Ya…
I’m against repeal of the state and local deduction so I’m really interested in where this goes. MD is one of the more costly states…
I’m also against an estate tax. Yes, it only effects relatively wealthy people, but it’s double taxation.
1 Like
May I ask why? If you earn all of your money legally and build an estate for your family you’ve paid taxes many, many times over.
Truly rich people just build trusts or find loopholes to get around the estate tax. It only really hurts unsophisticated business owners (farmers and pizza shops owners etc…).
How do you pay tax on 50% of the worth of a pizza shop or farm that you want to keep whole and running in the second generation?
2 Likes
Good point regarding the small business angle.
I’m not because I view it as a bailout for high tax states. Somebody working in a high tax state doesn’t care about that because they if that tax goes up/down it is just a shift in paying federal or state taxes.
I think it would make people take a harder look at their states income tax, which wouldn’t be a bad thing. Obviously people in New York or CA will be pushing against it.
This is also a laymans interpretation so feel free to correct.
1 Like
My problem with removing it is you’re now paying tax on the same income twice. Once to the Fed and once to state/local plus property tax (which can include an additional city tax). Plus state sales tax.
It’s just out of control…
It should be a straight credit, @Basement_Gainz do you know if it’s above or below the line? I can’t remember.
I agree, but there are no consequences if a state raises taxes. It just shifts the burden. If you are taxes separately people will be a lot more careful with state tax levels.
1 Like
In theory, perhaps, but, Baltimore for example, has incredibly high property taxes and people still buy property there. I mean, I can’t just up and move to Delaware because MDs income tax is too high. I need a job and the jobs are here not there (speaking generally).
1 Like
Plus you have entrenched politics in states to deal with. MD is a democratic state because Baltimore, Prince George’s, Howard, and Montgomery County control the politics for the most part. So, lowering state taxes is a particulariliy tough sell here.
Simple socialist math. I think the loss in those tax revenues is an unnecessary cut given how fiscal conservatism doesn’t exist anymore.
iirc the estate tax minimum is like 5mil+. Only hits like .03% of the population. Chances are if you know a business owner, they’ll never be touched by the estate tax.
TBH I used to be in favor of removing the estate tax. If I had any remaining faith in republican’s ability to reduce govt waste at this point instead of pandering for political points, I’d probably still be in favor of removing it instead of lowering it.
3 Likes
If the Republicans pass that part of it, it will be the biggest FU to blue states imaginable. Immediately the left coast and the Northeast will have pressure to lower state tax burdens from their constituents. All those liberals will be fiscal conservatives overnight when their effective tax rate increases 13% in California.
The flight to Texas and other low tax states will increase. All the sudden the map below will matter… way more than it ever has. This would be a shrewd move from the normally hapless craven Republicans. This will be a huge federal tax increase on people who would never vote Republican anyway. If anyone complains the reps can point to the state governments and say “talk to your governors and state reps, why do they need 13%?” I hope they do it.
“Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy’s strategy.”
2 Likes
You can itemize either state/local income taxes or state/local sales taxes on the 1040. But not both.
1 Like
Adjusting for inflation, the richest athlete who ever lived was a Roman charioteer named Appuleius Diocles, earning the equivalent of USD 15 billion during his career of 20+ years.
Elite gladiators such as Tetrius and Flamma were paid mind-boggling sums going into today’s hundreds of millions, not taking into account additional income from branded merchandise (yes, branded merchandise) and sponsorships.
The Roman city of Tolmis on the shores of the Black Sea once infamously blew its entire yearly budget on a meet-and-greet visit from a famous gladiator Thracius.
And yes, even then many were complaining that those vasts sums of money could be spent on doctors and helping the poor.
5 Likes
If someone has a pizza shop valued ar 5.5 mm (11mm married) - ĺ have a strong interest in being adopted. And quick!
2 Likes
The high income people will move to red states, change the political leanings through massive donations and liberal ideals. The grifters and grafters will remain in their current states and vote for the party of the upraised hand. No thanks.
See the East Coast for further clarification
panem et circenses
Worked then. Still works now.
2 Likes
Do you study Roman history?
I like to think of myself as an armchair historian interested in history in general.
1 Like
I’ve seen you give very detailed accounts of Roman history, I like the parallels. I recently skim-read Will Durant’s Caesar and Christ book and am fascinated with that historical time, especially from an engineering perspective. I’m impressed with how much of the political and minute details you remember.
1 Like
The plan would deliver far more modest tax cuts to most other households — an average cut of $1,700 for households in 2027, according to the report. But the results would be unevenly spread, with 1 in 4 households paying more in taxes.
Despite repeated promises from Republican lawmakers that the plan is designed to provide relief to the middle class, nearly 30 percent of taxpayers with incomes between $50,000 and $150,000 would see a tax increase, according to the study by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The majority of households that made between $150,000 and $300,000 would see a tax increase.
Meanwhile, the study found that 80 percent of the tax benefits would accrue to those in the top 1 percent. Households making more than about $900,000 a year would see their taxes drop by more than $200,000 on average.
Those trends were credited to the loss of itemized deductions, particularly the ability to deduct state and local property taxes from income.
The loss of the personal exemption, which shields $4,050 of income from federal taxes for every household member, also would play a major role in increasing taxes for some households, the analysis found — an effect that would get worse over time because the amount of the personal exemption kept pace with inflation.
Meanwhile, the study found that 80 percent of the tax benefits would accrue to those in the top 1 percent. Households making more than about $900,000 a year would see their taxes drop by more than $200,000 on average.
The analysis also found the plan would provide disproportionately large benefits for businesses compared with what the middle class and low-income Americans would receive.
“A major feature is tax collections would shift dramatically, from businesses to individuals,” said Eric Toder, a co-director of the Tax Policy Center.
The tax plan would increase the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the first decade, the center found.
2 Likes