Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Help me understand why income and property taxes have been deductible on personal tax returns but not sales taxes? I don't think that was fair. I think all taxes paid by individuals at the state and local level should be deductible from Federal taxable income. If the congress wants to make income taxes progressive it should be on the net.
I am not sure of the statutory basis of the challenge by some states but once I heard that the Federal government could not tax payments made to local states.
I don't recall the reasoning involved, but sales taxes used to be deductible until the 1986 tax reform.
wait..... I thought they were all complaining about how much this tax package was a tax cut for the rich and these guys are thinking about lawsuits because they are rich and it messes up some of their deductions.
wait..... I thought they were all complaining about how much this tax package was a tax cut for the rich and these guys are thinking about lawsuits because they are rich and it messes up some of their deductions.
the hypocrisy!!
You don't have to be 'rich' to itemize, you just have to pay a lot in SALT / mortgage interest.
Actually, I'm retired, so I'm counting on you to remain gainfully employed to keep me in the style to which I'm accustomed.
You know what screws you guys every time? The constant gloom and doom and end of the world predictions.
Reality: in most state and local budgets around 80% is mandated spending (Maryland's is 82%). So when the various current gubernatorial hopefuls promise something like free college for all they're actually saying "I'm going to increase mandated spending to 85%".
Federal mandated is around 60% or so.
In theory, more money in the pockets of consumers will lead to more economic activity and increase tax collections. Will that happen? Probably, but how much is the question. And it's an aggregate number.
What people always fail to take into account is that businesses aren't taxpayers, they're tax collectors. Every penny of tax levied on a business is baked into every product sold. Cars, clothes, hamburgers, whatever.
And, to show I'm not real probusiness, I will state that in my little corner of the cosmos businesses cost my residents a significant portion of their property tax payments. From business license cost not covering how much it costs to process them, to businesses dumping their trash in public trash cans instead of having a contractor pick it up so our town employees have to take it and dump it to business owners not living in town so we don't get the pittance of personal income tax for them from the state.
I dont think its gloom and doom that people born disabled get only $700 a month to live on now. Its gloom. Really gloomy. Thats the consequences of decades of anti-tax mentality. The notion that tax cuts dont hurt people badly is really dangerous. More cuts will be underway from the already paltry $700 level. I think its appalling. Just in order for the ruling donor class to get even richer so they can buy even more puppets in DC. And no, taxes on businesses are not simply paid by consumers. If that were the case, businesses would not be so livid about it. Stock buybacks, not lower prices will take place as a result of this tax cut. The rich CEOs after all are rewarded when the stock price increases, and the stocks do increase when stock buybacks take place.
wait..... I thought they were all complaining about how much this tax package was a tax cut for the rich and these guys are thinking about lawsuits because they are rich and it messes up some of their deductions.
the hypocrisy!!
The truly rich dont care about these deductions. The truly rich are the large donors. The owners of America. The top 0.01%.
It's too bad that so far in this thread the tax issue can't be discussed in a mature and adult way.
Here's the objective truth: it is bad for the economy and it is bad for America for federal policy to pick winner states and loser states. If Trump wants a strong economy he can't do it without California's tech sector and New York's financial prowess. The blue states need the the industry, energy, and agriculture from the red states. We are the United States and we should be working together.
The left has been crying for the rich to pay their fair share for years now.
Now they are with the restricted deductions.
Not really. If you earn more than $200 a month in Alabama, you get no Medicaid, even if you have children. Its basically a death sentence for lots of people. Teachers and law enforcement officers earn close to nothing in places like Oklahoma, Alabama and Arkansas. This is by design.
Link please. I have seen a few leftists promoting this story with nothing to back it up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
