Should Pittsburgh tax non-residents who work in the city? (Republic: insurance, find a job)

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by BrianTH

Tax wages, but give a deduction for any money spent in the City.

I think that would get terribly complicated. I can't imagine many people saving a year's worth of lunch receipts. Maybe it could just be assumed they are spending a certain amount and there can be a standard deduction. Or the tax rate could be 3% for residents, and less for non-residents.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by Faer

Instead expand the city borders, and thus the tax base.

Yes - though a commuter tax could be a useful stick to encourage consolidation.

In practice, municipal consolidation needs the enthusiastic participation of three different sets of officials: City, suburb and state. The Gen Ass and Guv have to be on-board, because PA's existing laws regarding municipal mergers are so arcane and impose such difficult conditions, that the only practical way to achieve it is with new legislation.

The only way state Repubs will join such an effort is if the terms of consolidation might open the possibility of Repub gains in city politics by incorporating enough suburban Repubs or Repub-leaning independents. Obviously, Grant St Demos have no incentive to accept such a deal.

The City might shift this stalemate by a dramatic brinksmanship gesture such as a punitive commuter tax, or a steep congestion tax, or both. But the Grant St Demo machine has no particular reason (apart from small matters like the city's perennial bankruptcy) to change the status quo so dramatically.

Besides, does Allegheny County really need 100 different mayors, municipal councils, etc?

Clearly the answer is no, unless amusement value is the only consideration (Dormont, this one's for you).

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I think that would get terribly complicated. I can't imagine many people saving a year's worth of lunch receipts. Maybe it could just be assumed they are spending a certain amount and there can be a standard deduction. Or the tax rate could be 3% for residents, and less for non-residents.

There is probably a way to do it electronically, and the purpose of making it variable would be to incentivize additional spending.

[squarian]

Originally Posted by ferrarisnowday

I think school districts would have to stay the same or slowly be consolidated. Changing the county's school districts would cause more backlash than an income tax on non-residents.

Clearly - you're never going to get e.g. Mt Lebo to agree to consolidation with Pgh if it also means losing their school district. So one step at a time - municipalities first, then school reform.

[SlurmsMcKenzie]

How are the outlying communities where these workers live supposed to deal with the extra tax burden? Do they need to adjust their tax rates accordingly to attract/keep workers when their property tax/school millage rates are already so high here in Allegheny County? Doing so would be extra difficult given the recent state cuts for education.

I think it would just encourage more people to hop across the border into neighboring counties and take advantage of lower property taxes there. I still think a flat tax is the way to go.

[Burghgirl17]

I live in the suburbs and work in the city. I spend a fortune in the city. For example- I spend $250/m to park in a garage owned by the Pittsburgh Parking Authority. That's $3000/yr (painful, I admit). I eat lunch out most every day - that's probably at least another $2,000- $2,500 (if not more when you add in business lunches at higher priced restaurants). Then there's coffee, happy hours, shopping, etc. This also isn't counting sporting events - we're season ticket holders for both Pitt football and basketball. So you count parking and food for those. Plus any cultural events that we go to- concerts, museums, Pirate games, Steeler games, etc.

As a suburbanite with a pretty nice disposal income, I spend far more in the city than many city-dwellers.

[hey man_its me]

Yep, more taxes, that is ALWAYS the answer....

[Love2Golf09]

Pittsburghers voted for mayor Luke and his super trash cans without any issue at all. Your schools suck and your budget is out of control. The state is going to take over management of your severely underfunded pension ponzi scheme. Pittsburghers created their financial mess, not people from the suburbs. Pay your own Damn bills and fire the politicians that promote such idiotic policies and you won't find yourself in this situation again. The fact that this idea is even being floated shows how fiscally irresponsible Pittsburgh's politicians are and makes the city look pathetic. I'm embarrassed for you east end liberals. Go steal the money from trader joes. I'm sure they will pony up for a noble cause. Tell them it's a civil rights issue.

[hornet67]

Originally Posted by Love2Golf09

Pittsburghers voted for mayor Luke and his super trash cans without any issue at all. Your schools suck and your budget is out of control. The state is going to take over management of your severely underfunded pension ponzi scheme. Pittsburghers created their financial mess, not people from the suburbs. Pay your own Damn bills and fire the politicians that promote such idiotic policies and you won't find yourself in this situation again. The fact that this idea is even being floated shows how fiscally irresponsible Pittsburgh's politicians are and makes the city look pathetic. I'm embarrassed for you east end liberals. Go steal the money from trader joes. I'm sure they will pony up for a noble cause. Tell them it's a civil rights issue.

Yeah, the boy mayor and the rest of the clueless, corrupt bozos in city " government" will be certain to spend the tax dollars wisely.
Yeah, we need MORE taxes. Then, see how many more employers take up the first chance to leave the city limits.

[ferraris]

Originally Posted by Burghgirl17

I live in the suburbs and work in the city. I spend a fortune in the city. For example- I spend $250/m to park in a garage owned by the Pittsburgh Parking Authority. That's $3000/yr (painful, I admit). I eat lunch out most every day - that's probably at least another $2,000- $2,500 (if not more when you add in business lunches at higher priced restaurants). Then there's coffee, happy hours, shopping, etc. This also isn't counting sporting events - we're season ticket holders for both Pitt football and basketball. So you count parking and food for those. Plus any cultural events that we go to- concerts, museums, Pirate games, Steeler games, etc.

As a suburbanite with a pretty nice disposal income, I spend far more in the city than many city-dwellers.

If you're going to compare city residents and suburban residents, then you should compare those with the same income. I think people working in the city that are in the same income brackets spend the same amount in the city on average, but those in the city are taxed on top of it.

I don't think that the city should tax non-residents out of some misguided attempt at redistributing wealth. But I do think it could be justified when you consider infrastructure costs. As others have said, it could also serve as a bargaining chip to convince municipalities to consolidate with the city/county, or as incentive for people to move into the city.

By the way, Philadelphia is another example of a city that taxes non-residents' income.