I was glad to read that U.S. Rep. Tom Suozzi has taken a strong stance in support of repealing the cap on the SALT tax deduction that was enacted as part of the Trump tax plan, saying that he will vote against any changes to the tax code unless a repeal of the cap is included. As a Mineola resident, I would like to know why Rep. Kathleen Rice is not taking a similarly strong position. For that matter, where are Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand?
A major factor in why blue states such as New York have higher state and local taxes is that we pay more in federal taxes than our communities receive in benefits. Therefore, we must pay higher state and local taxes to provide adequate funding for vital services such as our public schools. The SALT deduction does not change this fact, but it does attenuate the degree to which it is the case. This was widely accepted as a reasonable compromise until the Trump administration came around.
In his letter to the editor, Donald Davret argued in favor of the SALT cap by claiming that many Long Island school districts are the de facto equivalent of private schools with the cost paid through property taxes rather than an annual tuition bill. While there is no doubt truth to this in some districts, it is not the case across the board.
I grew up in Port Washington, where students who benefit from free and reduced lunches and students who live in houses on multi-acre plots with seven-figure price tags go to the same high-quality schools. They attend classes together with the same teachers, the overwhelming majority of whom are excellent. If the SALT cap is repealed, it will likely have the effect of making communities like Port Washington less affordable to the middle class, thereby increasing rather than decreasing economic segregation. If equality of opportunity is our goal, then we should be seeking ways to export the Port Washington model not just to other districts on Long Island but throughout the nation rather than changing the tax code in ways that may disincentivize such economically heterogeneous communities from existing in the first place.
Mr. Davret references people earning $400,000 per year, yet the reality is that one need not earn even half that much money in order to be adversely affected by the SALT cap. The bottom line is that this change does affect the middle class, not just the very wealthy. It is also important to note that the blue states that suffer under this policy generally have the highest cost of living in the country. One must earn more money here than in most other places in order to enjoy a middle-class lifestyle.
Given this, it is reasonable to seek to reduce the additional tax burden on people living here relative to those earning the same income in areas where basic necessities such as housing can be obtained for far less money. New York Democrats should keep their promises to the voters and fight to repeal this unfair provision.
David Golub
Mineola
Mr. Davret replies:
“A major factor in why blue states such as New York have higher state and local taxes is that we pay more in federal taxes than our communities receive in benefits. Therefore, we must pay higher state and local taxes to provide adequate funding for vital services such as our public schools.”
False. While we do transfer more than we receive, that is not the reason why our taxes are so high. Our taxes are high chiefly due to a rapacious civil service that has not taken a single step to contain itself.
There is no reason for 163 school districts, there is no reason to fund the health care and pensions of the civil service while millions can’t fund their own, there is no reason for a bloated law enforcement apparatus, and there is no reason for a bicameral legislature, which practically has to make up reasons for its existence for most the “legislation” it passes. This a heavy political lift to overcome. That being said, it does not justify a tax break. The system is structured for extortion, and you accept it.
If you read this newspaper regularly, you’ll see the wealthy districts are practically in an arms race to spend as much money as possible with no actual benefit to educational outcomes. Parents are publicly shamed for not supporting an endless list of “needs.”
“I grew up in Port Washington, where students who benefit from free and reduced lunches and students who live in houses on multi-acre plots with seven-figure price tags go to the same high-quality schools. They attend classes together with the same teachers, the overwhelming majority of whom are excellent.”
I’m sure I speak for all of the impoverished children when I say, “thanks for the crumbs.” I mean, who among us would not be grateful for a free school lunch?
Aside from the miniscule cohort of students who “benefit” from this, once again: there are no “good schools.” Academic performance is tied to the economic well being of the parents. This is shown with every annual summation of school performance released. Each district’s “performance” correlates with almost perfect symmetry to the earnings power of the district itself.
I see no reason for federal tax policy to subsidize such a regime, nor do I see any reason for outsized remuneration to be written off when other schools go begging, especially the ones that don’t benefit from your magnanimity.
And the property taxes themselves sustain inequality on a scale not seen almost anywhere else. That’s why people like them. It keeps the “wrong sort” of people out.
“Mr. Davret references people earning $400,000 per year, yet the reality is that one need not earn even half that much money in order to be adversely affected by the SALT cap.”
This is merely a result of the policies you’ve tolerated without complaint for decades, as it continued to spin out of control. Again, no reason to subsidize this. That’s also why I suggested raising the cap from $10k to $20-25k to provide relief for those on the lower end of the wage scale who got ensnared by this.
“One must earn more money here than in most other places in order to enjoy a middle-class lifestyle.”
Yes, and the reasons are stated above. You merely let your pockets get picked. What is funny about this is that the very people who drive higher costs in the region, i.e., the public service unions, demand ever higher remuneration to cover the higher tax burden they themselves generated, which results in a self-perpetuated death spiral. And the rationale always works!
I’ve been on the property tax issue for decades. Time was I knew the New York State Real Property Tax Law better than most legislators did, and given decades of mismanagement, outright racial bias in assessment practices, and gross incompetence by successive County Executives, the only moral path is to stew in our own juice.
Maybe when people actually have to pay the price for their own sniveling passivity to this mass theft, something can get done.
I am not holding my breath.