screen-shot-2019-02-11-at-6-43-02-pm-150x150-9137329Governor Andrew Cuomo has announced he’s flying to Washington on Tuesday to meet with President Donald Trump about the impact on New York of the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap in the new federal tax law.

Last week, Trump said in an interview that he’s “open to talking about” the SALT cap, and reportedly added: “There are some people from New York who have been speaking to me about doing something about that, about changing things.”

Spoiler Alert: even assuming Trump has been uncharacteristically thick-skinned in the face of Cuomo’s unrelentingly harsh political attacks, the SALT cap isn’t going anywhere.

It boils down to basic math. The Tax Foundation estimates the limit on SALT deductions will raise at least $600 billion in revenues over the 10-year period to help offset the costs of the tax cuts for individuals and corporations under the new federal tax law, formally entitled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or TCJA. Without the money saved from capping SALT, the budgeted 10-year cost of TCJA to the federal treasury would swell from $1.5 trillion to more than $2.1 trillion, according to the original Joint Tax Committee score of the bill. That would generate more red ink than even the most rabid supply-side, deficit-tolerant congressional Republicans could swallow.

Since restoring the cap would benefit mostly high-income taxpayers—even while benefitting the treasuries of deep blue Democratic states with soak-the-rich tax policies—congressional Democrats alike would never consider such a change unless it was combined with a sharp increase in taxes on high earners, corporations, or both. That would be a non-starter in the Republican-controlled Senate, not to mention the White House.

While Democrats in Congress have joined some Republicans (such as New York’s Rep. Peter King) in vowing to repeal the cap, there’s scant evidence leaders in either party really care all that much. Soon after the TCJA took effect last year, New York’s own senior senator, Charles Schumer, signed on to a $1 trillion Senate Minority infrastructure plan that would be financed largely by a rollback of TCJA provisions disproportionately benefitting affluent New Yorkers—without restoring full SALT deductions.

Cuomo has repeatedly charged that the SALT cap was politically motivated, aimed primarily at heavily Democratic “blue” states to help finance tax benefits for residents of Republican “red” states.  He’s right, and it was hardly a secret; congressional Republicans didn’t deny it, and conservative supporters of the tax cut hailed it as overdue comeuppance for high-tax liberals.

But Cuomo also has repeatedly mixed his messages, implying the TCJA is primarily a tax cut for the rich, including corporate tax cuts, and that the SALT cap is raising federal taxes for New Yorkers. All of which is a gross distortion, to say the least.

The $600 billion in revenue raised by the SALT cap can more appropriately be paired with the $700 billion revenue loss associated with the TCJA provision doubling the standard deduction for individual income tax filers. The bigger standard deduction delivers big savings to low- and middle-income taxpayers, including many who previously itemized SALT deductions in New York and other high-tax states.

As for the impact on individual taxpayers, the vast majority of New Yorkers will save money despite the SALT deduction limit. The Tax Policy Center estimated 8.3 percent of New Yorkers will pay more, compared to 6.3 percent nationally. Most of the losers are concentrated within the top 1 percent of the income pyramid—especially in New York City, where the combined top-bracket rates rate will now be higher. (See our statewide map of estimated impacts, and other links, here.)

The $2.3 billion heart attack

Cuomo’s visit to Trump follows up on his announcement last week that state personal income tax estimated payments in December and January fell $2.3 billion below projections, creating fiscal stress he described as “serious as a heart attack.” He has implied, without saying so, that the revenue shortfall reflects decisions by high earners to leave New York in response to the loss of the SALT cap. From his remarks today:

This is not an academic discussion, my friends. This is real life. This changes the economic trajectory of the state. People are mobile. And they will go to a better tax environment. That is not a hypothesis. That is a fact. People act in their own economic interest. Businesses act in their own economic interest.

OK. But to assume the entire $2.3 billion loss was due solely to out-migration, you’d have to believe that roughly 15 percent of the highest-earning 1 percent of New York residents have moved away— or that roughly 15 percent of their income vanished from the tax base—in the space of a few months. That’s highly unlikely to have occurred in the short term.

After all, at least some portion of the revenue shortfall was probably due to the stock market’s epic fourth quarter reversal last year, which would have depressed if not reduced capital gains income. (Cuomo’s initial FY 2020 Executive Budget revenue estimate, prepared in early January, assumed capital gains income actually increased slightly in 2018.)

To whatever extent the revenue drop can be linked to the TCJA and its SALT cap—and the new federal law could, indeed, be the major factor—it dramatically highlights the sensitivity of high earners to big changes in effective tax rates.  Clearly many New Yorkers with control over the timing of their bonuses, profits and capital gains accelerated as much as they could into 2017, right before the new tax law took effect, in order to maximize the value of their last year of uncapped SALT deductions. This would have reduced their 2018 incomes, explaining a bigger drop than Cuomo’s budget staff expected. But going forward, the only way the same earners can permanently escape an effectively high tax burden is by moving somewhere else.

Mixed messaging

As Cuomo stressed last week, New York is highly dependent on the highest-earning 1 percent of its residents, who generate roughly 46 percent of the income tax liability for all resident taxpayers.

But even as the governor pounds away at the SALT cap, his budget proposals would perpetuate the problem—and even make it worse.

He is, after all, also calling for a five-year extension of the supposedly temporary, so-called “millionaire tax,” which he previously extended for no more than two or three years at a time. At 8.82 percent, compared to the permanent-law top rate of 6.85 percent, it was near its 30-year high when the SALT cap took effect.

Cuomo also has renewed (in Part Y of the Article 7 Revenue Bill) his support for a proposal that wold have New York join four neighboring states in sharply raising taxes on “carried interest,” a form of investment income that makes up a big chunk of the earnings of private equity and hedge fund managers. Federal tax law gives carried interest preferential treatment at the capital gains rate—which critics have branded a “loophole.”  Trump himself said during his 2016 campaign that he favored closing the loophole, but the tax bill only closes part of it, by requiring a minimum three-year holding period for investment gains to receive preferential tax treatment. This is not an issue on the state level in New York, which taxes all income at the same rate.

So, while sounding the alarm over the potential loss of rich residents, Cuomo is (at least in concept) supporting a 200 percent tax increase aimed at the some of the state’s highest earners—fund managers who easily generate hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars a year to the state treasury.

The carried interest proposal has been the political hobby-horse of teacher unions unhappy with the support provided to charter schools by some prominent hedge fund managers. While pandering to carried-interest opponents, Cuomo may have been assuming that the targeted taxpayers will cut him slack and view the proposal as little more than political theater, since New York and four neighboring states are highly unlikely to coordinate on a huge tax increase.

But in today’s political atmosphere, targeted fund managers are more unlikely to feel uneasy about this. Surely they realize there is no shortage of lightly taxed states and cities (one of which just attracted the headquarters of a storied New York investment firm) that would welcome new millionaire earners with open arms.

About the Author

E.J. McMahon

Edmund J. McMahon is Empire Center's founder and a senior fellow.

Read more by E.J. McMahon

You may also like

Next Time Get It In Writing: The NY Redistricting Bait-and-Switch

New Yorkers got a thorough lesson on the difference between a constitutional amendment and a law. Read More

How a Medicaid Program To Improve Nursing Home Care Ended Up Paying for Union Benefits

New York State's budget-making process sometimes works like a closed loop, as interest groups on the receiving end of state spending reinvest a portion of their proceeds to lobby Albany for still more money. Read More

Turning NY’s Yellow Buses Green Could Cost $8B+

New York in 2022 imposed the largest unfunded mandate on schools in a generation, requiring them to replace their buses with electric models. New price data indicate the cost is still rising. Read More

The Election Day After Tomorrow

New York’s “cap and invest” program (NYCI), a central part of the state’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, appears designed to hold back much of the program’s sticker-shock until January 2027—after the 2026 election. Read More

How Eliminating the Medicaid ‘Gap’ Would Perpetuate Inequity in Hospital Funding

A change in Medicaid reimbursement currently being pushed by New York's hospital industry appears likely to benefit high-end hospitals proportionally more than safety-net institutions, a review of hospitals' financial repor Read More

Union Membership Dropping in NY Too

The decline in union membership observed nationally appears to be occurring in New York as well. Read More

Hochul’s ‘Straight Talk’ on Medicaid Isn’t Straight Enough

Arguably the biggest Medicaid news in Governor Hochul's budget presentation was about the current fiscal year, not the next one: The state-run health plan is running substantially over budget. Read More

NY private employment was flat at end of 2023

New York's post-pandemic employment recovery stalled in the final quarter of 2023, with the state ending the year still 76,400 private jobs below its February 2020 level. Read More