state is a parasite that has artificially lower state taxes because you are subsidized by CA and NY?
Yeah, that’s brilliant sh!t right there.
That’s “subsidized” according to the two item methodology that WalletHub constructed and The Atlantic borrowed for their article. Keep in mind GIGO.
https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/#methodology
Good info, thanks. I like this answer that explains why southern states dominate the “most dependent” category is historical. During the many decades in the 20th century when the South was solidly Democratic, its congressional representatives in both the House and the Senate, enjoying great seniority, came to hold leadership positions on powerful committees, which they used to send federal dollars back to their home states in the form of contracts, projects, installations.
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.