[Mr_250]

Originally Posted by Stylo

It is really confusing what the Republicans are doing with this tax bill. They’re going to increase taxes on the biggest big spending group with SALT elimination. And a fragile real estate market that’s just recovering could suffer too.

Hope this elimination does not pass. This will hurt CT. I know talking with people they always say "taxes are high but at least we can write them off." If this isn't the case it does not seem right.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

Hope this elimination does not pass. This will hurt CT. I know talking with people they always say "taxes are high but at least we can write them off." If this isn't the case it does not seem right.

It’s the equivalent of being taxed twice. The Republicans have lost their minds.

[murk mags]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

After you move to Tyler, TX please come back here and give us price comparisons. You should also forward that to your former CT representatives and tell them that's why you left.

It can be as simple as
Ct salary xx
TX salary xx
CT Property tax xx
TX Property tax xx
CT sales tax xx
TX sales tax XX
CT income tax xx
TX income tax xx

I will gladly do this!

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by ads94

SEBAC has an ironclad agreement that we cannot just toss out.

It looks like to me the Governor can lay off employees and that is not breaking the contract, right?
https://ctmirror.org/2017/04/20/mall...lanned-for-may

Start laying off CT employees and hiring new ones with a different pension/benefit scheme. I bet there are a lot of creative lawyer politicians out there who can figure out a bunch of ways to achieve this goal.

It will be interesting to see how your statement holds up if the Republicans get a hold of power in the next election.

[cttransplant85]

Originally Posted by Stylo

It’s the equivalent of being taxed twice. The Republicans have lost their minds.

Are you trying to say increasing taxes on the rich causes capital flight? Why wouldn't the same dynamic work on the national level?(Hint it does). The left is always trying to make the argument that tax/capital flight was a myth. That the laffer curve is non-sense.

Keep in mind, the vast majority of people do not itemize and the ones who do are almost certainly heavily invested in the stock market(30k dow is almost a certainty in a 20% c-corp environment based on earnings per share assumptions alone) so they will benefit. Most states in the country have very little income taxation, I paid 2% last year in South Carolina and they're moving to eliminate the income tax next year. Even if they don't I've calculated that under both plans my federal rate goes from like 18% to 13% so it's a huge tax reduction for me regardless AND I work for a corporation so the plan should put upward pressure on my wages. CT just needs to find a way to lower their taxes, there's areas that they can cut.

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by CTartist

It looks like to me the Governor can lay off employees and that is not breaking the contract, right?
https://ctmirror.org/2017/04/20/mall...lanned-for-may

Start laying off CT employees and hiring new ones with a different pension/benefit scheme. I bet there are a lot of creative lawyer politicians out there who can figure out a bunch of ways to achieve this goal.

It will be interesting to see how your statement holds up if the Republicans get a hold of power in the next election.

We have already covered this numerous times here. All new state employees do have different pension/benefits. There's no more gravy train.

As for cutting benefits and pay even more for Govt employees I don't think that will have the effect you're looking for. No one's going to sit at the DMV and listen to people ***** all day for $12 an hour with a crappy health insurance plan to boot. No ones going to patrol the highways or prisons for $12 an hour either and no ones going to plow the roads for $12 an hour.

As for laying off employees not all employees are covered by unions and there is more than one union.
A lawsuit was just settled last year that was between state employee unions and Rowland. Those union employees won the lawsuit and will be receiving $100 million + for doing nothing but sitting on their butts all day. In the end it would have been cheaper to just have kept those employees on the payroll to begin with.


"More than 27,000 current state employees are receiving cash payouts or extra vacation time as the result of a lawsuit settlement with Connecticut’s state employee unions, which dates back to 2003.
According to the lawsuit, Gov. John Rowland unfairly unfairly targeted 2,300 union members when he laid off state employees to deal with a budget crisis."


Majority of SEBAC settlement to be paid to current state employees | Yankee Institute for Public Policy

Be careful what you wish for. And remember Rowland was a Republican.

[NCOriolesfan]

Originally Posted by Stylo

It is really confusing what the Republicans are doing with this tax bill. They’re going to increase taxes on the biggest big spending group with SALT elimination. And a fragile real estate market that’s just recovering could suffer too.

But why should those of us in states with lower taxes subsidize those in higher tax states? If you think the Northeast is so great then suck it up and pay up. My house here in NC is assessed at $135,000. Property taxes are around $1,600. In my hometown in CT they would be close to $4,000. Should I subsidize the people in my hometown because they continue to bend over and take it from the politicians?

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by NCOriolesfan

But why should those of us in states with lower taxes subsidize those in higher tax states? If you think the Northeast is so great then suck it up and pay up. My house here in NC is assessed at $135,000. Property taxes are around $1,600. In my hometown in CT they would be close to $4,000. Should I subsidize the people in my hometown because they continue to bend over and take it from the politicians?

You have it backwards. The high income states subsidize the low income states.

Per capita IRS tax collection for year 2015 in CT was approx $16,500 for NC it was approx $7,800
CT paid just over twice what NC did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa...venue_by_state

Trump's plan is a roundabout way to stick it to the so called "liberal states" although I don't think he's smart enough to have designed this feature, but the others around him very much are.

[Lincolnian]

Originally Posted by NCOriolesfan

But why should those of us in states with lower taxes subsidize those in higher tax states? If you think the Northeast is so great then suck it up and pay up. My house here in NC is assessed at $135,000. Property taxes are around $1,600. In my hometown in CT they would be close to $4,000. Should I subsidize the people in my hometown because they continue to bend over and take it from the politicians?

The higher tax states have been subsidizing lower tax states for quite some time. Connecticut is the 3rd highest contributor to federal taxes despite SALT with a 2014 per capita contribution of $13,558. The amount of money received back is less than 50% of what was paid out. Many of the low tax states, like South Carolina which is near the bottom of contribution to federal taxes at $3344, are recipient states receiving more than they contribute. Now the legislators from the recipient states want to tax higher tax states like Connecticut more to subsidize their lifestyle and skirt their obligations to take care of their own people. It's hypocrisy.

https://ctmirror.org/2014/11/14/high...-it-gets-back/

[Mike 75]

If the GOP tax bill passes (and that's a big if), CT and other high income tax states are going to have to consider changing their tax structure to be more reliant on sales taxes. In other words, increase the sales tax and decrease the income tax. As we know, many of the people "moving" to Florida and other low tax states are doing so for 6 months and a day so as not to pay any CT income taxes. Higher sales taxes allow the state to recoup some of the lost income tax revenue when those people are in CT the rest of the year. Also, a lower income tax rate may disincentivize people from "moving" in the first place. You don't hear about people complaining about high sales tax states. Plus, the reality that if the SALT deduction goes, it will be near impossible to raise the income tax again.

The Dems will complain its too regressive and the GOP won't like it because it makes it look like they're raising taxes. But since the state is unable to address spending, its going to have address revenue and do so in a different way from the past.