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.
No. But I still would have been better off if I had. TX has no state income tax. I'm currently paying both real estate tax AND state income tax. 0.6% real estate tax plus 4.75% state income tax. TX would be cheaper for me, but I like where I am, now.
People pay a lot in taxes in Texas. Sales tax can be 8.25% and property taxes are very high.
How are you going to address the massive deficits if not by taxes.
Removing social security deduction limit and have long term capital gain tax rate changed for high income earners (not 150k more like 400k) would both get support from me. Currently executives making millions can benefit from long term cap gains rates on their stock options and pay an effective tax lower than me.
They added trillions to the debt so Republicans could give their 1 percent donors a tax cut the average america got crumbs back. Corporations got huge tax cuts and instead of investing and hiring more people they sat on the money and paid it out in bonuses instead and still laid off workers
They don't call it the GOP tax scam for nothing cause that's what it is.
I am trying to understand this. You seem to be skipping the middle. Where is the 200-350K folk? Anyone paying 245K in property taxes is wealthy. I'm not arguing your point there. I think I get it. Although, anyone paying 15K in SALT in a blue state...that doesn't make sense. How is a 200K (to use my example) homeowner with children paying 15K in SALT? And maybe you can do some magic with the numbers! That would be appreciated. So, SALT in MA for a humble home of 350k all combined would easily be around 35K and that doesn't include the loss of exemptions, which for a family of 4 or 5 is 16-20k. That is potentially 40K+ off the top, which lowers that tax rate to your 150K, but without it that family is closer to 175K. That's not a ton of money, but even with the lower tax rate they are paying more and a few thousand makes all the difference for the middle class. Am I figuring this wrong?
that is why I'm thinking it would make more sense for states to all pay evenly and the over payments can go back.
When people give you those selective 'examples' they are usually comparing non-itemized pre tax bill returns vs non-itemized after. What they want you to forget is that they took away the $4200 individual deduction that could be claimed per family member on itemized returns. That + the loss of SALT hurt a lot of middle class taxpayers. The counter argument usually is "but look at the increase in the child credit", the problem is that credit is not available to families with 17 or 18 year old kids. And after they took almost all our deductions away, they still didn't steal enough so in 2020 the medical exemption will only cover costs over $10,000 AGI.
They threw a few bucks into peoples take home pay and at the same time screwed the eyes out of millions of taxpayers and have the audacity to claim that this was a "middle class tax cut" SMH
Removing social security deduction limit and have long term capital gain tax rate changed for high income earners (not 150k more like 400k) would both get support from me. Currently executives making millions can benefit from long term cap gains rates on their stock options and pay an effective tax lower than me.
The problem with removing the SS tax limit is that the benefits cap would also have to be removed. The Fed Gov can't afford to pay that. Anyway, as it is, the middle class and above already LOSE money on SS, on average.
Quote:
"As recently as 1985, workers at every income level could retire and expect to get more in benefits than they paid in Social Security taxes, though they didn't do quite as well as their parents and grandparents.
Not anymore.
A married couple retiring last year after both spouses earned average lifetime wages paid about $598,000 in Social Security taxes during their careers. They can expect to collect about $556,000 in benefits, if the man lives to 82 and the woman lives to 85, according to a 2011 study by the Urban Institute, a Washington think tank.
Social Security benefits are progressive, so most low-income workers retiring today still will get slightly more in benefits than they paid in taxes. Most high-income workers started getting less in benefits than they paid in taxes in the 1990s, according to data from the Social Security Administration."
When people give you those selective 'examples' they are usually comparing non-itemized pre tax bill returns vs non-itemized after. What they want you to forget is that they took away the $4200 individual deduction that could be claimed per family member on itemized returns. That + the loss of SALT hurt a lot of middle class taxpayers. The counter argument usually is "but look at the increase in the child credit", the problem is that credit is not available to families with 17 or 18 year old kids. And after they took almost all our deductions away, they still didn't steal enough so in 2020 the medical exemption will only cover costs over $10,000 AGI.
They threw a few bucks into peoples take home pay and at the same time screwed the eyes out of millions of taxpayers and have the audacity to claim that this was a "middle class tax cut" SMH
I didn't realize that for older kids. That is exactly my point. The child credit didn't compensate for me to break even either and by break even I just mean paying the same amount at the end of the year as I did with the dems. It hurt blue state middle class families for sure. This year is going to be especially hard. There will be the increased tax bill and increased childcare since there probably won't be school or only part time school in many coastal states.
With that said, one thing I've learned from this from my other conversations is that blue states need to get ourselves together where it comes to seniors. We need to cast a wider net for care and sustainability, which means we need to keep costs of everything more reasonable and not just housing. It's like a chaotic piecemeal system.
Removing social security deduction limit and have long term capital gain tax rate changed for high income earners (not 150k more like 400k) would both get support from me. Currently executives making millions can benefit from long term cap gains rates on their stock options and pay an effective tax lower than me.
Yeah, I'd be OK with moving the high earners ($400K - the top 1%) into a slightly higher income tax bracket, as long as it's still lower than what they were paying before the tax cut. As far as the long-term capital gains rate, I thought it already WAS higher for higher earners. (People in the low tax brackets pay nothing, I believe, and as you go up the income ladder, the rate increases. I thought.)
When people give you those selective 'examples' they are usually comparing non-itemized pre tax bill returns vs non-itemized after. What they want you to forget is that they took away the $4200 individual deduction that could be claimed per family member on itemized returns. That + the loss of SALT hurt a lot of middle class taxpayers. The counter argument usually is "but look at the increase in the child credit", the problem is that credit is not available to families with 17 or 18 year old kids. And after they took almost all our deductions away, they still didn't steal enough so in 2020 the medical exemption will only cover costs over $10,000 AGI.
They threw a few bucks into peoples take home pay and at the same time screwed the eyes out of millions of taxpayers and have the audacity to claim that this was a "middle class tax cut" SMH
But you're ignoring the other half of the tax cut package, which was the corporate tax cut. If businesses owe less on their profits, then of course they are more valuable companies, and that was reflected in the zooming stock market. So even the 10% of us in the middle class, who saw our taxes go up slightly, more than made that back (like 25x in my case) with an increase in our retirement funds.
I didn't realize that for older kids. That is exactly my point. The child credit didn't compensate for me to break even either and by break even I just mean paying the same amount at the end of the year as I did with the dems. It hurt blue state middle class families for sure. This year is going to be especially hard. There will be the increased tax bill and increased childcare since there probably won't be school or only part time school in many coastal states.
With that said, one thing I've learned from this from my other conversations is that blue states need to get ourselves together where it comes to seniors. We need to cast a wider net for care and sustainability, which means we need to keep costs of everything more reasonable and not just housing. It's like a chaotic piecemeal system.
Blue states need to stop taxing their residents so much. It's nothing but egregiously excessive local and state government spending due to graft. Blue states need to get their act together before too many of their productive citizens leave due to being overtaxed, and they're left with huge government expenses and way too little tax revenue.
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.
