Advertisement

Archive for Friday, January 13, 2012

Battle forming over Brownback’s plan to scrap earned income tax credit

Gov. Sam Bronwback said "that the State of our State is strong — and getting stronger," as he gave the State of the State address on Wed., January 11, 2012, in Topeka.

Gov. Sam Bronwback said "that the State of our State is strong — and getting stronger," as he gave the State of the State address on Wed., January 11, 2012, in Topeka.

January 13, 2012

Advertisement

— Democrats and advocates for low-income families on Friday blasted Gov. Sam Brownback’s proposed tax plan because it would junk tax credits aimed at helping poor and elderly Kansans.

And they distributed runs from the Kansas Department of Revenue on how Brownback’s plan would affect different types of taxpayers.

Currently, a single head of household with one child, with a Kansas adjusted gross income of $20,000 per year and using standard deductions would receive a $382 state income tax refund. Under Brownback’s plan, that taxpayer would owe $60 in taxes because of the loss of tax credits. That amounts to a tax increase of $442.

Meanwhile, under the current tax schedule, a married couple with a Kansas adjusted gross income of $64,930, filing jointly with one child and using standard deductions, would pay $2,412 in state income taxes. Under Brownback’s plan, they would pay $1,987, for a tax cut of $425.

House Minority Leader Paul Davis, D-Lawrence, said Brownback’s proposal shifted the burden of taxes onto poor people while giving businesses and wealthier Kansans a tax cut.

Fight over Earned Income Tax Credit

An example of this, he and Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said was Brownback’s desire to eliminate the state version of the Earned Income Tax Credit.

Getting rid of the EITC would take $90 million out of the pockets of working poor families and put 4,000 more Kansas children under the poverty line, according to Kansas Action for Children.

“Elimination of the Earned Income Tax Credit would have a devastating impact on Kansas children and families,” said Shannon Cotsoradis, president of KAC.

But the Brownback administration has said there is widespread fraud in the EITC.

Brownback’s Budget Director Steve Anderson said, “We have no way of making sure, for example, that a single mother is spending that on needs for her children.”

That brought a sharp retort from Davis.

“The worst thing that people in government can do is make judgments about how people are spending their money. I don’t think it’s the place of the budget director to be making judgments about how they spend money.”

Hensley said the EITC “is a tried and true credit and anti-poverty type program.” At the news conference, Hensley handed out a paper with a quote from former President Ronald Reagan who signed into law the federal EITC. Reagan said, “The Earned Income Tax Credit is the best anti-poverty, the best pro-family, the best job creation measure to come out of Congress.”

Advocates estimated that more than 90 percent of Kansas’ EITC dollars go to families with children, and the average credit is about $360.

But Brownback officials have said two thirds of the money the state would recover from eliminating the EITC would be used to lure more federal dollars and then be plowed back into programs designed to help low-income families. The other third of the captured EITC will be used to double the standard deduction, under Brownback’s plan.

Lowering rates, eliminating credits

Brownback’s tax overhaul, which he says is needed to spur the economy, would collapse the three current individual income tax rates into two.

Kansas’ current tax rates for married couples filing jointly are 3.5 percent on the first $30,000 of income, 6.25 percent on income between $30,000 and $60,000, and 6.45 percent on the portion above $60,000.

Brownback’s plan would tax 3 percent of the first $30,000 and 4.9 percent on the portion above that. It would also eliminate individual state income tax on most small businesses.

Brownback said his plan would unleash the Kansas economy by making state tax policy more competitive with other states.

“I firmly believe these reforms will set the stage for strong economic growth in Kansas and will put more money into the pockets of Kansas families and businesses,” he said.

The plan would also eliminate many personal deductions and credits. Some of the larger ones are for charitable contributions, mortgage interest, real estate taxes, state and local taxes, the EITC, food sales rebate credits, and child and dependent care.

Comments

Morganna 2 years, 3 months ago

OMG - I am of the working class - am not stupid - am underpaid and get earned income. My EIC - all of it, state and federal, goes into a savings account and is used when my paycheck does not cover all expenses. My EIC puts tires on my car so I can go to work 5 days a week, fixes plumbing problems, pays for clothes and shoes for my child, school trips, school lunches, class fees, school pictures, graduation, doctor appointments and medication, the list goes on and on. Is the state EIC large - not compared to federal - it does pay to get my child enrolled into school and put money towards school lunches. Am I wasting that money?

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 3 months ago

The earned income tax credit make the tax code into a welfare "payout" program. If you owe no taxes you should simply not "pay" we should not be issuing welfare type checks as a supposed method of income redistribution or fairness. Brownback is showing that he understands business and government here by trying to make our tax system less cumbersome and less expensive to administer.

0

Stain 2 years, 3 months ago

His plan is regressive and it is a shameful attack on the poor.

0

raiderssb 2 years, 3 months ago

As a "former" KANSAN - he is an embarrassment to the State. He is a fake Christian, and nothing but destruction for the working class. I'm proud to say I'm from Douglas County, one of the three sane counties who vote Democratic over, and over. Yes, we're liberal, Democrats, and we really do care!!

0

guess_again 2 years, 3 months ago

Isn't this the same Brownback that believes a non-extension of the so-called "Bush tax cuts" in DC is a tax increase?

How is that different than his state budget recommendation FOR an extension of the temporary state sales tax increase adopted only two years ago which was scheduled to be eliminated under current law.

Brownback, by his, and fomer fellow republican senators/reps own definition, is advocating for an increase in state taxes, no matter whose income tax he argues he is reducing.

0

voevoda 2 years, 3 months ago

The Brownback tax plan: Take from the wretch and give to the peer. Who wins under his plan? Wealthy business owners who don't have children or a mortgage and who don't give to charity. Who loses? Modestly-compensated employees who have children and a mortgage, and who give to charity.
Kansas doesn't need a tax plan that rewards selfishness.

0

verity 2 years, 3 months ago

Paragraphs 3 and 4 of this article proves that Sam is truly trying to carry out his push for marriage agenda to get people (women and children) out of poverty.

0

usnsnp 2 years, 3 months ago

If he wants to elimate tax breaks that would lower over all tax rates, why does he not propose the elimination of the tax breaks for Federal retirement, State retirement, Railroad retirement and military retirement payments. O he will not do that because he knows that the people that receive theis payments vote.

0

FalseHopeNoChange 2 years, 3 months ago

Reagan was senile. Everybody knows that trickle down is what destroyed the economy.

Right?

My accountant Swifty, said to not worry.

0

Alceste 2 years, 3 months ago

Although the blurb below is about the Federal EITC, the Kansas EITC is really no different. Tax income.....do not tax work: http://www.taxkimk.com

"American economists on both the right and the left have long advocated subsidizing low-wage work as a means of social inclusion—offering an economic compact with everyone who embraces work, no matter their level of skill. The Earned Income Tax Credit, begun in 1975 and expanded several times since then, does just that, and has been the country’s best anti-poverty program. Yet by and large, the EITC helps only families with children. In 2008, it provided a maximum credit of nearly $5,000 to families with two children, with the credit slowly phasing out for incomes above $15,740 and disappearing altogether at $38,646. The maximum credit for workers without children (or without custody of children) was only $438. We should at least moderately increase both the level of support offered to families by the EITC and the maximum income to which it applies. Perhaps more important, we should offer much fuller support for workers without custody of children. That’s a matter of basic fairness. But it’s also a measure that would directly target some of the biggest budding social problems in the United States today. A stronger reward for work would encourage young, less skilled workers—men in particular—to develop solid, early connections to the workforce, improving their prospects. And better financial footing for young, less-skilled workers would increase their marriageability."

http://financialdarwinism.com/PDF/pdf_08.pdf

0

Loki 2 years, 3 months ago

Someone should not get a tax break for choosing to have children. You already get an education frm the tax payers and many choose not to participate in their work medical plans letting the tax payers pick up that burden also, but they can afford cable and eating out and going to movies, etc. Taxpayers pay enough for your choice, no more tax credits for children so you can buy a new TV or video game system.

0

Jock Navels 2 years, 3 months ago

the eitc is a form of welfare...for businesses. it's a wage subsidy. if you earn nothing, your eitc is nothing. you have to be an unsuccessful hard working person to receive it. so, brownie, how about matching the elimination of the eitc with a raise in the state minimum wage. have the direct recipients of the fruits of the labor of others pay for that fruit.
i predict in 14 years a huge crime wave of victorian era petty crimes committed by the thousands of born but uncared for children of kansas. then a round of republican fear mongering and more cops, loss of civil rights and more prisons to 'solve' the problem. you watch.

0

Scut Farkus 2 years, 3 months ago

I will be truly amazed if he is reelected. But then again, Kansans as a whole, are not the most intelligent residents of this great nation. They knew what they were voting for when they elected him in the first place.

0

Lana Christie-Hayes 2 years, 3 months ago

"The plan would also eliminate many personal deductions and credits. Some of the larger ones are for charitable contributions, mortgage interest, real estate taxes, state and local taxes, the EITC, food sales rebate credits, and child and dependent care." .. Sam Blows A Lot!!

0

Kontum1972 2 years, 3 months ago

you can be sure he did not buy that suit.....

0

Tanya Spacek 2 years, 3 months ago

@ktgman: "so called 'working poor?'" You don't think they exist? Do you get out much?

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Does this remind anyone else of King John and the Sheriff of Nottingham? we need modern day Robin Hood and a modern version of the Magna Carta.

0

Jon Jambor 2 years, 3 months ago

Why do Scott's articles keep showing up in the news section? They need to go into the opinion and editorial section!

Be that as it may, this statement really sums up the mentality of the entitlement statist: "Getting rid of the EITC would take $90 million out of the pockets of working poor families..." Excuse me? That $90 million is not their money. That money is taken out of the pockets of the taxpayers and TRANSFERED to the so called"working poor".

Furthermore, Mr. Davis is either being ironic or moronic when he asserts that people in government shouldn't make judgements about how people are spending their money. WHAT? That's all they do. Instead of letting us spend our money the way we best see fit, they are quite happy telling us to spend it on bigger government and transfer payments.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Why doesn't Brownback make judgements about how businesses will spend their money? They certainly aren't using tax subsidies to create jobs. Boeing is the quinticential example. Kansas has been subsidizing them for decades but that didn't generate any loyalty to Kansas. I guess Brownback feels that poor people have poor judgement, hence they are poor whereas the wealthy have good judgment, hence they are rich. The problem is that type of "every man for himself" thinking is what caused the economic crisis we've been in bush 2 was president.

0

autie 2 years, 3 months ago

Why is it when the put up Brownback's picture, he usually has his "jesus' pose going on? Does he have a coach to help him with visuals when he speaks?

0

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 3 months ago

To quote my husband, "Gee, I didn't think Republicans got rid of tax credits."

0

toe 2 years, 3 months ago

Poor foolish Brownback. He forgot that the tax policy of the State included a welfare component. Perhaps he should have eliminated sales taxes on food and medicine for those that qualify for the eic as a away to encourage good use of welfare dollars rather than a few hundred bucks for the illegal drugs many use eic for now.

0

blindrabbit 2 years, 3 months ago

If I'm not mistaken isn't that Speaker O'Neal of the left side of the story photograph, now serving as the Kansas jester and clown-in-charge

0

Jimo 2 years, 3 months ago

So the GOP continues to cement it's "brand" as tax increasers on the lower classes?

Is Brownback aware that such a form of negative income tax was originally championed by none other than that saint of the GOP Radicals, Milton Friedman? (Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom, page 192-94 in my edition.)

0

Steven Gaudreau 2 years, 3 months ago

I think Sam needs to re read his Bible. Im pretty sure it states that we are suppose to help the needy. Theres also something about a needle, a camel, rich and heaven but it eludes me.

0

sciencegeek 2 years, 3 months ago

tennesseerader illustrates a tenet of the conservative attitude: that poverty is caused by laziness. To them, the 1% should get breaks because they earned it, while everyone else just has to work harder. This also justifies their superior attitude toward their financial (and moral) inferiors.

They don't understand "working poor" because they've never lived it. They don't care about health care costs because they've always been able to have afford premiums, let alone been bankrupted by a serious illness. Public education isn't that important because their kids go to church school or are home-schooled by mothers who don't have to work to pay the bills.

The irony is that they don't understand how their attitude is condemned by their favorite prop: the Bible.

0

progressive_thinker 2 years, 3 months ago

It is sad that our state is looking at cutting the earned income tax credit. This credit is designed to encourage and reward work for those who are employed at the lowest of wages. Remember, this is an incentive to a working class person for sticking with what is likely a tough, underpaid job.

It is interesting that there was no outcry among the right wing extremists over the 47 million in corporate welfare offered up to AMC to move to Leawood last fall. From my perspective, this demonstrates the hypocrisy that has engulfed our elected state leaders. I can presume that we will see more of this to come.

0

tomatogrower 2 years, 3 months ago

A single parent with an adjusted gross income of $20,000 who qualifies for earned income credit will probably have to use the refund to catch up on utility bills or rent, so they won't become homeless. What does Brownback think they are spending it on? I'd be more worried that the person on welfare is spending their money on drugs and alcohol. They have more time on their hands, than someone who is working hard to support their family. It sounds like it would be easier to just quit and go on welfare. Of course, then he could claim that he opened up some jobs.

0

2 years, 3 months ago

that's a good point that last year brownback rejects federal dollars but then today says he wants to lure federal dollars, yes which is it? what does ALEC want you to do today?

0

Mary Sucha 2 years, 3 months ago

The single head of household taxpayer that is losing their $382 Kansas EITC, will still get their federal EITC witch equals about $2,122.

0

Brock Masters 2 years, 3 months ago

It occurred to me that the Brownback administration is on the right track and we should use their EIC approach as the model for other issues. For example, we all know that some people abuse prescription drugs so we shouuld ban all prescription drugs to eliminate the abuse.

No doubt some people speed while driving so lets ban all driving.

It is so simple you wonder why no one thought of this before.

0

sassykansan 2 years, 3 months ago

So glad to know Governor Brownback's worried about whether or not us single mothers are spending our money appropriately. This is one of the most ignorant arguments I've ever heard.

0

Gandalf 2 years, 3 months ago

I wonder what form of birth control Mrs. brownback uses? EviLsam avoidence?

0

moxibustion 2 years, 3 months ago

Brownback has no compassion for the needs of others. $60 a week can buy a family groceries, pay a utility bill or buy new clothes. Oh, that's right, single parent families don't deserve healthy food, a warm home, or new clothes. Because they are lower class citizens in the eyes of Brownback.

Can we impeach this idiot and elect someone who is in touch with reality and the needs of the people in Kansas as opposed to the Koch Brothers?

0

mloburgio 2 years, 3 months ago

Kansas poverty report reveals bleak data The poverty rate for Kansas children rose from 18 percent to nearly 24 percent between 2009 and 2010, and 20,000 more Kansans fell into poverty during the same time frame.

“It’s at least honest,” said Jesyca Rodenberg, spokeswoman for KACAP, about the 2012 Kansas Poverty Report. “We have problems with our infrastructure.” http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/dec...

Kansas ranks 50th in progress on insuring children

While the nation as a whole made progress in reducing the number of uninsured children from 2008 to 2010, the number in Kansas without this benefit increased by 7,850 over those three years.

the rate of uninsured Kansas children was 8.2 percent in 2010, up from 7.4 percent in 2008.

Nationally, the rate was reduced from 9 percent in 2008 to 8 percent in 2010. Thirty-three states cut their rates. The bottom line: Kansas tied with Minnesota for 50th in terms of futility on this pressing issue.

http://cjonline.com/blog-post/tim-carpenter/2011-12-05/kansas-ranks-50th-progress-insuring-children

If you want a ks. republican to care about you, remain a fetus!

0

Gandalf 2 years, 3 months ago

How come EviLsam turns down fed grants and says we need to wean ourselves off of fed dollars one day. Then turns around and tells us he want to cut EIC for the poor and elderly and use the saving to lure fed dollars for new programs?

Can't he even keep his lies straight?

0

Les Blevins 2 years, 3 months ago

In my mind this describes what Republicanism actually is. To be a Republican is to favor a redistribution of wealth from the have-nots to the have's. Or in other words to sock it to those who can least defend themselves and help those who least need help. To take from the poor and give to the richer. I think it's time to call their hand on this and vote them all out when the chance comes.

0

GardenMomma 2 years, 3 months ago

"Brownback’s Budget Director Steve Anderson said, 'We have no way of making sure, for example, that a single mother is spending that on needs for her children.'"

"But Brownback officials have said two thirds of the money the state would recover from eliminating the EITC would be used to lure more federal dollars and then be plowed back into programs designed to help low-income families..."

We have no way of making sure, for example, that the federal dollars "lured" is spent on needs and programs designed to help low-income families. If you don't trust your constituents to spend their own money on their needs, why should we trust you to spend it for us?

0

Gandalf 2 years, 3 months ago

Evilsam IS for smaller government. He wants it compressed until all power resides in his hands alone. without any of those pesky constitutional issues or check and balances!

Dictatorship in brownbackinstan anyone?

0

tennesseerader 2 years, 3 months ago

Earned income tax credits are welfare and it is not fair for successful hard working to people to be punished for the laziness of others. Good Job Sam!

0

63BC 2 years, 3 months ago

Currently, a single head of household with one child, with a Kansas adjusted gross income of $20,000 per year and using standard deductions would receive a $382 state income tax refund. Under Brownback’s plan, that taxpayer would owe $60 in taxes because of the loss of tax credits. That amounts to a tax increase of $442.

So to be clear, the household in this example would pay a total of $60 in state income tax.

Sixty bucks. A year.

Twenty cents a day.

Truly heartless.

0

Katara 2 years, 3 months ago

"Brownback’s Budget Director Steve Anderson said, “We have no way of making sure, for example, that a single mother is spending that on needs for her children.”

Well, yes. Flighty creatures that women are, you know, lacking any form of common sense, need a man to make sure that money is spent on her children's needs and that she is taken care of without a worry to trouble her pretty head. That is why Brownback is encouraging marriage and wishes to make it difficult for one to get out of one. Women need a man to tell them what to do. My goodness, think of the poor children!

0

pace 2 years, 3 months ago

Shame, Sam is putting his foot down, down on the necks of children, again.

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 3 months ago

It's not what the 1% have or don't have. It is the preferential treatment that sucks.

The 1% cannot pay the bills, fill the military needs nor provide the health care this country demands. Nor do they pay taxes such that the rest of the 99% do.

If any group should receive preferential treatment it is the 99 % that do pay the bills, fill the military needs and spend tons and tons of money that which keeps the USA in what jobs are left. The 99% are the primary stakeholders of the USA!

When it comes to funding Social Service needs in this country it is the 99% that does so. Why does the 1% bitch about the 99% using what they pay for?

0

sad_lawrencian 2 years, 3 months ago

This is unconscionable. Raising taxes on Kansas' poorest and most vulnerable citizens. And how dare they suggest single mothers don't spend on the needs of their children! Impeach Brownback!

0

rockchalk1977 2 years, 3 months ago

"Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." Barry Obama, Feb 5, 2008.

0

thebigspoon 2 years, 3 months ago

In the Brownback world of "smaller government" are not included the words "less intrusive government". It is incomprehensible to me that this man actually thinks that the excuse, "We have no way of making sure, for example........" is an actual reason and justification for taking from the neediest of taxpayers the very safety net that so many need in order to live without more aid from the state. Good God, Mr. Brownback, do you not have an ounce of humanity in your soul? Under what conditions do you justify taking food, shelter and clothing from families? Are you truly convinced that this is the right thing to do or are you so cloistered with the business interests of the state that you are unable to do the right thing, time after time after time? There is nothing, I mean, nothing, that justifies this move, and, if you had a heart, you'd admit that this is wrong. But, then, I guess the Koch Brothers haven't told you to say that, so, "Tough bananas, Kansas!" is your motto. You should be, but will not be, ashamed.

0

Gandalf 2 years, 3 months ago

I want a detailed accounting of how EviLsam spends his farm subsidy!

0

ksjayhawk74 2 years, 3 months ago

“We have no way of making sure, for example, that a single mother is spending that on needs for her children.”

Yes, we don't make poor people show the State a detailed expense report, proving they're spending their EITC on their children. Just end the EITC so we don't have to worry about where poor people spend their money, because they won't have any. It makes perfect sense.

0

Jan Rolls 2 years, 3 months ago

Sam the sham and his idiotic buddies are dirty rotten scum that could care less about people. This nut thinks he was elected king.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.