Some interesting comments on the property taxes etc.To make things
more fair, maybe the final tax bill can "compromise" and allow the first
$10,000 of property, sales and/or income taxes to be deducted. That helps
prevent New York and California from avoiding paying their fair share of federal
tax.As regards double taxation, which tax is "primary"?
Federal taxes come first because everyone pays those. Then local taxes are paid.
Open Minded Mormon - Everett, WADec. 8, 2017 12:30 p.m.Thanks
for your response, and your service. I too have traveled "all over the
world" and retired from Ft. Lewis WA. So, I have a pretty good idea of land
values in King County and the surrounding area and property, sales, and other
taxes in the area.I've never intentionally,
"bad-mouthed" any state. Every state has its issues, virtues, and
shortcomings. Each state has the ability to fix its unique issues. I picked
Utah because I can live with its current situation. Bad air will drive me
out.The issue is within a Federal System, people have a Federal and
a State Government. Both provide benefits, and demand payment(taxes) for their
services. State and local taxes, and Federal Taxes should be paid. State taxes
should not relieve its residents of any portion of paying the Federal bill.Services provided by the states do not reduce the federal benefits or
responsibilities of any citizen. Everyone has the same Defense bill, Social
Security, Medicare,... that the Federal Government provides. The states do
nothing to fund these services.We need to dump the SALT deduction.
It puts everyone on a level paying field.
@majmajor - Layton, UTDec. 8, 2017 10:26 a.m.Open Minded
Mormon - Everett, WADec. 8, 2017 9:44 a.m.You should move back
here, from WA.====== 1. Those numbers are based on
living in Utah. I have had this DN account for over 12 years, and moved to Utah
10 years ago - show me where to change/edit I'd be happy to do it.2. The State of Washington has no income tax and no sales tax on the basics -
food, clothing, shelter. My taxes [and Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos's] were
all WAY less there and schools and public services were all far superior to
Utah.3. I'm not trying to bash Utah -- quite the contrary,
I'm actually trying to IMPROVE it.4. In my life, I have
actually lived all over the Unites States and the world. [I'm a Veteran]
Unless there is change, the way things are going now my next move will be
to Canada or possibly New Zealand. If I'm going to have to pay over a 1/3
of my income in taxes - I might as well get the free healthcare and a decent
retirement. My VA certainly won't be enough to cover it....
The rich are getting their deduction for their private jets; the middle class is
getting ice water poured over their heads.
The mayor is wrong. Do not punish states for fiscally responsibility and lower
taxes.Liberal states can still keep higher taxes; don't force
other states to pay for their bloat.
Re: "Beyond the unfairness of middle-class family tax increases,and double
taxation . . ."Ha!Republican politics has NOTHING to
do with fairness.Republican politics is all about lying, cheating,
and defrauding . . . And guaranteeing wealthy donors even greater wealth at the
expense of everyone else.Why do you think the lying, cheating,
thieving Putin Puppet in the White House is the chosen leader of the
To the critics of New York and California. One would think these places the
worst in the country. But then again, California is the largest state by
population and still growing. And New York is the home to vast droves of
opportunity and wealth. And Wall Street! Now citizens of those two states pay
high taxes, and are net revenue producers to the US Treasury. They will be hurt
by the SALT reductions. However, these high tax states won't collapse.Oh, and BTW, Montana is a high tax state as well. We have a high income
tax (but no sales tax). We lose out, as do the citizens of Utah with their
property tax and income tax deductions.Sadly, the DN is only now
reacting to the news that the SALT deduction will surely be eliminated, thereby
hurting many in the middle class in Utah (the rich dislike this, but it
won't change their behavior). My question to the editorial page of the DN,
why did it take you so long? Is this your political bias showing (speak no ill
of a GOP bill or candidate)? Or is this some ruse to paper over your slavish
devotion to GOP causes?
Open Minded Mormon - Everett, WADec. 8, 2017 9:44 a.m.You
should move back here, from WA.FYI, Utah intentionally taxes things
that are NON-DEDUCTIBLE. The following are examples of non-deductible taxes for
individuals (some on your list, and there are several more that I can’t
think of); - vehicles - age based, not value based - only value based is
taxable - sales tax - increased vehicle registration fees on
hybrids The only thing that is a significant tax deduction for my
family is my home’s property tax.Taking a look at the value of
the SALT deduction in an apples-to-apples comparison, a family, making $75K in
King County, WA will pay LESS federal taxes then the same family in Layton, UT.
I've used 2 different tax programs along with last year's 1040 to
assess the GOP tax plan for myself.I make $75,000My
'new' Federal tax rate bracket being proposed tax drops a whopping
$375.That is what they try to tell is so good about it.However
-- My Utah State Tax was $3500 - other my other Local taxes [i.e.,
property, cars, etc.] is another $3300 so, I will actually lose $6800 in
Federal deductions -- Therefore, our tax liability actually
increases another $2100.so our NET total tax out-of-pocket will actually
increase by $1,725which the GOP will NOT tell us.Do not
believe the GOP liars!Do the math people -- Numbers do no lie.The liars will tell you this helps the middle class -- and then
assume you are too stupid to actually check the math -- As I simply
demonstrated -- it will not.only the Corporations and uber-wealthy are
made better off!
Bottem line. Eliminating the SALT deduction hurts the wealthy, and
doesn't affect the poor. No wonder the Dems. are crying.
So using some commenters logic California and other liberal states are
subsidizing charity deductions of republican states. So in the end
it all evens out as long as citizens get to deduct their salt.
Eliminating the SALT deduction was part of the plan, to punish states and cities
who have the temerity to try and solve problems themselves, and use locally
raised tax revenue to address issues.*When* (not "if") the
economy turns south and federal tax revenues are constrained, the pressure will
be on to dramatically cut the Department of Education and the associated monies
that come to Utah schools.Corporate cuts are permanent, the
individual cuts expire after 5 years, so as the rising federal tax burden
squeezes state taxes, tax payers will be at war with each other regarding the
funding of schools here in Utah. Anti-tax politicians will push for
a 50% copay for parents to pay for their childrens' K-12 education.Citizens turning against each other, children feeling like a burden.
This is the kind of future we voted for, folks.
California residents reduce their Federal tax burden by 101 billion dollars a
year. New York by close to 50 billion.These States are run by
Democrats who never stop shouting about how the rich don't pay their fair
share of taxes; while they (Ca. and N.Y.) steal from the other 48 States.Nice.
The SALT deduction is just another cynical ploy for Republicans to make a small
group pay for their gift to the wealthy and, at the same time stick it to blue
states. DNSubscriber:“But, if the folks who
choose to live in high tax Nirvanas like New York and California were paying
their fair share to the feds”California’s economy
contributes substantially to U.S. GDP. It is more than paying its share,
WalletHub ranked CA as #46 (high to low) in how many net federal dollars it
receives. (UT ranked #40–receiving more net federal dollars than CA).
By voting to eliminate the SALT deductions, Congress made it clear that the rest
of the nation should not be subsidizing high state tax rates, like those in
largely Democratic states, like New York and California.In my
opinion, the compromise is noteworthy and praiseworthy, too.
Real tax reform is about eliminating a ton of complexity of the current tax
system and taking away government's ability to coerce behavior through the
tax code.I am in favor of eliminating all the various tax deductions
in EXCHANGE for lower overall tax rates. If you just eliminate deductions while
leaving all the rates the same, then yes you are raising taxes.But I
would much rather have a simplified system where I pay a lower rate on all my
earnings and forget about needing to keep track of every expense so that I can
get that lower 'effective' tax rate on April 15 through deductions
after I have filled out a ton of paperwork and paid my accountant a lot of fees.
This is a ridiculous article. Fear mongering and hyperbole....We don't get
to write off the sales tax we pay.....how is that tragedy any less than losing
the balance of the SALT deduction?
Wrong, Mr. Mayor (who has done a great job in our city, by the way!). The SALT
deduction is grossly unfair.The insatiable federal spending machine
demands more money every year. So, they jack up tax rates to get more. And
everyone will pay more, which is okay, I guess.But, if the folks who
choose to live in high tax Nirvanas like New York and California were paying
their fair share to the feds (regardless of the extortionate amount of earning
confiscated by their state) then the feds would not need to raise
everyone's taxes as much.If the feds need $500 billion more to make
up for those who took the SALT deduction, some of that will come from people not
able to take SALT deductions, making them pay more than their fair share to the
feds.So, when the bluest states are collecting money from their
subjects, the feds come after people in places like Utah where we elect
legislators who live within their means.Make everyone pay their fair
share to the feds, regardless of how much their state or city taxes them.
Eliminate the SALT deduction! Cut federal spending on every program but
When states pay higher taxes, they generally provide more services to their
residents and ask for less from the federal government. I say we encourage
states to continue to be self-reliant and take care of their people by keeping
the SALT deduction.
@majMajorLosing this deduction hurts people in Utah. The narrative
that it encourages states to jack up local taxes is a fallacy.
Mayor, You are right."eliminating SALT could
potentially lead to increased pressure on state and local elected officials to,
in turn, lower their tax rates to offset the impact of the loss of the
deductibility of those taxes."State and local officials NEED
that pressure to manage services, and local and state taxes. If a city decides
to charge more taxes for the same or undesired services as another city, that
encourages people/businesses to "vote with their feet" and leave. The excuse that your city's taxes are high, "but you can take
them off on your federal taxes," is dishonest, and a crutch that local
officials use too often. We need to get rid of it.
Mayor,You are wrong. The “SALT deduction” is a
bad deal for taxpayers that pay little state/local tax. The SALT deduction has
been used by high-tax States and cities (i.e. New York City, New York State,
California...) to have residents in other states pay a greater proportion of the
Federal Tax. For example, people working in New York City pay an
employment tax, AND a State Tax both of those taxes are currently used to reduce
that individual's Federal taxes. So compared to a person making the same
income as one in Utah, high tax state resident will pay LESS federal taxes. So
we are subsidizing states with more social programs or services. I
have no issue with New York/California over-taxing, or providing increased
social services to its residents/workers, but they need to pay their share of
THEIR Federal services. State taxes pay for STATE services, and shouldn't
reduce a person's obligation to pay his/her Federal taxes. It is a Federal
government. Citizens have obligations to their state, and federal
government.Federal taxes need to be based on income, and not force
conservative states to pay more taxes compared to liberal states for the same