Judge dismisses high-tax states' lawsuit against Trump tax deduction limits

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
118,684
Do not like...this accelerates Boneheaded Bolsheviks evacuation of the high tax mess they made and are leaving behind.



Judge dismisses high-tax states' lawsuit against Trump tax deduction limits

https://www.foxbusiness.com/money/j...es-lawsuit-against-trump-tax-deduction-limits

By Paul Conner FOXBusiness

A federal judge handed the Trump administration a win Monday, dismissing a lawsuit from states with high taxes.

The lawsuit asked U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken to block the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act's limit on how much people can deduct in state and local taxes (SALT). The provision effectively raised the tax burden on citizens of high-tax states.

New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Maryland brought the suit in July 2018, claiming the tax deduction limit was a way for the Trump administration to stick it to blue states. The judge ruled that the limit did not violate the 10th Amendment, which says that powers not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution are left to the states.

"The cap, again like every other feature of the federal Tax Code, is a part of the landscape of federal law within which states make their decisions as to how they will exercise their own sovereign tax powers," Oetken wrote.

"Because the States have failed to plausibly allege that the cap, more so than any other major federal initiative, meaningfully constrains this decision-making process, this Court has no basis for concluding that the SALT cap is unconstitutionally coercive," he continued.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act limited the state and local tax deduction at $10,000, which is below the average of what individuals claim in states like New York and Connecticut. Before the cap, the average deduction claimed in California, for example, was $22,000, according to Kevin de Leon, a Democratic member of the California state Senate.

As a result, wealthier taxpayers have left these states for no-income tax destinations like Florida.

New York had the third-largest outflows of any state, with 452,580 people moving out within the past year. California, another high-tax state, had the largest outflow of domestic residents – with the highest proportion of people headed to Texas, Arizona and Washington.

New York's government estimated in February that tax payments were $2.3 billion below forecasts.
 
The court's opinion can be read here https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016d-82a6-d9fa-a36f-a6e6c35c0001. Unless you're interested in various procedural matters, start on page 23 to read the discussion of the merits of the case.

Irony: Judge Oetken, who wrote the opinion, was nominated by Obama upon a recommendation by Senator Schumer of (you guessed it) New York, a seriously blue state with high local taxes.

Well, that guaranteed that the case would be thrown out, especially since they seemed to be arguing it on 10th Amendment grounds.
 
Well, that guaranteed that the case would be thrown out, especially since they seemed to be arguing it on 10th Amendment grounds.

But the Tenth Amendment argument was so weak as to be almost nonexistent. The plaintiff-States were essentially claiming that Congress' explicitly delegated power to tax can't be exercised in a manner that adversely affects the States' own power to tax. This turns the Supremacy Clause on its head and makes the federal taxing power subservient to the desires of States that want to tax and spend on a high level.
 
But the Tenth Amendment argument was so weak as to be almost nonexistent. The plaintiff-States were essentially claiming that Congress' explicitly delegated power to tax can't be exercised in a manner that adversely affects the States' own power to tax. This turns the Supremacy Clause on its head and makes the federal taxing power subservient to the desires of States that want to tax and spend on a high level.

The Bill of Rights was meant to prevent all three branches from abusing power. “In order to prevent the the misconstruction or abuse of power further restrictive clauses shall be added”.

https://www.archives.gov/founding-d...ript#toc-the-preamble-to-the-bill-of-rights-2

The judicial branch rubber stamping laws against any of the Bill of Rights is a judicial abuse of power.
 
The judicial branch rubber stamping laws against any of the Bill of Rights is a judicial abuse of power.

There's nothing in the Bill of Rights that says individuals have a right to an unlimited income tax deduction for state and local taxes. The requirement that the income tax (and all other indirect taxes) be geographically uniform is sufficient protection against regional favoritism.
 
There's nothing in the Bill of Rights that says individuals have a right to an unlimited income tax deduction for state and local taxes. The requirement that the income tax (and all other indirect taxes) be geographically uniform is sufficient protection against regional favoritism.

Straw man argument!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top