A group of moderate House Republicans has decided to reject the GOP leadership’s proposal, which aims to increase the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap to $30,000 as part of a broader bill that includes key legislative priorities from Trump.
The House Ways and Means Committee, responsible for the tax aspects of this GOP megabill, was reviewing a plan to raise the SALT deduction cap from its current $10,000 limit to $30,000. This discussion took place during a lengthy closed meeting on Thursday, according to two sources.
Details of the proposal have not been disclosed by the leadership.
Members of the SALT Caucus, including Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), Andrew Garbarino (R-N.Y.), Nick LaLota (R-N.Y.), and Michael Lawler (R-N.Y.), described the $30,000 proposal as unacceptable.
“We approached the SALT issue in good faith from the beginning. We’re representing taxpayers in New York. Yet, without prior notice or agreement, leadership unilaterally proposed this $30,000 cap. It’s not just disappointing; it risks undermining President Trump’s significant bill,” they stated.
The group argued that New Yorkers contribute significantly more in taxes than they receive from Washington, similar to many so-called “low tax” states that heavily depend on federal funding. They emphasized that raising the SALT cap isn’t a luxury but a fair demand and firmly stated, “We reject this offer.”
This refusal marks yet another complication in the House’s efforts to advance Trump’s agenda, which prominently features an extension of the 2017 tax cuts. Over recent months, lawmakers have repeatedly clashed over the SALT deduction cap, a point of contention since its introduction in the 2017 legislation, particularly affecting Republicans in high-tax blue states.
Moderate Republicans are advocating for raising the cap to provide tax relief, but some fiscally conservative members are concerned about the potential costs of such a change.
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) mentioned on Thursday morning that discussions around a $30,000 deduction cap are ongoing.
“I’ve heard those figures, and others are aware of them too,” Johnson remarked when questioned about the $30,000 cap. “It’s still a topic of discussion among members, and I believe we’ll arrive at a suitable conclusion.”
He added, “I can’t predict the outcome since I don’t have all the specifics, but there’s considerable analysis involved. Our goal is to ensure it serves the majority of constituents and adequately addresses various concerns across affected districts.”
