If NY business moves to Mississippi because of taxes, Mississippi will be less of a taker state. If it helps equalize, I am all for it.
And why exactly would they want to move there? I doubt full property tax deduction for the employees is what keeps corporations in NYS. 
Probaly not by itself. At some point, it could add to the benefits of moving. Businesses moved out of NY believe it or not. Would tech companies have moved to AZ or TX if CA tax was lower? Sample of 1, I am not moving to CA. I am taking my higher than average tax to somewhere else althogh CA would be my first choice except the tax.
They’re cutting the mortgage interest deduction AND the property tax deduction. If you live in a high housing cost area, you get smacked.
This bill will depress housing starts in high housing cost areas. Great, just what California needs.
“A $2M house in Dallas carries a $46,000 property tax bill.”
But in NYS we have state and local income tax on top of that!
[quoteThis bill will depress housing starts in high housing cost areas. Great, just what California needs.
[/quote]
H&R Block guy was on TV a while ago. He didn’t think it will have much impact on housing starts. There are severe shortage that they will build no matter what.
My husband said that a positive is that at least our debt will be paid off soon. So instead of putting money towards our debt, we can put it towards increased taxes. 
Wall Street is not moving to Mississippi. Corporations, IMO, want to be in places where there is a highly educated population and isn’t pining to live in the 1950’s.
A huge international nano chip fab manufacturer (Global Foundaries) came into my area a few years ago and are already expanding again (I think it’s now Phase 3) because they needed to be where there is a highly educated workforce and tech support companies and services. These are extremely high paying jobs.
I am sure there are companies that left NY or not moving to NY because of taxes. It’s curious to bring one counter example to refute a big picture argument.
They are also limiting CEO pay deductions from corporation expenses if over $1M. Yay! Mississippi looking better! $1M in Misssissippi goes much further than in NY, I would guess.
@BunsenBurner said:
Could be. But would probably have a better view. 
Here’s a $2M house:
http://www.ebby.com/property/139679623/6540-stichter-avenue-dallas-tx-75230
Big banks don’t need to. They robbed the whole country. They must have left over money from the heist to pay taxes ten times over. I remember smaller firms moving to NC some years ago citing expenses.
Seems very favorable to those with lots of capital to invest passively, but not those who put their own labor into the business.
I thought taxing the wealthy was a good thing? Well, here you have it. You’re welcome.
The bill eliminates deduction for interest on student loans. But hey, it also eliminates the tax on estates bigger than $5 million. So if you have student loan debt and you also inherit a $6 million estate, you’re better off.
Ah, but it isn’t actually taxing the wealthy, it’s taxing the wanna-be wealthy.
Medical expense deduction gone. Will hit seniors hard.
Taxing the wealthy to give to the less wealthy, good thing. Taxing the wealthy to give to the filthy rich, not so much.
Estate tax elimination is disappointing. Hopefully, they put a beak on it before it gets phased out fully. I’d be ok with it if they also eliminate step-up measure and tax capital gains on inheritance. If they do that, it could produce more tax than from estate tax on big estates.
Tough to get very worked up about anything in the proposed bill at this point as its likely to change (assuming anything actually gets enacted).
Giving to the filthy rich? What? First off, the filthy rich are the ones negatively affected by these deduction changes, and second, the deduction changes directly increase tax revenue, not line pockets of the “filthy rich”…
Your argument makes no sense whatsoever.
True, but someone choosing to live above their means isn’t my problem 