E.J. McMahon in today's New York Post adds his name to the list of those beginning to realize just what the elimination of the state/local income tax deduction would mean for New York.
Deduction curbs would hit New York harder than any state because,How about a few numbers:
thanks to their heavy state and local taxes, New York’s highest-income taxpayers
claim higher deductions than their counterparts elsewhere.
As of 2010, New Yorkers earning $1 million or more generated 14 percent of
the entire nation’s federal individual income taxes in that bracket, according
to IRS data. So, 14 percent of any tax rate increase targeted solely at these
top earners would come from New York. . . .
That’s not all. Counting commuters from other states who are taxed by AlbanyWhew! And we are less than 7% of the nation's population.
on wages and bonuses earned here, New York’s tax base accounted for 30 percent
of all the deductions for state and local taxes claimed by Americans earning $1
million or more as of 2010.
So is Senator Schumer going to get out front cynically protecting the highest-earning New Yorkers from this onrushing train even as he pretends to attack "the rich"? He has been uncharacteristically quiet lately, but I find this from a summary of a speech he gave back in October:
He suggested that it is important to protect some tax expenditures, such asVery clever there, Chuck, the way you bury the mention of the big money.
those for college education, retirement savings, mortgage interest, charitable
deductions, and state and local tax deductions.
The second highest income tax state, California, will be with us on this one. Between the two of us, we're almost up to 20% of the population. You would think that the other 80% of the United States, if they are paying even the slightest attention, will catch on to us on this one. On the other hand, by the evidence of the voting patterns of the 18-29 year olds, it is difficult to underestimate the ease with which voters can be fooled on matters of money.