Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 275 posts

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#51

Post by ghouse »

seibelj wrote: post #16

Coastal liberals are very happy for tax increases except when they have to pay it themselves! This makes the situation more fair - eliminate market warping changes such as the property tax deduction and stop letting states get a free ride when increasing taxes by reducing the federal burden. Seems fair to me.

Two issues here: 1) I thought the GOP was in favor of strong local governance and believed money is more efficiently allocated at the state level. This action flies in the face of that. 2) _Generally_ the states who are penalized by this change in tax policy already pay more in federal taxes than they receive in benefits.[1]

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-s...

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#52

Post by eli »

nostromo wrote: post #12

I don't see why state taxes should be federally deductible to begin with. Two families both make $250,000 a year. One is in New York and one is in Texas. The family in Texas is carrying more of the federal tax burden than the family in New York. Why? Both are (in theory) receiving the same benefits from the Federal Government and should pay the same in taxes. If you're a progressive this should make even less sense:…

Taxes aren't based on how much you benefit from government. Progressive tax rates make sense because the wealthy can afford to pay a larger share of their paycheck to support shared society. Not because they necessarily derive more benefits than the middle class.

If we taxed people based on the benefits they receive from the government, then the homeless would pay a fortune.

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#53

Post by hbarka »

vkou wrote: post #8
mmanfrin wrote: post #5

I'm a highish earning single homeowner in Alameda County (Bay Area) -- between the Mortgage Interest deduction, the Property Tax deduction, and the State Income Tax deduction being slated for removal, my taxable income is about to go up something like $60k, which is a large chunk of my actual income. This tax bill utterly fucks me, to the point I'm considering selling my house to get ahead of the inevitable housing c…

> I cannot see this bill as anything short of theft. Why do I have to pay double-digit percentage more on my taxes to give the ultra rich a tax cut? In what fucking world does that make any economic sense. My rent isn't tax deductible. Why is yours blessed with such a status (In the form of a mortgage, and property tax deduction)? All that mortgage tax deductions do, economically, is increase the overall price of hom…

Relax. You’re not subsidizing anyone. Homeowners pay a larger share than renters to begin with. And if you know anything about Western society, home ownership creates stable societies—that’s why ownership is encouraged.

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#54

Post by matt_wulfeck »

refurb wrote: post #14
mmanfrin wrote: post #5

I'm a highish earning single homeowner in Alameda County (Bay Area) -- between the Mortgage Interest deduction, the Property Tax deduction, and the State Income Tax deduction being slated for removal, my taxable income is about to go up something like $60k, which is a large chunk of my actual income. This tax bill utterly fucks me, to the point I'm considering selling my house to get ahead of the inevitable housing c…

People have been clamoring for more taxes on the rich. Well, this is what it looks like. Oh wait! You didn't think you were rich, right?

Depends on if you mean rich for California, rich for the USA, or rich for the world.

Oh wait! They didn’t think wealth was relative, right?

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#55

Post by seibelj »

nostromo wrote: post #12

I don't see why state taxes should be federally deductible to begin with. Two families both make $250,000 a year. One is in New York and one is in Texas. The family in Texas is carrying more of the federal tax burden than the family in New York. Why? Both are (in theory) receiving the same benefits from the Federal Government and should pay the same in taxes. If you're a progressive this should make even less sense:…

Yes, liberals love high taxes when it hits someone but themselves. No one likes paying taxes.

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#56

Post by jbooth »

harryh wrote: post #19
mmanfrin wrote: post #5

I'm a highish earning single homeowner in Alameda County (Bay Area) -- between the Mortgage Interest deduction, the Property Tax deduction, and the State Income Tax deduction being slated for removal, my taxable income is about to go up something like $60k, which is a large chunk of my actual income. This tax bill utterly fucks me, to the point I'm considering selling my house to get ahead of the inevitable housing c…

There are numerous items written by economists that discuss in detail why state and local taxes and mortgage interest should not be deductible from federal taxes. It's very highly agreed upon. Perhaps you should seek out some of this literature. I also strongly suspect that you are overestimating the magnitude of the tax increase you will see but if course it's very hard to know without the details of your particular…

That's all fine, but IN CONTEXT, OP is still getting robbed. They're paying higher taxes while the super-rich pay lower taxes.

They could have passed a bill that eliminated those deductions and gave corresponding tax breaks to the middle class. They could have passed a bill that skipped the tax breaks for the super-rich and actually cut the deficit. I'm OK with paying my fair share if we were actually solving problems.

But no. We've gotta pay higher taxes while still blowing a hole in the deficit? In what world does that make sense?

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#57

Post by hcknwscommenter »

jacob019 wrote: post #35
lettergram wrote: post #3

This doesn't really make sense to me. So it appears that the tax bill generally is reducing the tax code and closing loop-holes (which typically is considered "good" to the left, and the right). In this case, it looks like the tax reductions are reduced in states that have higher taxes. Well that makes sense, because the states with lower taxes have less to write off (as they have 0% in some cases). Of course Texas w…

Yes, any change will have winners and losers. The winners will be happy, and the losers will be mad. We all support the idea of simpler tax code, but the devil is in the details. I'm not sure that eliminating the state tax deduction really simplifies anything though. It seems like a transfer of power from the states to the federal government.

"It seems like a transfer of power from the states to the federal government."

Bingo, remember that the next time some politician tells you they are in favor of state's rights.

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#59

Post by benjaminl »

mmanfrin wrote: post #5

I'm a highish earning single homeowner in Alameda County (Bay Area) -- between the Mortgage Interest deduction, the Property Tax deduction, and the State Income Tax deduction being slated for removal, my taxable income is about to go up something like $60k, which is a large chunk of my actual income. This tax bill utterly fucks me, to the point I'm considering selling my house to get ahead of the inevitable housing c…

So you lost your special interest deductions and now have to pay taxes on your actual income? Doesn't sound unfair to me.

Re: Among the Tax Bill’s Biggest Losers: High-Income, Blue State Taxpayers

#60

Post by vostok »

nostromo wrote: post #12

I don't see why state taxes should be federally deductible to begin with. Two families both make $250,000 a year. One is in New York and one is in Texas. The family in Texas is carrying more of the federal tax burden than the family in New York. Why? Both are (in theory) receiving the same benefits from the Federal Government and should pay the same in taxes. If you're a progressive this should make even less sense:…

Two questions:

----

1. What about the property tax deduction? Why are property taxes deductible, but income taxes are not?

----

2. How do you feel about the mortgage interest deduction? A very similar question could be asked.

Two families both make $250,000 a year. One took out a $750k mortgage and one took out a $300k mortgage. Why should the second family carry more of federal tax burden than the first?

I don't have the right answer, but it's something to consider.

Post reply on HN