Cuomo blames federal tax law for $2.3 billion New York state budget deficit

[Conservative]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cu...for-2-3-billion-new-york-state-budget-deficit

New York state is facing a $2.3 billion budget deficit, and Gov. Andrew Cuomo believes it's largely due to the Trump administration's tax reforms which, on the "flip side," have taxed the rich are encouraging wealthy residents to leave.
President Trump's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which takes effect for the 2018 tax year, places a cap on the state and local tax deduction (known as SALT) that Americans can take. Residents of largely blue states with relatively high state and local taxes are adversely affected, Cuomo says, by the new cap of a $10,000 deduction. New York state's average SALT deduction was around $22,000 before the law changed.

LOL, yep, look what taxing the rich does for one of the bluest states in the nation. It is about damn time that the cost of blue state social engineering and high costs of that engineering comes to light. Keep driving people out of the states, leftists!! the true cost of liberalism now being felt by even rich liberals

 

[AliHajiSheik]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cu...for-2-3-billion-new-york-state-budget-deficit



LOL, yep, look what taxing the rich does for one of the bluest states in the nation. It is about damn time that the cost of blue state social engineering and high costs of that engineering comes to light. Keep driving people out of the states, leftists!! the true cost of liberalism now being felt by even rich liberals

I don't understand the governor's argument. The SALT deduction impacts federal taxes, anything due to the state and local governments would still need to be paid.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I don't understand the governor's argument. The SALT deduction impacts federal taxes, anything due to the state and local governments would still need to be paid.

Not if folks move out of the higher taxed states. If one has income subject to the 30% federal marginal tax bracket then making $12K of their federal SALT deduction go away costs them about $3K/year more.

 

[Conservative]

I don't understand the governor's argument. The SALT deduction impacts federal taxes, anything due to the state and local governments would still need to be paid.

His argument was that in the past 22,000 could be deducted from both federal and state taxes now it is capped which shines the true light on liberal social engineering.

 

[Xelor]

I don't know exactly how NY state taxpayers calculate their income tax liability to NY; however, I suspect that they "piggy-backs" their state income tax calculation off of 1040 AGI or 1040 taxable income. If that's the case, then TCJA provisions that lower either of those values will lower NY state tax revenue and it'll have nothing to do with whether wealthy people move from or remain in (as residents, proprietors, or employees) NY state.


New York state's rich folks overwhelmingly with regard to the totality of NY's wealthy residents, live in NYC, which is literally a stone's throw from New Jersey, which itself offers places for wealthy people to live. Also, Philly is a 45 minute train ride from Manhattan, which is where most of NY's wealthy people work. Lastly, NYC residents (rich and poor alike) are, unlike folks in most of the rest of the country, quite comfortable with using public transportation, so the prospect of having to take a train to work isn't a big deal.

Accordingly, NYC, the state's primary source suffers from the unique geographical circumstance of it being very easy for folks (frankly, of all income levels) to simply move. Moving won't obtain one who moves yet continues to work in NY any reduction in the taxes they pay to NY; however, they may find their own state's taxable income/taxes reduced by the portion of income or state income taxes attributable to NY.

The big reduction comes in moving from NYC to someplace other than NYC. The reason is that NYC directly imposes its own income tax. That it does may very well inspire folks to move to NJ, even though NJ is also a high tax state. Similarly, the federal cap on the SALT deduction adversely affects real-property-owning NY residents of all income levels, but especially in high income areas, because, in general property values are higher; thus property taxes are higher, even when NY's property tax rate is no different than the rate in lower property-value locales.


The point of the above is that the primary drivers to the decrease in NY state tax revenues can very well derive predominantly from federal income tax changes regardless of NY state's tax structure (including its various tax rates).

 

[AliHajiSheik]

Not if folks move out of the higher taxed states. If one has income subject to the 30% federal marginal tax bracket then making $12K of their federal SALT deduction go away costs them about $3K/year more.

They would have had to decide pretty quickly. $2.3 billion in taxes would be a huge amount of income moving out of the state. Hard to believe that much income would be impacted. Hard to believe that property taxes would account for that. Even if someone sold, the buyer would still have to pay.

 

[Conservative]

They would have had to decide pretty quickly. $2.3 billion in taxes would be a huge amount of income moving out of the state. Hard to believe that much income would be impacted. Hard to believe that property taxes would account for that. Even if someone sold, the buyer would still have to pay.

See here is the problem that the left will never address. Blue states have the highest cost of living due mostly to state, local taxes along with entitlement benefits such as state pensions. Social engineering isn't free regardless of what they want people to believe. Deducting state and local taxes from their federal tax obligations helps offset the costs of those state and local taxes for if your state taxes are high and your federal taxes are reduced because of the high state tax deductions the net affect on the taxpayers is minimal. Red states are accused of taking more than they are giving but the reality is most red states don't have those high state taxes to deduct from their federal returns thus are actually subsidizing blue state federal taxpayers paying more if the income level is the same and the taxpayer is itemizing

 

[ttwtt78640]

They would have had to decide pretty quickly. $2.3 billion in taxes would be a huge amount of income moving out of the state. Hard to believe that much income would be impacted. Hard to believe that property taxes would account for that. Even if someone sold, the buyer would still have to pay.

It is likely the combination of income and property taxes which would motivate someone to relocate their primary residence elsewhere. The very wealthy often own more than one 'home' (residential property) and thus have the ability for (one of) their business interest(s) to offer "temporary" shelter in NY/NYC for use when they are "in town for business" yet claim to live elsewhere "most of the time". I doubt that it would take too many of the mega-rich claiming to no longer primarily reside in NY/NYC to make a serious dent in state/local tax revenue.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

It is likely the combination of income and property taxes which would motivate someone to relocate their primary residence elsewhere. The very wealthy often own more than one 'home' (residential property) and thus have the ability for (one of) their business interest(s) to offer "temporary" shelter in NY/NYC for use when they are "in town for business" yet claim to live elsewhere "most of the time". I doubt that it would take too many of the mega-rich claiming to no longer primarily reside in NY/NYC to make a serious dent in state/local tax revenue.

I just find it hard to believe that there are that many people. This is tax amount, figure New York State has income tax of 10% (I don't really know), then that would be $23 billion in income. Combined with property taxes, which again has to be paid by someone. It just doesn't add up to me.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I just find it hard to believe that there are that many people. This is tax amount, figure New York State has income tax of 10% (I don't really know), then that would be $23 billion in income. Combined with property taxes, which again has to be paid by someone. It just doesn't add up to me.

I think that the outflow from higher taxed (and thus higher cost of living) states/cities is more than just a reaction to the recent limiting of the SALT federal income tax deduction.

 

[pamak]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cu...for-2-3-billion-new-york-state-budget-deficit



LOL, yep, look what taxing the rich does for one of the bluest states in the nation. It is about damn time that the cost of blue state social engineering and high costs of that engineering comes to light. Keep driving people out of the states, leftists!! the true cost of liberalism now being felt by even rich liberals

LOL, I love it when conservatives talk about social engineering when in fact blue states like NY and CA are among the biggest donor states in the federal budget and pay more in federal taxes than what they receive in federal benefits. By contrast, the poor red states in the South receive more in federal benefits than what their residers pay in federal taxes. And of course, with the new tax laws, success is penalized in the "irresponsible" liberal coast in order to help the p**s poor Conservative in the South. And the funny thing is that the same conservatives try to lecture progressives about "personal responsibility."

The link below comes from Foxbusiness which is not exactly liberal

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ap-fact-check-blue-high-tax-states-fund-red-low-tax-states

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government's system of taxing and spending.
...

Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.

Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for tax every dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.


I assume the above federal policies do not count as "social engineering."

I am a permanent US resident living in CA near Palo Alto. I am a mechanical engineer, so I am not complaining about my finance. I do want to point that when the new tax law hit taxpayers in places like NY and CA, it did not hit just some ultra rich.

By the way, since I am a "liberal" and a European "socialist," I have no problem to see the federal government subsidize the poor in the south. I just do not like to see the same people talking like I am the "irresponsible" liberal in a high-tax liberal State while they are the "responsible" conservatives in the low-tax red state.

 

[Conservative]

LOL, I love it when conservatives talk about social engineering when in fact blue states like NY and CA are among the biggest donor states in the federal budget and pay more in federal taxes than what they receive in federal benefits. By contrast, the poor red states in the South receive more in federal benefits than what their residers pay in federal taxes. And of course, with the new tax laws, success is penalized in the "irresponsible" liberal coast in order to help the p**s poor Conservative in the South. And the funny thing is that the same conservatives try to lecture progressives about "personal responsibility."

The link below comes from Foxbusiness which is not exactly liberal

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/ap-fact-check-blue-high-tax-states-fund-red-low-tax-states

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government's system of taxing and spending.
...

Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.

Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for tax every dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.

California fared a bit better than other blue states. It received 96 cents for every dollar the state sent to Washington.


I assume the above federal policies do not count as "social engineering."

I am a permanent US resident living in CA near Palo Alto. I am a mechanical engineer, so I am not complaining about my finance. I do want to point that when the new tax law hit taxpayers in places like NY and CA, it did not hit just some ultra rich.

By the way, since I am a "liberal" and a European "socialist," I have no problem to see the federal government subsidize the poor in the south. I just do not like to see the same people talking like I am the "irresponsible" liberal in a high-tax liberal State while they are the "responsible" conservatives in the low-tax red state.

Please continue to show the world how poorly informed you are and uneducated on this subject. Red States subsidize Blue states that were able to deduct high state and local taxes from their Federal return whereas Red states don't have those high taxes. Further Red state AND blue states get money from the Federal govt. for federal mandates and expenses NOTHING ELSE. California gets more money from the Federal Taxpayers than any other state. Where did you get your education?

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/smart/texas/

 

[pamak]

Please continue to show the world how poorly informed you are and uneducated on this subject. Red States subsidize Blue states that were able to deduct high state and local taxes from their Federal return whereas Red states don't have those high taxes. Further Red state AND blue states get money from the Federal govt. for federal mandates and expenses NOTHING ELSE. California gets more money from the Federal Taxpayers than any other state. Where did you get your education?

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/smart/texas/

Please continue to show the world your inability to use sources to counter arguments
When you find a study to counter what I said, feel free to show it. I was not talking about Texas. Texas is not part of the poor South and oil makes a big difference. I was talking about the states that I presented in my link and about the big picture which shows that

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government's system of taxing and spending.

which destroys your position.

 

[Conservative]

Please continue to show the world your inability to use sources to counter arguments
When you find a study to counter what I said, feel free to show it. I was not talking about Texas. Texas is not part of the poor South and oil makes a big difference. I was talking about the states that I presented in my link and about the big picture which shows that

In fact, most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending. Most low-tax states make a profit from the federal government's system of taxing and spending.

which destroys your position.

Keep showing your partisan ignorance and how easy it is to indoctrinate the willing. JUST CHANGE THE NAME TO YOUR STATE AND LEARN SOMETHING

Maybe federal employees need to stop retiring to the Red States which are lower cost states. Not sure what it is about liberals who are so bullheaded that they believe anything negative presented to them. States get Federal dollars for FEDERAL EXPENSES AND FEDERAL MANDATES

 

[pamak]

Keep showing your partisan ignorance and how easy it is to indoctrinate the willing. JUST CHANGE THE NAME TO YOUR STATE AND LEARN SOMETHING

Maybe federal employees need to stop retiring to the Red States which are lower cost states. Not sure what it is about liberals who are so bullheaded that they believe anything negative presented to them. States get Federal dollars for FEDERAL EXPENSES AND FEDERAL MANDATES

Before you try to teach me anything, you need to learn how to use sources to support your position instead of rudeness.

I presented a study from foxbusiness which showed that most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending.

. This means that your position that " Red States subsidize Blue states that were able to deduct high state and local taxes from their Federal return whereas Red states don't have those high taxes" is completely illogical. A State can only subsidize another state indirectly through the federal budget. So, if one state gets less dollars from the federal government than the dollars it sends to Washington through federal taxes, it does not receive any subsidy from any other state. So, your response does not make sense

Originally Posted by Conservative

Please continue to show the world how poorly informed you are and uneducated on this subject. Red States subsidize Blue states that were able to deduct high state and local taxes from their Federal return whereas Red states don't have those high taxes. Further Red state AND blue states get money from the Federal govt. for federal mandates and expenses NOTHING ELSE. California gets more money from the Federal Taxpayers than any other state. Where did you get your education?

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/smart/texas/

 

[Conservative]

Before you try to teach me anything, you need to learn how to use sources to support your position instead of rudeness.

I presented a study from foxbusiness which showed that most high-tax states send more money to Washington than they get back in federal spending.

. This means that your position that " Red States subsidize Blue states that were able to deduct high state and local taxes from their Federal return whereas Red states don't have those high taxes" is completely illogical. A State can only subsidize another state indirectly through the federal budget. So, if one state gets less dollars from the federal government than the dollars it sends to Washington through federal taxes, it does not receive any subsidy from any other state. So, your response does not make sense

What states send to D.C. is irrelevant, what they get back is for Federal Mandated expenses, you don't seem to be able to grasp the concept. You think states should pay for military bases? How about states paying for federal employees? How about states paying retirement benefits, SS and Medicare? You are simply a typical leftwing individual who buys what they are told and ignores the link I gave you which spells it out

This thread is about High blue state taxes and rich people fleeing. You don't get it so here is something to ponder, 2 people making 100,000 a year, one in a red state and one in a blue state and both itemize. The blue state has 22,000 in State and Local taxes and the red state has zero, which one pays more in federal taxes?

 

[pamak]

What states send to D.C. is irrelevant, what they get back is for Federal Mandated expenses, you don't seem to be able to grasp the concept. You think states should pay for military bases? How about states paying for federal employees? How about states paying retirement benefits, SS and Medicare? You are simply a typical leftwing individual who buys what they are told and ignores the link I gave you which spells it out

This thread is about High blue state taxes and rich people fleeing. You don't get it so here is something to ponder, 2 people making 100,000 a year, one in a red state and one in a blue state and both itemize. The blue state has 22,000 in State and Local taxes and the red state has zero, which one pays more in federal taxes?

What states send to the DC is not irrelevant at all. You cannot talk about subsidies without examining BOTH contributions and receipts of federal benefits! Your example does not show the big picture which is all that counts. State politics have multiple effects. Blue States with higher minimum wages, stronger unions and "socialist policies" help more workers live above the Federal poverty line and trigger less funds from the federal government to help the poor.
This is why one needs to see the big picture.

 

[Conservative]

What states send to the DC is not irrelevant at all. You cannot talk about subsidies without examining BOTH contributions and receipts of federal benefits! Your example does not show the big picture which is all that counts. State politics have multiple effects. Blue States with higher minimum wages, stronger unions and "socialist policies" help more workers live above the Federal poverty line and trigger less funds from the federal government to help the poor.
This is why one needs to see the big picture.

Population is the issue on money going to D.C., Federal mandates are the issue of money coming back. You keep ignoring that reality. My point is right on and you ignored it showing how easily it is to indoctrinate far too many. You really need to stop while you are behind, find out what a federal mandate is. Rather sad to see how poor the education system is in this country, class envy, jealousy resonate with the left today as they play on liberal ignorance

 

[pamak]

Population is the issue on money going to D.C., Federal mandates are the issue of money coming back. You keep ignoring that reality. My point is right on and you ignored it showing how easily it is to indoctrinate far too many. You really need to stop while you are behind, find out what a federal mandate is. Rather sad to see how poor the education system is in this country, class envy, jealousy resonate with the left today as they play on liberal ignorance

And the existence of subsidies is an issue of the balance between the money that goes to the DC and the money that comes back. You keep ignoring that reality. Federal Taxes are effectively a form of a mandate. So let's stop the BS saying that "population is the issue on money going to D.C" but the money that comes back is an issue of "federal mandates."

 

[noonereal]

And the existence of subsidies is an issue of the balance between the money that goes to the DC and the money that comes back. You keep ignoring that reality. Federal Taxes are effectively a form of a mandate. So let's stop the BS saying that "population is the issue on money going to D.C" but the money that comes back is an issue of "federal mandates."

It's like talking to a stone. The poster is wildly extreme to the point of self blindness.

His comments are of no relevance, sadly.

 

[pamak]

It's like talking to a stone. The poster is wildly extreme to the point of self blindness.

His comments are of no relevance, sadly.

I am not interested in your personal commentary. If you have any argument to offer feel free to do so. Your opinion about me does not concern me.

 

[Conservative]

And the existence of subsidies is an issue of the balance between the money that goes to the DC and the money that comes back. You keep ignoring that reality. Federal Taxes are effectively a form of a mandate. So let's stop the BS saying that "population is the issue on money going to D.C" but the money that comes back is an issue of "federal mandates."

You are a waste of time, clueless and ignoring the questions posed. Expenses of the Federal government have nothing to do with balance

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Doc91478]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/cu...for-2-3-billion-new-york-state-budget-deficit



LOL, yep, look what taxing the rich does for one of the bluest states in the nation. It is about damn time that the cost of blue state social engineering and high costs of that engineering comes to light. Keep driving people out of the states, leftists!! the true cost of liberalism now being felt by even rich liberals

~~~~~~
New Yorkers pay sky-high local income and property taxes because that’s what he and other elected officials want. Surely, other states provide most of the same services — but without spending anywhere near as much, and thus without taxpayers footing so high a bill. If wealthy New Yorkers choose to flee to states where officials make more sensible decisions about taxes, Cuomo’s ability to finance that lavish spending vanishes, blowing a big hole in his budget. Maybe it’s time for Albany “leaders” to start making decisions that benefit all New Yorkers — not just their political allies.

 

[noonereal]

I am not interested in your personal commentary. If you have any argument to offer feel free to do so. Your opinion about me does not concern me.

go back and read again

you did not follow

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

I am not interested in your personal commentary. If you have any argument to offer feel free to do so. Your opinion about me does not concern me.

He's talking about the poster you are debating. Not you.