Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Guest
When a bill is finally agreed upon then one can argue its positive/negative affects.
However a very critical piece of this proposal is the state/local income tax deduction. iIs a good example of tax preference that adds complexity to the tax codes and subsudizes some taxpayers at the expense of other taxpayers.
In States like New York, New Jersey, California its a big deal. Its a savings overall of $1.25 trillion over 10 years, savings that can be used to lower rates.
There are 33 House Republicans who hail from states such as New York were this deduction is sacrosanct and they are the wealthiest regions in the nation were the deduction amounts are substantial for these taxpayers.
You can bet what side of this issue Chuck Schummer will be on.
Another deduction is the mortgage deduction and lobbyist from builders and realtors are lining up at the door.
Unless we get a clean bill with NO CARVE OUT the end product will be diluted
Personal Best Regards:
|
It appears that Republicans will scrap the idea of eliminating this deduction to get votes for the overall proposal.
Republicans consider keeping the state and local tax deduction as they search for votes for overhaul - LA Times
So much for the carve out.
I am more interested in my OP...i.e., cutting taxes from wherever, with no commensurate spending cuts.
I keep hearing about, what even supporters question a huge increase in GDP.
That is what I would like to hear opinions on, because you cut taxes, they are cut. Nobody will want to raise them and depending on such an increase in GDP seems a bit irresponsible.
The deficit grows, the rich get richer it seems