CDZ The Mortgage Deduction Cap, Migration and Natural Disasters

In red states like FL and TX I would agree but in states with major financial exchanges like NY and IL lack of SALT deductions could easily collapse not just the whole state but also adjoining states if the exchanges move to a lower SALT jurisdiction. That is why Cuomo is going to court over that deduction. Barring those two situations the Mortgage deduction cap is going to be the major motor of migration for the next few years.

In 2014 the average SALT deduction in NY was a tad over $21k, and in IL it was a tad under $12.9k. Considering they still get to deduct $10k under the new tax bill, and considering most filers in those and other states don't itemize in the 1st place, aren't you overstating the case for collapse? Illinois is headed for a collapse anyway, no? I find it hard to accept that rich guys in NY are going to have to pay federal taxes on an average of an extra $11k; even at the new top rate of 37% that's still only an extra 4 grand in taxes. And in IL we talking about an extra $1k in more fed taxes, BFD. And I'm pretty sure they'll find ways to lower that amount one way or another.

In short, I really don't think NY, IL, and the adjoining states are going to collapse due to the limit placed on the SALT deductions for federal taxes even if the exchanges moved elsewhere. And Cuomo is grandstanding, he's got no case whatsoever and I'm sure he knows that. Most likely he's thinking about running for president in 2020 and wants to gin up the base. He ain't going to allow the NYSE to leave without a heckuva fight.
 
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy
 
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
 
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?

The courts will decide. I double-checked BAT. In any form but a straight tariff it would have been unconstitutional because it indirectly places implicit charges on exports. Thank you for making me dig a little deeper. Some of us are in the bull ring if you wan to go further in this.
 
The Republican tax bill just killed charitable deductions
 
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?

The courts will decide. I double-checked BAT. In any form but a straight tariff it would have been unconstitutional because it indirectly places implicit charges on exports. Thank you for making me dig a little deeper. Some of us are in the bull ring if you wan to go further in this.

Don't believe I'm allowed into the BR since I wasn't invited in the OP. But if I was I'd comment on DF's post about the coming tax revolt in some states and offer the thought that in the last few elections the Dems in many states are getting kicked out. Still got some diehard states that remain true blue but those states are losing people and gaining illegals or those that are not as wealthy as those who are leaving. And yet they do not seem disposed to change their views on economic growth.
 
In 2014 the average SALT deduction in NY was a tad over $21k, and in IL it was a tad under $12.9k.

The problem won't be so much for "average" filers, but high income earners will be less likely to purchase high-end real estate and more likely to move to other states. This may have a detrimental effect on California and other states which rely on highly "progressive" income tax rates.
 
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?

The courts will decide. I double-checked BAT. In any form but a straight tariff it would have been unconstitutional because it indirectly places implicit charges on exports. Thank you for making me dig a little deeper. Some of us are in the bull ring if you wan to go further in this.

Don't believe I'm allowed into the BR since I wasn't invited in the OP. But if I was I'd comment on DF's post about the coming tax revolt in some states and offer the thought that in the last few elections the Dems in many states are getting kicked out. Still got some diehard states that remain true blue but those states are losing people and gaining illegals or those that are not as wealthy as those who are leaving. And yet they do not seem disposed to change their views on economic growth.
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?
Well the Chicago exchanges have been more blunt about their prepping to leave if any taxes affecting them is too annoying. Since operations and transport costs would drop like a rock if more of the exchange warehouses were on the lower MS and they have multiple back up sites and offers from other states to come on down they can as hard nosed as they want to be. NYC tends to be less openly in the face with annoyances but Toro and several other people on the board claim to run funds from way outside of NYC and NJ had a state financial crisis because just one really big trader left for FL right after the 2016 election. 2aguy

Illinois is about to go down the shitter, that state is one effed up fiscal mess. For sure business can be run on those exchanges from pretty much anywhere and IMHO the liberals in those states killed the golden goose by squeezing it too hard for a long time. The tax cut bill may just be the last straw. I am curious to see what changes they make in those states (if any) and whether there's any blowback from the voters. I mean, if you keep voters these people back into office then who really is to blame when your state can't pay the pensions they promised to public employees?

The courts will decide. I double-checked BAT. In any form but a straight tariff it would have been unconstitutional because it indirectly places implicit charges on exports. Thank you for making me dig a little deeper. Some of us are in the bull ring if you wan to go further in this.

Don't believe I'm allowed into the BR since I wasn't invited in the OP. But if I was I'd comment on DF's post about the coming tax revolt in some states and offer the thought that in the last few elections the Dems in many states are getting kicked out. Still got some diehard states that remain true blue but those states are losing people and gaining illegals or those that are not as wealthy as those who are leaving. And yet they do not seem disposed to change their views on economic growth.
True
 
In 2014 the average SALT deduction in NY was a tad over $21k, and in IL it was a tad under $12.9k.

The problem won't be so much for "average" filers, but high income earners will be less likely to purchase high-end real estate and more likely to move to other states. This may have a detrimental effect on California and other states which rely on highly "progressive" income tax rates.

I would say will instead of may but otherwise 100% agreement. Capital flight is a compound interest function rather than a one off event Google or Apple execs don't care if their CA house goes down X% but their subordinates do and those execs care mightily about the rest of their homes going down nearly as much. Even the Dohenys (Doheny was the billionaire who set off the Teapot dome scandal back in the 20s) and the Gettys are getting worried about real estate depreciation in the LA basin. That's bad.
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.

How exactly does a tax on consumers increase the costs builders incur to build homes, thus home prices? All the builders' tax expenses, as before H.R. 1-2018 are deductible as business expenses on Schedules E or C.

Moreover, I don't see how the SALT tax deduction limit is a COL factor for middle-income home buyers.
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.

How exactly does a tax on consumers increase the costs builders incur to build homes, thus home prices? All the builders' tax expenses, as before H.R. 1-2018 are deductible as business expenses on Schedules E or C.

Moreover, I don't see how the SALT tax deduction limit is a COL factor for middle-income home buyers.
Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels. If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself. Discrete math problems do not have anywhere near as many shortcuts as continuous functions so that software is needed unless you got lots and lots of spare time. NYC spent many years straightening out traffic light heuristics after a somewhat non-conforming parade route during a papal visit. This was before cloud computing became common so back up was really poor.
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.

How exactly does a tax on consumers increase the costs builders incur to build homes, thus home prices? All the builders' tax expenses, as before H.R. 1-2018 are deductible as business expenses on Schedules E or C.

Moreover, I don't see how the SALT tax deduction limit is a COL factor for middle-income home buyers.
Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels. If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself. Discrete math problems do not have anywhere near as many shortcuts as continuous functions so that software is needed unless you got lots and lots of spare time. NYC spent many years straightening out traffic light heuristics after a somewhat non-conforming parade route during a papal visit. This was before cloud computing became common so back up was really poor.
If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself.
I am well aware of how costs flow through the supply chain.

I'm also well aware that you've not identified any basis for thinking that SALT taxes are going to in the foreseeable future increase at materially faster/more than they have done historically.

Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels.

That's all well and good; however, what was just passed was a tax bill that cut individuals' and business' federal income taxes, at least in the short-term. That makes for a reduction in the overhead costs associated with building construction, not a cost increase, and nobody need do any math at all to know as much. With regard to the impact of H.R. 1-2018 on supply chain SALT costs, it's a cost reduction that filters through the supply chain, not a cost increase. Remember, you wrote:
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.
Additionally:
  • The cost for repairs of the sort you describe is overwhelmingly borne by property insurers, not property owners, so any potential cost increase that might make damage repairs "no longer economically repairable" -- if even there be one, for insurers are overwhelmingly corporations and they got nearly a 15% tax but -- is that of property insurance premiums, not building construction.
  • The price buyers/owners pay for a building is distinct from the sums they pay for property taxes. Builders may or may not consider the property tax attendant to the homes they plan to construct; however, the tax and the price builders charge are two separate items. For instance, the mortgage deduction is based on the price of one's home, not the sum of the price of one's home plus the property tax on the home/land.
  • AFAIK, jurisdictions be they "blue" or "red" have not in the wake of and/or due to H.R. 1-2018's changes to have increased SALT taxes; thus there's no basis for asserting that sums property owners must pay in 2018 and beyond will increase on account of anything having to do with H.R. 1-2018.

    Supply+Chain+Participants.jpg


    Looking at the graphic above, the only supply chain participants for whom increases in SALT taxes may have an impact on their real property buying decisions are those for whom being able to on Schedule A deduct SALT from their adjusted taxable income is a deal-breaker. Everyone else in the supply chain will in 2018 and onward, as in years past, deduct from their federally taxable income the sum of SALT paid in relation to property they hold for the purpose of conducting whatever business directly or indirectly provides finished goods to customers, be those customers other businesses or consumers.
  • Did you even look at the content at link I provided? If you did and used the sorting features there, you've have observed that what constitutes a "high SALT" state is a function of two things: the price of real property and the effective tax rate property owners pay. Texas, for example, has the fifth highest property tax rate (it also has high sales and use tax rates), but it has low house prices; thus more people pay lower sums of real property tax. In contrast, D.C. has a very low effective property tax rate, but the property taxed is pricey.

    Indeed in all but two of the so-called "high SALT rate" states property taxes are moderate to low; thus if one is dissuaded from buying real property in most of them, it's the price of the property itself, not the SALT, driving that decision. That's no different than before H.R. 1-2018's limitations on SALT deductibility from 1040-reported one's income.
In light of all of the above, while the amount of SALT consumers pay may affect what real properties they buy and from where they purchase personal property, it'll have no more impact that it has in the past for most buyers.
 
It will be interesting to see what the stats show in the next couple of years for new business startups and expansions of existing businesses, I'm guessing the higher SALT states are going to be losing businesses and the income earners that go with it to other states. It ain't just the rich guys that matter cuz there's fewer of them, but also the not-so-rich guys that follow the money to Texas or wherever for a better job. Which has already been happening for some time now, and I'm not too sure how much of an impact this new tax bill will have cuz a lot of people have already left or are already in the process of leaving anyway. I would say tho that the new tax bill is going to push a few more people into the get-out-of-dodge category.
 
The reduced deduction functions as a SALT increase, that leads to out-migration and either SALT increases/service reductions or bond downgrades.
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.

How exactly does a tax on consumers increase the costs builders incur to build homes, thus home prices? All the builders' tax expenses, as before H.R. 1-2018 are deductible as business expenses on Schedules E or C.

Moreover, I don't see how the SALT tax deduction limit is a COL factor for middle-income home buyers.
Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels. If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself. Discrete math problems do not have anywhere near as many shortcuts as continuous functions so that software is needed unless you got lots and lots of spare time. NYC spent many years straightening out traffic light heuristics after a somewhat non-conforming parade route during a papal visit. This was before cloud computing became common so back up was really poor.
If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself.
I am well aware of how costs flow through the supply chain.

I'm also well aware that you've not identified any basis for thinking that SALT taxes are going to in the foreseeable future increase at materially faster/more than they have done historically.

Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels.

That's all well and good; however, what was just passed was a tax bill that cut individuals' and business' federal income taxes, at least in the short-term. That makes for a reduction in the overhead costs associated with building construction, not a cost increase, and nobody need do any math at all to know as much. With regard to the impact of H.R. 1-2018 on supply chain SALT costs, it's a cost reduction that filters through the supply chain, not a cost increase. Remember, you wrote:
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.
Additionally:
  • The cost for repairs of the sort you describe is overwhelmingly borne by property insurers, not property owners, so any potential cost increase that might make damage repairs "no longer economically repairable" -- if even there be one, for insurers are overwhelmingly corporations and they got nearly a 15% tax but -- is that of property insurance premiums, not building construction.
  • The price buyers/owners pay for a building is distinct from the sums they pay for property taxes. Builders may or may not consider the property tax attendant to the homes they plan to construct; however, the tax and the price builders charge are two separate items. For instance, the mortgage deduction is based on the price of one's home, not the sum of the price of one's home plus the property tax on the home/land.
  • AFAIK, jurisdictions be they "blue" or "red" have not in the wake of and/or due to H.R. 1-2018's changes to have increased SALT taxes; thus there's no basis for asserting that sums property owners must pay in 2018 and beyond will increase on account of anything having to do with H.R. 1-2018.

    Supply+Chain+Participants.jpg


    Looking at the graphic above, the only supply chain participants for whom increases in SALT taxes may have an impact on their real property buying decisions are those for whom being able to on Schedule A deduct SALT from their adjusted taxable income is a deal-breaker. Everyone else in the supply chain will in 2018 and onward, as in years past, deduct from their federally taxable income the sum of SALT paid in relation to property they hold for the purpose of conducting whatever business directly or indirectly provides finished goods to customers, be those customers other businesses or consumers.
  • Did you even look at the content at link I provided? If you did and used the sorting features there, you've have observed that what constitutes a "high SALT" state is a function of two things: the price of real property and the effective tax rate property owners pay. Texas, for example, has the fifth highest property tax rate (it also has high sales and use tax rates), but it has low house prices; thus more people pay lower sums of real property tax. In contrast, D.C. has a very low effective property tax rate, but the property taxed is pricey.

    Indeed in all but two of the so-called "high SALT rate" states property taxes are moderate to low; thus if one is dissuaded from buying real property in most of them, it's the price of the property itself, not the SALT, driving that decision. That's no different than before H.R. 1-2018's limitations on SALT deductibility from 1040-reported one's income.
In light of all of the above, while the amount of SALT consumers pay may affect what real properties they buy and from where they purchase personal property, it'll have no more impact that it has in the past for most buyers.
The reduced deduction functions as a SALT increase, that leads to out-migration and either SALT increases/service reductions or bond downgrades.
Argument by assertion
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.

How exactly does a tax on consumers increase the costs builders incur to build homes, thus home prices? All the builders' tax expenses, as before H.R. 1-2018 are deductible as business expenses on Schedules E or C.

Moreover, I don't see how the SALT tax deduction limit is a COL factor for middle-income home buyers.
Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels. If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself. Discrete math problems do not have anywhere near as many shortcuts as continuous functions so that software is needed unless you got lots and lots of spare time. NYC spent many years straightening out traffic light heuristics after a somewhat non-conforming parade route during a papal visit. This was before cloud computing became common so back up was really poor.
If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself.
I am well aware of how costs flow through the supply chain.

I'm also well aware that you've not identified any basis for thinking that SALT taxes are going to in the foreseeable future increase at materially faster/more than they have done historically.

Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels.

That's all well and good; however, what was just passed was a tax bill that cut individuals' and business' federal income taxes, at least in the short-term. That makes for a reduction in the overhead costs associated with building construction, not a cost increase, and nobody need do any math at all to know as much. With regard to the impact of H.R. 1-2018 on supply chain SALT costs, it's a cost reduction that filters through the supply chain, not a cost increase. Remember, you wrote:
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.
Additionally:
  • The cost for repairs of the sort you describe is overwhelmingly borne by property insurers, not property owners, so any potential cost increase that might make damage repairs "no longer economically repairable" -- if even there be one, for insurers are overwhelmingly corporations and they got nearly a 15% tax but -- is that of property insurance premiums, not building construction.
  • The price buyers/owners pay for a building is distinct from the sums they pay for property taxes. Builders may or may not consider the property tax attendant to the homes they plan to construct; however, the tax and the price builders charge are two separate items. For instance, the mortgage deduction is based on the price of one's home, not the sum of the price of one's home plus the property tax on the home/land.
  • AFAIK, jurisdictions be they "blue" or "red" have not in the wake of and/or due to H.R. 1-2018's changes to have increased SALT taxes; thus there's no basis for asserting that sums property owners must pay in 2018 and beyond will increase on account of anything having to do with H.R. 1-2018.

    Supply+Chain+Participants.jpg


    Looking at the graphic above, the only supply chain participants for whom increases in SALT taxes may have an impact on their real property buying decisions are those for whom being able to on Schedule A deduct SALT from their adjusted taxable income is a deal-breaker. Everyone else in the supply chain will in 2018 and onward, as in years past, deduct from their federally taxable income the sum of SALT paid in relation to property they hold for the purpose of conducting whatever business directly or indirectly provides finished goods to customers, be those customers other businesses or consumers.
  • Did you even look at the content at link I provided? If you did and used the sorting features there, you've have observed that what constitutes a "high SALT" state is a function of two things: the price of real property and the effective tax rate property owners pay. Texas, for example, has the fifth highest property tax rate (it also has high sales and use tax rates), but it has low house prices; thus more people pay lower sums of real property tax. In contrast, D.C. has a very low effective property tax rate, but the property taxed is pricey.

    Indeed in all but two of the so-called "high SALT rate" states property taxes are moderate to low; thus if one is dissuaded from buying real property in most of them, it's the price of the property itself, not the SALT, driving that decision. That's no different than before H.R. 1-2018's limitations on SALT deductibility from 1040-reported one's income.
In light of all of the above, while the amount of SALT consumers pay may affect what real properties they buy and from where they purchase personal property, it'll have no more impact that it has in the past for most buyers.
The reduced deduction functions as a SALT increase, that leads to out-migration and either SALT increases/service reductions or bond downgrades.
Argument by assertion

When your aftertax income goes down your effective tax rate goes up how come you can't recognize a tautology?
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.

How exactly does a tax on consumers increase the costs builders incur to build homes, thus home prices? All the builders' tax expenses, as before H.R. 1-2018 are deductible as business expenses on Schedules E or C.

Moreover, I don't see how the SALT tax deduction limit is a COL factor for middle-income home buyers.
Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels. If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself. Discrete math problems do not have anywhere near as many shortcuts as continuous functions so that software is needed unless you got lots and lots of spare time. NYC spent many years straightening out traffic light heuristics after a somewhat non-conforming parade route during a papal visit. This was before cloud computing became common so back up was really poor.
If the local college has an operations research or even just a logistics program you can probably get the necessary software to prove this yourself.
I am well aware of how costs flow through the supply chain.

I'm also well aware that you've not identified any basis for thinking that SALT taxes are going to in the foreseeable future increase at materially faster/more than they have done historically.

Tax expenses are a cost. Costs compound throughout the supply and distribution channels.

That's all well and good; however, what was just passed was a tax bill that cut individuals' and business' federal income taxes, at least in the short-term. That makes for a reduction in the overhead costs associated with building construction, not a cost increase, and nobody need do any math at all to know as much. With regard to the impact of H.R. 1-2018 on supply chain SALT costs, it's a cost reduction that filters through the supply chain, not a cost increase. Remember, you wrote:
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs.
Additionally:
  • The cost for repairs of the sort you describe is overwhelmingly borne by property insurers, not property owners, so any potential cost increase that might make damage repairs "no longer economically repairable" -- if even there be one, for insurers are overwhelmingly corporations and they got nearly a 15% tax but -- is that of property insurance premiums, not building construction.
  • The price buyers/owners pay for a building is distinct from the sums they pay for property taxes. Builders may or may not consider the property tax attendant to the homes they plan to construct; however, the tax and the price builders charge are two separate items. For instance, the mortgage deduction is based on the price of one's home, not the sum of the price of one's home plus the property tax on the home/land.
  • AFAIK, jurisdictions be they "blue" or "red" have not in the wake of and/or due to H.R. 1-2018's changes to have increased SALT taxes; thus there's no basis for asserting that sums property owners must pay in 2018 and beyond will increase on account of anything having to do with H.R. 1-2018.

    Supply+Chain+Participants.jpg


    Looking at the graphic above, the only supply chain participants for whom increases in SALT taxes may have an impact on their real property buying decisions are those for whom being able to on Schedule A deduct SALT from their adjusted taxable income is a deal-breaker. Everyone else in the supply chain will in 2018 and onward, as in years past, deduct from their federally taxable income the sum of SALT paid in relation to property they hold for the purpose of conducting whatever business directly or indirectly provides finished goods to customers, be those customers other businesses or consumers.
  • Did you even look at the content at link I provided? If you did and used the sorting features there, you've have observed that what constitutes a "high SALT" state is a function of two things: the price of real property and the effective tax rate property owners pay. Texas, for example, has the fifth highest property tax rate (it also has high sales and use tax rates), but it has low house prices; thus more people pay lower sums of real property tax. In contrast, D.C. has a very low effective property tax rate, but the property taxed is pricey.

    Indeed in all but two of the so-called "high SALT rate" states property taxes are moderate to low; thus if one is dissuaded from buying real property in most of them, it's the price of the property itself, not the SALT, driving that decision. That's no different than before H.R. 1-2018's limitations on SALT deductibility from 1040-reported one's income.
In light of all of the above, while the amount of SALT consumers pay may affect what real properties they buy and from where they purchase personal property, it'll have no more impact that it has in the past for most buyers.
The reduced deduction functions as a SALT increase, that leads to out-migration and either SALT increases/service reductions or bond downgrades.
Argument by assertion

When your aftertax income goes down your effective tax rate goes up how come you can't recognize a tautology?
How does after tax income go down as a result of a tax cut?
 
Damage due to fires, snow, mudslides and other natural disasters may no longer be economically repairable within the blue wall because of SALT driving up the cost of living including home prices and construction costs. How fast will the tax base shrink in the mostly blue states, counties and municipalities where this is happening? And what will the response be, higher taxes, reduced services or both?

Rebuilding is already happening in Northern California.

Both the areas in Northern California and in Santa Barbara area are among the most in demand real estate in California- at the most it will slow down demand- but prices will continue to go up in the areas.
 

Forum List

Back
Top