Like that hasn't been happening.
That's bullshit. Dems will need to take Congress & the Presidency to do that. Throwing shade on them won't help that happen. Quite the opposite. It plays to the Poor Bernie! crowd to keep them out of the voting booth.
Like that hasn't been happening.
Lose $300 under the House plan and over $1500 under the Senate plan. 28 years old, middle class. Thanks Republicans!
Updated my estimate with the new plan and taking into account splitting up deductions in an optimal way with my GF (I claim the standard deduction, she claims mortgage interest and property tax). Between savings from the tax plan and buying our house this year (vs renting last year) we steal about $11k extra per year from red state idiots. Thanks Dump voters! Exactly zero of that will be going back into the economy -- we'll bank that shit at Vanguard and come that much closer to retiring and doing whatever we want at 45 (mid 20s now), whether social security is solvent or cut back or not. Red state rubes can work until they die.
Median income of Trump voters was higher than the median income of Clinton voters.
Holy god please stop with this Stockholm syndrome bullshit. The right got what they wanted through savage attacks on the Republican leadership. Forced out Bohner and Cantor, primaried others. Now they control all levers of government. The idea that in order for the rancid, rotten Democratic party to save us we need to tolerate their bullshit is incredibly offensive and completely inconsistent with what we've seen in American politics for the last decade.
I mean, really? Democrats have gotten clobbered for working with Republicans on things in the past that have had a conservative slant
Isn't that what they voted for?Updated my estimate with the new plan and taking into account splitting up deductions in an optimal way with my GF (I claim the standard deduction, she claims mortgage interest and property tax). Between savings from the tax plan and buying our house this year (vs renting last year) we steal about $11k extra per year from red state idiots. Thanks Dump voters! Exactly zero of that will be going back into the economy -- we'll bank that shit at Vanguard and come that much closer to retiring and doing whatever we want at 45 (mid 20s now), whether social security is solvent or cut back or not. Red state rubes can work until they die.
There have been numerous important discussions of how states might respond to the repeal of the SALT deduction. David Kamin lists some of them here; he also notes that these possible (likely?) responses should be taken into account by the JCT because they will reduce the revenue gains that the federal government is expecting.
I should like to sketch out one additional state response. Suppose the House approach to the SALT deduction were to become law. This means that the deduction would be eliminated except for $10,000 in property taxes. A certain group of taxpayers will now find themselves with less than $10,000 in property taxes to deduct, but lots of state income taxes that they can no longer deduct. To be specific, suppose a taxpayer has $5,000 in property taxes that they can still deduct, but $8,000 in income taxes that they cannot. If $5,000 of the income tax liability could be shifted into the property tax then the taxpayer (and the state) would not be leaving a deduction on the table. This could be done, of course, just by increasing property taxes and reducing income taxes. As it turns out, even if increasing property taxes is on balance a good idea, it is one that is highly fraught politically and has big implications for state-local relations. Also, as the current experience with drive-by tax reform is continually illustrating, major changes to tax systems should not be done quickly. See here for some of the issues raised by a shift to property taxes.
But a state with an income tax need not engage in a prolonged debate about increasing its property tax in order to maximize the value of the SALT deduction for its citizens. In broad strokes, all a state needs to do is formally increase its property taxes so that citizens can get the maximum deduction, but then in effect hold taxpayers harmless by means of the state’s income tax.
Here is what this might look like a little more specifically. The state can authorize its localities to impose a special property tax supplement up to $10,000 so as to assure all taxpayers maximize their SALT deduction (if they end up itemizing). Next, the state creates a generous property tax circuit breaker in its income tax. The circuit breaker could work like this: to the extent the property tax burden as a percentage of a taxpayer’s income is greater than it was in 2017 — and that increase is a result of a special supplemental property tax — then that additional property tax is forgiven. To be sure, there would be many details to work out (such as coordinating the timing of local property tax collection with the state income tax), but I think the mechanism is sound. An additional refinement could be to make certain that some small portion of the new property tax is in fact collected by the locality so that the whole structure is respected.
I should add that I believe that states (really localities) should increase their use of the property tax in general and that generous circuit breakers are an important way to make this possible. See my argument here. One would hope that the fact that this self-help proposal for the states is also a reasonable idea on its own would make it more attractive.
You live in IL now, do you really want a 25k or higher property tax bill? What about retired people? They have a paid off house and still have a $1000+ a month property tax tab.
This is messy. Let's just legalize pot and smoke away our concerns over the next few years. .
If they can make it a wash with SALT deductibility without adverse impacts I don't really care how they get it. The bigger picture here also is that there are going to be holes in this thing big enough to drive supertankers though that will result in FAR less federal revenue than any score has anticipated. What good legislatin'.
We should legalize weed now anyway. Scoop up as much money before those dummies in WI/IN/MO figure it out.
It won't happen simply because the feds will collect more from the target populations & the states can't cut revenues. The feds will simply disallow any scheme that reduces their revenue. Don't like that? Feel free to sue with a stacked federal bench.
If they can make it a wash with SALT deductibility without adverse impacts I don't really care how they get it. The bigger picture here also is that there are going to be holes in this thing big enough to drive supertankers though that will result in FAR less federal revenue than any score has anticipated. What good legislatin'.
We should legalize weed now anyway. Scoop up as much money before those dummies in WI/IN/MO figure it out.
They do understand how people vote though. The Reps gave me $700! The Dems didn't get me $700. The program cuts the Reps are getting ready to serve up are lost on people. Those cuts will be blamed on the workers at the local level who have to tell folks they can't have the services they rely on, damn government.
For an admin slobbering over themselves to defer to state rights... Let's get this party started v
This does piss me off about the Dems. They totally concede the argument on taxes, other than to just raise them (on the rich.)
What I would like to see is that they become champions of tax cuts for the middle & working classes.
They should ride this tax bill as a billionaire bailout that screws the workers. Promise to rebalance the bill towards the middle class for the next election, make the middle &lower end cuts permanent, and increase the taxes on the very top as the payfors.
Do it under reconcilation too as that's how we roll now. F the kumbaya grand bargain bullshit.
LOL...just look at the FCC restricting states from implementing their own net neutrality after its' immanent repeal (12/14/17 IIRC) as an example of how they really feel about states rights.