when it comes to raising taxes in Oregon, my first inclination is to vote NO for several reasons.
#1 local and state government has not proven to me that they can manage money properly
#2 I am broke!
What really throws a red flag for me is any time that they mention a tax measure will
"These funds preserve class sizes, save jobs for teachers, provide seniors with in-home care, and provide health care for thousands of Oregonians through the Oregon Health Plan."
I don't want to just walk to the ballot box to vote no, I want to run.
how many times have we been fooled by this rhetoric?
It's for the kids...BS!
I also find it interesting looking at some of the flyers in favor of these measures. for example...
"It's simple: Corporations should pay more then $10 in Oregon income taxes"
"The Plan: Increase the $10 corporate minimum income tax to $150"
First of all the ads are making it sound like all business only pay $10 in corporate taxes. not true
It is true that Oregon's corporate tax rate is 6.6% and is subject to a $10 minimum tax.
secondly, they are throwing around the word "CORPORATION" to give the impression that we're only talking about businesses like Nike, Albertsons, Exxon, etc. and forgetting that there are a large percentage of corporations that GROSS under $100,000, which is not a lot of money in this day and age.
Heres a little bit of trivia, did you know that corporations and other business also pay any PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX IN THE STATE OF OREGON?
Oregon Department of revenue Oregon law requires all personal property to be valued at 100% of its real market value... listing should include items that have been fully appreciated, in storage, our expense... and must file a return by March 1 with a listing of all assets, data acquisition, cost, and a statement of real market value. [Believer or not, this does include toilet paper... seriously]
Back when I had my business that meant I had to include everything within the business to include sales counters, clocks, toilet paper [seriously] any inventory and test equipment, computers, store signs and the list goes on.
When I bought my business, the owner was anxious to sell before March 1 because after March 1 the new owner gets stuck with these taxes I've never heard of before. Basically, it blindsided me with a unexpected $5,000 bill and that was back in 1995.
One of the other arguments that I love, "97.5% of taxpayers will not see their taxes increased."
While that may be true, common sense says that any time that you increase taxes on businesses of any size, they will pass that increase to the consumer.
Oregon also has a self employment tax which covers all business in Oregon. Part of this self employment tax in Lane County is for LTD. [never have ridden the bus, but I sure I paid for it]
The only good thing that I can see in favor of these measures is that people on unemployment will get a tax break on the first $2400 that they receive in unemployment benefits.
I always thought that taxing unemployment was dumb in the first place, but then again we are talking about Oregon.
5 comments:
Robin--
Given the elasticity of the demand curve of a firm's products or services, the firm will attempt to pass onto the consumer the increased costs it faces.
Unfortunately, most firms won't be able to pass those increased costs forward. They'll have to eat them.
Fr'instance, say you raise wheat. My cousin in Northern Idaho raises wheat. When it comes to setting the price of wheat, what control over that price does either an Oregon rancher or Idaho rancher have?
You simply increase the costs of production. Where to recoup this increase in costs? Wages? Equipment maintenence?
I'm a builder, and can order a truss from either Washington or from an Oregon truss manufacturer. The distance to my job site is equal to each manufacturer. Which manufacturer has a comparative advantage when it comes to supplying me with the trusses I need?
The Oregon truss manufacturer needs to be able to compete against the Washington truss manufacturer. What would motivate the Oregon truss manufacturer to increase his price? A need for greater competitiveness? Clearly, no. Raising your price does not make you more competitive, it makes you less competitive.
Given that increase taxes will consume a fixed amount of your revenue, what can you do to maintain your competitiveness vis a vis your out-of-state competitors? The simplest input variable to adjust is labour. So, we either see declining wage rates, or increasing unemployment.
Regardless of what you might read in the "Eugene Register-Guard."
.
As you've noted that C corporations, as well as all other businesses, pay a good deal in taxes other than state corporate excise taxes.
Businesses pay license fees, transit district fees, property taxes on personal property (that's durable business equipment, such as desks and copiers, in addition to taxes on real property they may own or lease), and dozens of other fees and taxes.
But the most important contribution businesses make to funding state services is that they employ people. Employers are the state's primary generators of state funding by the employment they provide and the income they generate for working Oregonians. Employers also are the primary tax collectors, withholding from employees' pay the estimated state taxes they may owe and sending that money to the state.
Private sector employers have shed 131,500 jobs since this recession started and re-growing that job base is the only sustainable way to rebuild state revenues.
ThinkOregon
The family is all voted. 4 voted "yes". Thanks for the information regardless.
Anon 11:44
That's cool, it would be interesting to share your thoughts what you like about those measures.
you are allowed to disagree with me here :)
If this were simply a decision to vote on a new tax or not it might be cut and dry.. what I am upset about is the waste of money in this process, and the lies being bandied about.
This is the second SPECIAL election in less than a year. WHO IS PAYING FOR THESE. Who is footing the bill for all the t.v. ads I see lying to me on television. We need to pass the bill to (if nothing more than) pay those bills. BUT more to the point, WHO is losing so much money because of 66-67 to raise this much fuss. We need to pass a morality law that says if any one elected to office gets caught is a lie any lie, they are removed from the office and may never hold public office again... of course we would have no one running the state or country if we did this today.
clif
Post a Comment