U.S. towns, cities fear taxpayer revolt if Republicans kill deduction

Reuters via Yahoo ^ | November 17th, 2017 | By Richard Cowan

[Mariner]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - From Pataskala, Ohio, to Conroe, Texas, local government leaders worry that if Republican tax-overhaul plans moving through the U.S. Congress become law, it will be harder for them to pave streets, put out fires, fight crime and pay teachers.

A tax plan approved by the House of Representatives on Thursday would sharply curtail a federal deduction that millions of Americans can now claim for tax payments to state, county, city and town governments.

Ending that deduction, the local leaders say, could make their taxpayers, especially in high-tax communities, less likely to support future local tax increases or even tolerate local taxes at present levels.

The proposed repeal of the state and local tax (SALT) deduction is part of an "assault on local governments" by Republicans in Washington, said Elizabeth Kautz, the Republican mayor of Burnsville, Minnesota, near Minneapolis.

"My hope is that we look at being thoughtful about what we're doing and not ram something through just to get something done before the year is out," Kautz said of the plan being rushed through Congress by her own party.

In the United States, local governments run schools, operate police and fire departments and maintain streets, parks and libraries, among other essential services. The federal government's role at that level is limited.

Cities, towns, counties and states collect their own property, sales and income taxes. Under existing law, payments of those taxes can be deducted, or subtracted from federal taxable income, lowering the amount of federal tax due.

-----snip-----

A bill being debated in the Senate, with Republican President Donald Trump's support, would kill the SALT deduction entirely for individuals and families, although businesses would keep it. The fate of that bill is uncertain.

[usconservative]

That's nothing. Wait until all those who are divorced and paying alimony court ordered support at the point of a gun and under threat of jail learn that they can no longer deduct that either!

Remember: the divorce rate in this country is near 50%.

[usconservative]

Why do Texans (no state income tax) have to subsidize the spending by the hard-Left governments of California, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York?

You've been repeatedly proven wrong on this point. It is fact that Illinois for example sends $40 Billion Dollars MORE each year in federal taxes, than it gets back.

Who's supporting who here? How about you start paying your fair share there bub, so the good people of Illinois don't have to subsidize your lazy butts in Texas.

[Mariner]

“and winning some battle and getting something done is always politically better than batting zero.”

I guess that depends on whether you own taxes are going up, and by how much.

[Califreak]

Well I suppose if they had any sense they would stop wasting those tax dollars on NON CITIZENS.

[Mariner]

“Because net profits, which are exposed to taxation, are only determined by subtracting all expenses from revenue.”

No unlike Adjusted Gross Income.

[Kickass Conservative]

I’m not sure what the Republicans in D.C. are thinking with this. It’s like us supplying Ammunition to our Enemies that they will used to destroy us in the Midterms.

Put an Income cap for the SALT Deductions so only the Evil Rich will lose them. Tie them to the top Tax Brackets so all those CA Dot Com Millionaires and Billionaires won’t be able to use the Deduction.

How can the Democrats disagree with that? They hate the Evil Rich.

The downside of course is all those Rich Liberals will leave the High Tax States in Droves and they will pollute the rest if the Country.

[SkyPilot]

The talk last month was that they were going to put an income cap on the SALT deductions, preserving them for the middle class.
The problem was that this would not generate the trillions they needed to offset giving the corporations a huge rate cut. Bottom line: they need our money, so they are just going to take it.

[greeneyes]

Whatever the Congress Critters do, it won’t be enough. I am opposed to the Income tax, Death Tax, and Property tax.

Anything short of that is just smoke and mirrors, and will assuredly benefit the big campaign contributors to the swamp critters.

I have yet to see a tax reform that did not have a negative impact on the middle class.

[Kickass Conservative]

Then say hello to the new Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Too bad these Republicans can’t just reduce Federal Spending. Yeah, I know. LOL

[ROCKLOBSTER]

It’s an income/mortgage issue.

Phhhht...

The mortgage interest deduction is a lobbied benefit for the lending industry, not the home buyer. It encourages the buyer to pay lots and lots of interest, over a long period of time, maybe equaling two or three times the amount of the face value of the loan. (cost of the loan) Cha-ching! Cha-ching! Cha-ching! Happy face lenders.

If you really wanted to benefit the average worker, you allow them to deduct the principle, not the interest. If they either paid cash, or paid the mortgage down quickly, they would be able to write off the actual cost of their home. This deduction would encourage that.

[American in Israel]

No

[Wuli]

“I guess that depends on whether you own taxes are going up, and by how much”

No, it doesn’t. I happen to currently live in a high tax state, so my taxes will be going up with any loss of SALT deductions, but I support the general removal of those deductions.

Every deduction is being supported by what are higher tax rates than would be needed without them. So the deductions for state and local income and sales taxes, for the higher tax states, have a nationally disproportionate affect of them essentially be subsidized by the taxpayers of the lower-tax states to whom those deductions have little or no impact.

The formula for funding Medicaid imposes a similar perverse affect. What the federal government pays is relative to the per-recipient costs in the state. So states that provided more generous benefits with more generous thresholds for participation got 50% per recipient for their costs - which were higher, which meant more federal dollars going to them because they chose to have higher medicaid costs. Another Progressive federal payback to more Progressive states.

In my view Medicaid costs to the federal government would be no more than 50% of the national median Medicaid costs. If a state wants to have a level of Medicaid benefits higher than the national median it should not be the requirement of the more frugal states to help them pay for benefits ABOVE the national median.

[bert]

That would just be the SALT deductions where the populous democrat states hood winked the states with no income tax.

They should be glad a refund of the ill gotten benefits were not requested

[momincombatboots]

I reapeat, this is not big city pd.

[GOPJ]

California and Illinois spend like drunken sailors. When no one will loan them any more money they'll expect the rest of us to bail them out.

You know that's true.

So yeah California ‘looks’ good - just like the family that lives high on the hog maxing out every credit card they have ‘looks’ good... Well until they hit the wall.

[itsahoot]

Gee thanks for talking to me like you’re 8 year old.

I overestimated your intellect I guess, because an 8 year old had no trouble understanding what I said.

The truth is, corporations DO pay taxes. You know it, and I know it.

No they collect taxes and you should know it but apparently can't grasp what an 8 year old can. Lets say your parents divorce and dad winds up paying big time such that you mother does not have to work. You ask mom for a new car and she gives it to you. Who really paid for it?

[SkyPilot]

Oh, I didn't know you were a 7 year old.

You are still trying to intimidate me with your childish games. And despite all your bluster, you are naked with your response. You have shown yourself to be the fool that you are.

Itsahoot cannot even answer the basic question as to why the corporations need a tax rate cut from 35% to 20%. Instead, you attack me, and my intelligence. You are a little baby.

I guess I have to treat you as such. You don't have the facts on your side, so you are attacking and pounding the table.

I'll ask again..IN.. VERY...SLOW....LETTERS: Why have corporations spent millions on lobbying and payoffs in order to obtain the massive rate cut (35% to 20% - and they get to keep their SALT deductions) if they don't even pay taxes - as you say?

You won't answer truthfully. Because you are a manipulator and a liar.

If you apologize, I'll accept it.

[SkyPilot]

Every deduction is being supported by what are higher tax rates than would be needed without them. So the deductions for state and local income and sales taxes, for the higher tax states, have a nationally disproportionate affect of them essentially be subsidized by the taxpayers of the lower-tax states to whom those deductions have little or no impact.

What?

Are you on drugs or something?

Tax deductions are deductions. They are being destroyed by both the House and Senate bills, so that the corporations can get a massive rate cut from 35% to 20%, AND they get to keep the SALT deductions that are being made illegal or capped (we still don't know which) by both bills.

Do you understand this?

[Wuli]

Do you understand most corporations don’t pay taxes, they are a cost of business passed through in the prices YOU PAY for their goods and services. They are pass through collectors of taxes assessed on the national production of goods and services - a cost everyone pays for. That is why corporate tax deductions are demonstrably economic (jobs) stimulators, as many countries we compete with have learned. The fastest growing economies on any continent are the ones that have lowered their business taxes.

[SkyPilot]

So you won’t admit that corporations are getting a rate cut from 35% to 20%. That is in the House and Senate Tax bills.....that we are supposedly discussing. I am dealing with an irrational person. A person who is detached from reality.

You must be a hoot to deal with, for your wife, and your children if you have any.