"Reverse Robin Hood" Tax Plan - Boo, Brownback! (Wichita: appointed, sales)

[AnywhereElse]

I was disappointed to read the following article: Poor face tax increase under Brownback’s plan, new state figures show | Wichita Eagle as they are want to increase the taxes on the poor, those making under $25,000 and increase the social services (public assistance programs) to cover the short fall? So, you have someone working and you take money for taxes from them and force them to go and apply for social services to cover the shortfall? Well, that should make them feel good about having a job! I was on Brownback's side until just lately and now he seems to be stumbling all over himself as I read all of his "money" saving ideas, not. His office also does not answer email!

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by AnywhereElse

I was disappointed to read the following article: Poor face tax increase under Brownback’s plan, new state figures show | Wichita Eagle as they are want to increase the taxes on the poor, those making under $25,000 and increase the social services (public assistance programs) to cover the short fall? So, you have someone working and you take money for taxes from them and force them to go and apply for social services to cover the shortfall? Well, that should make them feel good about having a job! I was on Brownback's side until just lately and now he seems to be stumbling all over himself as I read all of his "money" saving ideas, not. His office also does not answer email!

You voted for him

Brownback only cares about appeasing Koch Brothers and the corporate elite while constantly talking about "social issues." Hopefully more Kansans will find out about what he is up to and vote in someone that is moderate with common sense

[MOKAN]

The way I read this article is that Kansas taxpayers making less than $25K would pay an average of $156 per year more than currently, assuming the facts in this article are correct and this tax formula goes through. Also, it says taxpayers in this group currently receive $2 million more than they actually pay in taxes. I assume via certain tax credits and deductions. That is income redistribution, which we all know Republicans don't support, so who's surprised? The article also says this group of folks paying on average $156 more per year will as a whole be paying about $80 million into the state income tax system versus sucking $2 million out! THAT is a major improvement. A minor $156 more per year to pay their fair share and contribute rather than hang off a tit? I like it and YES, that should make these workers feel better about working.

What I'm not sure about is getting rid of the mortgage interest and charitable contribution tax deductions.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by AnywhereElse

I was disappointed to read the following article: Poor face tax increase under Brownback’s plan, new state figures show | Wichita Eagle as they are want to increase the taxes on the poor, those making under $25,000 and increase the social services (public assistance programs) to cover the short fall? So, you have someone working and you take money for taxes from them and force them to go and apply for social services to cover the shortfall? Well, that should make them feel good about having a job! I was on Brownback's side until just lately and now he seems to be stumbling all over himself as I read all of his "money" saving ideas, not. His office also does not answer email!

Having read the article, this is interesting because they started off with the changes and are now doing the analysis that would show how the various groups are impacted.

This is normally how things work, you make a proposal and then you run the numbers to view the impacts and then you tweak things.

With that said, I am going to withold judgement until the final version is complete.

I'm torn because frankly, the people having to pay an average of $156 are currently not paying ANYTHING in terms of state income tax. However they are contributing by paying sales tax and property taxes (either directly of as a portion of their rent costs etc.)

On the plus side, I do agree with Brownbacks citation of economists noting that states with lower tax burdens are more likely to attract business....which grows the tax pie.

For PR and political purposes it's going to just be easier to keep the taxes static for the <25k crowd, otherwise I think this is actually a pretty good move.

P.S. When you cut taxes in general the main beneficiaries are going to be those that pay the most. That's kinda assumed IMO.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

You voted for him

Brownback only cares about appeasing Koch Brothers and the corporate elite while constantly talking about "social issues." Hopefully more Kansans will find out about what he is up to and vote in someone that is moderate with common sense

The overarching concept of the tax cuts is actually common sense from an economic standpoint.

How they decide to allocate the cuts needs some work though.

Just as a reference, why did Tiger Woods move his official residence from CA to FL? Because it saved him probably 5 million a year.

Look at what Philly has done to their city with a 5% city tax.

[lifelongMOgal]

A differing perspective: Jordan defends tax plan as concerns mount | CJOnline.com

Why is it unreasonable that those who historically use more of the public services and resources pay into the system? Loopholes for the higher income levels, according to the article, appear to have been greatly closed.

If people want their services then the tax base has to be broadened. Until Kansas increases its manufacturing base and is able to attract population outside of Johnson and Miami counties, this is one way to accomplish it.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/01/1...-tax-plan.html

The lowest tax bracket for taxpayers making less than $15,000 would drop to 3 percent from 3.5 percent.

But the governor’s plan, which is billed as “revenue neutral,” relies on eliminating roughly two dozen tax breaks, including the deductions for home interest mortgage and charitable contributions.

The home interest deduction saves taxpayers on average $389 a year, while the charitable contribution donation saves an average of $243 a year.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

Having read the article, this is interesting because they started off with the changes and are now doing the analysis that would show how the various groups are impacted.

This is normally how things work, you make a proposal and then you run the numbers to view the impacts and then you tweak things.

With that said, I am going to withold judgement until the final version is complete.

I'm torn because frankly, the people having to pay an average of $156 are currently not paying ANYTHING in terms of state income tax. However they are contributing by paying sales tax and property taxes (either directly of as a portion of their rent costs etc.)

On the plus side, I do agree with Brownbacks citation of economists noting that states with lower tax burdens are more likely to attract business....which grows the tax pie.

For PR and political purposes it's going to just be easier to keep the taxes static for the <25k crowd, otherwise I think this is actually a pretty good move.

P.S. When you cut taxes in general the main beneficiaries are going to be those that pay the most. That's kinda assumed IMO.

$156 dollars is still $156 less that the working people will have to spend on goods and services- often within the local economy which supports businesses. How exactly will Kansas attract more businesses by slightly lowering the tax burden? I don't see businesses clamoring to move into Kansas. It might be a negligble difference in economic growth at best.
We'll see what Brownback pulls out of his hat next...

[MOKAN]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

$156 dollars is still $156 less that the working people will have to spend on goods and services- often within the local economy which supports businesses. How exactly will Kansas attract more businesses by slightly lowering the tax burden? I don't see businesses clamoring to move into Kansas. It might be a negligble difference in economic growth at best.
We'll see what Brownback pulls out of his hat next...

If these fine folks go from leeching $2 mill out of the tax system to paying in $80 mill, is that not worth an extra $156 per year? Those folks would then get to contribute and feel good about it while paying their fair share.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

$156 dollars is still $156 less that the working people will have to spend on goods and services- often within the local economy which supports businesses. How exactly will Kansas attract more businesses by slightly lowering the tax burden? I don't see businesses clamoring to move into Kansas. It might be a negligble difference in economic growth at best.
We'll see what Brownback pulls out of his hat next...

Agreed, my writing wasn't the clearest on the topic and I did point out that the <25k crowd are still paying taxes, just not state income taxes. So, it's unfair to say they "aren't paying in" and $156 is indeed a big blow to people making so little.

I cannot predict the extent of the impact of lowering taxes but it does have a real impact in the ability to attract business and development.

KS has made some pragmatic (if not surprising decisions) in recent years....the Casino opening Feb 3 at the Legends complex was clearly not a socially conservative move.

I'm not a fan of Brownback, I will never vote for the guy....but some of his economic efforts are at least in the right direction. Meanwhile my home state of IL staggers towards bankruptcy with 2 governors in jail so perhaps it's just perspective LOL.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by MOKAN

If these fine folks go from leeching $2 mill out of the tax system to paying in $80 mill, is that not worth an extra $156 per year? Those folks would then get to contribute and feel good about it while paying their fair share.

In fairness, the sales tax was planned to reduce by 0.5% and it's being kept where it's at. You also have property taxes they have to pay.

Sales tax hits the poor hardest so it's safe to say that they are indeed paying into the state and local coffers, just not via the states income tax.

So, I don't know that you can describe them as "leeching" especially since you'd have to know what the state has to pay out to them.

I have a 25yo friend that makes maybe 22k a year and would pay no state income tax or very little...but they aren't getting any handouts at all. Just saying.