A Tax Deduction Cap, good idea?

[Stardreamer]

Finally realizing that 'we'll let congress work it out' wasn't going to cut it for the tax deductions and loopholes he plans to cut to make his tax plan deficit neutral, Romney floated some ideas now on how he might go about it. One the ideas he floated he called the deduction 'bucket' which is essentially putting a cap on the deductions you can take. His plan is set the limit at $17,000. Under this plan, you can take any combination of deductions you want but once your total deductions reach $17,000; that is all you get, you can't take any more.

Now I don't know if this suggestion would balance the equation with the rest of Romney's plan (critics are highly doubtful) but I'm not really interested in that point here. I'm interested in this idea in and of itself, is implementing a tax deduction cap a good idea? It sounds like a fair idea that would affect higher income earners more than lower income earners and should raise considerable revenue. Should we implement something like this (regardless of who wins) and is $17,000 the right figure or should it be higher or lower? What do you think?

[Benvolio]

Finally realizing that 'we'll let congress work it out' wasn't going to cut it for the tax deductions and loopholes he plans to cut to make his tax plan deficit neutral, Romney floated some ideas now on how he might go about it. One the ideas he floated he called the deduction 'bucket' which is essentially putting a cap on the deductions you can take. His plan is set the limit at $17,000. Under this plan, you can take any combination of deductions you want but once your total deductions reach $17,000; that is all you get, you can't take any more.

Now I don't know if this suggestion would balance the equation with the rest of Romney's plan (critics are highly doubtful) but I'm not really interested in that point here. I'm interested in this idea in and of itself, is implementing a tax deduction cap a good idea? It sounds like a fair idea that would affect higher income earners more than lower income earners and should raise considerable revenue. Should we implement something like this (regardless of who wins) and is $17,000 the right figure or should it be higher or lower? What do you think?

Bear in mind the limitation in practice would limit mostly the deductions for state taxes paid and charitable limitation. Congress will not want to limit either, so the resulting limitation would not mean much.

[Stardreamer]

Bear in mind the limitation in practice would limit mostly the deductions for state taxes paid and charitable limitation. Congress will not want to limit either, so the resulting limitation would not mean much.

The idea as I've seen it put forward applies to all deductions including the home mortgage deduction. One critic of the $17,000 figure pointed out that you don't have to be too rich to have your mortgage deduction alone to reach it.

[Kulindahr]

I'd rather start with ending the practice of allowing donations to churches as deductions. That amounts to government funding of religion. Charitable deductions should have to serve a secular purpose.

[Benvolio]

I'd rather start with ending the practice of allowing donations to churches as deductions. That amounts to government funding of religion. Charitable deductions should have to serve a secular purpose.

Taxing people on the income they give to churches would be a tax on the "free exercize" of religion, prohibited by our Constitution.