property tax has nothing to do with the federal. the state takes care of that.
It does because we used to be able to deduct them. Now there is a cap.
@newHSmom, that’s simply not true. We will now be able to deduct only $10K of our $30K property tax on our federal income tax.
@Nrdsb4 property tax is imposed by the state not the federal. asking federal to pay back a tax state imposed does not sound very rational
"Ok…so for every year we have been married…kids dependent…or not…we have claimed zero exemptions because I believe that is how the max was taken out of our pay each pay period. Even WITH that…and an extra $100 taken out each pay, we still had to pay additional when we filed.
I’m not complaining…but what I want to know is…how will we know what to do now? Exemptions are gone. We don’t have dependents.
Lovely."
Your’s is simple. Take your expected income, deduct $24,000 (married joint standard deduction) to get taxable income, and run it thru the tax rates. That’s your tax. Divided by 52 or however many pay periods you have. Withhold that amount and you should be good.
^^I don’t think being “noble” has anything to do with it. It’s just someone looking at their tax situation accurately.
I challenge this assertion. Please explain the basis for the claim, especially since this seemed quite central to your overall argument.
“Who cares if some rich person gets an 3rd Maserati if the rest of the population has good jobs and can provide for themselves and their children? Maybe at some point your average Joe or Josephine will be able to afford their own. Vibrant economies provide economic mobility. Economics is not a zero sum game.”
I do, if I build Corvettes. He should buy a Corvette, better car imho. 
changed to rational. It is not rational or reasonable to asking federal to pay back a tax the state imposed, not to mention about noble. This should be a common sense
What kind of house do you live in that you have $30,000 in property taxes? Yikes.
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/02_economic_mobility_sawhill_ch3.pdf indicates that father to son economic mobility is lower in the US (and UK) than in many other rich countries (figure 2 on page 3, table 1 on page 4), although Americans are more likely believe that economic mobility is good in the US (figure 1 on page 1).
@yourmomma agree with you, they should buy three Corvettes instead.
“It is not rational or reasonable to asking federal to pay back a tax the state imposed, not to mention about noble. This should be a common sense,”
But landlords still get to deduct their property tax and businesses still get to deduct their state taxes and property tax. Both of which are state imposed.
Re #2883, the idea that the federal tax code should be rational is, to me, laughable. However, as we approach 3000 posts, I believe it has been pointed out multiple times that the tax code is written to not only collect revenue, but to promote certain behaviors. Rules that allow businesses to write off certain property as Section 179 property are meant to stimulate business equipment purchases. Rules regarding deductibility of mortgage interest and property taxes are meant to stimulate the economy in the housing and home improvement sectors. A small amount of revenue is lost, but more is eventually gained. Etc., etc., etc…
For me, the lack of careful consideration, as to the full impact of this legislation is completely frustrating. NYT calculator guesstimates that I will come out just a few hundred dollars ahead, but I would be more content if Congress would keep my money and spend it on things I value like CHIP and infrastructure.
Apples and oranges. That is a business. Businesses get to deduct their costs. It doesn’t matter if the cost is a local tax, or the handyman.
We are in the same situation but property tax deduction didn’t help much since we also owe AMT where it all gets added up to calculate the final tax. I expect eliminating deduction will not change much.
It’s about not taxing the same money twice. Double taxation is supposed to be undesirable. And how is the IRS “paying it back” to the individual? I’m not really getting your argument despite your claim that it is common sense.
@emilybee if you meant the “passthrough tax cut”, it’s the incentives for businesses,
"For me, the lack of careful consideration, as to the full impact of this legislation is completely frustrating. NYT calculator guesstimates that I will come out just a few hundred dollars ahead, but I would be more content if Congress would keep my money and spend it on things I value like CHIP and infrastructure. "
There is nothing stopping you from paying more taxes, if you choose.
So using that argument, should we get rid of Medicare and Social Security payroll taxes?
Look, I understand that many of us, including me, live in high tax states and are going to get hit with the SALT limitation.
But try to take your self-interest out of it, and ask yourself: Why should the federal government get less tax because you choose to live in a high tax state?
I am interested in hearing the answers.