Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Itemized deduction

An itemized deduction is a provision in the United States federal system allowing individual taxpayers to subtract specific, enumerated personal and investment-related expenses from their (AGI) on Schedule A of , thereby reducing as an alternative to the fixed , with the choice determined by whichever method yields the larger total subtraction. Common categories include state and local income or sales taxes, and taxes, home mortgage interest on qualified , charitable contributions to eligible organizations, casualty and theft losses from federally declared disasters, and medical or dental expenses exceeding 7.5% of . These deductions, governed by sections such as 163 (interest), 164 (taxes), 170 (charitable contributions), and 213 ( expenses), incentivize behaviors like homeownership and while requiring detailed recordkeeping and substantiation to prevent abuse. Taxpayers forgo the standard deduction—set at $14,600 for single filers and $29,200 for married filing jointly in tax year 2024, adjusted annually for inflation—only if itemized totals exceed it, a threshold that post-2017 reforms, including a near-doubling of the standard amount and a $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions, have made rarer for many households. While simplifying compliance for most, these changes have shifted the deduction's primary benefit toward higher-income individuals with substantial qualifying expenses, amplifying debates over its role in distorting economic decisions versus providing targeted relief.

Definition and Fundamentals

Core Concept and Purpose

Itemized deductions enable individual taxpayers to subtract specific, qualified expenses from their to arrive at a lower figure, as opposed to claiming a flat . These expenses, detailed on Schedule A of , include state and local income or sales taxes, taxes, home mortgage interest on acquisition debt, charitable contributions to qualified organizations, certain medical and dental expenses exceeding 7.5% of , and losses from casualties or in federally declared areas. Taxpayers elect itemization only if the total exceeds the amount, which for tax year 2024 stands at $14,600 for single filers and $29,200 for married filing jointly. The core purpose of itemized deductions lies in adjusting to better reflect a taxpayer's actual economic capacity by excluding expenditures that do not constitute freely , such as unavoidable payments to other governments or costs associated with income-producing activities like homeownership. This approach addresses potential over-taxation from figures that include non-discretionary outlays, with specific deductions like mortgage historically aimed at promoting residential and charitable giving intended to subsidize voluntary societal contributions. Empirical data indicate that itemization primarily benefits higher-income households, as only about 10-15% of returns claim it post-2017 reforms, with the top quintile capturing over 90% of the value due to their disproportionate qualifying expenses. From a causal standpoint, itemized deductions serve to counteract distortions in the tax base arising from —such as state tax payments—or personal necessities, ensuring taxation targets net resources rather than inflated gross measures, though this requires substantiation through receipts and may increase compliance burdens compared to the simpler alternative.

Comparison with Standard Deduction

Taxpayers may elect either the or itemized deductions on their federal tax , selecting whichever method yields the greater total deduction to reduce and thereby minimize . The provides a fixed amount subtracted from without requiring substantiation of specific expenses, simplifying for most filers. In contrast, itemized deductions require listing and documenting qualifying expenses on Schedule A of , such as home mortgage interest, state and local taxes (capped at $10,000 for most taxpayers under post-2017 rules), charitable contributions, and medical expenses exceeding 7.5% of . For tax year 2025, the amounts are $15,750 for single filers and married individuals filing separately, $31,500 for married couples filing jointly, and $23,625 for heads of , with additional amounts of $1,600 (or $1,950 if unmarried) for taxpayers aged 65 or older or blind. These figures adjust annually for inflation and reflect increases implemented under the of 2017, which roughly doubled prior levels to broaden the tax base and reduce reliance on itemized deductions. Itemized deductions, however, remain subject to limitations like the $10,000 state and local tax cap and phase-outs for high-income earners via the Pease limitation (suspended through 2025 but potentially reinstated), often making them viable only for those with substantial qualifying outlays exceeding the standard amount.
Filing Status2025 Standard Deduction
Single or Married Filing Separately$15,750
Married Filing Jointly$31,500
Head of Household$23,625
The standard deduction favors simplicity and universality, eliminating the need for record-keeping and reducing administrative burden, which empirical data shows leads over 90% of taxpayers to claim it post-2017 reforms due to elevated thresholds outpacing typical itemized totals for average households. Itemizing suits scenarios with concentrated expenses—such as large charitable gifts, unreimbursed medical costs above the AGI floor, or mortgage interest on high-value homes—but demands verifiable receipts and increases audit exposure, particularly for categories like miscellaneous expenses eliminated after 2017. Taxpayers in low-tax states or without significant deductible outlays rarely benefit from itemizing, as the fixed standard deduction approximates common costs without customization. Ultimately, the choice hinges on computing both totals, with itemizing elected only if it surpasses the standard by enough to offset added compliance costs.

Eligibility Criteria and Filing Process

Taxpayers are eligible to claim itemized deductions if they file a U.S. income tax return on or Form 1040-SR and choose to itemize rather than claim the . This election is typically beneficial only when the total of allowable itemized deductions exceeds the for the taxpayer's filing status and circumstances. For tax year 2025, the is $15,750 for single filers and married individuals filing separately, $31,500 for married couples filing jointly or qualifying surviving spouses, and $23,625 for heads of household. Nonresident aliens and certain other filers face restrictions, such as inability to claim certain itemized deductions unless a applies. Taxpayers engaged in a or deduct business expenses on separate schedules like Schedule C, not Schedule A, which is reserved for nonbusiness personal deductions. The filing process requires completing Schedule A (Form 1040) to categorize and calculate itemized deductions, including medical and dental expenses exceeding 7.5% of , state and local taxes up to specified limits, qualified home interest, charitable contributions subject to percentage-of-income caps, and casualty and losses in declared areas. Taxpayers enter qualifying amounts on the corresponding lines of Schedule A, apply any applicable limitations or phase-outs (such as the overall limitation on itemized deductions for high-income taxpayers under prior rules, though suspended through 2025), and total the deductions on line 17. This total transfers to Schedule 1 (Form 1040), line 12, and ultimately reduces on to determine . Substantiation is mandatory; taxpayers must retain records such as receipts, canceled checks, and appraisals to verify claimed amounts, as the IRS may returns and disallow unsubstantiated deductions. For married taxpayers, joint filers generally itemize collectively for shared expenses, but those filing separately may claim individually paid portions of certain deductions like state taxes or medical expenses. software or preparation can automate calculations, but manual filers must ensure compliance with annual IRS instructions, which detail line-by-line requirements and any inflation-adjusted thresholds. Taxpayers cannot combine itemized and standard deductions; the election applies to the entire return.

Historical Development

Origins and Early Implementation (1913–1940s)

The federal , enabled by the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment on February 3, 1913, was implemented through the , which established itemized deductions as the primary mechanism for reducing to arrive at taxable . Taxpayers could subtract ordinary and necessary business expenses, interest payments (including personal interest), state and local taxes (excluding federal income taxes), casualty and theft losses, and bad debts. These provisions aimed to tax only net economic gain, exempting a of $3,000 for single filers ($4,000 for married couples) while applying a 1% normal tax rate above that threshold, plus a progressive surtax reaching 6% on incomes over $500,000. Initially, the tax affected fewer than 1% of Americans, mainly high earners who detailed their qualifying expenses on returns. World War I prompted expansions via the War Revenue Act of 1917, which raised top rates to 67% and introduced limited deductions for charitable contributions to war-related causes, later generalized to certain organizations under the Revenue Act of 1918 amid a peak top rate of 77%. These changes broadened allowable subtractions to encourage during fiscal strain, while maintaining core itemized categories like taxes and losses. Post-war adjustments in the Revenue Act of 1921 reduced rates (top at 25% for lower brackets, 58% for highest) but preserved itemized deductions, with refinements limiting non-business losses to prevent abuse. Through the and 1930s, amid the , the system emphasized business and investment-related subtractions, though economic pressures led to temporary credits rather than major deduction overhauls; state and local taxes remained fully deductible, supporting by avoiding on lower government revenues. By the early 1940s, World War II's demands massified the tax base, with the Revenue Act of 1942 adding deductions for unreimbursed medical and dental expenses exceeding 5% of net income, acknowledging rising personal costs amid wartime and . This expansion reflected causal links between health burdens and reduced earning capacity, without altering the itemized requirement for all taxpayers. The Individual Income Tax Act of 1944 introduced an optional —initially $500 for those with over $5,000—as a simplification for the newly broadened filer pool, yet itemized deductions endured for individuals with substantial qualifying outlays, ensuring precision in taxing net income over fixed approximations.

Expansion and Standardization (1950s–1980s)

The of 1954 recodified the U.S. tax laws, standardizing itemized deductions by organizing them under sections 163 through 170, which enumerated allowable personal expenses including state and local taxes, home mortgage interest, charitable contributions, and dental costs exceeding specified floors, and casualty or losses. This consolidation preserved deductions carried over from the 1939 code while introducing clarifications and liberalizations, such as refining the expense deduction to permit amounts exceeding 3 percent of () for individuals under age 65 and 1 percent for those 65 and older, a reduction from the prior uniform 5 percent floor that broadened accessibility for many taxpayers. The code also maintained full deductibility of state and local taxes paid, including , , and general sales taxes, reinforcing their role as a core itemized category amid economic growth and rising federal rates topping 91 percent. Legislative adjustments in the further expanded specific provisions to address taxpayer relief under high marginal rates. The Social Security Amendments of 1960 liberalized medical deductions by allowing claims for unreimbursed expenses of parents not qualifying as dependents, provided the taxpayer supplied over half their support, thereby extending benefits to a wider . Similarly, the Tax Reform Act of 1969 raised the limit for deductible cash charitable contributions to public organizations from 20 percent to 30 percent, enabling larger write-offs for donors while introducing a minimum tax to curb excessive sheltering by high-income individuals. These changes coincided with growing utilization, as the share of returns claiming itemized deductions climbed from around 30 percent in 1960 toward 40 percent by the late , driven by the value of offsets against top rates exceeding 70 percent. Into the and early , itemized deductions solidified as a standardized framework for tax equity, with acts like the Revenue Act of 1978 adjusting related floors (such as tying them to the zero-bracket amount) but preserving the core categories without major contractions until base-broadening reforms. This era's expansions reflected congressional intent to mitigate bracket creep from and promote incentives like homeownership via interest and philanthropy via contributions, though critics noted their disproportionate benefit to higher earners with greater capacity for such expenditures. By 1980, itemized deductions totaled over 20 percent of on claiming returns, underscoring their entrenched role before subsequent limitations.

The 1986 Tax Reform Act and Base-Broadening Efforts

The Tax Reform Act of 1986 (TRA 1986), signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on October 22, 1986, represented a landmark effort to simplify the U.S. tax code by reducing marginal tax rates while broadening the taxable income base through restrictions on preferences, including itemized deductions. The Act lowered the top individual income tax rate from 50% to 28% and consolidated the rate structure into two brackets (15% and 28%), with these changes phased in over 1987–1988, while aiming for revenue neutrality by curtailing deductions that had proliferated under prior law. For itemized deductions, the legislation retained core categories deemed essential—such as qualified home mortgage interest, charitable contributions, and state and local taxes—but eliminated or suspended others to minimize distortions in economic decision-making and expand the base of taxable income subject to the lower rates. These reforms were projected to raise approximately $1.3 billion in additional revenue from itemized deduction limitations in 1987 alone, offsetting rate reductions. Key retentions included deductions for on secured by a principal residence or one second home (up to the property's ), charitable contributions (subject to existing percentage limits of ), and state and local , , and income or general sales taxes, though the standalone deduction for state and local sales taxes was eliminated effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 1986. Medical and dental expenses remained deductible to the extent exceeding 10% of (), with no change to the prior-law floor, while casualty and losses were preserved but confined to amounts exceeding both $100 per event and 10% of . These preserved deductions accounted for the bulk of itemized claims, reflecting a policy choice to maintain incentives for homeownership, , and recovery from unforeseen losses without unduly narrowing the base. To achieve base broadening, TRA 1986 introduced a 2% floor for a new category of miscellaneous itemized deductions, encompassing unreimbursed employee business expenses, advisory fees, preparation costs, and rentals, which had previously been fully deductible and encouraged tax sheltering; this floor applied to the aggregate of such expenses, disallowing the portion below 2% of effective after 1986. interest deductions (e.g., on cards or consumer loans) were phased out entirely by 1991, starting with 35% disallowance in 1987 and increasing annually, while interest was capped at net income with carryforwards allowed. Additionally, passive activity rules curtailed deductions for from rental real estate or other passive against non-passive , with a $25,000 allowance for active participation phased out for over $100,000–$150,000, effective 1987 and fully phased in by 1991. These curbs on miscellaneous and non-qualified interest deductions were estimated to generate over $5 billion in revenue from 1987–1991 by incorporating previously sheltered into the base. The base-broadening strategy extended beyond itemized deductions to repeal broader preferences like the exclusion for employer-provided fringe benefits in some cases and the two-earner married couple deduction, but for itemizers specifically, it reduced the number of taxpayers benefiting from deductions by elevating the (to $3,000 for singles and $5,000 for joint filers in 1987, indexed thereafter) and simplifying eligibility. Overall, these measures increased the proportion of subject to from about 75% under prior law to nearly 100%, enabling rate cuts without net revenue loss, though critics noted potential disincentives for charitable giving and due to reduced marginal benefits at lower rates. The Joint Committee on Taxation's analysis confirmed that the deduction reforms contributed to the Act's revenue-neutral profile, with individual tax liabilities projected to decline by $120 billion over 1987–1991 after accounting for base expansions.

Post-1986 Adjustments and the Pease Limitation

The introduced structural changes to itemized deductions effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 1986, including a 2 percent floor on miscellaneous itemized deductions and an increase in the medical expense deduction threshold from 5 percent to 7.5 percent of (), aimed at broadening the tax base while preserving key incentives. Subsequent adjustments sought to further constrain deduction benefits for higher-income taxpayers amid fiscal pressures. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA 1990), signed into law on November 5, 1990, enacted the Pease limitation—named after Representative Donald M. Pease—as an overall cap on itemized deductions to generate revenue without directly raising statutory tax rates. This provision applied starting with the 1991 tax year and reduced the allowable amount of otherwise qualifying itemized deductions by 3 percent of the excess of a taxpayer's over an inflation-adjusted threshold ($100,000 for single filers and , $150,000 for married filing jointly in 1991), with the phaseout capped at 80 percent of total deductions to avoid fully eliminating them. The Pease mechanism operated indirectly by trimming deduction amounts rather than disallowing specific categories, effectively increasing the marginal for affected taxpayers by approximately 1.05 percentage points in the top (3 percent reduction multiplied by the 35 percent top rate post-1993). Thresholds were adjusted annually for under Section 1(f), rising to approximately $261,500 for filers and $313,800 for filers by 2017. Exemptions applied to certain deductions like medical expenses, investment interest, and casualty losses, preserving their full deductibility even as others were scaled back. The limitation's design reflected a to target upper-income households—those with exceeding the thresholds claimed about 40 percent of itemized deductions despite comprising less than 10 percent of filers—while minimizing distortion to lower deduction categories. Further refinements occurred in subsequent legislation. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA 1993) made the Pease limitation permanent and aligned it with the expanded 39.6 percent top rate, intensifying its revenue impact. The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA) initiated a temporary phase-down of the limitation, reducing it to zero for tax years after 2009 as part of broader rate cuts and personal exemption restorations. However, the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 and subsequent extensions under the Tax Relief Act of 2010 and earlier measures reinstated the full Pease limitation starting in 2013, reflecting ongoing congressional efforts to balance deficit reduction with tax relief. These adjustments demonstrated the Pease provision's role as a flexible tool for fiscal policy, raising an estimated $40 billion over a decade in the 1990s by curbing deduction subsidies without altering base eligibility rules.

Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

The (TCJA), 115-97, was signed into law by President on December 22, , and substantially altered the landscape of itemized deductions to broaden the individual income tax base while lowering marginal tax rates across brackets. These reforms, applicable to tax years beginning after December 31, , and scheduled to sunset after December 31, 2025, aimed to simplify compliance by curtailing deduction preferences that had narrowed the taxable base, thereby enabling rate reductions without equivalent revenue loss. A core mechanism was nearly doubling the —from $6,500 to $12,000 for single filers and $13,000 to $24,000 for joint filers in 2018 (with inflation adjustments thereafter)—which reduced the number of taxpayers itemizing from approximately 31% in to about 10% in 2018, as the often exceeded total itemized amounts for middle-income households. Additionally, the TCJA suspended the overall limitation on itemized deductions (formerly the Pease phase-out) for 2018 through 2025, eliminating the reduction of itemized deductions by 3% of () exceeding certain thresholds. Among the most prominent changes, the TCJA capped the deduction for state and local taxes ()—encompassing property, income, and sales taxes—at $10,000 annually ($5,000 for married filing separately), regardless of or filing status, with no adjustment. This limit applied to payments made after December 31, 2017, and particularly impacted residents of high-tax states like , , and , where average SALT payments often exceeded the cap; for instance, in 2017, the average SALT deduction was about $13,000 for itemizers in the top income quintile. The provision sought to curb subsidization of state-level spending through federal tax benefits but drew criticism from affected jurisdictions for distorting fiscal incentives. The TCJA also restricted the home mortgage interest deduction under Internal Revenue Code Section 163(h). For indebtedness incurred after December 15, 2017, the deduction applied only to qualified residence interest on up to $750,000 of acquisition indebtedness (down from $1 million pre-TCJA), with home equity indebtedness interest suspended entirely unless proceeds were used to buy, build, or substantially improve the home qualifying for the deduction. Existing mortgages originated before December 16, 2017, retained the prior $1 million limit, creating a grandfathering effect that preserved value for prior borrowers but limited benefits for new ones; this change reduced the deduction's revenue cost by an estimated $12 billion annually through 2025. Miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% floor—such as unreimbursed employee expenses, tax preparation fees, and expenses—were suspended outright for 2018 through , eliminating claims totaling about $100 billion in 2017. Similarly, personal casualty and theft losses became deductible only if attributable to events declared disasters by the under the Stafford Act, disallowing routine losses like those from localized accidents and reducing the deduction's scope to federal emergencies such as hurricanes or wildfires. For charitable contributions, the TCJA raised the AGI limit for cash donations to public charities from 50% to 60%, potentially allowing higher deductions for large donors who itemize, though the higher overall diminished the incentive for smaller givers by reducing itemization rates. Non-cash contributions retained prior limits (e.g., 30% for appreciated property to public charities), and the overall effect was a net reduction in marginal benefits for giving, estimated at over 30% for many taxpayers due to fewer itemizers and lower top rates. These modifications reflected a base-broadening , with empirical analyses indicating they offset much of the revenue loss from rate cuts, though sunset provisions introduce uncertainty post-2025.

One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 and Beyond

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (OBBBA), enacted as Public Law 119-21 on July 4, 2025, extended and refined the itemized deduction framework established by the 2017 (TCJA), which had temporarily curtailed several deductions to offset rate reductions and broaden the tax base. While preserving the TCJA's suspension of miscellaneous itemized deductions—such as unreimbursed employee expenses and tax preparation fees—the OBBBA rendered this suspension permanent, effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2025, eliminating these categories to simplify compliance and reduce administrative burdens. Key modifications included expanding the state and local tax (SALT) deduction cap from $10,000 to $40,000 for tax year 2025, with a 1% annual adjustment through 2030, after which it reverts unless extended; however, the deduction phases out by 30% of modified (MAGI) exceeding $500,000 ($250,000 for married filing separately), reducing to $10,000 for those above $600,000 MAGI. The retained its TCJA limit of $750,000 in acquisition indebtedness ($375,000 for married filing separately), made permanent, while reinstating the deductibility of premiums as qualified interest starting in 2026; pre-December 16, 2017 mortgages remain eligible up to $1 million. For charitable contributions, the Act permanently set the cash donation limit at 60% of () while introducing a 0.5% floor on deductions effective 2026, requiring contributions to exceed this threshold for deductibility; non-itemizers gained an above-the-line deduction up to $1,000 ($2,000 joint filers), excluding certain funds like donor-advised accounts. Casualty and theft losses remained restricted to federally declared disasters, a TCJA provision made permanent. An overall limitation applied to taxpayers in the 37% bracket, capping the value of itemized deductions at 35 cents per dollar starting 2026, akin to a partial revival of pre-TCJA phaseout mechanisms. The Act also introduced a new itemized deduction for on loans for new U.S.-assembled personal-use vehicles, up to $10,000 annually through 2028, phasing out above $100,000 ($200,000 joint), aimed at incentivizing domestic but limited to qualified purchases. These changes, projected to reduce federal revenue by approximately $5 trillion over a decade while boosting long-run GDP by 1.2%, prioritized permanence for base-broadening elements while easing certain caps to address regional fiscal pressures, particularly in high-tax states.

Categories of Allowable Deductions

Medical and Dental Expenses

Medical and dental expenses qualify as an itemized deduction under Section 213 of the , allowing taxpayers to deduct unreimbursed costs for the , , , , or prevention of , or for affecting any or function of the body. This includes payments for services or goods necessary for medical care of the taxpayer, spouse, or dependents, provided the expenses are not compensated by insurance or otherwise reimbursed. The deduction applies only to the portion of total qualifying expenses exceeding 7.5% of (AGI), a threshold in effect for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, following temporary reductions and extensions under prior legislation. Qualifying medical expenses encompass a broad range of costs, such as fees for physicians, surgeons, dentists, and other ; hospital services; diagnostic tests; prescription drugs; and medically necessary equipment like crutches or wheelchairs. Transportation primarily for purposes, including mileage at 21 cents per mile for 2025 or actual expenses, and certain costs when away from for care (up to $50 per night per person) also count, but only if the primary reason for the trip is . Premiums for , including policies (subject to age-based limits), may be included if paid by the , though employer-sponsored premiums are generally excluded. Expenses must be paid during the tax year and primarily for prevention or alleviation of physical or mental defects, excluding cosmetic procedures unless medically necessary. Dental expenses mirror medical ones, covering treatments like cleanings, fillings, extractions, , and when aimed at preventing or alleviating dental disease, but not purely cosmetic work such as teeth whitening. For instance, costs for braces qualify if prescribed for structural correction, while veneers for aesthetic purposes do not. Taxpayers must substantiate claims with records, as the IRS requires documentation like receipts or provider statements to verify eligibility and prevent abuse. To compute the deduction, aggregate all unreimbursed medical and dental expenses, subtract 7.5% of , and enter the excess on Schedule A, line 4 of , provided itemizing exceeds the . For tax year 2025, this applies uniformly, with no AGI-based phase-outs beyond the threshold itself under current law. The provision incentivizes out-of-pocket spending on essential care but benefits higher- taxpayers less proportionally due to the , and its utilization remains low, with fewer than 10% of filers claiming it in recent years owing to the elevated post-2017 reforms.

State and Local Taxes (SALT)

The state and local tax (SALT) deduction permits taxpayers who itemize deductions on their federal income tax returns to subtract eligible state and local taxes paid from their federal taxable income. Eligible taxes include state and local income taxes (or, at the taxpayer's election, general sales taxes), real estate taxes on real property, and personal property taxes based on the value of the property. Taxpayers cannot deduct both income and sales taxes in the same year; the sales tax option is calculated using actual expenses or the IRS optional sales tax tables, which may benefit those in low- or no-income-tax states. Foreign real property taxes are deductible as itemized deductions but not as business expenses unless tied to a trade or business. The deduction originated with the Revenue Act of 1913, which established the modern federal income tax and implicitly allowed deductions for state taxes paid, reflecting an intent to avoid double taxation on the same income base. Over time, it evolved into a significant tax expenditure, with the Tax Reform Act of 1986 standardizing it as part of base-broadening reforms that lowered marginal rates while preserving the deduction for paid taxes. The SALT deduction effectively shifts a portion of state and local tax burdens to the federal government by reducing federal revenue, benefiting residents of high-tax jurisdictions disproportionately—data from 2017 showed that 96% of SALT deductions were claimed by taxpayers in the top income quintile. Critics argue it incentivizes higher state and local spending, as federal deductibility subsidizes such taxes, while proponents contend it mitigates double taxation without favoring any particular state policy. Prior to , no aggregate cap applied to deductions, allowing full deductibility for eligible payments, which averaged $12,000–$15,000 for itemizers in high-tax states like and . The of 2017 imposed a $10,000 annual limit ($5,000 for married filing separately) on the combined deduction for tax years 2018 through 2025, aiming to offset revenue losses from rate cuts and curb perceived subsidization of state fiscal policies. This cap reduced itemized deductions for approximately 10 million taxpayers, particularly in high-tax areas, prompting workarounds like pass-through entity taxes enacted by 30 states by 2023 to bypass the limit for business owners. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 raised the cap to $40,000 for most filers starting in tax year 2025, with annual 1% inflation adjustments through 2029, followed by reversion to $10,000 in 2030; a phase-down applies for adjusted gross incomes exceeding $500,000, reducing the cap at a 30% rate. This adjustment primarily aids higher- households in high-tax states, with estimates projecting $200–$300 billion in additional federal revenue costs over five years due to increased claiming. Deductions remain unavailable for taxes paid on federally nontaxable , such as Social Security benefits, and are subject to overall itemization requirements where the total must exceed the ($15,000 single/$30,000 joint for 2025).

Home Mortgage Interest

The home mortgage interest deduction permits taxpayers who itemize deductions to subtract qualifying interest payments on indebtedness secured by their main home or a second home from . This deduction applies only to interest on loans used to acquire, construct, or substantially improve the qualified , with the serving as the primary for the . Taxpayers receive Form 1098 from lenders reporting the interest paid, which is then reported on Schedule A of Form 1040. Qualified residences include the taxpayer's main —defined as the home where the taxpayer lives most of the time—and one second home, such as a vacation property, which need not be used personally if rented out for fewer than 15 days per year or if rental income does not exceed expenses. The loan must be a secured , meaning the home is listed as , and on unsecured loans or those not tied to home acquisition does not qualify. For home equity indebtedness, deduction is limited post-2017 to cases where proceeds are used to buy, build, or improve the home; otherwise, such remains nondeductible through at least 2025 unless extended. Deduction limits are tied to the amount of qualifying indebtedness: for debt incurred after December 15, 2017, is deductible only on up to $750,000 of principal ($375,000 if married filing separately), a reduction from the prior $1 million limit implemented by the of 2017. Loans originated before that date retain the $1 million ceiling ($500,000 if married filing separately). The 2017 Act suspended deductions for loans not used for home improvements until 2026, but the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 made the $750,000 acquisition indebtedness limit permanent while reinstating limited deductibility under strict use requirements. Taxpayers with multiple qualifying loans aggregate the debt to apply these caps, prorating deductible if exceeding limits. Points paid to obtain a —prepaid interest—are generally in full in the year paid if for the main home and meeting IRS criteria, such as reasonable amounts and standard practices, or ratably over the loan term otherwise. Refinanced mortgages allow points deduction only to the extent allocable to reduced principal, with seller-paid points treated similarly if bona fide. Late payment or penalty interest on mortgages does not qualify, nor does interest on loans for non-residential property improvements. The deduction phases out indirectly for high-income taxpayers via the and interacts with overall itemized deduction limits, though no direct income threshold applies.

Charitable Contributions

Charitable contributions to qualified organizations are deductible as an itemized deduction under Section 170 of the , provided the elects to itemize rather than take the . Eligible recipients include entities organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, such as those granted tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(3). Contributions must be voluntary transfers of money or property without expectation of substantial benefit in return, and the deduction applies only to the or adjusted basis of the donated asset, depending on the type. The deduction originated in the War Revenue Act of 1917, enacted amid to fund military efforts through sharply higher rates, with the provision aimed at preserving incentives for private amid increased government revenue demands. Initially limited to 15% of , the cap evolved through subsequent legislation; by the , it reached 20-30% of () for most gifts, expanding to 50% by 1969 for cash donations to charities. The temporarily raised the limit to 50% but introduced complexities for non-cash gifts, while the (TCJA) of 2017 increased it to 60% for cash contributions to charities through , reverting thereafter absent extension. Under rules effective for tax year 2025 following the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, itemized deductions for charitable contributions face a 0.5% floor, allowing deductibility only for amounts exceeding this threshold, applied across all gifts. The tax benefit is capped at an effective 35% rate regardless of the donor's marginal bracket, reducing the subsidy for high-income taxpayers previously benefiting from rates up to 37%. For non-itemizers, a limited above-the-line deduction of up to $1,000 ($2,000 for joint filers) applies to cash gifts, expanding access but with strict qualified organization requirements. donations, such as appreciated securities, remain deductible at up to 30% of for public charities, with carryover provisions for excess amounts over five years. Substantiation is mandatory: contributions under $250 require bank records or receipts, while those $250 or more need contemporaneous written from the donee detailing the amount, date, and any goods received in exchange. Non-cash gifts exceeding $500 necessitate Form 8283, with appraisals required for values over $5,000 (except publicly traded securities). Quasi-endowments or donor-advised funds qualify if ultimately disbursed to operational charities, but direct benefits like event tickets reduce the deductible portion by their . Empirical analyses indicate the deduction raises total charitable giving by lowering its after-tax cost, with price elasticity estimates ranging from -0.5 to -1.5, implying a 10% increase boosts donations by 5-15%. Post-TCJA data show a $20 billion annual drop in giving after 2017, attributable to fewer itemizers due to the doubled , though the effect varied by income level with high earners less responsive. This suggests the policy subsidizes giving without fully crowding out private initiative, as evidenced by sustained growth outpacing GDP historically, but critics argue it disproportionately benefits higher-income donors who claim 90% of the value despite comprising one-third of claimants.

Casualty, Disaster, and Theft Losses

Personal casualty, disaster, and theft losses refer to uncompensated damage or destruction of personal-use property resulting from sudden, unexpected, or unusual events. A casualty is defined as the complete or partial destruction of property from an identifiable event sudden in nature, such as fire, storm, shipwreck, or automobile accident, but excludes progressive deterioration like termite damage or rust. Theft constitutes the unlawful taking and removal of property with intent to deprive the owner, encompassing burglary, larceny, and embezzlement, but not mere loss or mysterious disappearance without evidence of theft. Disaster losses qualify when attributable to a federally declared disaster under the Stafford Act, as designated by the President, encompassing events like hurricanes, wildfires, or floods declared after specific dates, such as Hurricane Katrina in 2005 or the 2024 California wildfires. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, and through 2025, (IRC) Section 165(h)(5), as amended by the (TCJA) of 2017, restricts deductions for personal casualty and theft losses to those arising from qualified federally declared disasters; non-disaster personal losses, including thefts like scams, are nondeductible unless tied to such a declaration. This limitation offsets personal casualty gains but disallows net losses otherwise, aiming to broaden the tax base by curtailing frequent small claims, though critics argue it leaves victims of localized events or non-declared thefts without relief. Qualified disasters include those under IRC §165(i)(5), with special rules allowing accelerated deductions in the disaster year and waiving certain limitations for events like the or 2023 Maui fires. The deductible amount for each qualifying loss is the lesser of the property's adjusted basis or the decrease in (FMV) due to the event, reduced by any or recovery proceeds. For real , the loss equals the difference between FMV before and after the casualty, capped at adjusted basis; for like vehicles or furniture, it is typically 100% of basis if completely destroyed. Gains from casualties, such as exceeding basis, must be netted against losses before applying thresholds. Post-TCJA, even losses require itemization on Schedule A (), though the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) of 2025 permits qualified losses exceeding $500 to be added directly to the without the 10% floor for certain designations, effective for disasters after July 4, 2025, to expedite relief for events like the 2025 Midwest floods. All allowable losses are subject to a $100 per-event reduction and an aggregate floor of 10% of (), computed after netting gains and losses. For example, a with $20,000 AGI and $5,000 in qualified losses after $100 reduction and would deduct $0 if below the $2,000 AGI , but OBBBA expansions for high-impact disasters suspend the 10% floor and allow above-the-line treatment up to $10,000 per event for incomes under $400,000. or income-producing losses remain fully deductible without these personal-use restrictions under IRC §165(c)(1)-(2). Taxpayers report via Form 4684, attaching casualty gain/loss schedules, with substantiation required via photos, appraisals, or repair records; failure to prove suddenness or amount disallows claims, as upheld in cases like Rev. Rul. 79-166 denying losses from . The TCJA's disaster-only rule, extended permanently by OBBBA in 2025, reflects empirical data showing pre-2018 deductions often abused for non-catastrophic events, with IRS audits revealing over $1 billion in improper claims annually from 2010-2017, though it disadvantages victims outside disasters, as Chief Counsel Advice ( 202502011) denied Ponzi loss deductions absent declaration. Post-2025, permanent status eliminates sunset, but retains authority for ad hoc relief via waivers, as in the 2020 for qualified improvement property.

Miscellaneous Deductions: Evolution and Current Status

Miscellaneous itemized deductions, as defined under Section 67, historically included expenses such as unreimbursed employee business costs, fees for tax preparation and advice, investment advisory and custodial fees, and rentals, allowable only to the extent they exceeded 2% of (). These deductions emerged in the mid-20th century as a catch-all for personal and investment-related outlays not fitting primary categories like medical or charitable expenses, with early codification in the of 1954 allowing broad deductibility for ordinary and necessary expenses in producing income. The 2% AGI floor was imposed by the to curtail perceived abuses, such as claiming minor personal expenses, and to prioritize substantial economic impacts while broadening the tax base. Post-1986, these deductions faced periodic scrutiny for adding complexity and disproportionately benefiting higher-income taxpayers with activities, leading to temporary limitations like the Minimum Tax's disallowance of certain items. The (TCJA) of 2017 fundamentally altered their trajectory by suspending miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% floor for tax years 2018 through 2025, alongside nearly doubling the to encourage simpler filing and reduce itemization incentives. This suspension applied to most categories, though narrow exceptions persisted for impairments-related work expenses, certain performing artists, and fee-basis government officials. As of October 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), enacted earlier in the year, permanently eliminates these suspended miscellaneous itemized deductions, preventing their reversion post-2025 and codifying TCJA's simplification goals indefinitely. The change aligns with efforts to minimize burdens, as pre-TCJA miscellaneous claims required extensive substantiation and contributed to higher administrative costs for both taxpayers and the IRS. losses remain deductible as an adjustment to rather than a miscellaneous item, limited to winnings, but no broad revival of the category is anticipated.

Limitations and Restrictions

General Phase-outs and Floors

The Pease limitation, enacted in 1990 as a backdoor increase on high-income taxpayers, reduced the value of itemized deductions by 3% of the lesser of itemized deductions or the amount by which () exceeded a threshold (originally $100,000, inflation-adjusted thereafter), up to an 80% cap on the reduction. This effectively functioned as an income without raising marginal rates explicitly. The (TCJA) of 2017 suspended the Pease limitation entirely for tax years 2018 through 2025, eliminating any across-the-board phase-out of itemized deductions based on levels. As of tax year 2025, no general phase-out applies to the total of itemized deductions, allowing high-income taxpayers to claim their full eligible amounts without reduction under this rule. Floors represent minimum thresholds that qualifying expenses must exceed before becoming deductible, typically expressed as a percentage of to target deductions toward significant hardships rather than routine costs. For medical and dental expenses under Section 213, only the amount exceeding 7.5% of is deductible; this floor, lowered from 10% by the TCJA and made permanent, applies to unreimbursed costs like premiums, treatments, and not covered by . For example, a with $100,000 and $9,000 in qualifying medical expenses can deduct only $1,500 after the floor. Personal casualty, disaster, and theft losses under Section 165 face dual floors: $100 per casualty event (noninflation-adjusted) plus an aggregate 10% of threshold, but TCJA restricted deductibility to losses in federally declared areas for tax years 2018 through 2025, disallowing claims for non- events like localized thefts or accidents. Qualified losses attributable to events declared by the under the Stafford Act must still clear these hurdles after subtracting insurance reimbursements, with net losses aggregated before applying the AGI floor. The TCJA's disaster restriction, intended to limit revenue loss from infrequent claims, reduced the effective availability of this compared to pre-2018 law, where all sudden, unexpected losses qualified. Miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the pre-TCJA 2% AGI floor—such as unreimbursed employee expenses, tax preparation fees, and investment expenses under former Section 67—remain fully suspended through 2025, rendering the floor moot for these categories. Other itemized deductions, including home mortgage interest, state and local taxes (up to caps), and charitable contributions, generally lack AGI-based floors, though they interact with suspended phase-outs and specific limits elsewhere in the code. These mechanisms collectively narrow the itemized deduction benefit to extraordinary expenses, promoting fiscal discipline by excluding claims while preserving incentives for major investments like healthcare or . Absent legislative extension, the Pease phase-out and miscellaneous deduction suspension are scheduled to expire after 2025, reinstating pre-TCJA rules with inflation adjustments.

Specific Caps and Suspensions (e.g., SALT and Mortgage Limits)

The state and local (SALT) deduction, encompassing property, income, and sales es, faced a $10,000 annual cap ($5,000 for married filing separately) under the (TCJA) for years 2018 through 2025, aimed at broadening the base amid lower individual rates. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) of 2025, this cap rises to $40,000 for joint filers ($20,000 for separate) for years 2025 through 2029, with a 1% annual inflation adjustment thereafter until reverting to $10,000 in 2030; however, the deduction phases out by 30% of the excess over $500,000 modified ($250,000 for separate filers), limiting benefits for higher earners. Home mortgage interest deductions are restricted to interest on acquisition indebtedness up to $750,000 ($375,000 if married filing separately) for loans originated after December 15, 2017, down from the prior $1 million limit; pre-2018 mortgages retain the $1 million threshold if not refinanced beyond original principal. The OBBBA renders this $750,000 limit permanent beyond 2025, eliminating the scheduled reversion, while suspending deductions for interest unless proceeds fund home improvements, a TCJA provision extended indefinitely. Miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% floor—such as unreimbursed employee expenses, tax preparation fees, and investment advisory costs—remain suspended through 2025 per TCJA and are permanently eliminated under OBBBA, reflecting policy prioritization of simplification over niche incentives. Casualty and theft losses outside federally declared disasters are similarly suspended, confining deductibility to qualified events with a $100 per-event floor and 10% threshold. These measures, while curbing revenue losses estimated at over $1 trillion pre-TCJA, have prompted workarounds like pass-through entity elections in high-tax states, though their efficacy diminishes under tightened OBBBA rules.

Interaction with Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT)

The Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) requires adjustments to itemized deductions when calculating alternative minimum taxable income (AMTI), effectively disallowing or limiting certain preferences to ensure higher-income taxpayers pay a minimum level of tax despite substantial deductions under the regular system. These adjustments are reported on Form 6251, where taxpayers add back disallowed amounts to taxable income before applying AMT exemptions and rates of 26% or 28%. The standard deduction is unavailable for AMT purposes, compelling the use of adjusted itemized deductions or zero if they provide no net benefit after add-backs. State and local taxes (), including income taxes, real estate taxes, and personal property taxes claimed on Schedule A, are fully nondeductible under and must be added back to AMTI on line 2a of Form 6251. This provision, unchanged by the (TCJA) of 2017, disproportionately affects residents of high-tax jurisdictions, as the add-back can substantially increase AMTI and trigger or amplify liability. For tax year 2024, with deductions capped at $10,000 under regular tax ($5,000 for married filing separately), the add-back eliminates this benefit entirely for affected filers. Miscellaneous itemized deductions subject to the 2% of () floor—such as unreimbursed employee business expenses, preparation fees, and investment expenses—are added back in full for , though these deductions remain suspended for regular purposes through year 2025 under TCJA 11045. mortgage deductions face restrictions: on acquisition indebtedness for a principal or second residence remains allowable, but on indebtedness (up to $100,000) is deductible only if the proceeds were used to buy, build, or substantially improve the qualified residence; otherwise, it is added back. This rule, codified in 163(h)(4), persisted post-TCJA, which suspended deductibility for regular after December 31, 2017, unless meeting the qualified use test. Charitable contributions are generally deductible under without adjustment, subject to the same percentage limitations based on as under regular tax (e.g., up to 60% for cash to public charities in 2024). Medical and dental expenses are allowable to the extent they exceed 10% of , mirroring regular tax rules with no additional AMT add-back. Casualty, disaster, and theft losses, limited post-2017 to federally declared disasters, require no further adjustment for . In certain scenarios, taxpayers may strategically claim itemized deductions even if below the threshold to elevate regular tax liability, thereby reducing tentative minimum tax and overall tax (regular plus , minus allowable credits), as ignores the . This tactic is particularly relevant for 2025 filers nearing phaseouts, where TCJA-expanded exemptions ($85,700 for singles, $133,300 for joint filers, inflation-adjusted) shield many but not all high-deduction households. Post-2025 TCJA sunset, reinstated exemptions and broader deductibility could alter these dynamics, potentially increasing exposure absent legislative changes.

Above-the-Line vs. Below-the-Line Distinctions

Above-the-line deductions, also known as adjustments to income, are subtracted from an individual's gross income to determine adjusted gross income (AGI) on the first page of IRS Form 1040. These deductions are available to all taxpayers, irrespective of whether they elect the standard deduction or itemize expenses. By reducing AGI, they can enhance eligibility for income-based tax credits, phase-out thresholds for other deductions, and certain income-tested benefits, such as the premium tax credit or retirement savings contributions credit. For tax year 2024, common above-the-line deductions include up to $300 for educator expenses ($600 for joint filers), student loan interest up to $2,500 (phased out above certain AGI levels), and half of self-employment tax for business owners. In contrast, below-the-line deductions encompass itemized deductions reported on Schedule A of , which are subtracted from only after the taxpayer forgoes the . These apply solely to the approximately 10-15% of taxpayers whose itemized total exceeds the —$14,600 for single filers and $29,200 for married filing jointly in tax year 2024. Unlike above-the-line adjustments, itemized deductions do not alter , limiting their indirect benefits on other tax provisions, though they directly lower for those who qualify. The primary distinctions yield varying taxpayer impacts: above-the-line deductions provide broader accessibility and amplified value by influencing AGI-dependent calculations, potentially yielding higher effective tax savings even for non-itemizers. Below-the-line itemized deductions, however, favor higher-income households in high-tax or high-cost areas where expenses like mortgage interest or state taxes accumulate substantially, but they introduce compliance burdens such as recordkeeping and may be curtailed by caps, as seen in the $10,000 limit under the of 2017. Empirical analysis indicates that above-the-line adjustments disproportionately benefit middle-income earners pursuing or , while itemized deductions skew toward the top quintile, with the top 20% claiming over 90% of itemized benefits in recent years.
AspectAbove-the-Line DeductionsBelow-the-Line (Itemized) Deductions
Calculation StageBefore (Form 1040, line adjustments)After (Schedule A, subtracted from )
AvailabilityAll taxpayers, no itemizing requiredOnly if exceeding
Impact on AGIReduces directlyNo effect on
Examples (2024) interest ($2,500 max), educator expenses ($300 max) interest, (capped at $10,000)
Broader EffectsAffects credit eligibility, phase-outsPrimarily reduces for itemizers
This framework underscores policy incentives: above-the-line provisions encourage universal behaviors like skill development without favoring itemizers, whereas below-the-line structures can distort toward specific expenditures but risk underutilization due to the standard deduction's prevalence post-2017 reforms.

Economic Impacts and Behavioral Incentives

Encouragement of Productive Activities (Homeownership, Charity)

Itemized deductions for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions are intended to incentivize behaviors deemed productive for economic and social stability, such as acquiring owner-occupied and supporting private . The mortgage interest deduction, codified under Section 163(h), reduces the after-tax cost of home financing, theoretically promoting homeownership by subsidizing debt-financed purchases over renting or equity-based investments. Proponents argue this fosters wealth accumulation, community investment, and long-term economic productivity, as homeowners exhibit higher labor force participation and neighborhood stability compared to renters. However, empirical analyses indicate limited efficacy in boosting overall homeownership rates; a study using panel data from the Survey of Consumer Finances found the deduction correlates with a 10.9% to 18.4% increase in home sizes purchased but no significant association with the probability of ownership itself. Similarly, econometric models from the and others reveal that the subsidy primarily elevates housing consumption among upper-income households, inflating prices without proportionally expanding the homeowner base. In contrast, the charitable contribution deduction under Section 170 demonstrably stimulates giving, with meta-analyses of longitudinal data estimating a tax-price elasticity of -0.5 to -1.2, implying that a 10% reduction in the after-tax cost of donating increases contributions by 5% to 12%. This incentive preserves private initiative in funding education, health, arts, and poverty alleviation, circumventing bureaucratic allocation and enabling donor-directed support for causes with potentially higher marginal impact than government programs. Evidence from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which suspended deductions for non-itemizers and raised the standard deduction, supports causality: affected taxpayers reduced itemized giving by approximately 10-15%, with aggregate charitable receipts declining in line with elasticity predictions. Aggregate data from the Internal Revenue Service further show that in tax years with higher marginal rates—and thus greater deduction value—total reported contributions rise, underscoring the mechanism's role in amplifying philanthropy beyond baseline altruism. These effects align with first-principles expectations that lowering the effective price of socially beneficial acts expands their prevalence, though benefits skew toward higher-income donors who itemize and claim larger incentives.

Distributional Effects: Empirical Data on Beneficiaries

Itemized deductions in the U.S. federal system are claimed on approximately 10% of tax returns in tax year 2022, a decline from 31% in following the expansion of the under the (TCJA). This low overall rate reflects that most lower- and middle-income taxpayers find the more advantageous, as their itemizable expenses—such as mortgage interest, state and local taxes (), and charitable contributions—typically do not exceed it. Empirical data from the (IRS) and Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) indicate that itemization is concentrated among higher-income filers, who possess larger qualifying expenses and face higher marginal tax rates, amplifying the deduction's value. Itemization rates rise sharply with adjusted gross income (AGI). In tax year 2022, only 2% of returns with AGI under $30,000 itemized, compared to 10% for AGI between $50,000 and $100,000 and 66% for AGI over $500,000. JCT projections for 2022 similarly show 14% itemization among filers with incomes of $50,000 to $80,000, escalating to nearly 40% for those over $200,000 and approaching 90% for the top 1% (over $1 million). Average deduction amounts further skew benefits upward: filers with AGI under $30,000 averaged about $28,000 in itemized deductions (primarily medical expenses), while those over $500,000 averaged $147,000 (driven by charitable contributions). IRS data for tax year 2021 confirm this pattern, with itemized deductions claimed on just 9.3% of returns but totaling over $1 trillion, disproportionately from higher AGI brackets due to scaled expenses like property taxes on high-value homes and substantial donations. The distributional impact favors upper-income groups, as they claim the bulk of major deduction categories. Taxpayers with AGI over $200,000 accounted for 60% of SALT deductions, 67% of mortgage interest deductions, and 88% of charitable contribution deductions in 2022 JCT estimates. This concentration arises because high earners in high-tax states incur larger SALT liabilities, own more expensive mortgaged properties, and donate greater sums, often from . The tax savings from these deductions—equal to the deduction amount multiplied by the marginal rate—are thus higher for top brackets (up to 37%), meaning the top 20% of earners capture most of the $100+ billion annual expenditure value, per IRS aggregates. Lower-income filers rarely benefit substantially, as few exceed the threshold after TCJA adjustments, and their lower rates reduce any savings.
AGI RangeItemization Rate (2022)Share of Key Deductions (> $200k )
Under $30,0002%N/A (minimal claims)
$50,000–$100,00010%N/A
Over $500,00066%60% (), 88% ()
Post-TCJA caps on SALT ($10,000) and mortgage interest further shifted benefits toward non-SALT categories like charity, which remain uncapped and favor the wealthy, as evidenced by 2021 IRS data showing charitable deductions comprising 33% of total itemized amounts despite the overall drop in filers. These patterns hold across IRS Statistics of Income (SOI) tables, underscoring that itemized deductions function as a targeted subsidy for high-expense lifestyles prevalent among upper-income households.

Effects on Tax Base, Revenue, and Compliance Costs

Itemized deductions narrow the tax base by permitting the exclusion of specific expenditures—such as mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable contributions—from prior to applying rates, thereby taxing a smaller portion of economic than a comprehensive base would. This base-narrowing effect requires higher statutory rates to generate the same revenue, as observed in analyses of U.S. where deductions and exclusions collectively reduce the effective base subject to taxation. Such narrowing can distort , encouraging spending on deduction-favored activities over others with higher productive value. The revenue implications are substantial, with the primary itemized deductions for state and local es, home mortgage interest, and charitable giving projected to cost the federal government around $118 billion in forgone revenue for 2024. These expenditures, classified as deviations from a reference base of total income, effectively subsidize certain behaviors at the expense of overall receipts, contributing to deficits unless offset by rate increases or spending cuts. Compliance costs rise with itemization due to the necessity of documenting and reporting itemized expenses on Schedule A of , involving greater time for record-keeping, substantiation, and potential professional assistance than the fixed . Empirical research quantifies these as transactions costs that dissuade some taxpayers from itemizing even when it would minimize , with studies estimating elevated burdens for complex returns including itemized schedules. The 2017 mitigated this by elevating the standard deduction, slashing the itemizer share from roughly 30% to 10% of filers and thereby reducing aggregate filing time and costs across the population. This shift lowered IRS processing demands while simplifying compliance for non-itemizers, though high-deductible taxpayers retained elevated burdens.

Controversies and Policy Debates

Claims of Inequity and Regressivity: Data and Rebuttals

Critics contend that itemized deductions exacerbate inequity by disproportionately benefiting higher-income taxpayers, who claim the vast majority of total deductions despite representing a small fraction of filers. In year 2022, while only about 10 percent of all individual returns itemized deductions, nearly two-thirds of returns with (AGI) exceeding $500,000 did so, according to data from the Urban-Brookings analyzing IRS statistics. Higher-income households also realize larger absolute savings; for instance, the top 20 percent of earners by AGI accounted for over 70 percent of the value of itemized deductions in recent pre-TCJA analyses, a pattern persisting post-reform due to scaled expenses like and taxes. These benefits are deemed regressive because, under a rate structure, each dollar deducted reduces by a greater amount for those in higher brackets—up to 37 percent for top earners versus 10-12 percent for lower ones—effectively subsidizing high-income activities at public expense. Analyses from on Budget and Priorities describe expenditures like itemized deductions as overall regressive, with the top quintile capturing 90 percent or more of benefits from provisions such as , thereby undermining the code's progressivity by shifting burden downward relative to taxation. Rebuttals emphasize that the federal remains markedly even after deductions, as high earners shoulder the bulk of . In 2022, the top 1 percent of taxpayers—those with over approximately $682,000—earned 26.3 percent of total but paid 40.4 percent of all individual es, per IRS data summarized by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation; the bottom 50 percent paid just 3 percent. Itemized deductions do not alter this, as they apply only to filers exceeding the threshold, which shields 87-90 percent of returns (mostly lower- and middle-income) from itemizing altogether. Proponents further argue that apparent regressivity overlooks causal incentives: deductions align taxation with economic reality by encouraging homeownership, which builds middle-class wealth and stabilizes communities, and charitable contributions, which fund often aiding lower-income groups. indicates the charitable deduction boosts giving by 25-50 percent, per econometric studies, generating broader welfare gains that offset distributional skew; without it, donations could decline sharply, harming nonprofits reliant on high-donor support. The post-2017 doubling of the curbed overuse, limiting itemizing to genuine high-expense cases and preserving progressivity without eliminating incentives, as confirmed by assessments showing sustained overall code progressivity.

Simplification Arguments vs. Incentive Preservation

Proponents of tax simplification argue that itemized deductions contribute significantly to the complexity of the U.S. individual system, imposing substantial compliance burdens on taxpayers who must track, document, and substantiate multiple categories of expenses such as mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable contributions. Estimates indicate that the time and resources devoted to itemizing exceed those for claiming the , with overall U.S. tax compliance costs reaching approximately $200 billion annually in recent years, a portion attributable to the intricacies of deduction calculations and audits. The demonstrated this principle by broadening the tax base through limitations on certain deductions and a substantial increase in the , which reduced the proportion of itemizers and simplified filing for many households without eliminating key incentives entirely. Advocates, including economists at the , contend that replacing itemized deductions with a higher would enable lower marginal tax rates across brackets, minimizing distortions while generating revenue—potentially $1 trillion over a from full elimination—thus aligning the more closely with a neutral consumption or income base. Opponents of wholesale elimination emphasize the role of itemized deductions in preserving behavioral incentives for activities deemed economically or socially beneficial, such as homeownership and charitable giving, arguing that their removal would alter choices in ways that undermine these goals. For instance, the mortgage interest deduction subsidizes investment, with empirical analyses of the 1986 reform showing subsequent declines in certain housing-related expenditures, though overall homeownership rates remained stable due to offsetting factors like lower interest rates. Similarly, the charitable contribution deduction exhibits a price elasticity of response estimated at -0.5 to -1.0 in meta-analyses of over 50 studies, indicating that a 10% increase in the after-tax cost of giving (via reduced deductibility) leads to a 5-10% drop in donations, primarily among higher-income itemizers who account for the majority of total contributions. The state and local tax (SALT) deduction, while criticized for subsidizing high-tax jurisdictions, is defended as preventing and encouraging , with post-2017 caps on SALT leading to observable shifts in interstate migration patterns favoring lower-tax states. This tension manifests in policy debates where simplification gains traction during reform efforts—such as the 2017 TCJA, which nearly doubled the and halved the share of itemizers to about 10%—yet faces resistance from stakeholders preserving incentives, as evidenced by ongoing efforts to repeal SALT caps amid claims of distorted economic decisions. Empirical evidence suggests that while deductions do induce targeted behaviors, their net societal value depends on causal assessments: for , the crowds in private giving but at a cost exceeding marginal benefits in some models; for , it inflates prices more than rates, per longitudinal . proposals thus often seek compromises, like floors or phase-outs, to balance reduced with retained incentives, though academic sources favoring elimination may underweight real-world elasticities due to ideological preferences for progressivity over behavioral nudges.

Empirical Evidence on Effectiveness and Reform Proposals

Empirical analyses indicate that the charitable contribution increases giving, with estimated tax-price elasticities typically ranging from -0.5 to -1.0, implying that a 10% reduction in the after-tax cost of donating leads to a 5-10% increase in contributions among itemizers. However, this response is concentrated among higher-income households, and the 's net social benefit is debated due to high revenue costs—approximately $20-30 billion annually forgone—relative to the induced giving, as much of the increase substitutes for donations that would occur absent . The 2017 (TCJA) provisions reducing itemization rates, such as the cap, empirically decreased charitable giving by 1-4% in affected counties, confirming sensitivity to deduction availability but highlighting how deduction limits can curb excess subsidization without fully eliminating . For the (MID), evidence shows negligible impact on overall homeownership rates, with U.S. ownership stable around 65% despite the subsidy's presence since , as marginal homeowners rarely itemize or benefit sufficiently to alter tenure decisions. Instead, the deduction primarily boosts housing consumption among existing owners, increasing average home sizes by 5-15% and capitalizing into higher prices—estimated at 10-20% elevation in high-tax areas—effectively transferring benefits to sellers and inflating costs for non-itemizers like renters and low-income buyers. Cross-national comparisons reinforce this, finding no correlation between MID-like subsidies and ownership rates across countries, suggesting the policy subsidizes larger homes for affluent households (top quintile captures 80-90% of benefits) rather than broad access. Aggregate cost-benefit assessments reveal itemized deductions generate $1.2-1.5 trillion in annual revenue forgone, with behavioral responses offsetting only 15-25% of that through induced activities, yielding low bang-for-buck ratios compared to direct spending programs. Compliance burdens further erode efficiency, as 20-30% of eligible taxpayers forgo itemizing due to documentation and time costs estimated at $100-200 per filer. The SALT deduction, in particular, encourages higher state taxes without commensurate local public good enhancements, as capitalization into property values offsets much of the federal subsidy. Reform proposals emphasize simplification and equity, including full elimination of itemized deductions paired with further standard deduction expansion, projected to raise $2-3 trillion over a decade while reducing distortions and compliance costs by 10-20%. Alternatives advocate converting deductions to flat credits (e.g., 15% rate) to preserve incentives for middle-income activities like charity while curbing regressive upside for high earners, potentially broadening the base without TCJA-style caps that expire in 2025. Policymakers have also floated targeted credits replacing MID and charity deductions, focusing on low-income homebuyers or matching grants, to achieve similar behavioral goals at lower fiscal cost, as evidenced by pilot programs showing higher efficacy than open-ended subsidies. These draw from CBO analyses underscoring that deduction limits, as in TCJA, minimally disrupt incentives but substantially boost revenue neutrality for rate cuts or deficit reduction.

References

  1. [1]
    About Schedule A (Form 1040), Itemized Deductions - IRS
    Information about Schedule A (Form 1040), Itemized Deductions, including recent updates, related forms, and instructions on how to file.
  2. [2]
    [PDF] Itemized Deductions - IRS
    Itemized deductions are subtractions from a taxpayer's Adjusted Gross. Income (AGI) that reduce the amount of income that is taxed. Most taxpayers have a choice ...
  3. [3]
    26 U.S. Code Subtitle A Chapter 1 Subchapter B Part VI
    26 U.S. Code Subtitle A Chapter 1 Subchapter B Part VI - ITEMIZED DEDUCTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS AND CORPORATIONS · § 161. Allowance of deductions · § 162. Trade or ...161. Allowance of deductions · Trade or business expenses · 163. Interest
  4. [4]
    Tax basics: Understanding the difference between standard ... - IRS
    Itemized deductions · State and local income or sales taxes. · Real estate and personal property taxes. · Home mortgage interest. · Personal casualty and theft ...
  5. [5]
    Instructions for Schedule A (2024) | Internal Revenue Service
    If you itemize, you can deduct a part of your medical and dental expenses, and amounts you paid for certain taxes, interest, contributions, and other expenses. ...
  6. [6]
    The difference between standard and itemized deductions ... - IRS
    Itemized deductions. Some taxpayers choose to itemize their deductions if their allowable itemized deductions total is greater than their standard deduction.
  7. [7]
    Topic no. 551, Standard deduction | Internal Revenue Service
    The standard deduction is a specific dollar amount that reduces the amount of income on which you're taxed.
  8. [8]
    26 U.S. Code § 68 - Overall limitation on itemized deductions
    26 U.S. Code § 68 - Overall limitation on itemized deductions ; Effective Date of 2025 Amendment. Pub. L. 119–21, title VII, § 70111(c) · July 4, 2025 · 139 Stat.
  9. [9]
    Topic no. 501, Should I itemize? | Internal Revenue Service
    Sep 19, 2025 · Itemized deductions, subject to certain dollar limitations, include amounts you paid, during the taxable year, for state and local income or ...
  10. [10]
    itemized deductions | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
    Itemized deductions are referred to as "below-the-line" deductions because they are deducted after the taxpayer determines AGI.Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  11. [11]
    State Itemized Deductions: Surveying the Landscape, Exploring ...
    Feb 5, 2020 · The two main rationales for offering an itemized deduction for real property taxes paid are to reduce the cost of property taxes for homeowners ...
  12. [12]
    Itemized Deduction Definition | TaxEDU Glossary - Tax Foundation
    Itemized Deduction ... Itemized deductions allow individuals to subtract designated expenses from their taxable income and can be claimed in lieu of the standard ...
  13. [13]
    What are itemized deductions and who claims them?
    Taxpayers can either take a standard deduction or itemize their deductions to reduce the taxable income on their federal income tax return.
  14. [14]
    What Are Itemized Tax Deductions? Definition and Impact on Taxes
    An itemized deduction is an expense that can be subtracted from your adjusted gross income (AGI) to reduce your taxable income and lower the amount of taxes ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Restrictions on Itemized Tax Deductions: Policy Options and Analysis
    Jan 1, 2013 · These provisions might be contained in the form of an itemized deduction for reasons of simplifying tax compliance and administration, so that ...
  16. [16]
    One, Big, Beautiful Bill provisions | Internal Revenue Service
    For single taxpayers and married individuals filing separately, the standard deduction for 2025 is $15,750, and for heads of households, the standard deduction ...<|separator|>
  17. [17]
    2025 Tax Brackets and Federal Income Tax Rates | Tax Foundation
    Oct 22, 2024 · Table 2. 2025 Standard Deduction ; Single, $15,000 ; Married Filing Jointly, $30,000 ; Head of Household, $22,500 ...
  18. [18]
    Can I itemize deductions on my 2025 tax return? - TaxSlayer Support
    In 2025, the standard deduction is $15,750 for single filers and $31,500 for married filing joint taxpayers.
  19. [19]
    Itemized deductions, standard deduction | Internal Revenue Service
    Feb 6, 2025 · You may be able to claim itemized deductions on a separate return for certain expenses that you paid separately or jointly with your spouse.Other deduction questions · Real estate (taxes, mortgage...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  20. [20]
    [PDF] 2024 Instructions for Schedule A - IRS
    If you itemize, you can deduct a part of your medical and dental expenses, and amounts you paid for certain taxes, interest, contributions, and other expenses. ...<|separator|>
  21. [21]
    What are Itemized Tax Deductions? - TurboTax Tax Tips & Videos
    Jul 31, 2025 · Itemized deductions include a range of expenses that are only deductible when you choose to itemize. Common expenses include:
  22. [22]
  23. [23]
    16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Federal Income Tax (1913)
    Sep 13, 2022 · The 16th Amendment, ratified in 1913, established Congress's power to impose a federal income tax, settling how to tax income.
  24. [24]
    [PDF] Personal Exemptions and Individual Income Tax Rates, 1913-2002
    Deductions were allowed for “personal” interest, Federal excise taxes, taxes paid to State and local governments, casualty or theft losses, and business ...
  25. [25]
    Tax History: Original Intent and the Revenue Act of 1913 - Tax Notes
    Sep 30, 2013 · In 1913 Congress enacted a top rate of 7 percent and a high exemption that spared all but 2 percent of households entirely. But just five years ...
  26. [26]
    The history of income tax's standard deduction is more interesting ...
    May 9, 2017 · In 1944, the income tax system was getting pretty complex, so Congress created the standard deduction. Above, piles of tax forms are on display ...
  27. [27]
    History of Federal Income Tax Rates: 1913 - 2025
    The highest income tax rate jumped from 15 percent in 1916 to 67 percent in 1917 to 77 percent in 1918. War is expensive. After the war, federal income tax ...
  28. [28]
    Historical Income Tax Rates and Brackets, 1862-2025
    Aug 15, 2025 · The Federal Income Tax was established in 1913 with the ratification of the 16th Amendment. Though barely 100 years old, individual income ...
  29. [29]
    CRS Report on History and Rationale of Medical Expense Deduction
    The primary purpose was to ameliorate the higher World War II taxes on individuals while maintaining a high level of public health. The deduction was changed ...
  30. [30]
    Historical Highlights of the IRS | Internal Revenue Service
    Sep 13, 2025 · 1944 - Congress passed the Individual Income Tax Act, which created the standard deductions on Form 1040. 1952 - President Truman proposed his ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1954 - GovInfo
    To retdse the internal revenue laws of the United States. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United.
  32. [32]
    Deduct This: The History of the Medical Expenses Deduction - Forbes
    Jun 20, 2011 · As part of the 1954 changes, the threshold for claiming expenses was lowered to 3% and the cap on the expenses was doubled. Ten years later ...
  33. [33]
    How does the federal income tax deduction for state and local taxes ...
    Taxpayers who itemize deductions on their federal income tax returns can deduct state and local taxes--specifically property taxes plus either income taxes or ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] ninety Years of Individual Income and tax Statistics, 1916-2005 - IRS
    1960 - Liberalization of allowable medical and dental expense deductions for taxpayers' parents. 1963 - Introduction of a deduction for contributions to a self ...
  35. [35]
    The rise and fall of itemized deductions - Tax Policy Center
    Aug 10, 2016 · To reduce their taxable income, individual taxpayers have the option to claim a standard deduction or itemize deductions. Only 30 percent of ...
  36. [36]
    General Explanation of the Tax Reform Act of 1976 - Tax Notes
    The Act makes permanent $4 billion of individual tax reductions. These result from the increases in the standard deduction. The Act extends through 1977 the ...Missing: 1970s | Show results with:1970s
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Evolution of the Federal Tax System: 1954-1983
    Jul 3, 1983 · Because of the structure of the tax, itemized deductions such as contributions, mortgage interest, and state income and property taxes would ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] Standard, Itemized, and Total Deductions Reported on Individual ...
    Apr 29, 2024 · Standard, Itemized, and Total Deductions Reported on Individual Income Tax Returns,. Tax Years 1950-2021. SOURCES: (1950-2000) IRS, Statistics ...
  39. [39]
    H.R.3838 - 99th Congress (1985-1986): Tax Reform Act of 1986
    Provides that the specified portion by which the deduction for losses incurred is reduced under such provisions shall be 15 percent for all taxable years ...
  40. [40]
    General Explanation of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 - Tax Notes
    May 4, 1987 · As part of the approach of the Act to reduce tax rates through base-broadening, the Act disallows the itemized deductions for State and local ...
  41. [41]
    [PDF] General explanation of the Tax Reform Act of 1986
    The Tax Reform Act of 1986 includes individual income tax, capital cost, capital gains, corporate taxation, minimum tax, and foreign tax provisions.
  42. [42]
    [PDF] Summary of H.R. 3838 (Tax Reform Act of 1986) as passed by the ...
    Jun 24, 1986 · This document summarizes the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (HR 3838) as passed by the Senate, including individual income tax provisions, and a title- ...
  43. [43]
    [PDF] OTA Paper 60 - The Tax Expenditure Budget Before and After the ...
    The 1986 Act took many steps forward in broadening the tax base. and SI few steps backward. The Act expanded the scope of I 1 tax expenditures and created 9 ...
  44. [44]
    The PEP and Pease Provisions of the Federal Individual Income Tax
    Jun 28, 2006 · This report examines these two tax provisions and issues raised by their repeal. Personal Exemption Phaseout (PEP) Prior to OBRA90, provisions ...
  45. [45]
    The Pease Limitation on Itemized Deductions Is Really a Surtax
    Oct 16, 2014 · It reduces households' taxable incomes and, consequently, their total taxes paid. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) reduced the amount of ...
  46. [46]
    The Limitation on Itemized Deductions in H.R. 1, the One Big ...
    Jun 16, 2025 · First, itemized deduction amounts are proportional to certain expenses, most notably state and local tax payments, charitable contributions, and ...
  47. [47]
  48. [48]
    How did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act change personal taxes?
    TCJA limited the itemized deduction for total state and local taxes to $10,000 annually, for both single and joint filers, and did not index that limit for ...
  49. [49]
    How did the TCJA and OBBBA change the standard deduction and ...
    The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (2017) nearly doubled the standard deduction and eliminated or restricted many itemized deductions in 2018 through 2025. It also ...
  50. [50]
    Expiring Provisions in the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (TCJA, P.L. 115-97)
    Nov 13, 2024 · Taxpayers who itemize their deductions can deduct up to $10,000 in state and local income, sales (in lieu of income), and property taxes, as ...Child tax credit · State and local tax (SALT... · Overall limitation on itemized...
  51. [51]
    Selected Issues in Tax Policy: The Mortgage Interest Deduction
    Oct 22, 2024 · The TCJA also temporarily increased the standard deduction, which reduced the number of taxpayers who claim itemized deductions generally, ...
  52. [52]
    The Mortgage Interest Deduction: Options for Reform
    Jun 6, 2025 · We show that increasing the SALT deduction limitation from $10,000 to $40,000 would almost double the tax code's subsidy for mortgage interest.
  53. [53]
    Individuals | Internal Revenue Service
    May 29, 2025 · Eliminating most miscellaneous itemized deductions such as: Deductions for employee business expenses; Tax preparation fees; Investment expenses ...
  54. [54]
    How did the TCJA affect incentives for charitable giving?
    Overall, the TCJA reduced the marginal tax benefit of giving to charity by more than 30 percent, raising the after-tax cost of donating by about 7 percent.Missing: casualty losses
  55. [55]
    One Big Beautiful Bill tax changes: How and when they impact you
    ### Impacts of OBBBA on Itemized Deductions
  56. [56]
    One Big Beautiful Bill Act Tax Cuts | Charles Schwab
    Oct 15, 2025 · The One Big Beautiful Bill Act preserves and expands many of the tax breaks that were due to expire at the end of this year.Individual Taxpayer Changes · Itemized Deductions · Investment And Business...
  57. [57]
    Budget Reconciliation: Tracking the 2025 Trump Tax Cuts
    On July 4, 2025: We estimate the One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed into law will increase long-run GDP by 1.2 percent and reduce federal tax revenue by $5.0 ...Tax Calculator · No Tax on Tips · Trump Tariffs Threaten to... · Overtime Pay
  58. [58]
    26 U.S. Code § 213 - Medical, dental, etc., expenses
    There shall be allowed as a deduction the expenses paid during the taxable year, not compensated for by insurance or otherwise, for medical care of the ...
  59. [59]
    Publication 502 (2024), Medical and Dental Expenses - IRS
    Dec 12, 2024 · Generally, you can deduct on Schedule A (Form 1040) only the amount of your medical and dental expenses that is more than 7.5% of your AGI.Introduction · What Expenses Can You... · How Much of the Expenses...
  60. [60]
    Topic no. 502, Medical and dental expenses - IRS
    Sep 19, 2025 · You may be able to deduct the medical and dental expenses you paid for yourself, your spouse, and your dependents during the taxable year.About Publication 502 · Can I deduct my medical and · Frequently asked questions
  61. [61]
    Topic no. 503, Deductible taxes | Internal Revenue Service
    Sep 12, 2025 · You may deduct as an itemized deduction, state and local income taxes withheld from your wages during the year (as reported on your Form W-2, ...
  62. [62]
    State and Local Tax (SALT) Deduction | TaxEDU Glossary
    The state and local tax (SALT) deduction permits taxpayers who itemize when filing federal taxes to deduct certain taxes paid to state and local governments.
  63. [63]
    How SALT May Shake Up the 2025 Tax Debate
    Aug 9, 2024 · It was originally more expansive—allowing taxpayers to deduct more kinds of state and local taxes and fees—but laws in 1964, 1978, and 1986 ...
  64. [64]
    Present At The Creation: A Short History Of The SALT Deduction
    Sep 15, 2025 · When Congress created the first national income tax in 1861, lawmakers allowed a deduction for “all national, state, or local taxes assessed ...
  65. [65]
    The SALT Cap: Overview and Analysis - Congress.gov
    Apr 3, 2025 · The SALT cap limits state and local tax deductions to $5,000 for married couples filing separately and $10,000 for others, established by the ...<|separator|>
  66. [66]
    SALT Deduction Cap Increase Proposal: Details & Analysis
    May 20, 2025 · That year, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) limited the deductible total of state and local taxes to $10,000 for tax years 2018 through 2025 to ...
  67. [67]
  68. [68]
    How Does the 2025 Tax Law Change the SALT Deduction?
    Jun 9, 2025 · OBBB increases the standard deduction by $750 for single taxpayers and $1,500 for married taxpayers in 2025, adjusting for inflation after 2025.
  69. [69]
    How the new SALT deduction cap could affect your taxes | Fidelity
    Aug 13, 2025 · The SALT deduction cap will quadruple to $40,000 through tax-year 2029. · Higher earners in high-tax states will benefit most, particularly those ...Missing: miscellaneous | Show results with:miscellaneous
  70. [70]
    Publication 936 (2024), Home Mortgage Interest Deduction - IRS
    You can deduct home mortgage interest on the first $750,000 ($375,000 if married filing separately) of indebtedness. However, higher limitations ($1 million ($ ...Qualified Home · Form 1098, Mortgage Interest... · Special Rule for Tenant...
  71. [71]
    Mortgage Interest Deduction - National Association of REALTORS®
    The Act repealed the deduction for interest paid on home equity debt through 12/31/2025. Interest is still deductible on home equity loans (or second mortgages) ...
  72. [72]
    Mortgage Interest Deduction | TaxEDU Glossary - Tax Foundation
    The current $750,000 limitation was introduced as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and will revert to the old limitation of $1 million after 2025.
  73. [73]
  74. [74]
    One Big Beautiful Bill Act: Key Changes in the TCJA Extension
    Jul 4, 2025 · The new law made permanent TCJA provisions that limit home mortgage interest deductions to $750,000 for new borrowing, and no deductions are ...<|separator|>
  75. [75]
    See if you qualify for the mortgage interest deduction worth thousands
    Feb 28, 2025 · Most homeowners who pay interest on a home loan can use the mortgage interest deduction. There's no income limit to qualify, but how much you can deduct ...
  76. [76]
    The Charitable Deduction for Individuals: A Brief Legislative History
    Jun 26, 2020 · The Tax Reform of 1969 (P.L. 91-172) made several modifications to the charitable deduction, including increasing the maximum AGI limits, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  77. [77]
    Charitable contribution deductions | Internal Revenue Service
    May 30, 2025 · Generally, you may deduct up to 50 percent of your adjusted gross income, but 20 percent and 30 percent limitations apply in some cases.
  78. [78]
    [PDF] A History of the tax-exempt Sector: An SOI Perspective - IRS
    The Revenue Act of 1917 established, for the first time, an individual income tax deduction for contributions made to tax-exempt charitable organi- zations. ...
  79. [79]
  80. [80]
    One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB): Impact on charitable giving
    Jul 4, 2025 · The new legislation caps the tax benefits of itemized charitable deductions at 35%, even for those in the 37% marginal tax bracket. In other ...
  81. [81]
    2025 is Now a Strategic Year for Charitable Giving | Jones Walker LLP
    Jul 19, 2025 · For the first time in years, non-itemizers can claim a charitable deduction: up to $1,000 for single filers or $2,000 for married couples filing ...Missing: US | Show results with:US
  82. [82]
    Tax Incentives for Charitable Giving: New Findings from the TCJA
    Jul 26, 2024 · Basic theory and our empirical results suggest heterogeneous effects for taxpayers with different amounts of itemizable expenses. Overall ...
  83. [83]
    Tax law change caused US charitable giving to drop by about $20 ...
    Jul 29, 2024 · A new study by researchers at Indiana University and the University of Notre Dame finds that US charitable giving fell by about $20 billion in 2018.<|control11|><|separator|>
  84. [84]
    Paying the 2025 Tax Bill: Charitable Deductions
    Dec 5, 2024 · Of the 12 million tax returns that claimed the charitable deduction, two-thirds reported income of $100,000 or more. These taxpayers claimed 90% ...
  85. [85]
    How Tax Policy Affects Charitable Giving - Philanthropy Roundtable
    Jun 5, 2024 · From a higher level, the broader economic impact of higher taxes means a reduced capital stock, lower productivity, and subsequently less ...
  86. [86]
    Publication 547 (2024), Casualties, Disasters, and Thefts - IRS
    Feb 11, 2025 · Personal casualty and theft losses attributable to a federally declared disaster are subject to the $100 per casualty and 10% of your adjusted gross income ( ...
  87. [87]
    26 U.S. Code § 165 - Losses | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
    There shall be allowed as a deduction any loss sustained during the taxable year and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise.
  88. [88]
    Topic no. 515, Casualty, disaster, and theft losses - IRS
    For tax years 2018 through 2025, personal casualty losses are otherwise not deductible. A theft loss deduction is generally available, however, if the loss is ...About Publication 547... · About Publication 536, Net... · About Publication 584...
  89. [89]
    Theft Loss Deductions Under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017
    May 14, 2025 · The TCJA modified IRC section 165 by adding a new subsection which significantly limited personal casualty and theft loss deductions.
  90. [90]
    [PDF] 2024 Publication 547 - IRS
    For tax years 2018 through 2025, if you are an individual, casualty and theft losses of personal-use property are deductible only if the losses are attributable ...
  91. [91]
    The One Big Beautiful Bill Breakdown: Natural Disasters and Theft ...
    Aug 4, 2025 · The “qualified” disaster designation allows taxpayers to add their casualty loss to the standard deduction and removes the 10% AGI limitation.
  92. [92]
    [PDF] 2024 Instructions for Form 4684 - IRS
    Form 4684 is for reporting casualty and theft losses, deductible for federally declared disasters, with extended relief for certain disasters.
  93. [93]
    Casualty Loss Deductions Update | 10% AGI Rule | $100 Rule Limit
    Aug 18, 2025 · The limitation that only losses from declared disasters are deductible is now permanent. While the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) had set this ...
  94. [94]
    [PDF] The Nonbusiness Casualty Loss Deduction - Congress.gov
    Jul 24, 2025 · The TCJA limited the deduction to casualties and thefts resulting from federally declared disasters from 2018 through 2025. It also raised the ...
  95. [95]
    IRS Chief Counsel Advice on Theft Loss Deductions for Scam ...
    Apr 24, 2025 · For tax years 2018 through 2025, personal casualty and theft losses are deductible only if they arise from a federally declared disaster. As a ...
  96. [96]
  97. [97]
    Publication 529 (12/2020), Miscellaneous Deductions - IRS
    Miscellaneous itemized deductions are those deductions that would have been subject to the 2%-of-adjusted-gross-income (AGI) limitation. You can still claim ...<|separator|>
  98. [98]
    [PDF] PRESENT LAW AND HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE FEDERAL ...
    Dec 1, 2010 · 6 Itemized deductions for State and local income taxes expire at the end of 2010. 7 The Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (Pub. L. No. 97-34). 8 ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  99. [99]
    Deduct This: History of the Tax Attorney's Fees Deduction - Forbes
    Jun 25, 2011 · Congress took the Treasury up on some of its advice and did impose a floor on miscellaneous deductions when it enacted the Tax Reform Act of ...
  100. [100]
    [PDF] The Strange and Curious Tax Treatment of Investment Expenses
    May 6, 2022 · The Code classifies investment expenses as “miscellaneous itemized deductions[,]”31 a classification that bears significant limitations. This ...
  101. [101]
    Miscellaneous Itemized Deductions: What's No Longer Tax Deductible
    Sep 22, 2025 · The TCJA suspended most miscellaneous itemized deductions for tax years 2018 through 2025, and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act made the ...
  102. [102]
    How Did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act Simplify the Tax Code?
    Aug 7, 2024 · The TCJA simplified tax filing through two main channels: encouraging taxpayers to take the standard deduction.Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution
  103. [103]
    IRS releases tax inflation adjustments for tax year 2026, including ...
    Oct 9, 2025 · For single taxpayers and married individuals filing separately, the standard deduction for 2025 is $15,750, and for heads of households, the ...
  104. [104]
    Major Changes to Individual and Estate Tax Law - Moss Adams
    Jul 23, 2025 · Under the TCJA, the Pease limitation was temporarily suspended through 2025 and there was no overall limit on itemized deductions.
  105. [105]
    [PDF] Rev. Proc. 2024-40: Inflation adjustments for 2025, individual ...
    For 2025, as in 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019 and 2018, there is no limitation on itemized deductions (referred to as the “Pease” limitation under prior ...
  106. [106]
    How Itemized Deductions Work - TaxAct Blog
    Sep 3, 2025 · Floors set a minimum amount at which you can start deducting certain expenses, such as medical expenses over 7.5% of AGI. That 7.5% is the floor ...
  107. [107]
    The Nonbusiness Casualty Loss Deduction - Congress.gov
    Jul 24, 2025 · Under permanent law, taxpayers can only deduct such losses to the extent each loss exceeds $100, and their total exceeds 10% of the taxpayer's ...Missing: medical | Show results with:medical
  108. [108]
    What Happens if TCJA Expires in 2025? - Weaver
    Jan 22, 2025 · The deduction for qualified business income is scheduled to expire December 31, 2025.
  109. [109]
    FAQ: The One Big Beautiful Bill, Explained - Tax Foundation
    Jul 23, 2025 · The law temporarily provides a more generous deduction cap for state and local taxes (SALT), increasing the cap from $10,000 to $40,000 from ...
  110. [110]
    Mortgage Interest Deduction Limits for 2025: What Changed After ...
    Aug 20, 2025 · Wondering about mortgage interest deductions in 2025? The new tax law locks in a $750000 cap, replacing the old $1M limit.
  111. [111]
    Instructions for Form 6251 (2024) | Internal Revenue Service
    If you owe AMT, you may be able to lower your total tax (regular tax plus AMT) by claiming itemized deductions on Form 1040 or 1040-SR, even if your total ...
  112. [112]
    [PDF] Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax - Taxpayer Advocate Service
    Common itemized deductions that must be added back to income include, but are not limited to: state and local taxes, real estate and personal property taxes, ...
  113. [113]
    [PDF] The Alternative Minimum Tax - Taxpayer Advocate Service - IRS
    Exclusion items are adjustments and tax preference items that result in the permanent disallowance of certain tax benefits such as the standard deduction, ...
  114. [114]
    Forcing Itemized Deductions Can Reduce the Alternative Minimum ...
    Nov 13, 2024 · Forcing itemized deductions increases the regular tax but reduces the AMT tax. This presents a complicated moving target for the tax practitioner.
  115. [115]
    Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) Planning After TCJA Sunset
    Oct 16, 2024 · Adjustments to 'regular' taxable income are made by adding back specific deductions that are reduced or eliminated by the AMT. These include ...
  116. [116]
    Above-The-Line Deductions: What Can You Claim? - TaxSlayer
    Aug 26, 2025 · Adjustments to income are often referred to as above-the-line deductions because of their physical placement on IRS Form 1040.
  117. [117]
    Reduce Your Taxable Income With Above-the-Line Deductions
    Some are above the line while others are below the line. Above-the-line deductions are used to calculate your adjusted gross income, which is the line. These ...Tax Deductions · Above-the-Line Deductions · Most Common · OthersMissing: code | Show results with:code
  118. [118]
    Tax Deductions: What Are They, Different Types, and More - TurboTax
    Aug 3, 2025 · “Above-the-line” deductions affect your adjusted gross income, but itemized deductions don't. There are even a number of tax deductions that are ...<|separator|>
  119. [119]
  120. [120]
    Deductions for individuals: What they mean and the difference ... - IRS
    A deduction reduces taxable income. Standard deductions are a fixed amount, while itemized deductions are chosen if they exceed the standard, and include ...Standard Deduction · Itemized Deductions · Schedule A (form 1040) For...
  121. [121]
    Itemized Deductions vs. Above-the-Line Deductions - TaxAct Blog
    they are subtracted from your income before your adjusted gross ...Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  122. [122]
    Tax Deductions: Above-the-Line, Itemized, and Neither
    Jul 27, 2025 · A tax deduction is either above-the-line or below-the-line. Above-the-line deductions lower your AGI and help you qualify for other tax breaks.Tax Deductions... · Standard Deduction Or... · Below-The-Line...
  123. [123]
    Above the Line vs Below the Line Deductions Explained
    Jan 3, 2024 · The main difference between above-the-line and below-the-line deductions is that above-the-line deductions are used to calculate your AGI.
  124. [124]
    Size of home, homeownership, and the mortgage interest deduction
    Empirical estimates suggest the MID is responsible for a 10.9–18.4% increase in the size of home purchased, but that it is not correlated with home ownership.
  125. [125]
    [PDF] The Benefits of the Home Mortgage Interest Deduction
    The home mortgage interest deduction creates incentives to buy more housing and to become a homeowner, and the case for the deduction rests on social benefits ...
  126. [126]
    Home Mortgage Interest Deduction - Tax Foundation
    Oct 15, 2019 · As discussed above, research suggests that it fails to encourage homeownership. However, the home mortgage interest deduction does represent ...
  127. [127]
    Tax Prices and Charitable Giving: Projected Changes in Donations ...
    We estimate the tax price elasticity of charitable giving using newly available data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics spanning 2001–17.
  128. [128]
    [PDF] How Do Changes in Tax Deductions Affect Charitable Contributions?
    The first generation of statistical studies of private giving, conducted in the 1970s, generally found that the price elasticity of giving was equal to or ...
  129. [129]
    [PDF] Individual Income Tax Returns, Preliminary Data, Tax Year 2021 - IRS
    Itemized deductions were claimed on only 9.3 percent of all returns for 2021.1 The total amount of itemized de- ductions claimed increased 11.5 percent to ...
  130. [130]
    Who Benefits from Itemized Deductions? - Tax Foundation
    Mar 7, 2019 · Itemized deductions primarily benefit higher-income households. The chart below uses data from the Internal Revenue Service to examine who claimed itemized ...
  131. [131]
    Individual statistical tables by size of adjusted gross income - IRS
    Nov 8, 2024 · Below is a complete list of tables from various sources and publications which are classified by size of Adjusted Gross Income.
  132. [132]
    Perspectives on the Need for Tax Reform: Before the Ways and ...
    ... itemized deductions by three cents for every additional dollar of income earned. ... Deductions also narrow the tax base The tax base ... itemized deductions ...
  133. [133]
    [PDF] “Perspectives on the Need for Tax Reform”
    May 25, 2016 · Deductions also narrow the tax base which, in turn, often requires ... Swap itemized deductions for lower rates. However, there are ...
  134. [134]
    A Truly Absurd Tax Code Illustrates the Need for Rational Reform
    Apr 16, 2014 · ... narrow the tax base and distort the economy cry out for fundamental reform. In 2012, the 33 percent of filers who claimed itemized deductions ...
  135. [135]
    Tax Expenditures | U.S. Department of the Treasury
    For example, the individual itemized deductions for charitable contributions, mortgage interest expense, and state and local taxes are all tax expenditures.
  136. [136]
    [PDF] The Compliance Cost of Itemizing Deductions
    We conclude that it is the transactions cost of itemizing that causes some tax- payers who could pay less in taxes by itemizing to choose instead to us the.
  137. [137]
    [PDF] Estimating the Compliance Cost of the US Individual Income Tax - IRS
    The Individual Taxpayer Burden Model (ITBM) estimates time and money spent on tax compliance, including tax liability and excess burden.
  138. [138]
    How Would TCJA Reforms Affect the Time Burden of Filing Taxes?
    Apr 12, 2024 · As enacted, the TCJA reduced the number of itemizers by increasing the standard deduction and limiting certain itemized deductions. These ...Missing: impact | Show results with:impact
  139. [139]
    The Regressivity of Deductions - Tax Foundation
    Jun 28, 2019 · Given our progressive income tax rate structure, deductions are more valuable to high-income individuals, meaning that tax deductions are regressive.
  140. [140]
    New Analysis Shows "Tax Expenditures" Overall Are Costly and ...
    Feb 23, 2009 · Overall, tax expenditures are regressive, the TPC analysis shows. ... Itemized deductions, such as for home mortgage interest. This ...
  141. [141]
    Who Pays Income Taxes? Tax Year 2022 - National Taxpayers Union
    Dec 4, 2024 · According to the latest IRS data, the top 1% of earners paid 40.4% of all federal income taxes in 2022. This underscores the extent to which the ...
  142. [142]
    Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2025 Update
    Taxpayers reported nearly $14.8 trillion in AGI on 153.8 million tax returns in 2022, an increase of $30 billion in AGI and 211,000 returns compared to 2021.
  143. [143]
    SOI Tax Stats — Tax stats at a glance | Internal Revenue Service
    Median AGI (TY 2018) [3], $43,614 ; Percent that claim standard deductions (TY 2018) [3], 87.3% ; Percent that claim itemized deductions (TY 2018) [3], 11.4%.
  144. [144]
    Reviewing Different Methods of Calculating Tax Compliance Costs
    Aug 21, 2018 · Theoretically, taxpayers should add up their itemized deductions to see if they can deduct more than the standard deduction. However, that's ...
  145. [145]
    Tax Reform Is Dead, Long Live Tax Reform - Brookings Institution
    The Tax Reform Act of 1986 strove to broaden the base and reduce tax rates. The top rate was reduced from 50 percent in 1986 to 28 percent by 1988.
  146. [146]
    Eliminate Itemized Deductions | Congressional Budget Office
    Dec 13, 2018 · One argument for eliminating itemized deductions is that their availability encourages spending on deductible activities because of the tax benefits those ...Missing: rebuttals inequitable
  147. [147]
    Did 1986 Tax Reform Hurt Affordable Housing? - Tax Foundation
    Jul 1, 2020 · We can look to the 1986 tax reform to see how changing the tax treatment of residential investment could impact housing prices and rents.
  148. [148]
    Tax Policy and Philanthropy: A Primer on the Empirical Evidence for ...
    Jun 18, 2013 · Tax policies in the US increase the incentive to donate to charity among those who itemize their deductions, and most of the tax revenue cost goes to subsidize ...
  149. [149]
    The 2025 Tax Debate: Individual Tax Deductions and Exemptions in ...
    Apr 9, 2025 · Taxpayers who still itemize but pay more than $10,000 in state and local taxes can no longer fully deduct their state and local tax liabilities ...Missing: summary | Show results with:summary
  150. [150]
    [PDF] Charitable Giving Behavior and the Evaluation of Tax Policy
    An alternative justification for the current charitable deduction is to view the deduction as an incentive by which the tax law encourages desir- able behavior.
  151. [151]
    Incentivizing Charitable Giving: A Systematic Review of Self
    Jun 25, 2025 · We systematically review research on incentives for charitable giving published between 1980 and 2022. We synthesize evidence from 153 unique studies.<|separator|>
  152. [152]
    [PDF] Tax Incentives for Charitable Giving: New Findings from the TCJA ...
    The overall decrease in giving is driven by those predicted to experience TCJA as a compensated price increase; for these taxpayers the compensated price.
  153. [153]
    The 2017 SALT cap reduced charitable contributions
    The empirical analysis in this paper involves comparing counties where the TCJA provisions cause a larger percentage of taxpayers to switch away from itemizing ...Missing: studies | Show results with:studies
  154. [154]
    The Home Mortgage Interest Deduction | Mercatus Center
    Jan 8, 2013 · Empirical evidence supports the claim that the mortgage interest deduction has little effect on homeownership rates in the United States.
  155. [155]
    An Economic Analysis of the Mortgage Interest Deduction
    Jun 25, 2020 · The deduction for mortgage interest is arguably the most well-known tax benefit, and is the tax benefit most often associated with promoting homeownership.Homeownership over Time · Financial Benefits · Effect on Homeownership
  156. [156]
    Mortgage Interest Deductions and Homeownership: An International ...
    Jun 18, 2020 · The empirical evidence suggests that, contrary to popular wisdom, the deduction generally does not increase the ownership rate. This result is ...
  157. [157]
    Eliminate or Limit Itemized Deductions - Congressional Budget Office
    Dec 7, 2022 · Under the first alternative, all itemized deductions would be eliminated. · Under the second alternative, the itemized deduction for state and ...<|separator|>
  158. [158]
    Estimating the Costs of Filing Tax Returns and the Potential Savings ...
    This paper estimates the cost of filing taxes and assesses several policy proposals aimed at reducing these costs.
  159. [159]
    Federal tax policy and the capitalization of local public goods
    This study examines the connection between federal tax policies and the capitalization of local public goods into housing prices, focusing on the deduction ...
  160. [160]
    [PDF] RADICAL SIMPLIFICATION OF THE INCOME TAX
    The propos- al would eliminate all itemized deductions, all personal credits, the section 199a deduction for business, the head of household filing status, and ...
  161. [161]
    [PDF] Towards a Targeted Homeownership Tax Credit
    As a result, most homeowners with incomes below $40,000 bypass itemizing their tax deductions in favor of taking the standard deduction. However, almost all ...
  162. [162]
    Selected Issues in Tax Reform: Itemized Deductions | Congress.gov
    Mar 4, 2025 · P.L. 115-97, commonly known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), modified the treatment of various itemized deductions through the end of 2025.