On Tuesday, 6th congressional district candidate Jeanne Ives made the rounds doing multiple media interviews, as captured here. In her interview with Crain’s Chicago Business the following was stated:
“In other items, Ives said she would raise the cap on the federal deduction for state and local taxes, but did not say how much. The GOP’s 2017 tax law capped the deduction to $10,000 a year, so low that many middle-class families are being hit, Ives said. She did add that other provisions of the bill helped many middle-class taxpayers.”Crain’s Chicago Business 10/8/19
In commentary to the above, the following was said:
While not a main part of the interview, Ives did say she favors raising the SALT deduction cap of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 [TCJA], but did not say how much. This brings up Lauren Underwood’s H.R. 1757, legislation strongly backed by Sean Casten. This issue raises a “red flag” with me, given the empirical evidence that says the SALT deduction cap did NOT result in a rise in middle class taxes after the Tax Cut & Jobs Act of 2017.
This is something Ives needs to discuss when she publishes her position paper on taxes and spending, because she has taken the Casten and Underwood line that the SALT deduction caps did raise taxes on the middle class.
McHenry County Blog awaits her stand on the issues of taxes and spending and for her to defend what she said in the interview.McHenry County Blog 10/8/19
On Thursday McHenry County Blog reached out to Ives’ campaign seeking information how she made her decision to support raising SALT deduction limits, through empirical data analytics or simply voter input, as well as her position paper on the issue. Her campaign’s response is below:
We will release position statements papers as the campaign moves forward. Jeanne stands with the people of the 6th district in every decision she makes.Jeanne for Congress Campaign Spokesperson 10/10/19
COMMENTARY: How did Ives come to take this position on raising the SALT deduction cap?
Hopefully, Ives discusses this stance more, possibly including on her weekly “Friday Night Lights” video podcast and will publish her position in writing soon.
McHenry County Blog has documented over the past 3+ months, H.R. 1757 including references to empirical data stating changes to SALT deductions will only positively benefit the rich/wealthy, which placed Underwood/Casten and the other Democrats favoring a change to defend giving a tax cut to the rich.
Here’s a summary, including analyzing all 8 bills proposed by the current Congress on TCJA and SALT deduction limitations, published by McHenry County Blog since June:
- First 5 bills filed from January to mid February were to repeal SALT deduction caps
- Underwood/Casten bill (H.R. 1757) filed in mid-March, was the first bill to concede the need for SALT deduction limitations since it keeps limitations in place, but raises the amount of the limitation
- Two other bills filed to address SALT deduction limitations after H.R. 1757 (through July)
- H.R. 2624 sponsored by Mikie Sherill (D, NJ) and had bipartisan cosponsorship
- H.R. 2894 sponsored by Dan Lipinski (D, IL), which is a copy of H.R. 1757, but with a funding mechanism
- Empirical analysis of SALT legislation concluded the beneficiaries of any change to SALT deduction limitation of TCJA will be the rich/wealthy and negligible benefit to middle class
- Published in CNBC
- Published in Bloomberg
- Published by non partisan Tax Foundation
- Underwood and others use the term “double tax” often, which is a lie
- Ways & Means subcommittee hearing on 6/25 attempted to address SALT limitations, and the Republicans defended TCJA and opposed all of the legislation citing the empirical data
- Local government leaders claimed SALT deductions hurt their city/schools/fire departments
- Tax Foundation witness shared their empirical findings no more than 6.5% of middle class nationwide negatively impacted by SALT deduction limits
- Casten testified before subcommittee (video below)
- Around the time of Ways & Means subcommittee hearing and again in mid-July, Underwood’s congressional office attempted a local approach with 14th district local government officials stating how SALT deduction limitations have allegedly harmed their constituents:
- All 7 elected officials are elected Democrats or mayors who are known Democrats
- No expert from Tax Foundation, or any other analytical group, included like at 6/25 hearing
- Some of the elected officials also have constituencies in the 6th district
- Article here
- In my opinion, the Democrats are trying to redefine the “middle class”, like the Left was able to redefine marriage.
The 6/25 hearing included this 3.25 minutes of testimony by Casten:
If Ives is going to campaign on raising SALT deduction limits as inputs from 6th district voters, she needs to avoid being vague. Casten and Underwood have their approach in writing in H.R. 1757
They do not have a funding mechanism in H.R. 1757, and to date have not embraced the funding mechanism proposed by fellow Illinoisian Lipinski in his legislation H.R. 2894.
Whether Ives will embrace the Lipinski approach to paying for SALT deduction increases, or propose one of her own, she needs to make her specifics known before the primary, meaning there is plenty of time yet the sooner the better.
And all of the Republican candidates in the 6th and 14th congressional districts need to make their detailed positions on SALT deduction limits known in writing, too.