Cuomo, AG: New Yorkers Have A Constitutional Right To Be Reimbursed For Our High Taxes

Hot Air ^ | July 18,2018 | ED MORRISSEY

[Hojczyk]

To be fair, it’s not just New York that thinks their wealthiest taxpayers have a constitutional right to get reimbursed for the state’s high tax rates. Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maryland have joined the lawsuit filed by Andrew Cuomo and AG Barbara Underwood, announced yesterday morning. They want to undo the $10,000 cap on deductions for state and local taxes passed as part of the tax-reform bill in December, claiming that limiting such reimbursements violates the Constitution.

New York’s sovereignty is precisely the solution for this issue. Cuomo and the New York legislature can simply change their tax code to save their citizens the extra cost, which originates from the state of New York and not from Congress. They want the money without the political headache, and they want the federal judiciary to rescue them from the consequences of their high-tax policies.

This is just a threadbare attempt to shift the blame for those tax policies, and it’s doomed to failure. But it does raise the question, as Twitchy notes: Why are Democrats trying to get a tax cut for the rich?

[Uversabound]

Oh he irks me all Dems get the rolling preachy sound to their voice lecturing us then doing evil, think of Cartman on South Park when he was an Evangical(the way he spoke)

[aquila48]

“The Bern wants to tax the rich ‘till there are no rich anymore.”

Suddenly the Rats love the rich. Their worst nightmare is all their rich people vacating their states.

[Red Badger]

Busy work for them........................

[Myrddin]

I think redlining is actually more than making sure the purchaser is capable of repaying the loan. It also extends to the location of the property on which the loan is made. A high crime neighborhood makes the property less attractive to a future buyer and a higher risk to the party offering the loan. Higher risk usually comes with a higher interest rate. Charging a higher rate for higher risk was deemed "racist" because the high crime neighborhoods happened to be full of "minority" populations. The whole calculated risk model was being tossed because someone was offended by reality.

[Lazamataz]

Cuomo, AG: New Yorkers Have A Constitutional Right To Be Reimbursed For Our High Taxes

You are right, Cuomo.

So get to payin'.

[LambSlave]

State and federal taxes pay for different services, so how can that be double taxation?

If they were both taxed at 55% you'd understand how it's double taxation; in principle, with multiple tax authorities applying a tax to the same base income the possibility of taxing more than you actually make is possible-- unless you are allowed to deduct some from the others. If you can't deduct state from fed, then you should be able to deduct fed from state, etc.

[pepsi_junkie]

The crazy communist Goldman Sachs guy who was just elected in governor of NJ last fall is actually going to raise taxes at the same time we lose this deduction. If there are no pitch forks, torches, and barrels of tar and feathers in the streets of Trenton next April 15 then this state is officially over.

By the way, top Goldman-Sachs execs keep getting elected Governor of NJ and they are all stone cold commies. I hate that company.

[Revel]

Remember that this is the state that now pays the tuition for college students, and then pawns it off on its tax payers.

[pepsi_junkie]

This is what they are advocating for. In effect, tax-payers from other states are subsidizing the high taxes these liberal bastions assess.

This is true but not a complete picture. If you look at the per-capita revenue the gov gets from various states, NJ is near the very top. Last time I looked it was top 3 every year going back a decade. Lots of wealthy people paying big federal tax bills. If you then look at the per-capita fed spending by state, NJ is either 49th or 50th always.

So NJ pays the treasury the most on a per-person basis. Then we get back the least on the same basis. NJ pays out way more than it gets back in fed spending programs. Many other states get way more fed spending then they ever send to DC.

So who's subsidizing who?

[kiryandil]

LOL! The Spew Yorker Tories are gonna take dry rhino horn up the wazoo, courtesy of President Trump!

Who's your Daddy now, Lefty beechez?

[The Toll]

Is new Jersey a big manufacturer of military equipment? Planes, Ships, Tanks, Submarines?

I think that kind of thing has a reflection on Fed Spending.

[Rumplemeyer]

You tell ‘em Fredo

[jaydubya2]

Thanks, that’s a good explanation.

[rolling_stone]

be careful what they wish for..eliminate all deductions for state taxes no disparity...

[rolling_stone]

be careful what they wish for..eliminate all deductions for state taxes no disparity...

[Yolanda]

Andrew Cuomo knows taxes in New York are sky high. Unfortunately for New York taxpayers Mr. Cuomo will do absolutely nothing to reduce taxes as that would require work on his part and cooperation of his fellow Democrats to cut spending.

[pepsi_junkie]

As of 2013 (the most recent year I could find data for) the top five states in terms of getting more than they pay (per capita) are South Carolina, North Dakota, Florida, Louisiana, and Alabama. South Carolina gets back almost 8x what they send to DC. North Dakota gets back over 5x what they send to DC.

So NJ is among the states paying those bills for everyone else. Keep that in mind when you say we're the ones being subsidized.

[Be Free]

This is true but not a complete picture. If you look at the per-capita revenue the gov gets from various states, NJ is near the very top. Last time I looked it was top 3 every year going back a decade. Lots of wealthy people paying big federal tax bills. If you then look at the per-capita fed spending by state, NJ is either 49th or 50th always.

So NJ pays the treasury the most on a per-person basis. Then we get back the least on the same basis. NJ pays out way more than it gets back in fed spending programs. Many other states get way more fed spending then they ever send to DC.

So who's subsidizing who?

The argument is about Federal taxation and deductions for SALT (state and local taxes) - the revenue-collection side of the equation. Your comments bring in spending, which is another subject altogether.

My original question remains: Why should a resident of your state with taxable income of $200,000 pay less Federal income tax than a resident of Nebraska with the same taxable income?

Frankly I think we should have a flat-tax and no deductions whatsoever, but that's not politically feasible. THEN we can argue about how and where it's spent.

[pepsi_junkie]

Why should NJ pay for highways in Nebraska when we in NJ pay for our own highways through our high local and state taxes plus ubiquitous tolls? For example. We can play this game forever, whenever this topic comes up people will defend the states that are getting the pork and lambast the states that pay for it.

How about we do both things? Get rid of the exemptions AND the pork? But I've found that even Freepers like the pork when it's to their state.