Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 104
Thanks Tree30Thanks

Thread: Cuomo To Sue U.S. Gov Over State Tax Break Change

  1. #21
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    30,334
    Thanks
    11022

    From
    on the river
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    What does "fair share" mean, exactly? You're asking them to pay tax on money they used to pay tax. And they already pay more tax than they get back in services. And the arrangement that was just ended was the deal from the beginning of the Federal income tax. So your ideas about "fair share" aren't fair at all.
    if the federal government allows the well heeled to deduct a large portion of the income taxes a state levies, that state unfairly benefits from the revenue gleaned from taxing the shit out of their wealthier residents. They are basically keeping their wealthier residents' wealth in the state, while passing off much of the costs associated with funding the nation on the residents of states that have low or no state income tax.

  2. #22
    Veteran Member PACE's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    24,491
    Thanks
    20603

    From
    None of your business
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said his administration plans to sue the federal government over the new Republican tax law, on the grounds that it’s unconstitutional because it discriminates against New York and other states that voted against President Donald Trump.

    “Make no mistake, they’re robbing the blue states to give money to red states,” Cuomo said during his State of the State speech in Albany Wednesday. “It is an economic civil war. It is illegal and we will challenge it in court as unconstitutional.”

    Cuomo, who described the Trump presidency as “the most hostile federal administration in history,” said the changes to state and local tax deductions in the bill will raise New Yorkers’ property and income taxes by at least 20 percent. The governor added that New York state already contributes $48 billion more annually to the federal government than it gets back.



    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic..._medium=social

    Good for him. This is what happens when you rush a bill through with no hearings and was done mainly to please the big GOP donors.
    Good move.

  3. #23
    Veteran Member PACE's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    24,491
    Thanks
    20603

    From
    None of your business
    Quote Originally Posted by Libertine View Post
    Think that might be a population based factoid?
    What difference does that make? Jersey California New York Connecticut and Mass are the biggest donors states while Mississippi Loiuisana Kentucky are the biggest federal welfare queens.

  4. #24
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    50,419
    Thanks
    38812

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by publius3 View Post
    70% of people currently do not itemize at all.

    In contrast, 77% of tax filers with an AGI between $100,000 and $200,000 chose to itemize their deductions in 2014, with an average of $25,598 in deductions claimed.

    But those itemized deductions come up against the AMT.

    These people are going to be in the AMT anyway....
    Which is why many tax experts think the AMT should be done away with

  5. #25
    Member
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    3,804
    Thanks
    1075

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    Which is why many tax experts think the AMT should be done away with
    Nwvertheless, the people currently complaining they won't be able to take a specific deduction already can't take advantage of the deduction. So what exactly is the complaint?

  6. #26
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    12,290
    Thanks
    3013

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    Mmm, I guess you missed this part


    The governor added that New York state already contributes $48 billion more annually to the federal government than it gets back.


    People in NY, NJ and CA pay far more in federal tax than most other other states do.
    Ms. HayJenn,

    Why do you think the federal government should not pay for the federal infrastructure?

  7. #27
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    50,419
    Thanks
    38812

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by publius3 View Post
    Nwvertheless, the people currently complaining they won't be able to take a specific deduction already can't take advantage of the deduction. So what exactly is the complaint?

    In CA, 38% of people itemize. That's the compliant. And not all of them are really rich either.

  8. #28
    Member
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    3,804
    Thanks
    1075

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by HayJenn View Post
    In CA, 38% of people itemize. That's the compliant. And not all of them are really rich either.
    And those people will have less than 24k in itemized deductions.

    In theory the people currently itemizing more than 24k can lose under this deal, but that's the point, those people have higher incomes that are then impacted by the AMT ANYWAY.

  9. #29
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    50,419
    Thanks
    38812

    From
    CA
    Quote Originally Posted by publius3 View Post
    And those people will have less than 24k in itemized deductions.

    In theory the people currently itemizing more than 24k can lose under this deal, but that's the point, those people have higher incomes that are then impacted by the AMT ANYWAY.
    You have no way of knowing how many of those people have less that 24k in itemized deductions.

    Sales, state, and property taxes tend to pretty high in places like CA, NY and NJ.

    So if your subject to both losing deductions and paying the AMT - you could be screwed under this plan.

  10. #30
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,218
    Thanks
    494

    From
    Barsoom
    This will be a pretty tough case to get off of the ground. Suing to overturn a law passed under the plenary power of Article I and the Sixteenth Amendment would be up against pretty high odds of failure. Even if the suit gained a little traction, it would be incumbent on New York to prove that the tax law intentionally targeted certain blue states and the entire debate record is in the public arena.
    Thanks from Rasselas and pragmatic

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Cuomo vs Trump in 2020?
    By bajisima in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 8th July 2017, 07:56 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 26th September 2016, 01:03 AM
  3. Mario Cuomo passes on
    By publius3 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 3rd January 2015, 02:40 PM
  4. Cuomo scandal
    By Macduff in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 5th November 2014, 05:58 PM
  5. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 29th January 2014, 08:25 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed