‘Made in America’ Just a Political Slogan to Conservatives

by Walter Brasch

Conservatives in Congress have once again proven they are un-American and unpatriotic. This time, it’s because of their fierce approval for the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.

The pipeline, being built and run by TransCanada, will bring tar sands oil from Alberta to the Gulf Coast. All the oil will be exported. Major beneficiaries, including House Speaker John Boehner, are those who invest in a Canadian company.

Opponents see the 1,179-mile pipeline as environmentally destructive. They cite innumerable leaks and spills in gas pipelines, and correctly argue that the tar sands oil is far more caustic and destructive than any of the crude oil being mined in the United States. They point out the pipeline would add about 240 billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. They also argue that the use of eminent domain by a foreign corporation, in this case a Canadian one, to seize private property goes against the intent of the use of eminent domain. Eminent domain seizure, they also correctly argue, should be used only to benefit the people and not private corporations.

Proponents claim it will bring jobs to Americans. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce claims the pipeline would create up to 250,000 jobs. However, the Department of State concludes that completion of the pipeline would create only 35 permanent jobs.

The Republican-led House has voted nine times to force the President to approve completion of the pipeline. In January, with Republicans now in control of the Senate, a bill to support construction of the pipeline passed, 62-36. Congressional actions appear to be nothing more than political gesturing. The decision to approve or reject the pipeline is that of a recommendation by the Department of State and, finally, that of the President.

However, the conservatives’ hatred of American workers became apparent in an amendment to the Senate bill. That amendment, submitted by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) would require, if the pipeline was approved, all iron, steel, and other materials used must be made in America by American companies. That would, at least, give some work to Americans. That amendment should have had widespread approval in the Senate, especially from the conservative wing that thrusts out its chests and daily proclaim themselves to be patriots of the highest order.

But when the votes were counted, the Senate, by a 53-46 vote, rejected that amendment. Voting for “Made in America” were 44 Democrats, one independent, and one Republican. Voting against the amendment were 53 Republicans.

The Republicans’ rejection of the amendment was expected. America’s corporate business leaders, most of them conservatives and registered Republicans, have freely downsized their workforce, outsourced jobs overseas, and proudly proclaimed their actions helped raise profits. Profits, of course, are not usually shared with the workers who make the product and then were terminated so American companies could use and exploit foreign labor, while the executives enjoy seven- and eight-figure salaries, benefits, and “golden parachute” retirement clauses not available to those whose labor built the companies and their profits.

Corporations have also figured out how to best send their profits to banks outside the United States and, thus, avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Several Fortune 500 corporations, with billions of dollars in assets, pay no federal taxes. For money they keep in U.S. financial institutions, corporations have figured out numerous ways to use loopholes to bring their tax burden to a percentage lower than what the average worker might pay each year.

Congress is a willing co-conspirator because it has numerous times refused to close loopholes that allow millionaires and the corporations to easily drive through those loopholes, while penalizing lower- and middle-class Americans.

By their own actions-in business and, most certainly, in how they dealt with the Keystone XL amendment-the nation’s conservatives have proven that “Made in America” and “American Pride” are nothing more than just popular slogans.

[Dr. Brasch, an award-winning journalist and proud member of several unions, is the author of 20 books. The latest book is Fracking Pennsylvania, an in-depth look at the economic, political, environmental, and health effects of horizontal fracturing in the United States.]

 

State Tax Cuts Take a Bite Out of Pennsylvania’s Budget Pie

By Chris Lilienthal, Third and State

State Tax Cuts Take a Bigger Bite of Budget Pie

Advocates delivered half a pie to every Pennsylvania legislator Tuesday. Why half a pie?

To remind them that a decade of large tax cuts for businesses has left schools, health care services, and local communities with a smaller share of the state budget pie.

Tax cuts enacted since 1999 have drained close to $3 billion this year alone from state coffers. The cost of the tax cuts has more than tripled since 2002, with little to show for it. Too often, these tax cuts are put in place with very little accountability or obligation for companies to create jobs. In fact, Pennsylvania ranked 27th in job growth in 1999-2000 but fell to 34th in 2011-12.

Budget cuts fueled by large business tax cuts also pass the buck to school districts and local governments – and onto local taxpayers.

Governor Corbett is now proposing a new round of tax cuts for 2015 and beyond that will cost as much as an additional $1 billion. The proposal includes no plan to close tax loopholes that allow companies to hide profits and avoid paying their share of taxes. 

Pennsylvania needs a budget that returns to tried-and-true investments in education and the public infrastructure that promotes long-term economic growth. After a long economic downturn, that is the path to more jobs, stronger communities, and a brighter future for our children. 

We can fund corporate tax cuts or we can fund our children’s schools, but increasingly we can’t do both. Giving larger slices of the pie to profitable corporations means less money in the classroom, fewer early childhood programs, and less support for local services. 

Pennsylvania needs real tax reform that levels the playing field for businesses that play by the rules, and stops giving away dollars that are essential to helping our children and families succeed. Only then will we be able to invest in a world-class public education and the community assets that build a stronger economy.

ALEC Policies Sell ‘Snake Oil to the States’

By Sharon Ward, Third and States

Three national organizations offered a scathing criticism of policies endorsed by the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC, in a conference call with reporters last week. Their findings strike a stake in the heart of ALEC claims that its view of the world – lower taxes, fewer workplace protections, and diminished public investments – is good for the public. 

Pennsylvania state lawmakers who look to ALEC for guidance on economic policy should stand up and take notice. 

Iowa Policy Project research director Peter Fisher discussed a recent report he co-authored with researchers from Good Jobs First, concluding that the tax, budget, and economic prescriptions put forth by ALEC simply don’t work.

Selling Snake Oil to the States took a look at ALEC’s annual Rich States, Poor States report, which ranks states based on their “economic outlooks” as defined by ALEC. The factors should come as no surprise: states with low taxes and right-to-work laws rank high by ALEC; those with progressive taxes, corporate income taxes, and worker protections rank far behind.

Fisher compared the ALEC rankings with actual state performance on real economic indicators over a four-year period. Do ALEC’s policy prescriptions improve state economies? The answer is no.

Between 2007 and 2011, researchers found no relationship between a high ALEC ranking and employment. They did find a correlation on personal incomes and poverty rates among states ranked high by ALEC, but it was a negative one – the better a state fared on the ALEC scale, the worse it did in real life. As Fisher said during the conference call:

It should be hardly surprising that policies to keep wages low have the effect of lowering the state’s income. … The ALEC policy prescriptions for states will not lead to growth and prosperity but to further inequality and lower incomes.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities examined sweeping tax and budget policies that ALEC is currently lobbying for in the states. The policies largely encompass deep tax cuts for wealthy individuals, investors, and corporations that will leave middle- and lower-income families paying more.

Both reports note that the ALEC agenda promotes low wage growth for families, fewer workplace protections, and strategies to starve public investments in education, health care, and other priorities – all of which reputable economists agree are critical to job creation and economic growth.

It is an article of faith among Pennsylvania lawmakers that ALEC policies are good for the economy. These reports provide clear and convincing evidence to the contrary: the arguments that the ALEC agenda are good for real people are nothing but snake oil. The policies are good for the businesses that pour millions into ALEC to promote this agenda. 

Governor Tom Corbett has hidden large expensive new tax cuts to profitable corporations in his budget proposal released this month. This and other ALEC agenda items won’t create jobs, but they will lead to greater inequality, slower income growth, and continued starvation of our public schools, transit systems, and other priorities.

Pennsylvania Among ‘Terrible 10’ Most Regressive Tax States

By Chris Lilienthal, Third and State

Working families in Pennsylvania pay a far higher share of their income in state and local taxes than the state’s wealthiest earners, according to a new study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP).

Pennsylvania’s tax system scored so poorly that it made the list of the “Terrible 10” most regressive tax states in the nation.

The Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center (PBPC) co-released the report, Who Pays? A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States, with ITEP. PBPC Director Sharon Ward made the point in a press release that “No one would deliberately design a tax system where low-income working families pay the greatest share of their income in taxes, but that is exactly the type of upside-down tax system we have in Pennsylvania.”

Middle-income families in Pennsylvania pay more than double the share of their income in taxes than the very wealthiest Pennsylvanians, while low-income families pay nearly three times as much as top earners, the report found. Get more details on the report, including a Pennsylvania fact sheet, here.

PA State & Local Taxes: Shares of family income for non-elderly taxpayers

The report should bury once and for all the myth of the makers vs. the takers. Low-income families in Pennsylvania are paying much more of their income in state and local taxes than the top 1%.

Families who qualify for state personal income tax forgiveness still pay large shares of their earnings in sales, local income and property taxes, the report found. At the same time, wealthy taxpayers benefit greatly from tax laws that allow them to write off property and income taxes from their federal taxes. This is, at best, a modest benefit for middle-class families and no benefit to very low-income earners.

Pennsylvania’s flat income tax contributes to its regressive tax ranking. Without a graduated tax rate that rise on more affluent earners, the state’s income tax does little to offset more regressive sales and property taxes. 

That’s why Pennsylvania should amend the state Constitution to enact a graduated personal income tax. Even without a constitutional change, the state could set a higher income tax rate on investment income, which goes primarily to wealthy Pennsylvanians, without raising the rate on wage earners.

PA Revenue Strong Midway Through Year; Tax Cut Could Have Big Impact

By Michael Wood, Third and State

With a strong December showing, the commonwealth now has a General Fund revenue surplus of $171 million (1.4% above estimate) for the first half of the 2012-13 fiscal year, double the Corbett administration’s revised estimate for the entire fiscal year. The strong December collections exceeded estimate by $112 million (or 4.8%).

The increased revenue is a good sign of a modestly recovering national economy and a brightening of the state’s fiscal picture going into the 2013-14 budget season. This is a nice change from previous years when midyear shortfalls triggered cuts to state services.

In December, personal income, corporate, and realty transfer taxes exceeded revenue targets by 10.1%, with sales, inheritance and other taxes (on cigarettes, alcohol, and table games) falling short of expectations by 2.8%.  

A similar picture exists over the first half of 2012-13 — corporate, personal income and realty transfer tax collections are a combined 5% higher than expected, while sales, inheritance, and other taxes have fallen 2.4% short of budget estimates.

One area of concern is that sales tax collections (the state’s second largest tax source) are $125 million, or 2.7%, lower than projected. It is not clear the reason for this as vehicle sales and consumer spending have been increasing. Perhaps the new tax collections from some online retailers may not be as large as anticipated.

Compared to last year, collections are $583 million, or 5%, higher, with corporate ($254 million) and personal income tax ($186 million) collections making up most of the increase in 2012-13.

A few caveats going forward:

  • Roughly 60% of the state’s General Fund revenue comes in during the second half of the fiscal year so a bad month or two of collections in the second half could cut or wipe out the state’s modest surplus.
     
  • To date, actual tax collections have been closer to the Independent Fiscal Office (IFO)’s projections than those of the Department of Revenue. Total General Fund collections are only $12 million higher than the IFO’s quarterly projections, and $171 million greater than Corbett administration estimates. There is cause for concern because the IFO projects $240 million less in revenue than the administration in the second half of 2012-13, with lower estimates for personal income, sales and corporate tax payments. While corporate taxes are currently $244 million (or 19.9%) higher than estimate, likely due to higher-than-expected quarterly estimated payments, the commonwealth could see smaller “final” tax year 2012 payments in March and April 2013.

    undefined

  • Additionally, the capital stock and franchise rate was cut again January 1 from 1.89 mills to 0.89 mills, meaning future quarterly payments could be smaller. As this business tax goes away — without any revenue source set to replace it — total corporate collections will likely shrink compared to previous years. This cutting away of the state’s revenue base will make it harder in the future to pay for education for our children, care for our seniors, and protection of our environment.

What to Make of the Fiscal Cliff Deal?

By Sharon Ward, Third and State

Tell us what you think about the Fiscal Cliff deal. Take our two-question survey.

The agreement reached by President Obama and Congress on January 1 was both historic and disappointing – and it leaves much unsettled. The urgency of the Fiscal Cliff has dissipated, but significant threats remain to federal funding for state and local services as well as refundable tax credits for low-income working families, Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.

There is much to dislike in this agreement. It makes permanent most of the Bush era tax cuts, ensuring that income from dividends and capital gains will be taxed at a lower rate than income from work. It makes permanent the estate tax but locks in a tax rate that creates a huge windfall for the top 0.3% of households. Sequestration cuts – the automatic spending cuts that members of both parties hated and the President said would not occur – have been postponed for two months, with three-quarters of FFY 2013 cuts ($85.6 billion) and $109 billion in annual cuts after that still in law through 2022. The President’s line in the sand on raising tax rates for the top 2% of earners got pushed way back, with top rates kicking in at $400,000 for an individual and $450,000 for a couple. A low-wage earner might need 20 years to make that much.

The agreement is at the same time extraordinary. Eighty-five Republican members of Congress voted with their Democratic counterparts to raise taxes on wealthy Americans – no small feat in a Congress defined (some might say dominated) by its Tea Party members, Grover Norquist, and fealty to the no-tax pledge. Even toward the end, the House of Representatives stood firm in its defense of tax cuts, failing to muster enough votes for Speaker John Boehner’s “Plan B,” which included significant spending cuts and limited tax hikes to millionaires and billionaires.

On the plus side, the agreement abandoned the plan for “chained CPI,” a new measure of inflation that would have reduced future cost-of-living increases for Social Security, veterans’ benefits and other critical benefits. There were no additional spending cuts. The family tax credit programs – including the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit – were protected, and improvements made to those credits were extended for five years. Emergency unemployment insurance benefits were extended for laid-off workers who would have faced a significant immediate threat if we went over the cliff.

So what happened? The framework for the debate has always been the same: a grand bargain that would achieve a deficit reduction target of $4 trillion through a combination of cuts and new revenue. 

The President took what could be considered a realistic path – pressing for tax cuts for the middle class and tax hikes for the top 2% who could most afford it (and have done the best over the past decade). He largely succeeded, and while that is a significant victory, it does not raise enough revenue to stabilize the nation’s debt. This will end up putting significant pressure on the spending side of the ledger.

Already much of the press on the agreement is calling for significant new cuts, without acknowledging the $1 trillion in cuts already agreed to in the Budget Control Act of 2011. Plus, the President has lost the leverage of the Fiscal Cliff deadline.

The next fight will take place over the next two months when Congress will have to act to raise the debt ceiling, probably in February. Sequestration cuts will be announced on March 1 and scheduled to begin on March 27, the date that the continuing resolution governing current year spending expires. 

The President acknowledged that the debate is not over in his January 2 press conference and made two strong statements; that the vote on the debt ceiling should not be tangled up in the larger deficit reduction plan, and that new spending cuts have to be matched one for one with new revenue. Still, few are optimistic that Congress will take a reasoned, balanced approach to resolve the remaining issues, as The New York Times notes:

In the weeks to come, Republicans will use not just the debt-ceiling threat, but also the $100 billion across-the-board cuts known as the sequester, delayed for two months in this week’s deal, and the potential shutdown of the government when the current spending resolution expires in March. Standing up to brinkmanship will require a level of resolve that the president has yet to fully demonstrate.

It is also unclear where new revenue will come from given the long-term agreement on the Bush tax cuts and the fact that the President has taken corporate tax reform off the table, arguing that loophole closures should be dedicated to corporate tax reduction. The easiest and most politically popular option, higher marginal tax rates on wealthy individuals, is done. The other options (capping the value of tax deductions for home sales or charitable contributions) will be harder to accomplish.  

So what’s at stake moving forward?

Sequestration cuts. The current plan locks in three-fourths of the cuts ($85.4 billion) plus another $4 billion in discretionary cuts in the current year (FFY2013). While there is some hope current year cuts will be reduced, it is more likely that the debate will center on knocking back the devastating sequestration cuts for 2014 and beyond.

Working family tax credits. One of the surprises of the debate was the targeting of the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit programs, which are refundable for very low-income working families. While the fiscal cliff agreement continues those programs for five years, including the improvements that specifically benefit low-income families, there is grave concern that their refundability may be in jeopardy.

Medicaid. The health care program was excluded from sequestration, but cuts are likely to be on the table. Since states jointly fund this program, reduced federal participation will just shift costs to states. On the plus side, Medicaid is key to the promise of coverage under the Affordable Care Act, so protecting Medicaid is likely to be a high priority for the administration.

Entitlements. Chained CPI might return, as well as cuts to Medicare and Social Security. 

Pressing for additional revenue will continue to be the key to avoiding new deep cuts to health care, education and other critical services. While the Fiscal Cliff no longer looms, the Debt Ceiling Cliff is just over the horizon.

Fiscal Chicken

by Walter Brasch

Talk show hosts and other bloviators have spent hours giving their versions of the fiscal cliff.

In fewer than 750 words, I’ll explain the truth.

Taxes and the deficit are intertwined. If Congress can’t come up with a plan to solve those problems, the U.S. will jump into the abyss of a deeper recession than existed under the latter years of the Bush-Cheney administration.

Let’s first look at taxes.

The Bush tax cuts expire at the end of this year.

The idea of the cuts was to spur the economy and give what is loosely called the “jobs creators” a slight push to hire more people.

But, the millionaire “jobs creators” held onto their money. They continued to downsize and outsource jobs, making even more money-which they used to buy whatever trinkets that rich people spend money on.

If Congress can’t agree on tax rates, beginning Jan. 1, 2013, every American will see a restoration of tax rates to a level that is about what they were before the Bush tax cuts. The lower- and middle-classes will be hit harder than the upper class.

President Obama, contrary to what the screaming harpies of the extreme Rightwing claim, doesn’t want to raise taxes. He wants the tax cuts to continue for 98 percent of all Americans-the ones making less than $250,000 a year. He wants to restore-note that word, restore, not raise-the tax liability for the richest 2 percent of Americans. The rate to the rich would still be below the rates they paid during most of the latter half of the 20th century. Even billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet agree that the rich need to be paying more.

The Republicans, knowing where their financial base is, demand that the tax cuts be extended to everyone. Their compromise was to allow the cuts to apply to everyone making $1 million a year or less. That would be net income, not gross income. Millionaires could still make $3 million a year if they can scam $2 million in deductions. Their rates would still be lower than almost any time since the income tax was first created in 1913.

The President countered with a $400,000 limit. That would include about 99 percent of all Americans. House Speaker John Boehner, however, found that a segment of his Republican party don’t want a compromise; they are determined to uphold some kind of a non-legal pledge to Grover Norquist that there would be no tax increases-ever-even if it is to restore, not raise, tax rates.

The second part of the problem is that of entitlements. The Republicans are willing to do some horse-trading. They won’t continue to hold 99 percent of Americans hostage if there are cuts in “entitlements” and programs that would significantly reduce the deficit. These entitlements benefit mostly the 99 percent. The Republicans even say they’ll consider closing some tax loopholes used extensively by the upper class. But, they won’t tell us what those loopholes are, even though the President has several times asked for specifics. Apparently, the Republicans believe releasing such information is classified, much like battle plans in Afghanistan or the number of toilet paper rolls the Pentagon buys.

The President has already compromised several times, but every time he makes a concession, the Republicans want even more. He has proposed an orderly reduction of the deficit by $1.6 trillion. Not good enough, say the dogma-driven Republicans. They want even more. And they want it now. They are aware that if the tax cuts expire all at once, the deficit immediately decreases, something that makes them drool in ecstasy. However, almost every economist of every political persuasion says a severe decrease in the deficit would lead the U.S. into an even worse recession than the one created by the Bush-Cheney administration.

Behind a wall of political gesturing, the Republicans are doing nothing, while blocking those who can do something. John Boehner now acknowledges he is blocked by party dogma and can’t control the Republican majority in the House who want the government to several cut entitlements while continuing all Bush tax cuts, even to millionaires who, not surprisingly, make up the majority of Congress. Their actions are driving America into fiscal cliff suicide.

The obstructionists in Congress need to realize this isn’t a deserted two-lane highway, and Americans don’t want the Republicans playing chicken with our nest eggs.

[Walter Brasch, a social issues columnist, has covered politics and government for four decades. His latest book is Before the First Snow: Stories from the Revolution.]

 

Pennsylvania Tax Giveaways and an Island in the Sun

By Jamar Thrasher, Third and State

A few weeks ago, the Pennsylvania General Assembly fast-tracked a bill in the waning days of the legislative session to allow certain private companies to keep most of the state income taxes of new employees. News reports to follow indicated the new tax giveaway was designed to lure California-based software firm Oracle to State College.

Well, it turns out the CEO of Oracle, which will benefit from the largess of Pennsylvania taxpayers, recently bought his very own Hawaiian island, as CNN reported back in June.

Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, the third richest man in the U.S., purchased about 98% of Lana’i, the sixth largest of the Hawaiian islands. Forbes reported that the deal was rumored to be worth $500 million.

As CNN tells us:

The island includes two luxury resorts, two golf courses, two club houses and 88,000 acres of land, according to a document filed with the Public Utilities Commission.

Which bring us back to Pennsylvania, where Governor Corbett recently signed House Bill 2626, allowing qualifying companies that create at least 250 new jobs within five years to pocket 95% of the personal income taxes paid by the new employees. 

Legislative sources told The Philadelphia Inquirer that “the bill was designed to lure California-based Oracle, the world’s third-largest software maker with $37 billion in revenue last year, to open a facility in the Penn State region, which would provide a pool of highly educated job seekers.”

We’ve already blogged about why this bill is a bad deal for Pennsylvanians, but Larry Ellison’s island provides us with yet another reason. 

Oracle should not be pocketing the withholding taxes of new employees in State College, especially at a time when the state is cutting investments in schools and underfunding infrastructure. 

And especially when the boss is doing well enough to afford an island in the sun.

A Rare Victory In The Endless Fight Against Corporate Welfare

By Mark Price, Third and State

In a rare victory against corporate welfare in Pennsylvania, Ahold USA has withdrawn its request for property tax breaks for a meat-packaging facility it is building in Lower Allen Township, Cumberland County.

As Michael Wood explained before the request was withdrawn:

Ahold is the poster child for a system that is costly, lacks real accountability and leaves the taxpayers paying more…

Paying a profitable corporation for something it was already planning to do makes no sense at all…

Lower Allen Twp. officials decided wisely to put the Ahold tax break on hold. It’s time more public officials followed their lead to stop playing the economic development game and direct tax dollars where they should be spent: on schools, public safety and other vital services. 

In some more mixed news, The Associated Press reports that both the House and Senate have approved House Bill 2626, which allows certain companies to keep new employees’ personal income tax withholdings.

The Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center came out last week with a Top 10 List of concerns with this plan, laying the foundation for some improvements to the bill made in the Senate this week. They include capping the cost of the program at $5 million per year (the original version could have cost hundreds of millions), and requiring that a qualifying company create at least 250 jobs within five years (100 within the first two years).

The bill still reflects a flawed approach to economic development, but the Senate’s more cautious approach is much better than the initial House version.

Sen. John Blake, D-Lackawanna, said the bill “crosses a line” in smart economic development by diverting tax revenue to a handful of private companies, and it duplicates existing programs in law that offer tax credits to companies that hire people.

The bill, he said, is “essentially an employee paying their boss for the privilege of having a job.”

As Greg LeRoy and Leigh McIlvaine of Good Jobs First explained in an op-ed this week, the “pay your boss to work” approach to economic development is deeply problematic.

It’s one thing to reduce a company’s income tax, property tax or sales tax in hopes of jobs. It’s another to give companies other people’s money. 

The name and idea are imported from Kansas, where they have caused enormous controversy. HB 2626 is modeled on the identically named “Promoting Employment Across Kansas,” or PEAK program, which was enacted in 2009. 

In the wealthy Kansas City suburb of Overland Park, MIQ Logistics and Dex One Service Inc. – two of the city’s largest employers – have so far received a total of $730,000 of their workers’ taxes through PEAK. 

Former Overland Park Chamber of Commerce executive Vern Squier, who worked with Kansas lawmakers to enact PEAK, is now CEO of the Chamber of Business and Industry of Centre County (State College), where he is pushing the copycat HB 2626. 

HB 2626’s sponsors say it would bring new jobs to the state. But PEAK in Kansas cannot be called a success. It is plagued by transparency problems and is fueling a bitter zero-sum jobs war with Missouri in the Kansas City metro area.

In the last three years, media-reported deals alone there have moved about 1,900 jobs from Missouri to Kansas and about 2,200 from Kansas to Missouri. Most of the moves were subsidized, often with the personal income taxes of workers (Missouri has a similar personal income tax giveaway). 

The costly Kansas City-area jobs war has gotten so bad that 17 prominent business leaders there issued a public appeal last year to Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback and Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon, saying: “At a time of severe fiscal constraint the effect to the states is that one state loses tax revenue while the other forgives it. 

“The states are being pitted against each other and the only real winner is the business who is ‘incentive shopping’ to reduce costs. The losers are the taxpayers who must provide services to those who are not paying for them.”

Property Tax Issues

( – promoted by John Morgan)

There have been many bills over the years trying to rid this state of its property tax.  None to date have been passed into law. I believe that is a great thing. NO not because I was a school board member that levied property taxes but because there is more behind it than the property tax you and I pay on our houses.

Let’s look at this from two view points. The first is a way to eliminate the property tax and be FAIR to everyone!  Make every parent pay the cost of education of their child(ren) as they go.  That is at the state average of $10,000.00 per year per child. Hold on a minute! We can’t do that the state constitution says that the state must provide that education. But let’s go into this just a little. As the system is right now we have a 13 year education system, K-12.  If it costs that $10,000 per year that’s $130,000 for each child that we get as an interest FREE loan.  That’s right, interest free.  If you have 2 children and the average is 2.4 currently that $260,000 to educate your children.  At your current property tax rate (because both the cost and the tax rate will continue to rise over time) how long will it take you to pay off that “loan”.

The second side of this is with the current system the old adage it takes a village to raise a child, really does come into play.  Right now the businesses in your school district also pay property taxes and this is the only tax they cannot get out of in some form.  They can pay executives more money to get out of paying hire income or profits based taxes, but not the property tax. So guess what happens if these bills get passed?  That’s right the businesses get a windfall as they would no longer pay their property taxes and would NOT, by any of the bills introduced so far, be forced to give the lost tax expense back to the public!  Yea they are at it again.  Businesses pay lower taxes on the backs of everyone else!  Businesses would not pay the personal income tax we would.  Businesses do not pay the sales tax we do!

I’m sorry I don’t want to go to a system of individuals paying for the school system alone!  Let’s let the village help to raise the children.  Who benefits through all this but the businesses when the students graduate and are able to be employed in those very businesses!

Let’s force the STATE to pay their fair share on an on going basis and then our property taxes will not be out of site!  In the last two years the state has reduced funding back to the 2006-2007 school year if I am correct.

HOW WOULD YOUR FINANCES BE IF A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF YOUR INCOME WAS TAKEN BACK THAT FAR?