To the Yonkers Times, Daniel Murphy
When I was a child, I understood a simple principle: if I broke a neighbor’s window and later paid to repair it, I had fulfilled an obligation; I had not performed an act of heroism. That principle offers a useful way to examine the current celebration surrounding the federal deduction for state and local taxes, commonly called SALT.
The deduction is not a recent privilege. It has roots in the Civil War income-tax laws and was incorporated into the modern federal income tax when it was established in 1913. For more than a century, taxpayers who itemized generally could deduct qualifying state and local income and property taxes without a specific dollar ceiling.
That changed in 2017. A Republican-controlled Congress passed, and President Trump signed, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Beginning in 2018, it capped the SALT deduction at $10,000 for individuals and married couples filing jointly. The cap especially harmed homeowners in high-tax, high-cost communities such as Westchester and the Hudson Valley.
The 2025 federal tax law raised the cap to $40,000, subject to income limitations. Congressman Mike Lawler now portrays that increase as a major victory he delivered. Although Lawler was not yet in Congress when the original cap was enacted, he belongs to the party that enacted it and voted for legislation that merely provides temporary, partial relief from it. His advocacy does not justify presenting the result without its essential history.
The Republican Party and President Trump created the $10,000 restriction in 2017. The new law does not fully restore what was taken away. The higher cap lasts only through 2029 and, under current law, falls back to $10,000 in 2030. Calling this a lasting solution—or an extraordinary achievement—asks voters to overlook both the source of the problem and its scheduled return.
This should not be a partisan exercise. Democrats and Republicans ought to establish a fair and durable policy for taxpayers in high-cost communities. Public officials should receive credit for solving problems, but not for temporarily easing burdens their own party imposed while leaving those burdens in place for the future.
Repairing part of a broken window is better than ignoring it. But it does not transform those responsible for the damage into heroes.
James Martorano, Yorktown Heights