A small but vocal group of lawmakers in the House of Representatives continues to push for higher limits on state and local tax (SALT) deductions. However, the only changes to the SALT deduction that should be discussed should be reductions, not increases.

The SALT deduction allows taxpayers to deduct certain taxes paid to state and local governments by itemizing tax credits (instead of claiming the standard deduction). The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act capped the deduction taxpayers can take on state and local taxes paid to $10,000.

After months of pushing various proposals to the wall to raise the SALT cap, the latest effort is HR 7160, the SALT Marriage Penalty Elimination Act. HR 7160 takes advantage of the fact that her SALT limit for claiming a “marriage penalty” is $10,000 for both single and married individuals. Therefore, we are proposing to increase the SALT limit to $20,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly for income up to $500,000 for the 2023 tax year.

But if SALT supporters' concerns are really about a “marriage penalty,” raising the cap for married taxpayers is not the only solution. As it turns out, the “marriage penalty” could be similarly comprehensively addressed by lowering the cap for single filers to $5,000 for her.

Since the legislators raising the issue with the SALT cap are unlikely to support it, it is clear that the “marriage penalty” is not the problem at all, but rather the cap itself. There are several reasons why SALT supporters put so much effort into reinstating the SALT deduction, but none of them are likely to be convincing to taxpayers.

SALT proponents, especially those in high-tax states, I repeatedly tried to portray this cap as a tax increase on the middle class.. It is different. An analysis by the Tax Policy Center found that the cap on deductions would be removed. 96 percent of middle-class households will receive no benefit.. Meanwhile, taxpayers making more than $1 million will receive an average tax cut of $48,000.

This clear divide is no exception to this particular proposal. By doubling the upper limit for married filers, Only 1.3% of benefits go to taxpayers with incomes of less than $100,000.. Meanwhile, the tax cut would reduce federal revenue by nearly $12 billion in just one year. Obviously, if extended, the amount would increase proportionately.

Another argument often made by SALT proponents is that SALT protects taxpayers from double taxation. This is also a strange argument because the SALT deduction only allows for deductions from certain state and local level taxes. What's more, the SALT deduction is only available to taxpayers who itemize their deductions, meaning most taxpayers receive no benefit at all. Only 10% of taxpayers, most of them wealthy. Isn't “double taxation” a problem for all other taxpayers?

Another popular argument is that the SALT deduction helps “donor countries” that contribute more in tax revenue than they receive in federal spending. This is another way of saying that these states have a lot of “.”donor taxpayer, also called the “wealthy class.” Wealthy taxpayers generally pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits under a progressive tax system. This result is widely accepted across other tax laws.

All these arguments are smoke and mirrors.of genuine The SALT deduction joins many progressive liberals in favor of lowering taxes for wealthy taxpayers because it dilutes the impact of state tax and spending policies on wealthy residents. Wealthy residents of these states can essentially receive a discount on their state and local taxes if they can deduct them from their federal income tax returns.

Without federal subsidies for high state taxes, wealthy taxpayers would bear the largest burden of state and local taxes. As a result, many of them leave for greener pastures, and it's no coincidence that they do. all but one of them 32 members of the SALT caucus Representatives from the 10 states that lose the most tax revenue to interstate migration are elected to Congress..

Taxpayers should not be fooled by arguments in favor of tax cuts for some wealthy taxpayers in high-tax states. Salt is not in our tax code, it is in our cupboard.

Andrew Wilford is director of the Interstate Commerce Initiative at the National Taxpayers Union Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to research and education on tax policy at all levels of government.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.