Because the election looms, tax specialists and politicos are gaming out what might occur to key provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, including the deduction cap on state and native taxes.
“There’s an interesting set of bedfellows and partnerships that might emerge on SALT,” said Arshi Siddiqui, a partner at Akin, and a Democratic strategist.
“You have got a number of members on the progressive side who would not be supportive of eliminating it, so you could possibly see a coalition there. But when there is a brilliant political campaign behind the SALT, I feel that we could see that significantly change.”
“There’s an interesting set of bedfellows and partnerships that might emerge on SALT,” said Arshi Siddiqui, partner at Akin and Democratic strategist. “You have got a number of members on the progressive side who would not perhaps be supportive of eliminating it, so you could possibly see a coalition there. But when there is a brilliant political campaign behind the SALT, I feel that we could see that significantly change.”
Shane Nelson Photo
The comments got here from a pair of tax panel discussions on Monday hosted by the Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute & Brookings Institution.
The contentious and much-debated SALT cap deduction is touted as a robust revenue tool for the federal government while bond issuers imagine it infringes on their sovereign ability to levy future taxes.
Based on the Treasury Department, the present budget deficit is $1.8 trillion, a number that may proceed to grow as the subsequent Congress takes over and begins on the lookout for ways to pay down the national debt.
Many experts see keeping the SALT cap in place to pay for other programs, especially if neither party nets an election sweep of the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives.
“Should you’re a divided government that brings an entire lot more political pressures to unravel that (SALT) issue,” said Sage Eastman, Partner, Mehlman Consulting, and Republican strategist.
“We have seen the political pressures the Trump administration clearly felt when it comes to trying to handle that. I’d be surprised if SALT stays the best way it’s today, but I would not wager a number of money.”
Each experts imagine a short lived extension of the TCJA is a secure bet and the controversy may begin with how big the deficit is allowed to be.
“You could possibly claim that number is zero, where the normal scoring might say it’s within the trillions, multiple trillions of dollars,” said Eastman.
“I do not know yet where Congress is settled. I do not even think Republicans are settled on a number, let alone the 2 parties. I feel like Dems are lots closer to zero than we’re, but we’re not $5 trillion either, so there’s a number of room there for the 2 parties to return together.”
Muni leaders remain concerned that proposed revenue raising concepts include eliminating the tax exemption for municipal bonds. Along with the SALT cap, pay-fors within the TCJA also included the elimination of advance refunding on tax exempt bonds.
Jason Smith, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, has already declared that the cap will remain in place assuming Republicans remain on top of things, but that it may very well be adjusted up from its current limit of $10,000. He also believes the “marriage penalty” may very well be eliminated, because the cap currently applies equally to single and joint filers.
The primary panel of the day focused on the longer term of corporate and individual tax rates, pass-through income deductions, the kid tax credit, the earned income tax credit and international tax laws.
The 2 economists on the panel agreed that the TCJA didn’t boost revenue streams into the federal government and took turns bashing an increase in tariffs as an efficient approach to cut the deficit.