Posted on 11/02/2017 7:21:40 AM PDT by GIdget2004
House Republicans will propose limiting the deductions for mortgage interest and state and local taxes in the tax bill they are releasing on Thursday, according to a summary of the legislation obtained by The Hill.
The bill, called the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” largely follows the parameters that GOP leaders and the White House outlined in September. It would reduce the number of individual tax brackets, slash rates for businesses and eliminate a number of tax breaks.
In order to offset the costs of the legislation, Republicans are putting forward some proposals that are sure to be controversial.
The bill would keep the mortgage-interest deduction, but only for newly purchased homes up to $500,000. Homes bought in the past could keep the deduction regardless of price. The housing industry is sure to push back on that cap.
The legislation would also taxpayers to deduct their state and local property taxes, but only up to $10,000. It would not allow people to deduct state and local income or sales taxes.
Blue-state Republicans have fought to preserve that deduction, which is important to their constituents. It’s not clear how receptive they will be to the compromise.
“I’m still analyzing it, but right now, I’m strongly leaning no,” Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) said.
Several other controversial ideas that were floated to help pay for the bill, including limits on pre-tax contributions to 401(k) plans and including repeal of ObamaCare’s individual mandate, were apparently not included, according to the summary.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
How is that possible? Can you break down the math because I don’t see how that would happen with the increased width of tax brackets and lower rates.
There is info on this...just look for it...http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/02/gop-tax-bill/
Thanks for the links, I’ll check them out. :-)
Another point of clarification for this thread is that the mortgage interest deduction is for *new* mortgages, not existing ones.
“dead in the water the way it is currently written”
Well of course.
Congressional Kabuki requires that House Rs ‘improve’ it, Senate Rs ‘improve’ it, and Trump ‘improves’ it.
That’s just the way it’s done. And all these future steps have been agreed to already.
Looks like a good start to me. Changes will be popular ones.
Agreed... as a CA freeper, I ran my 2016 taxes under the proposed plan and would have paid $150 more in Fed Income Tax, but nearly $3K more in CA income taxes. I am nearly certain that the greatest tax impact this plan will have on those the media is saying it will impact most (upper-middle and high earned income MFJ in high tax states) will be on state income tax (due to a significant reduction in federal itemized deductions carried into the state formula and resulting in significantly higher state taxable income). And... there is absolutely ZERO chance states like CA, NY, or OR reduce state income tax rates or modify the brackets... free money to them. Which leads me to ask the question: Is the proposed structure specifically designed to get the producers in high-tax states to relocate by significantly increasing state tax burden? Heck, thinking about investing in real estate in no/low-tax states just at the thought.
Compared to Texas who receives $1.50 for every dollar sent, it’s quite reasonable.
And don’t even get me going on South Carolina, who is 1st in per capita use of the SALT deductions AND receives $8!, $8! in federal expenditures for every dollar in income taxes paid.
It seems like it would be easy to create a family farm exemption. Create a percentage of land that is used for farming and exempt it up to, I dunno, $20 million.
How many farmers are dying each year with tracts of land worth $5 million? Less than a thousand?
I agree philosophically with an appeal of the estate tax or at least a large exemption. (There is a part of me that thinks that no one should inherit hundreds of millions of dollars but I can’t fully explain why).
It just seems like when you are screwing around with families that make less than $150K, 10 figure estates should take a back seat.
Yeah, that’s Peter King.
The 12 percent rate only goes up to $45,000 for individuals. Pathetic. You need better in order to eliminate those blue state goodies without pushback.
TAX CUTS DON'T COST THE GOVERNMENT ANYTHING!
You have so far shown me nothing to give credence to. Seriously, a single link to a single web site with a flawed and very incomplete analysis? Its like believing in global warming.
That said, it’s been widely known and accepted for decades...
Am I supposed to take your word for it? Sorry. I don't believe that any more than I believe Jerry Brown has a balanced CA budget.
But if that were the intent they’d be removing the deductions for businesses instead of individuals.
Would be good policy beyond a doubt but businesses donate faithfully for their deductions.
Wow, imagine if California businesses couldn’t deduct those gasoline taxes!
No no no no no no
NO!
News from VA gov race via NR: “Ralph Northam says he would sign a bill banning sanctuary cities, yet he voted against the very same ban to settle a tie in the Virginia Senate”
CA provides a useful object lesson in what not to do imo.
I read in an email I received that said the 12 percent bracket goes up to $90,000 FOR MARRIED COUPLES, meaning that the individual 12% bracket will presumably only reach $45,000. There will also be the obscene 35% and the f***-the-rich 39.6% bracket. No way you can get rid of the blue state goodies people like Peter King love so much with such a pathetic rate cut.
So much for simplification. Pathetic.
Yep. For those of you in New York with the average $6,000 property tax bill and the income and sales tax rates to boot, this bill will not be of much help. Same with prosperous people in other blue states like mine.
As Taxman said, regarding my personal idea for a tax cut plan, rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic.
I have no obligation to prove facts to you.
Do your own research and be edified.
Or not.
Does the fact that SC has the highest percentage of retired military residents in the U.S. affect that stat? Idk.
According to my math a middle income family of 4 would have to be taking itemized deductions of over 30k in the old system to not be saving money on this proposed tax break using the increased standard deduction and new rates and bracket.
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.