Site Meter

Digging in on the Budget

6OF7 AGREE-01
Tax Commissioner Joe Testa testified on Tuesday in front of the House Ways & Means Committee on the tax changes in the Governor’s budget proposal.  This committee will dig in on the tax changes offered. He begins his written testimony with a summary of one word – Jobs. The testimony and questions centered on how to best help Ohio’s businesses with our tax code and the committee continued to echo a growing theme around tax shifting.

Commissioner Testa advocated once again for lowering the income tax in Ohio in hopes of making Ohio more ‘competitive’ and attracting jobs. However, this theory is questionable at best. Claims that people will move from one state to another, because of taxes, are highly flawed.  Most research (6 out o 8 studies published since 2000 on the subject) has found that state taxes have little to no impact on The economy of a state.

Most small businesses will start their business in the community where the owner lives. When businesses do make location decisions, the top factors considered are infrastructure, educated workforce, and access to customers and suppliers. In addition, business owners want to live in good communities that have a high quality of life. You just can’t lure entrepreneurs with tax cuts.

Instead of more tax cuts, Ohio should invest in education, infrastructure, and guaranteeing strong public services that strengthen our communities. Research shows that a smart workforce is likely to attract high paying jobs into Ohio. We continue to struggle with under-investment in our schools, growing tuition, and a 16% poverty rate. Ohio can and must do better.

Make a difference! Over the next few weeks, the Ways and Means Committee will continue to debate and discuss this legislation. They want to hear from you – CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATOR TODAY!

Governor proposes massive tax shift

style2_Taxshift3-01Governor Kasich released his budget proposal yesterday, continuing a 10 year strategy of income tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy. This strategy has not worked – leaving Ohio with fewer jobs, smaller paychecks, and fewer resources to invest in our neighborhoods and communities.

The budget proposal includes a 23% income tax rate cut that will benefit the wealthiest Ohioans, while increasing sales taxes on everyone. There are some modest improvements to Ohio’s tax policy, but these small changes are extremely limited in comparison to the billions of dollars proposed in this tax shift.

The budget also includes modest investments and and modest budget cuts. Ohio has serious needs including a 16% poverty rate, high levels of childhood hunger, and crumbling infrastructure.

One Ohio Now will continue to work on interpreting the state budget over the coming days, weeks, and months. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

DRAFT SCHEDULE

Screen Shot 2015-01-16 at 11.59.14 AM

Representative Smith, Chair of the Ohio House Finance Committee released his draft timeline for the Ohio budget.

Draft_Schedule_for_131th_GA_Budget

Tax Rankings: an unhelpful measure

Don't be tricked by tax climate rankings

The Tax Foundation released their “Small Business Tax Climate Index” (SBTCI) earlier this week, and Ohio ranked 44th – down a few spots from last year. The Tax Foundation, founded in 1937 in opposition to progressive proposals, bases their rankings on 115 features of tax law that it weights in order to generate a single number to rank states.

We shouldn’t give too much weight to this measure, because the number doesn’t paint an accurate picture for policymakers or businesses. Instead, Ohio should invest in great public services that strengthen our communities.

SBTCI is flawed:

1. Rankings are not connected to taxes paid: The rankings measure an abstract of ‘business competitiveness’ not the tax load or taxes paid by business in each state. The Council on State Taxation (COST) calculates the taxes paid by businesses in each state. As a share of gross state product, Ohio businesses pay a rate of 4.1% (in state and local taxes) compared to a national average of 4.7%. READ MORE ON THE FLAWS IN TAX RANKINGS

2. Rankings exploit minor differences: Most businesses will pay a similar total tax rate regardless of which state they operate.  States, however divide up their taxes differently between business, individual, income, sales, and property taxes.  Yet, the weights applied by the Tax Foundation increase the impact of an income tax on the ranking. Ranking the income tax is misleading, because 31% of all business taxes paid in Ohio (state and local) are in the form of property taxes. Corporate and personal income taxes paid by businesses are about 12%.

3. Ideology drives rankings: The Tax Foundation assumes that low and flat taxes are the best for job growth – even though much of the research disagrees.  Every business is taxed differently by the state and local communities. Drawing a single ranking conclusion is not helpful for businesses or policymakers looking to develop effective, efficient, and fair tax systems. In the end, the rankings highlight a political and ideological goal of cutting taxes and reducing public services. They do not set a road map for a more prosperous Ohio that gives every Ohioan an opportunity to succeed.

A new approach: 

Research also shows that state tax policy has little to do with economic growth, but smart public investments are the foundation of a strong economy.

Ohio should look at the rankings that matter most to people – safe neighborhoods, quality of our schools, a healthy environment, and other factors that impact our lives.  Ohio will succeed in growing our economy by improving our schools, making neighborhoods safe, and making sure we have great public infrastructure. Instead of tax rankings, we should race to win on measures that matter to all Ohioans.

The Economics of a Bridge

roadHow many of you took an economics class in high school or college? Economics traditionally focuses on reducing costs and increasings sales, in order to increase profits. But how does the calculation change when profit is no longer the driving force?

In the “Economic Case for Free Bridges and Roads” Alex Marshall presents the public economics piece that is often forgotten in our public finance discourse. Private companies seek to maximize profit, but public investments should maximize usage – that way the public get the most return on their investment.

Usage is our Return on Investment. We need to focus our economic return on the usage and not the profitability of a bridge, a school, or other public investment. The value of a bridge comes from its benefit to the community. The cost of a bridge will be the same whether 50 people or 50,000 people use it each day. The return on investment is greater if 50,000 people use the bridge. Fees required to cross the bridge will reduce the usage – and lessen the return on investment. I would also add that not only the quantity of the usage, but the quality of the use. For example, a bridge to connect a hospital to a neighborhood (saving valuable minutes in an emergency) has a high quality, even if use is limited.

Capacity Marshall points out that capacity issues (such as on busses and subways) can warrant fees-for-service, but only to address capacity issues and not in an attempt to cover the full cost of these services. The fees will drive down usage, reducing the public good done by that service.

The common complaint from taxpayers is ‘I don’t ride the bus, why should I pay for it?’ There are a few good reasons. First, public transportation reduces traffic congestion, pollution, and parking hassles for others – so everyone does benefit. If we believe public transit serves the public good, everyone should pay their fair share to cover the costs. Second, about 50% of highway spending in America comes from general revenue sources – and not the gas tax or user fees (tolls). People that don’t drive pay for roads that others use. Public investments improve the community – not just a select few.

Ohioans Love Libraries. Many Ohioans never set foot in a library, but still appreciate the asset to the community. If there were check-out fees, the usage of our public libraries would dramatically drop. We don’t want this to happen, because libraries serve a public interest. We invest in the public libraries and keep the service free to benefit everyone. (late fees address are used to deter people pushing the capacity of the library by not returning materials on time. Nobody would want late fees to be a primary funding source for our libraries!) We want more people using them, to maximize our return on the investment. Our roads, schools, public transportation, and social services are needed just like our libraries and we should finance them as such.

 

Elimination…

decisionThe Cleveland Plain Dealer ran opposing Opinion-editorial pieces questioning if Ohio should eliminate the income tax. Charlie Earl of the Ohio Libertarian Party wrote a piece calling for Ohio to dump the income tax and Zach Schiller of Policy Matters Ohio wrote a piece identifying how dumping the income tax would hurt Ohio. (Policy Matters Ohio is a coalition member of One Ohio Now.)

Mr. Earl correctly identifies the impact of cutting the income tax in Ohio – cutting services. Mr. Earl says, “As a rule, states that get by without a personal income tax just spend less per resident than states that don’t.” This means less for education, higher college tuition, more potholes in the streets, and fewer community services that strengthen our communities. Most elected officials who oppose the income tax refuse to acknowledge that income tax cuts will lead to service cuts. They continue to believe in a misguided theory that lower taxes produce more revenue for the state. Eliminate the income tax, eliminate many great public services that strengthen our communities. 

Mr. Earl also spouts a favorite talking point of anti-tax organizations. He believes that tax cuts attract business and people into Ohio. This just isn’t true. Research continues to show that people move for weather, jobs, and family. When you look at the mobility between all 50 states, people are moving to the energy boom or warmer climates – disregarding the income tax rates of those communities.

It is time for Ohioans to get real on tax cuts. They simply don’t work. As Mr. Schiller points out, Ohio has lost jobs over the past decade of income tax cuts. Eliminating the income tax will shift the tax load onto property and sales taxes – raising taxes on low and middle income Ohioans. Struggling businesses with low profits will have a higher tax load while highly profitable business owners will see their taxes cut… again.

Candidates and Taxes

keep calmThe Cleveland Plain Dealer asked candidates in Northeast Ohio their opinions on the tax change packages of 2013 and 2014. (READ THEIR ANSWERS HERE).  This is a very important question, because more income tax cuts will likely be one of the largest budget proposals next year – and those elected will need to make a decision.

Ohio’s income tax generates about $8 billion a year for public services and our communities. In 2013-14, the state cut income tax rates by 10%, cut taxes for pass through entities by 75% (first 50% but expanded to 75%), and raised the sales tax rate by about 5%.

WHAT THEY SAID:

Many candidates discussed the ongoing tax shift from the wealthy to the poor by raising the sales tax and cutting the income tax. Other candidates discussed the shift from the state level of funding to the local level of funding and onto property taxes. Other candidates focused their comments on supporting the tax shift and income tax cuts as a smart business and economic decision. For the most part, these answers did not discuss the lost services. Also, no candidate discussed research that points to the harm that business tax cuts may have on the economy. Or to research that shows how an income tax can reduce growing volatility in our tax code that results from growing inequality.:

Public Investments: Not one candidate for Governor and very few state legislative candidates connected taxes paid to the services they fund. When we cut any type of tax, Ohio policymakers must a) make up that revenue somewhere else, b) cut funding for services or c) a combination of the two. Since 2005, Ohio has cut taxes for the wealthiest Ohioans, raised taxes on low and middle income Ohioans, shifted the revenue responsibility to local communities, and cut spending in various areas.

Ohio’s elected leaders cannot make tax decisions in a vacuum. Ohio continues to under-invest in K-12 education, human services, higher education, and local communities. We need to restore funding cuts made over the past 10 years and stop cutting the income tax.

Eroding the foundation

erroding roadOhio has cut our state income tax 7 times in 10 years. The foundation of a strong economy continues to be reliable infrastructure, an educated workforce, and safe communities. Tax cuts erode our public investments in things like roads, schools, and public safety services. On Monday October 20th, legislation was introduced (HB 639) that will eliminate Ohio’s income tax over the next 10 years.  Elimination of Ohio’s income tax will cost Ohioans over $8 billion a year in public investments.

Since the 2005 tax cuts, Ohio has lost jobs and reduced spending on education, community services, and public safety in our local communities. Tax cuts simply have not worked.  Before any further tax cuts in Ohio – let alone eliminating the revenue entirely – Ohio should decide what kind of state we want.  Ohio could strengthen the foundation of our communities and economy by reducing college tuition, expanding pre-school access, and making our communities safer. Common sense public investments, like these and others, will strengthen our communities and improve the quality of life for all Ohioans.

 

Did you see the numbers?

numbersOhio’s poverty rate is down to 16.0% for 2013 from 16.3% in 2012. Ohio gained 200 new jobs last month and unemployment stayed the same. More Ohioans have insurance than before, but many Ohioans are still going hungry…and on and on and on.

All the numbers can become mind-numbing and lost in translation. Here is the big thing we take away from all the numbers that have recently been released – people are still struggling to get by. College debt, school fees, childcare, car repairs, and much more are making it more and more difficult for more Ohioans to get by day-in and day-out. Is this level of struggle for many Ohioans the New Normal? We can’t accept a 16% poverty rate to be celebrated.

10 years ago we cut taxes, and Ohioans were told that this would help our state create jobs and then more people would have opportunities. The wealthiest 1% of Ohioans are paying nearly $20,000 less than they would have, and the majority of us are actually paying more in taxes to maintain our roads, schools, parks, and basic public services. Tax cuts simply didn’t work. Poverty is up, jobs are down, and people are struggling.

If Ohio begins to invest wisely into efficient and effective services, we can make a difference. Ohioans would feel the investments in higher educaiton, preschool, and parks and recreation very quickly for those directly impacted by those services. Those improvements will spread throughout the entire economy as families are more economically stable and people have the opportunities for success.

Inequality slows state revenues – income tax part of solution

money scalesThe Standard & Poor’s (S&P) released a report on Sept. 15th highlighting the impact of economic inequality on state revenue. Their findings conclude that state revenue growth has declined in recent years as a result of this inequality. Most notably, states that are more reliant on sales tax see a larger impact from inequality on state revenues, while states with a progressive income tax are able to partially offset the impact of inequality on their state revenues.

The research analyzes data from 1950-2012 and concludes that slower state revenue growth is a structural problem connected to economic inequality and not a result of normal economic cycles. From 1950-1979, states averaged growth of 9.97% and since 2009 states average growth of 4.36%. State income tax cuts have not produced the promised economic growth over the past decade.

This report along with many others should lead Ohio’s leaders to re-think our 10 year trend of cutting Ohio’s personal income tax. A balance of revenue sources is needed for states, like Ohio, to maintain responsible fiscal policy and address slumping and volatility in revenues. An income tax cannot solve inequality on its own, but through smart public investments in schools and community services, Ohio can create the opportunities for all Ohioans to succeed.