Kramer: That's a shame!"
Posted on 04/18/2018 1:52:05 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Lots of people just talk about soaking the rich, but Donald Trump and the GOP actually did it — in California, anyway, although they won’t be alone. The controversial phase-out of the state and local tax deduction (SALT) will drop like a bombshell on high-tax-rate blue states, which is one reason why Democrats so staunchly opposed it. According to an analysis from California’s Franchise Tax Board, the Golden State will be Ground Zero:
President Donald Trump’s tax cuts will be anything but for about 1 million California taxpayers who will owe Uncle Sam more money a year from now.
They’re the Californians who will lose a collective $12 billion because the new law caps a deduction they have been able to take for paying their state and local taxes, according to a new analysis by the Franchise Tax Board.
Very wealthy Californians earning more than $1 million a year will pay the lion’s share of that money, with 43,000 of them paying a combined $9 billion.
It’s not all coming from the wealthy. Another $1.1 billion will come from households earning less than $250,000, hiking their tax liability $4400 on average. That’s not peanuts, but it’s a far cry from the average $209,302 per family that will be owed by those households earning more than a million dollars a year.
Put this another way. That represents the federal tax liabilities that everyone else in the country subsidized through SALT. The “progressive” income tax used taxes paid by people in low-tax states to repay the wealthy for their taxes in places like California. The SALT deduction really only comes into play for people who can itemize enough to outstrip the standard deductions, so its benefit plays mostly to the wealthy anyway.
It also plays mostly to the benefit of a very few states. California and New York taxpayers soak up almost third of all benefits from SALT deductions; add in New Jersey, Illinois, Texas, and Pennsylvania, and they account for more than half of its benefits. Taxpayers in most other states end up footing the bill.
Not only do other taxpayers end up subsidizing the wealthy, they also indemnify blue-state politicians against the consequences of their tax policies. Next year, taxpayers in California, New York, and other high-tax states will have to truly pay for their own taxes rather than foist them off on everyone else. When that happens, will high tax rates be politically sustainable? Will the political party that insists on the rich “paying their fair share” celebrate the impact of the rich actually paying their fair share? Probably not, which is the real reason Democrats are running on the repeal of the tax cuts.
That will likely prove to be a very popular platform … in California and New York. Among the millionaires. And the Democrats who run those states. For now.
ACLU sues Los Alamitos over city’s move to exempt itself from California sanctuary laws
The ACLU sued the city of Los Alamitos on Wednesday, alleging its move earlier this week to exempt itself from California’s sanctuary laws violates the state constitution and wastes taxpayer money.
It's a little hard to find good data but this analysis is interesting: Which States Are Givers and Which Are Takers?
It shows that most states get back more than they pay in, but the data isn't the most current.
The basic pattern is that the rich states pay in the most, naturally, and the poor states receive the most due to higher poverty rates and more government services.
It doesn't address your overhead issue directly but it does consider the number of federal workers in each state when looking at return of tax dollars.
I thought that’s what leftists wanted. Tax the rich.
Not feeling it. Maybe they should get that politburo in Sacto to lower state taxes
Yes and moreover, high taxes make states a great place to live /s
So CA is even greater now!
About time the socialists choked on their socialism.
Now this is winning! More please!
JoMa
Oh, yeah, they have lots of that.
No wonder they are so liberal. They’ve been shirking their taxes all along. It’s easy to support taxes when you’re not paying your fair share.
If he lowers taxes, how will he pay for all the illegal aliens’ sanctuary city and state perks. How will they pay for the manure maps for tourists?
Bring it on!
Liberals LOVE high taxes.
Now that is funny....
And I’m stealing for a bunch of LeftTards I will associate with this weekend...
Sorry:
Should read “ LibTards “
Some of my friends know my handle....and they can’t handle it or me...
So Tom Steyer will actually pay his fair share in taxes? Cry me a river.
The end of the SALT deduction affects rich liberals, who vote Democrat anyway.
Besides, they want to pay more in taxes. We are granting them their wish. What’s the problem?
“Where does Michael Moor(efood) live? Please tell me California.”
Sadly we are stuck with the slob here in Michigan along with the most Obnoxious man in America: Slip and fall Attorney Jeffry Feiger and it was Chris Matthews who gave him the title.
We need our own well-funded version of the ACLU. We need somebody who can fight those battles and defend those little cities that otherwise tend to lose the battles.
You nailed it.
“I’d think that many long-time California homeowners have their property taxes protected by Prop 13, so it’s the rich Californians in wealthy neighborhoods in new homes who will pay the most.”
The Follywooders, NYCity Rich, Chicoms and other liberals who have bought homes in the past couple of years as their primary or second or third home in a coastal or a elite wino area, who will get hammered by the change in SALT taxes.
As per the following:
“Very wealthy Californians earning more than $1 million a year will pay the lion’s share of that money, with 43,000 of them paying a combined $9 billion.
It’s not all coming from the wealthy. Another $1.1 billion will come from households earning less than $250,000, hiking their tax liability $4400 on average. That’s not peanuts, but it’s a far cry from the average $209,302 per family that will be owed by those households earning more than a million dollars a year.
Put this another way. That represents the federal tax liabilities that everyone else in the country subsidized through SALT. The “progressive” income tax used taxes paid by people in low-tax states to repay the wealthy for their taxes in places like California. The SALT deduction really only comes into play for people who can itemize enough to outstrip the standard deductions, so its benefit plays mostly to the wealthy anyway.
It also plays mostly to the benefit of a very few states. California and New York taxpayers soak up almost third of all benefits from SALT deductions; add in New Jersey, Illinois, Texas, and Pennsylvania, and they account for more than half of its benefits. Taxpayers in most other states end up footing the bill.
Not only do other taxpayers end up subsidizing the wealthy, they also indemnify blue-state politicians against the consequences of their tax policies. Next year, taxpayers in California, New York, and other high-tax states will have to truly pay for their own taxes rather than foist them off on everyone else. When that happens, will high tax rates be politically sustainable? Will the political party that insists on the rich “paying their fair share” celebrate the impact of the rich actually paying their fair share? Probably not, which is the real reason Democrats are running on the repeal of the tax cuts.”
Elite limo liberals like Pelosi, Zuck and those who control Sillycon Valley will get taxed and have to pay more taxes on their multi million $ homes.
Being from Pennsylvania I’m cool with this. Blue states (even though we voted Trump) deserve this.
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.