Your feelings on S.A.L.T.?

[Uncensored2008]

You might want to look up which states take MORE in federal assistance than they contribute in taxes raised. Seriously, look it up.

You might want to add SALT into federal assistance - oh and take out support of military bases.

Seriously - look at it honestly.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If SALT is your issue, then you have been very fooled on where the taxation problem is in this nation.

Tax breaks for the rich are very important for the democrats. They fight hard to keep them. High tax states like California and New York DEPEND on middle America to support them.

 

[OrphanSlug]

Tax breaks for the rich are very important for the democrats. They fight hard to keep them. High tax states like California and New York DEPEND on middle America to support them.

Congrats on posting one of the most misleading and inaccurate contributions so far this year. If your takeaway is that Democrats are protecting tax breaks for the rich then Newsmax is far better at propaganda than most of us considered.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Yes, No? Either way why do you feel that way? (State and Local Tax). Tying up the OBBB.

I think the government paying out our tax dollars should be the ones collecting the taxes. If the state is handing out the money then the state should be taxing the people. That way I know where my money is going and who to hold accountable.

 

[holbritter]

The S A L T deduction cap hurts those in higher tax states that still contribute more to the federal government than they receive in benefits. This deduction levels the playing field somewhat but not enough to offset the disparity with those states receiving more from the feds than they contribute. I notice those that oppose the SALT deductions have no issue with the redistribution of wealth to the lesser tax and mostly red states. Very interesting indeed.

SALT only hurts those who can afford the property that hits that limit on property tax. For the lower middle class and below, the reduction of the standard deduction that will result if SALT cap is removed, will hurt more.

 

[holbritter]

The rich? Seriously?

Higher middle class and above.

How many below that can afford places that are more than $10k in property tax? Please remember there is more to NYS than the city and surrounding suburbs.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

"Your feelings on S.A.L.T.?"
I don't see why the entire nation's tax payers have to support any state and local government's which can't manage their finances, can't manage to live within their means.

If voters in those locales with high state and local taxes have an issue with the expense of those state and local taxes they need to take this issue up with those state and local governments, not the nation's tax payers at large.

If you feel that way, wait until you hear about how those states pay far more into the federal government than they get back in federal spending.

Why should a NY taxpayer be penalized and a Mississippi taxpayer benefit? It would be one thing if NY taxpayers got back tons in federal spending, and thus their state tax deductions were actually being subsidized by the rest of the country, but that isn't the case. An NY or NJ taxpayer might get 60 cents back on the dollar in terms of federal spending relative to the taxes they pay in to the federal government. Now, to pile on, they can't even deduct all their state taxes. Y'all aren't ignorant either, you know this.

Which states contribute the most and least to federal revenue? | USAFacts

In 2023, New Yorkers paid about $89 billion more to the federal government than they received.

usafacts.org

 

[bythoughts]

The S.A.L.T. tax exemption doesn't survive bounds tests.

• Suppose a state declares itself an idyllic Marxist Republic, from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. As they don't need money any more, they tax any income at 100% and put it into the communal commodities reserve for equitable distribution. As a result, the people from that state don't need to pay any part of the Federal taxes?
• Suppose a state goes full metal Libertarian - no taxes of any kind. You have to join a community organization to own and repair a share of your local road system, as part of a set of contracts which fortunately don't end up with one rich guy holding everybody's road vehicle access for ransom. Well, people in that state still have to pay for their roads and bridges, but now they get zero SALT tax exemption; the Federal tax treats them as if they were wealthier than they really are.

The conclusion is that the SALT tax exemption is meant to be about the same proportion of income for everyone. Maybe there is some legitimate intent to make up for communities that have had disaster or mismanagement that makes them higher-tax ... I don't know. But it would be more straightforward not to keep track of any of it and just end the exemption. The lowest-impact way to do that would be to couple it with an equitable tax reduction for everyone.

 

[eohrnberger]

Exactly my point. I am being taxed on money I spent on taxes.

Federal, State, and Local governments are separate government entities, each with their own taxation regulations and laws.

Since your position is that your State and Local taxes are too high, shouldn't you be talking to those State and Local government entities about their taxation laws and regulations?

I mean rather than demanding that the Federal Government entity, the one not responsible for your high State and Local taxes, 'fix' it for you?

You have arbitrarily decided that that's a good thing, since you sit on the other side of it.

Sorry, but you know nothing of which side I 'sit' on that.

I've had this discussion with too many red state posters who love seeing blue states getting "their due", who will argue until the cows home.

Fact is, Trump campaigned on getting rid of SALT caps, so if you have a problem with them, perhaps you should address him.

I think I'm holding a principled position, one which I've held since these types of discussion, SALT specifically, have started here on DP while being a member of DP.

 

[eohrnberger]

Wow. I guess that would explain why most of the SALT issues are coming from NY congresspeople. Its really not an issue in Ohio.

Well, its no surprise, really. NY State and NYC are both one of those Democrat bastions who's Democrat controlled government can't seem to manager their finances, which lead to those excessive SALTs which people are complaining about.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Tax breaks for the rich are very important for the democrats. They fight hard to keep them. High tax states like California and New York DEPEND on middle America to support them.

NY taxpayers paid in 89 billion dollars more than they received in federal spending last year.

 

[eohrnberger]

Why should the people of Montana subsidize the leftist insanity of California?

SALT is welfare for blue state - nothing more or less. Leftist giving tax breaks to the rich.

In the process of giving those tax breaks to the rich, the State and Local governments, can hike their tax rates and get more money, rather than managing their finances better.

 

[eohrnberger]

If you feel that way, wait until you hear about how those states pay far more into the federal government than they get back in federal spending.

Why should a NY taxpayer be penalized and a Mississippi taxpayer benefit? It would be one thing if NY taxpayers got back tons in federal spending, and thus their state tax deductions were actually being subsidized by the rest of the country, but that isn't the case. An NY or NJ taxpayer might get 60 cents back on the dollar in terms of federal spending relative to the taxes they pay in to the federal government. Now, to pile on, they can't even deduct all their state taxes. Y'all aren't ignorant either, you know this.

Which states contribute the most and least to federal revenue? | USAFacts

In 2023, New Yorkers paid about $89 billion more to the federal government than they received.

usafacts.org

You're missing my point, which is, and always has been, that the State and Local governments who's voters are demanding relief from their tax rates, laws, and regulations should work to reduce those State and Local taxes so that SALT relief isn't needed or warranted.

'Oh but I want my X, Y and Z level of government services!' OK, if you want them, pay for them, don't try to get others to pay for them.

Your bringing in the age old diversion argument which is completely separate and immaterial from my point.

 

[BirdinHand]

You're missing my point, which is, and always has been, that the State and Local governments who's voters are demanding relief from their tax rates, laws, and regulations should work to reduce those State and Local taxes so that SALT relief isn't needed or warranted.

Your bringing in the age old diversion argument which is completely separate and immaterial from my point.

So…the same people that are arguing that states should take more responsibility for providing for citizens in their states are also arguing out of the other side of their mouths that my tax money should flow to DC to be sent to Mississippi?

Or to states where they don’t even HAVE state taxes?

How about those red states start actually having their people pay some state and local taxes instead of relying on MY federal tax dollars to fund their needs?




Sorry…but you don’t get to call for cuts to the federal government AND demand that I send the federal government more of my money to fund the welfare red states.


Grab those bootstraps

 

[ALiberalModerate]

You might want to add SALT into federal assistance - oh and take out support of military bases.

Seriously - look at it honestly.

1. A military base is a huge economic benefit to a state and to the communities around it.

2. Just look at the per-capita taxes paid to the federal government. The average New Yorker pays just under 19k a year to the federal government. The average resident of Mississippi sent just 5k to the federal government in taxes. Now, to pile on, you want to tell the average New Yorker that even though they pay 2 and 3 times as much per person to the federal government that many residents of other states pay, they can't deduct their state and local taxes. If you are going to be a hand out welfare queen that wants all that tax money from states like NY, at least own it.

 

[L88]

Seems incongruous to believe that more current federal obligations should be pushed onto the states and believe states should be penalized for raising revenue from their residents.

How are the states penalized?
Why shouldn't wealthy people pay their fair share?
What happened to end deductions for wealthy people?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

You're missing my point, which is, and always has been, that the State and Local governments who's voters are demanding relief from their tax rates, laws, and regulations should work to reduce those State and Local taxes so that SALT relief isn't needed or warranted.

'Oh but I want my X, Y and Z level of government services!' OK, if you want them, pay for them, don't try to get others to pay for them.

Your bringing in the age old diversion argument which is completely separate and immaterial from my point.

Whether their state or local taxes are too high is irrelevant. The average New Yorker pays 2 to 3 times as much in federal taxes to the federal government than most residents of other states pay in. To then tell them, despite that, despite the fact they already disproportionately fund the federal government, they can't deduct their state and local taxes, isn't fair and you know it.

Its pretty easy to cut state and local taxes when your residents get back more in spending from the federal government than they pay in.

 

[ttwtt78640]

If you feel that way, wait until you hear about how those states pay far more into the federal government than they get back in federal spending.

Why should a NY taxpayer be penalized and a Mississippi taxpayer benefit? It would be one thing if NY taxpayers got back tons in federal spending, and thus their state tax deductions were actually being subsidized by the rest of the country, but that isn't the case. An NY or NJ taxpayer might get 60 cents back on the dollar in terms of federal spending relative to the taxes they pay in to the federal government. Now, to pile on, they can't even deduct all their state taxes. Y'all aren't ignorant either, you know this.

Which states contribute the most and least to federal revenue? | USAFacts

In 2023, New Yorkers paid about $89 billion more to the federal government than they received.

usafacts.org

Itemized FIT deductions (like SALT) are only beneficial if their (total) amount exceeds the ‘standard’ deduction. Of course, they benefit those with higher incomes more.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Itemized FIT deductions (like SALT) are only beneficial if their (total) amount exceeds the ‘standard’ deduction.

Well, in a high cost of living area, where incomes are higher due to the higher cost of living, people are often over the standard deduction. I don't live in NJ, California, Mass, or NY, but given how much I pay in taxes every year and the fact that I don't get anything for it out of the federal government, if I lived in one of those places, I would be pretty pissed off if I couldn't deduct my state and local taxes even though I was paying all that money into the federal government and getting basically nothing in return for it.

 

[BirdinHand]

pretty easy to cut state and local taxes when your residents get back more in spending from the federal government than they pay in

The SALT cap was MEANT to be punitive to the blue states when Trump 1.0 enacted it.



SALT deductions were NEVER capped before that.

Because state and local governments are supposed to provide for their citizens and the federal government is designed to supplement where there are gaps.

Instead, we have a map where the blue states fund the red states. And get less back.

I’m tired of funding welfare states.

Let them fund themselves - they’re the ones voting for a smaller federal government - let’s give them what they asked for

 

[ttwtt78640]

Well, in a high cost of living area, where incomes are higher due to the higher cost of living, people are often over the standard deduction. I don't live in NJ, California, Mass, or NY, but given how much I pay in taxes every year and the fact that I don't get anything for it out of the federal government, if I lived in one of those places, I would be pretty pissed off if I couldn't deduct my state and local taxes even though I was paying all that money into the federal government and getting basically nothing in return for it.

I’m shocked that higher income folks don’t ‘qualify for’ as much (federal) government assistance as lower income folks. That’s certainly a valid reason for taxing them less.

 

[Greenbeard]

How are the states penalized?
Why shouldn't wealthy people pay their fair share?
What happened to end deductions for wealthy people?

The GOP raised the federal tax burden of taxpayers in states that do what the GOP ostensibly wants, self-funding more of their own health care, education, and safety net expenses.

 

[BirdinHand]

I’m shocked that higher income folks don’t ‘qualify for’ as much (federal) government assistance as lower income folks. That’s certainly a valid reason for taxing them less.

It isn’t the individual recipients in as much as it is the overall amount of federal tax dollars received.

Lower SALT in states = those states get more funding for schools, roads, infrastructure, etc

And that funding comes from blue states

Texas - for example - receives $300+ MORE per student in federal funding for their public schools than NJ does.

Why isn’t Texas paying more money to fund their own schools? Why am *I* paying to fund not only NJ public schools but also fund MORE per student in TX than in NJ from the federal government?

Mississippi gets $1K/student MORE.

I’m tired of paying welfare to states who vote for “state rights” and a smaller federal government.

They want “state rights” and a smaller federal government - then do it and stop taking my federal tax money to fund what they should be funding in a state basis.

 

[AZRWinger]

I oppose all itemized FIT deductions, since they result in larger federal subsidies for those with higher annual incomes. A $10K itemized deduction gets someone with (enough) income in the 25% bracket a $2.5K federal subsidy, while it gets someone with (enough) income in the 35% bracket a (40%) larger $3.5K federal subsidy.

You need to research your complaint. A $10K in itemized deductions is less than the standard deduction. You'd pay less FIT taxes not itemizing.

Learn the difference between subsidy and deduction. Income is earned by individuals and businesses. Government doesn't subsidize them by allowing us to keep more of what we earn.

Whether you realize it or not your aversion to itemized deductions is a step towards a flat tax.

 

[eohrnberger]

So…the same people that are arguing that states should take more responsibility for providing for citizens in their states are also arguing out of the other side of their mouths that my tax money should flow to DC to be sent to Mississippi?

Or to states where they don’t even HAVE state taxes?

Each state and local government controls their own tax rates.

How about those red states start actually having their people pay some state and local taxes instead of relying on MY federal tax dollars to fund their needs?

Sorry…but you don’t get to call for cuts to the federal government AND demand that I send the federal government more of my money to fund the welfare red states.

I see them as two separate issues.
One being the State and Local tax rates, and the other being a federal one.

If you have issue with the State and Local tax rates, you need to take that up with them, rather than looking for federal redress.

If you don't want the federal government taking your federal tax dollars to fund other state's needs, that's a federal government issue, take it up with your elected congressmen.

Grab those bootstraps