Posted on 11/19/2017 1:20:05 PM PST by Mariner
ATLANTA - A popular deduction targeted in the GOP's overhaul of the tax code is used by more than a quarter of all filers in a majority of states, including many led by Republicans where some residents eventually could see their federal tax bills rise.
The exact effect in every state isn't known, in part because of differences in the Senate and House versions of the bill. But the change to the deduction for state and local taxes could alter the bottom lines for millions of taxpayers who itemize.
Residents in high-tax, Democratic-led states appear to be the hardest hit. But some filers also could be left paying more in traditional Republican states, such as Georgia and Utah where about a third of taxpayers claim the deduction.
"It's a bad deal for middle class families and for most Georgians," said Georgia state Rep. Bob Trammell, leader of the House Democrats.
He said Republicans are eliminating the state and local deduction to help pay for tax cuts for businesses and the wealthy.
How many winners and losers are in each state depends in large part on another aspect of the Republican tax overhaul that would nearly double the standard deduction — to about $12,000 for individuals and about $24,000 for married couples.
Republicans say that provision would be a net benefit for most tax filers.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Maybe some people aren’t that saavy, hence the ability for their family to take care of them.
I like the way you think. I liked Trump’s original plan better than the one coming out of the congress, but a plan cutting rates, reducing brackets, and generally simplifying the system is a good thing. Especially cutting the corp tax rate. I say we take what we can get while we can get it and put our people back to work as the economy expands.
People should not accept these liberal arguments (ie, arguments the AP/Sacramento Bee, etc) without thinking it through themselves. Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that cutting the tax rates and reducing the brackets will result in actual tax cuts for most taxpayers and that the ensuing booming economy will lift the middle class as well as the wealthy.
And most (actual) taxpayers will soon restructure their finances to take advantage of the new plan.
“If the California resident and I have an identical tax return with the exception of his deduction for state income tax I will pay more in Federal Taxes than the Californian.”
That is not necessarily true.
You also could deduct your sales tax paid, property tax, excise taxes on your boat and truck, the school bond etc.
It’s entirely possible, with my property tax capped by Prop 13, you could have more SALT deductions than me. IN fact the state of Texas, due to its wealth, is the 3rd largest recipient (net) of the SALT deductions.
Responsible persons have also had money stolen from them every pay period without their consent and were told the money would be there. Social security is not a hand out. If it’s stopped, fine...but those who were robbed have a right to get their money back. Despite the rhetoric, social security is not an entitlement. That money belongs to those who had it taken from them.
It’s absolutely hysterical to watch so called conservatives bark in support of a GOP tax plan while at the same time screech in support of daddy Government tax plan as if we have a tax problem. What happened to real conservatism?
We DONT HAVE A TAX PROBLEM WE HAVE A PIGGY GOVERNMENT SPENDING PROBLEM!!
The Nationalist populists will continue to cheer as long as it furthers their cause of “making the other side pay” even at the expense of a disgusting tax policy
Responsible persons have also had money stolen from them every pay period without their consent and were told the money would be there. Social security is not a hand out. If it’s stopped, fine...but those who were robbed have a right to get their money back. Despite the rhetoric, social security is not an entitlement. That money belongs to those who had it taken from them.
Sorry for the double post...not sure how that happened.
Hi.
#1 I don’t support the Federal government income tax system,
it is un-Constitutional, and I pay taxes to them only because they threaten to destroy my life if I don’t.
The last time I checked each person in a marriage gets a standard deduction of $6300 which is the same as a single standard deduction per person.
Now if you are talking about the tax rates you may have a point. Taxes are designed to tax you on what you have left over after paying for what it costs to live a “normal” life.
I agree with you on the EITC, that is just income re-distribution. I have a child and never qualified for the ETIC and believe you me, I paid dearly to raise her.
I agree with you, if you can’t afford your kids don’t have them.
As for education we should subsidize that, but the Federal government should not be in the education loan business. I told my daughter I would support her through college, but only for STEM or medical degrees, at affordable universities. She went a different way and is doing fine, with no student loan debt.
If more parents held that line, fewer non-breeders would be picking up the public university tab.
Lastly consider this, Children are our future. They will pay for your medicare, social security, work to enrich the portfolios you hold, take over paying the taxes you no longer pay, et al. Even if you had no offspring, you owe “our children a chance”.
The real conservatives are the ones concentrating on getting things done one step at a time rather than wasting their efforts and wind looking for purity.
That’s how you fix problems. You attack the first bit, the next bit and after a time you can revise the earlier bits closer to where the Constitution has set them to be.
While we are attacking and simplifying the tax code we are drawing back and attracting businesses & investments, redeveloping an industrial base and bringing back a strong middle class. POTUS is moving to decrease the size of Government more than any President in 50 years. Let some of those changes percolate through, let the judicial benches be filled with conservative judges. Then we will have the leverage to really clean the swamp.
I learned in my 20’s a rather gross proverb that none the less has stood me in good stead life long.”Perfection is the enema of the good.” another pertinent one is “The longest journey starts with a single step and the path is not always straight.”
I’m in favor of cutting taxes, cutting spending, cutting regulations, cutting government, cutting illegal immigration, cutting Islamic immigration, restructuring our trade agreements, revitalizing industry, manufacturing and the economy and putting our people back to work. Trump also favors of all of the above and that’s why I like him. The GOPe not so much.
I’m for all of what you say. I can’t find disagreement in any item you propose.
Two wise sayings to live by. I’ll have to remember those going forward
In ALL FAIRNESS we should not be talking about eliminating some tax breaks and keeping others.
If we eliminate all, 100% of deductions, exemptions, exclusions and credits, raise the “standard deduction”, set a floor beneath which the poorest pay no tax, and set a single flat tax that applies to everyone, then MOST folks would get a tax break.
And that one act - a universal flat tax with no deductions, exemptions, exclusions and credits, by eliminating 100% of the social & economic engineering in the tax code - would be such a boost to the economy (people and companies making decisions based on natural financial reasons, not to get a better tax break) that it will take care of the issue of being “revenue neutral”.
Why the RINOs don’t propose it? It takes off the table the buying and selling of votes and influence with rules added to the tax code, and with that the use of the tax code to get political contributions for the next election campaign.
I would LOVE to see this flat tax proposal become a Constitutional amendment, leaving Congress only the ability to raise or lower the one universal flat tax, NOT pick and choose whose ox will get gored and whose won’t.
“And that one act - a universal flat tax with no deductions, exemptions, exclusions and credits, by eliminating 100% of the social & economic engineering in the tax code - would be such a boost to the economy (people and companies making decisions based on natural financial reasons, not to get a better tax break) that it will take care of the issue of being “revenue neutral”.
Precisely correct.
ALL Interest should be treated the same for all Individuals.
You get Interest? Add it to your taxable Income.
You pay Interest? Deduct it from your taxable Income.
Do it on line 6a on the 1040. And 1040 Eazy Peezy.
Enough Monkey Business.
Why can’t they let me keep my deduction for state and local taxes PLUS give me the other proposed deductions too? What’s so hard to understand about it all. Don’t engage in smoke and mirrors. Keep it simple. Don’t insult my intelligence. Make me happy by taking away this anxiety about this whole tax cut business. I’m your friend. Don’t disappoint me.
So me and the wife both work. Are you saying we should only have a $12,000 standard deduction? That sounds like a marriage penalty, not a subsidy.
Basically, if you are in New York, you would have to be earning into 6 figures before the extra $12,000 in standard deduction would not more than cover the loss of the state and local taxes. In other states it would be even higher.
Bottom line: Good for the so called middle class. In states with no income tax, you no longer would have to keep track of your sales taxes that you were charged. Simplified.
“Basically, if you are in New York, you would have to be earning into 6 figures before the extra $12,000 in standard deduction would not more than cover the loss of the state and local taxes. In other states it would be even higher.”
Since when is $125k or so not middle class?
Is that, like, upper class? lol
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.