Tax Justice Digest stories about Louisiana

Like just about every other state in the nation, Louisiana faces a serious budget deficit, one that some analysts believe could reach as much as $2 billion (almost one-fifth of its general fund budget) in the coming year.  Unlike other states, though, Louisiana has an option for closing a substantial portion of that gap that would not entail cutting spending below current levels or raising taxes above what people currently pay.

What is this seemingly "free lunch"?  Well, policymakers in Louisiana could significantly shrink the projected deficit by cancelling -- or at the very least, suspending -- the substantial tax cuts that have been enacted over the last two years but that have yet to take effect.  In July 2007, Louisiana adopted a change in its personal income tax that will ultimately allow some Louisianans to reduce their incomes for state tax purposes by the full difference between their federal itemized deductions and their federal standard deduction (often referred to as "excess itemized deductions").  That change was to be implemented in three stages, with the final stage scheduled to occur this year. 

In June 2008, the state made another change to the income tax, expanding the bottom tax bracket so that more of people's incomes would be taxed at a rate of 2 percent instead of the top rate of 4 percent.  While this latter change was far more significant in size, it was also delayed in effect;
Louisiana residents won't see any change in tax withholding until July. 

Repealing these cuts -- or delaying them, as Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu recently
advocated -- would bring in at least $350 million more in tax revenue each year than is now expected, yet the level of taxes Louisianans would pay would stay exactly the same as it is today.

For more about Louisiana's budget situation, visit the Louisiana Budget Project's web site.
We've recently highlighted a variety of progressive revenue raising options gaining serious attention in New York and Wisconsin.  This week we bring you yet another idea that's recently been the subject of debate, though this one applies to fewer states.  Those seven states still offering income tax deductions for federal taxes paid (i.e. Alabama, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Louisiana, and Oregon), should immediately repeal, or at the very least dramatically scale back, that deduction.

The federal income tax deduction takes what is perhaps the best attribute of the federal income tax -- its progressivity -- and uses it to stifle that very attribute at the state level.  Since wealthy taxpayers generally pay more in federal taxes than their less well-off counterparts, allowing taxpayers to deduct those taxes from their income for state income tax purposes is a gift to precisely those folks who need it least. And since most state income tax systems possess a degree of progressivity, those better-off taxpayers who face higher marginal tax rates are benefited even more by being able to shield their income from tax via this deduction.

Iowa Governor Chet Culver most recently drew attention to this problem while
urging lawmakers this week to end the deduction.  The idea has also recently garnered attention in Missouri, where ITEP recently testified on a bill that would, among other changes, eliminate the deduction.  Finally, another bill making its way through the Alabama legislature seeks to end the deduction for upper-income Alabamians.

With three of the seven states that still offer this deduction considering its elimination, this is definitely one progressive policy change to keep an eye on.

Gloom & Boom

|

States' collective fiscal outlook appears to be quite dim and could get even darker in the months ahead according to a report released this week by the National Conference of State Legislators (NCSL).  The report notes that, in the aggregate, states experienced a $40 billion budget gap for fiscal year 2009, a chasm that has been bridged largely through reductions in spending.

 

Not every state's budget is shrouded in gloom, however.  Some states derive significant revenue from severance taxes (taxes imposed on the extraction of natural resources like oil and natural gas) and have economies closely tied to these industries. These states, Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming for example, are enjoying substantial budget surpluses. 

 

Given the volatility of energy markets, these surpluses are likely a temporary phenomenon, but that hasn't stopped states from considering and enacting tax cuts that would permanently reduce revenue.  Earlier this year, Louisiana briefly weighed the idea of repealing its income tax altogether, only to settle on an oh-so-modest annual cut of $300 million.  North Dakota has not only revived its property tax debate from a few years ago, but may also place on this November's ballot a measure that would slash the personal income tax by 50 percent and the corporate income tax by 15 percent.  In this context, a plan backed by West Virginia Republicans to completely exempt groceries from the state sales tax appears far more reasonable in scope - and would certainly help to improve the progressivity of the state's tax system.  However, it would still likely leave the Mountain State with inadequate revenues once oil and gas prices come back to earth.

 

Perhaps the most responsible - and fair - approach to surpluses generated by skyrocketing severance tax revenue comes from New Mexico, where Governor Bill Richardson this past week put forward a proposal to dedicate the majority of the state's projected $400 million surplus to one-time tax rebates and to highway construction.  Richardson's proposal does contain some permanent changes in tax law, such as an expansion of the state's working families tax credit, but they appear to be targeted towards those low- and moderate-income taxpayers who are facing the greatest challenges from the nationwide foreclosure crisis and from rising fuel and food prices.

Policymakers in Louisiana this week took one of the final steps towards enacting an unfair and unaffordable personal income tax cut.  On Wednesday, the House of Representatives unanimously approved SB 87, a measure that would repeal one more element of the landmark 2002 Stelly Plan, returning the level at which a married couple’s income becomes subject to the state’s top income tax rate of 6 percent from $50,000 to $100,000.  (Single people will also derive some benefits from the bill, as it would push back the start of their top bracket from $25,000 to $50,000.)

 

As new reports from the Louisiana Budget Project (LBP) and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) show, however, SB 87 not only ignores the Bayou State’s perilous long-term fiscal condition, but also the impact of its current tax system on low- and moderate-income Louisianans.  While Louisiana may be temporarily flush with revenue due to escalating oil prices, as LBP points out, general fund revenue is expected to decline by 1.5 percent on average over the next four years; indeed, the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana further notes, “even if oil prices remain high, state revenues are projected to drop by $377 million from 2009 to 2010”.  Cutting personal income taxes by $300 million or so, as SB 87 would do, would only add to Louisiana’s long-term fiscal woes.

 

SB 87 also directs the vast majority of its benefits to the most affluent taxpayers in the state, when those taxpayers already pay a much smaller portion of their incomes in taxes than working Louisianans do.  Roughly 75 percent of the tax cut that would be spawned by SB 87 would go to the wealthiest fifth of Louisianans, while taxpayers in the bottom two-fifths of the income distribution would see virtually no change in their taxes.  Conversely, as ITEP’s latest analysis demonstrates, the poorest 40 percent of non-elderly Louisianans paid upwards of 12 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes in 2006, while the very best-off one percent paid the equivalent of just 6.4 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes.  Of course – and leaving questions of fiscal responsibility aside -- far more progressive options for cutting taxes – such as reducing Louisiana’s sales tax rate or lowering its bottom income tax rate -- were available to the members of the Louisiana House, if only they had chosen to pursue them.

 

The House’s version of SB 87 must now be reconciled with the version passed by the Senate earlier this year, but few should expect this to improve the measure any.  The version passed by the Senate ultimately would have repealed the income tax in its entirety, making the House’s approach seem positively responsible and equitable in comparison.
Last week, Louisiana’s House Ways and Means Committee approved a measure (SB 87) to repeal one more element of the state’s 2002 “Stelly Plan,” marking further retreat from that landmark legislation’s principles of tax fairness, adequacy, and stability.  As reported by the Ways and Means Committee, SB 87 would raise the income levels at which married couples begin to pay the state’s top 6 percent income tax rate from $50,000 to $100,000 (and from $25,000 to $50,000 for single people).  As a result, the measure would reduce annual income tax revenue by close to $300 million per year, but would only cut taxes for the one-third of Louisianans who currently pay at the 6 percent rate.  In fact, more than a quarter of the bill’s benefits would accrue to the wealthiest 5 percent of Louisianans.

While the Committee’s version of the measure is certainly an improvement over the version adopted by the Senate – which would have repealed the state income tax altogether – less expensive, more fair, and farther reaching alternatives are available. 

A new
analysis, jointly released by Louisiana’s Agenda for Children and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, offers one such alternative.  It shows that, by expanding the state’s bottom income tax bracket – instead of shrinking its top bracket – and by strengthening its EITC, Louisiana policymakers could cut taxes for twice as many people – but at half the cost of SB 87.  Such an alternative would lower the taxes paid by slightly more than three-quarters of Louisianans, while reducing annual income tax collections by roughly $130 million.  The alternative would not only provide a larger average tax cut to middle-income Louisianans, but would also ensure that the bulk of the tax reduction it would produce would go to the bottom 60 percent of the income distribution.  Other alternatives – such as reducing Louisiana’s lowest income tax rate or lowering the state’s sales tax rate – would also be preferable to SB 87 from a tax fairness perspective

Given the highly regressive nature of Louisiana’s current tax system – as of 2006, the poorest 20 percent of Louisianans faced an effective tax rate that was more than twice that of the richest 1 percent – the need for such an equity-enhancing alternative is clear.  It’s now up to Louisiana’s elected officials to respond.
In the eyes of most fiscal policy experts, there are a few commonly accepted principles for judging tax policy – neutrality, horizontal and vertical equity, and enforceability, to name a few.  Apparently, in the eyes of one Louisiana legislator, “cutesy” now ought to be added to the list.

As the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported earlier this week, Sen. Joe McPherson apologized to his colleagues for casting the deciding vote in favor of an amendment to repeal the state’s income tax, which currently yields nearly $3 billion per year.  It seems that the Senator expected the amendment to lose, but “wanted to be on the record as doing away with income taxes.” He later owned up to being “cutesy” with his vote. 

The bill that Senator McPherson and his colleagues voted to amend would have repealed yet another element of the 2002 Stelly plan, which substantially improved the fairness of Louisiana’s tax system.  Just last year, Pelican State lawmakers voted to reinstate the “excess” itemized deductions that had been eliminated as part of the Stelly plan, a move that cost the state more than $150 million in tax revenue annually and that benefits only the wealthiest 20 percent of taxpayers. 

The bill being debated now was intended to raise the income tax brackets that had been lowered under the Stelly plan. It would have (before being amended) reduced state revenue by roughly a quarter of a billion dollars per annum and, despite the claims of proponents, yet again help the most affluent. As the Times-Picayune notes, the bill’s proponents portray it as a prototypical “middle-class tax cut”, but preliminary estimates from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy indicate that more than 70% of the benefits from changing Louisiana’s income tax brackets would accrue to the wealthiest fifth of taxpayers.

Louisiana is the number three film producing state in the nation, but behind the multi-million dollar films and flashy actors lies the dirty side of what can only be called the state's tax credit industry.  As explained by an article in the magazine Fast Company, the FBI is investigating whether or not a company was improperly granted film production tax credits, which in Louisiana can be converted to cash by resale to another party that pays state taxes. One credit granted was worth more than the entire budget of the film produced. In 2002, when the state first developed these credits there wasn't even a system in place for the independent auditing of expenditures. 

Louisiana's former Film Commissioner, Mark Smith, is currently under investigation and, in a perhaps predictable twist, now works for the movie industry. The lack of oversight is not the only reason to question the whole idea of tax credits for film production. Their impact on economic development is questionable, particularly since nearly all states now have some type of film tax credit.
Louisiana's 8-week legislative session came to a close late last month and Governor Kathleen Blanco has signed a variety of bills into law.  HB 365 allows state income tax filers to claim the same itemized deductions they claim on their federal returns.  The problem is, only the wealthiest 20 percent of Louisianans itemize. The estimated $157 million the provision will cost could be put to better use.  SB 3 provides a "sales tax holiday" on the first Friday and Saturday in August and applies to the first $2,500 spent by consumers.  The bill makes the holiday permanent and was introduced as a "back-to-school" benefit. The only improvement in tax fairness is SB 341, a progressive bill that provides for a refundable state Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), equal to 3.5 percent of the federal EITC.  This will distribute $40 million in refunds to low-income Louisianans (about 29 percent of all filers) on Tax Day. 
Louisiana's 2007 legislative session came to an end yesterday. Fueled by large projected budget surpluses, lawmakers spent the session pondering all sorts of options for tax cuts, ranging from smokestack-chasing tax giveaways to tax breaks for struggling artists. In the end, lawmakers took an important first step towards tax fairness by enacting a refundable Earned Income Tax Credit, thanks in part to the work of the Louisiana Budget Project. But legislators took a step backwards as well, expanding the ability of the wealthiest Louisianans to claim the same itemized deductions they took on their federal tax forms. This move is estimated to benefit only 20 percent of Louisiana families. Left to be seen is whether Governor Kathleen Blanco might veto these high-end cuts.

Over the past few weeks, three more states have taken steps towards helping low-wage workers and their families by means of the earned income tax credit (EITC).  In Delaware, the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee recently approved a measure that would make the state's existing EITC refundable, meaning that individuals and families who owe less in personal income taxes than the value of their EITCs would receive refund checks to help offset other taxes and to make it easier to make ends meet.  In Oregon, Republican and Democratic members of the House Revenue Committee have put forward a proposal that would raise that state's EITC from 5 percent of the federal EITC to 12 percent. As the Eugene Register-Guard observes this proposal would help to achieve a vital goal - eliminating income taxes on working families living in poverty in Oregon.  Lastly, the Louisiana Senate has passed legislation that would create a state EITC equal to 5 percent of the federal EITC. This report from the Louisiana Budget Project details the positive impact that such a credit would have.

About this Archive

This page is a archive of recent entries in the Louisiana category.

Kentucky is the previous category.

Maine is the next category.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.