Tax Justice Digest stories about Pennsylvania

The governors of Illinois and Pennsylvania are each seeking to follow the feds’ lead and stimulate their economy with tax breaks.  Governor Rendell’s plan in Pennsylvania is to rebate up to $400 to low-income families with children, with the precise amount of the rebate being determined by the number of parents, number of children, and income earned in the family.  In Illinois, Governor Blagojevich’s plan is similar to Rendell’s proposal in that it is only available to families with dependent children, though it differs in that its income eligibility thresholds are much higher: single-parent families earning up to $75,000, and two-parent families earning $150,000 will be eligible for the full $300 per child credit.  Blagojevich’s plan could be made more effective and less expensive by lowering the income limits to make these credits available primarily to the low and middle income families who would be most likely to immediately spend tax rebates on everyday needs.

Fortunately, both of these stimulus proposals are refundable, meaning that families receive the money regardless of how much, if any, state income tax they paid.  This is an extremely important component of any fair credit or rebate since even though those in the greatest need often pay no income taxes because of their low incomes, they do pay huge portions of their incomes in regressive sales and property taxes.

One additional flaw with each plan is that low-income individuals without children will see no benefit.  In terms of both stimulating the economy and assisting those in need, both of these plans could be improved by extending the rebates/credits in some form to individuals without children. This could be done very easily in Illinois by lowering the income eligibility criteria and using the resulting savings to assist low-income, childless individuals.

 

A battle over what to do with projected budget surpluses appears imminent in Pennsylvania.  Gov. Ed Rendell proposed Monday to use much of the budget surplus to provide rebates of up to $400 to low-income households. Though much less effective than enacting an Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), this proposal would do a great deal not only to improve tax fairness and the lives of those most in need, but also to stimulate the economy by putting money back in the hands of low-income individuals sure to spend it on their daily needs.

By contrast, Pennsylvania Republicans have proposed using the surplus to cut the income tax rate.  Unlike the Governor’s proposal, which involves changes only to the current year’s tax collections, the Republican plan would alter the Pennsylvania tax code in a way that would permanently restrict the state’s ability to raise revenue.  A broad income tax rate cut would also benefit the wealthiest Pennsylvanians far more than it would low and middle income taxpayers, and would completely wipe out the surplus and likely force future legislators to chose between cutting services and raising other taxes. 

In addition to this plan, some legislators have suggested a “zero growth budget” where government spending increases would be strictly limited to the rate of inflation. Such limitations have proven disastrous for state governments, the most famous example having taken place in Colorado where a similar measure was suspended after education and other public services sharply deteriorated without adequate funding.

Pennsylvania lawmakers continue to tussle over how to cut local property taxes -- and how to pay for it (if at all). The principal plan making its way through the state House of Representatives would cut school property taxes for all Pennsylvania homeowners, and increase the state income tax and sales tax rate to pay for it. But Republican leaders have proposed a variety of alternatives, including a more aggressive plan that would completely repeal school property taxes and expand the state sales tax base. The "repeal everything" bill was rejected earlier this week.
 
But debate nonetheless ground to a halt later in the week after Republicans sponsored a successful amendment to the principal House plan. As amended, the House plan now focuses entirely on eliminating school property taxes for seniors earning less than $40,000 -- but does not include any tax hikes to pay for it, and does nothing for non-elderly homeowners.
 
Meanwhile, as the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center reminds us, truly targeted tax reform alternatives are receiving a hearing as well, with an Earned Income Tax Credit receiving more attention from state lawmakers this year.
In many ways, Maryland's current debate over legalized gambling is depressingly familiar. Faced with a loophole-ridden and unfair tax system that cries out for progressive reform, some elected officials want to introduce thousands of slot machines as a politically palatable revenue-raising alternative. But Maryland offers an interesting, if bizarre, twist. Governor Martin O'Malley's administration is arguing that slot machines would make an excellent economic development tool for propping up the state's ailing horse-racing industry.
 
About the best one can say about the idea of providing tax subsidies for such a small and distinctly 19th-century industry is that it's less expensive than the more conventional smokestack-chasing other states continue to engage in. But Maryland isn't the first state that's had this idea -- and neighboring Delaware's experience has not exactly yielded dividends for that state's racing industry. And as an excellent Washington Post editorial explains, the environmental and economic policy goals the administration allegedly seeks to achieve with slots are a red herring.
 

The author of the O'Malley administration report that makes the economic development-based pitch for slots, Thomas Perez, claims that the introduction of slots in neighboring states has "revitalized the previously moribund horse racing industries in those states." Perez describes his report as "a fact finding tour of racetracks in Delaware, West Virginia and Pennsylvania." Perez's research techniques included counting the number of Maryland license plates in a West Virginia parking lot -- but his time might have been better spent just asking West Virginia's Racing Commission chairman, who sees "no correlation... inverse, in fact" between their 1994 introduction of slots at racetracks and the current health of that state's racing industry.

After a tumultuous legislative session, including a one-day government shutdown, Pennsylvania has a budget. Governor Ed Rendell, who had included an array of tax increases in his budget proposal, ultimately got none of them in the agreed-upon budget. Among the tax hikes left on the cutting-room floor were a 1 percent sales tax increase designed to pay for property tax cuts, a 10-cent cigarette tax hike earmarked for health care spending, an innovative proposal to impose a 3 percent payroll tax on companies that don't provide health care coverage for their employees, and an equally innovative plan to impose a new profits tax on oil companies that would have used combined reporting to curtail tax avoidance by Big Oil. 
 
Rendell's only notable success on the tax front, in fact, was pushing through new tax breaks to encourage filmmakers to shoot in Pennsylvania, at a cost of up to $75 million a year, although the real winner here was actor-turned-lobbyist Paul Sorvino.
 
But the next six months are not likely to be any easier for the legislature (or for Rendell). Lawmakers have agreed to a September special session to discuss Rendell's energy-independence plans, and Pennsylvania's perpetual property tax problems haven't gone anywhere.
The governors of both Pennsylvania and Wisconsin have proposed new taxes for oil companies. Governor Rendell would subject oil companies' gross profits in his state to a 6.17 percent tax in lieu of the state's corporate income tax. Governor Doyle would tax oil companies' gross receipts at 2.5 percent. It remains to be seen whether state governments can really ensure that the tax will be paid by the oil company shareholders, as both governors claim, rather than being passed onto consumers.
 
Probably the most important step a state can take to ensure that oil companies (and other businesses) are paying their fair share is to adopt combined reporting of corporate income for tax purposes. This prevents companies from shifting costs and profits (on paper) between subsidiaries in different states to get the lowest tax bill possible. Fortunately for Pennsylvania, Governor Rendell's tax on oil companies would be calculated using combined reporting. Experts like University of Wisconsin-Madison economist Andrew Reschovsky have suggested that Wisconsin needs to move in this direction as well. Reschovsky told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, "In my view, if the governor wants to raise more money from oil companies, and other multinational companies, the most effective thing he could do would be to urge the Legislature to adopt combined reporting."

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell has proposed a new "Oil Company Gross Profits Tax" on oil companies doing business in the state. The tax, which would be levied in place of the state's regular corporate profits tax, would be calculated using "combined reporting," a loophole-closing technique that has already been enacted in two states this year, and is estimated to raise more than $750 million a year. A new report from the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center argues that Rendell's proposal would be a sustainable and fair funding solution for Pennsylvania's transportation funding needs. Read the report here.

As expected, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick this week joined the ranks of chief executives calling for the use of combined reporting of state corporate income taxes to combat tax avoidance by large and profitable companies. Like the Governors of New York, Pennsylvania, and Iowa, Governor Patrick, in his FY2008 budget plan, recommended adopting this approach to corporate taxation, which would require corporations operating in multiple states to report all of their income — including that attributable to subsidiaries. This would negate any tax benefit derived from accounting schemes designed to shift profits out-of-state. A fact sheet from the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center explains how combined reporting works and why it's needed in the Bay State. While Martin O'Malley has not yet added his name to this growing gubernatorial roster, Maryland legislators this week considered a bill to institute combined reporting in their state. ITEP Executive Director Matt Gardner was among those who testified on the measure.

State corporate income tax reform is gathering momentum in 2007, as more and more states are considering adopting an important corporate tax reform: combined reporting. Governors in New York, Iowa and Pennsylvania have already proposed this important loophole-closing reform, and newly elected Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick is sending signals that he may follow in their footsteps. Meanwhile, a new paper by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities' Michael Mazerov gives the lowdown on an equally important corporate tax reform that could productively be adopted by every state with a corporate tax: company-specific disclosure of taxes paid (or not paid). Mazerov's paper includes model legislation for use in any state seeking to shed more light on corporate tax avoidance.

The all-important first step towards an equitable property tax is figuring out how much each home and business is actually worth. To do this perfectly, a tax assessor would need to visually inspect the inside and outside of every home — which, of course, no one actually does. But as a recent New York Times article notes, governments from Philadelphia to Florida are now relying on computerized aerial images (taken from a small plane) to detect changes in the outside appearance of homes and businesses. A Philadelphia tax administrator notes that the computerized system, which costs the city about $100,000 a year, "probably paid for itself within about two weeks." Assessment by low-flying planes may seem intrusive, but at the end of the day this is how the property tax is supposed to work. This approach is in stark contrast to the head-in-the-sand approach to property tax administration proposed by Alabama Democratic gubernatorial candidate Lucy Baxley, who has proposed ending the annual reassessment of Alabama homes.

About this Archive

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

Oregon is the previous category.

Rhode Island is the next category.

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