Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, June 16, 2012

Brownback tax cut law produces winners and losers, KU tax law professor says

June 16, 2012

Advertisement

Kansas University tax law professor Martin Dickinson spoke Saturday to Douglas County Democrats at the Lawrence Public Library about the impact of Gov. Sam Brownback's tax cuts.

Kansas University tax law professor Martin Dickinson spoke Saturday to Douglas County Democrats at the Lawrence Public Library about the impact of Gov. Sam Brownback's tax cuts.

Winners and losers

KU professor Martin Dickinson’s analysis of the state tax cuts signed into law by Gov. Sam Brownback.

Losers:

Employees: Tax rates lowered but employees will carry an increased share of the overall tax burden.

Children awaiting adoption: Adoption credit repealed.

Working parents: Credit for child care credit repealed.

Seniors: Deduction for long-term care insurance repealed.

Low-income persons: Food sales tax refund repealed.

Low-income renters: Property tax refund for renters repealed.

Winners:

Owners of rental real estate: tax exempt.

Recipients of royalties from minerals, oil, gas, copyrights or patents: tax exempt.

Farmers: tax exempt.

Independent contractors: tax exempt.

Partners, S corporation shareholders, and limited liability company members: tax exempt.

Beneficiaries of trusts and estates: tax exempt.

Martin Dickinson, a Kansas University law professor and nationally recognized authority in tax law, said Saturday the tax cuts Gov. Sam Brownback signed into law will benefit the wealthy, produce revenue shortfalls and possibly prompt gaming of the tax system.

Asked if the tax cuts would lead to economic prosperity, as Brownback has promised, Dickinson said the tax cuts were pushed by supply-side economists.

“Personally, I’m not much of a believer,” Dickinson told a crowd of about 100 people at the Douglas County Democratic Party meeting at the Lawrence Public Library, 707 Vt.

Brownback, a conservative Republican, made tax cuts the centerpiece of the 2012 legislative session.

The bill he signed will cut the individual income tax rates of 6.45 percent, 6.25 percent and 3.5 percent to just two rates at 4.9 percent and 3 percent.

It will also eliminate state income taxes for the owners of partnerships, S corporations and limited liability companies. In addition, it exempts from taxes income from farms, royalties on minerals, oil, gas copyrights and patent, and real estate rental income.

“The ramifications of this are really something,” Dickinson said about the business tax changes.

For example, he said, in a partnership of physicians, the physicians won’t pay state income taxes under the new law, but the nurses, lab techs and clerical workers will continue to pay income taxes.

Brownback has said the changes will stimulate the economy like an adrenaline shot to the heart. He said that the tax cuts will create 22,900 new jobs, give $2 billion more in disposable income to Kansans and increase population by 35,740, in addition to normal population growth.

The tax cuts, Brownback said, will “help make Kansas the best place in America to start and grow a small business.” The Brownback administration has said the new law will leave $1.1 billion in the pockets of Kansans during a two-year stretch.

“My faith is in the people of Kansas, not the government’s ability to tax and redistribute,” Brownback said when he signed the law last month. “They know better how to spend their money, and I believe they will do incredible things with it.”

But Dickinson pointed to estimates by the nonpartisan Kansas Legislative Research Department that show the effects of the tax cuts will short the state treasury by $4.5 billion in revenue over the next six years. The current state budget is about $6.6 billion annually.

And the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy has stated that the bottom 20 percent of income earners will pay more taxes while the top 1 percent will see the greatest percentage tax cut.

Low-income Kansans will be hit by other aspects of Brownback’s tax bill, which does away with the food sales tax refund and a property tax refund for renters. Kansas will join Alabama and Mississippi as the only states that charge sales tax on food and provide no food sales tax rebate for poor people, he said.

Dickinson said that in discussions he has had with two law firms, lawyers predict “the gaming here will be massive” because businesses will reorganize to avoid paying state taxes.

In addition, income earned by independent contractors will be tax exempt.

“There will be employers in Kansas who will have employees come to them and say, ‘I want to be an independent contractor,’” Dickinson said.

A person in the audience asked what can be done about this law.

State Sen. Marci Francisco, D-Lawrence, said that even if opponents of the tax plan picked up legislative seats in the next election and were able to amend the law, “the more difficult thing is having a governor who will sign those changes.”

Ed Quick, chairman of the Douglas County Democratic Party, said it may take having to elect a new governor in the next gubernatorial election in 2014.

“The more people in Kansas learn about this, there will be an uprising, perhaps,” he said.

Comments

jackson5 2 years, 3 months ago

Bill Snyder's contract with KSU provides that nearly $800,000 in compensation is paid to his LLC, rather than to him as salary. Because of this tax law changed designed to help small businesses, Snyder's will save over $40,000 annually on his personal taxes.

How long until other university coaches and personnel structure their contracts this way to avoid paying kansas income taxes?

0

Orwell 2 years, 3 months ago

"Brownback officials have said two thirds of the money the state would recover from eliminating the EITC [tax credit benefiting lower-income taxpayers] would be used to lure more federal dollars and then be plowed back into programs designed to help low-income families." – LJW, "Battle forming over Brownback’s plan to scrap earned income tax credit" Jan. 13, 2012.

Plainly Brownback really thinks only SOME people know better than the government how to spend their own money. And evidently he thinks he can change reality from one day to the next without anyone paying attention.

0

overthemoon 2 years, 3 months ago

For working parents in the lower income range, the loss of childcare credits will be devastating. Brownback wants to force women to have have children and then slaps them in the face with expenses that will literally mean the children won't have enough to eat. Next I suppose he'll lower or do away with the minimum wage. He's going to might surprised when the population of Kansas starts dropping like a rock. Just who is going to work for all those 'Job Creators'???

0

Catalano 2 years, 3 months ago

"Just who is going to work for all those 'Job Creators'???"

Independent contractors? They'll still have to pay their federal taxes, but apparently not state income tax. Wonder how many small businesses will want to eliminate "employees" and re-hire them as "independent contractors"?

0

4getabouit 2 years, 3 months ago

Probably better put more money into a larger state highway system to accommodate the massive influx of people moving to Kansas.

This may turn into the biggest debacle in Kansas history.

What a huge gamble on the part of Brownback.

0

Orwell 2 years, 3 months ago

No gamble at all. It's an immediate big return for the Haves and Have-mores who invested in a right-wing governor and legislature. If you have a million in taxable income and you can buy exemption from state income taxes you're $64,500 ahead. Even if you contributed $30,000 to the "right" campaigns you get over 100% return on your investment.

Plus, when various health and safety regulations are gutted, the additional profit from eliminating your business compliance costs is pure gravy.

0

verity 2 years, 3 months ago

Said it before, going to keep saying it. Get out and vote in the next election. Can't defeat Brownback electorally for two more years, but we can elect more moderate people to the legislature and that will stop some of this and maybe even turn some of it around.

I'm going to be working to elect a Democratic representative in my district and to beat an ALEC Republican. The moderate Republican running for senate will get my vote.

I hadn't realized the adoption credit was being repealed. That seems particularly heinous.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

I agree with a lot of what Martin said, but I seriously doubt any employees will want to become ICs with the self employment tax. There are also other consideration likes DOL and IRS regulations on who is an IC. I just don't see that happening. On the businesses side, I need to read this law, still, but there seems to be a pretty massive pitfall if it is form 1120 or 1065 income that is exempt, while general Schedule C income is not. In a single member LLC the income is treated as if earned directly by the sole member, unless an election has been made to treat the entity as a corporation. That could lead to some very LLCs to be taxable while others are not.

The biggest problem with this law is that the projections for new business are overblown. Kansas is not going to grow because of a tax bill. Boeing just left and clearly stated they didn't care one damn bit about Sam's tax code shenigans. It's going to cause massive budget problems. We're going to have to raise some tax, whether income, sales or property, to make up for this idiocy.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

and that's where Kansas becomes the great Koch petri dish. How does it feel to be a lab rat, Kansas. Obe part gamble, part experiment. And all this on what was a perfectly healthy body. We really elected some fantastic decision makers.

0

Catalano 2 years, 3 months ago

Another iPhone typo from you: "fantastic"...I'm sure you meant "fanatic"! (insert smiley wink emoticon here)

Plus, I agree with what you said about people becoming ICs. But not everyone thinks things through like you apparently do.

0

ljwhirled 2 years, 3 months ago

The folks who paid for Sam's election won big. These are the same folks who will be paying for his Presidential run in 2016.

The folks who didn't vote, or voted on stupid social issues like abortion and evolution instead of important issues like education and medical care got screwed.

Though I disagree with the move, I made out fine. My kids go to private school and I own my own business. These cuts won't really effect me.

Next time I suggest folks exercise their franchise and vote in their own best interest.

When the cuts to education, Medicaid and infrastructure spending start effecting your community next year, don't come crying to me. Mr. Brownback is doing EXACTLY what he said he would do. I disagree with it, but I will certainly benefit from it.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

I'm in the same boat as you, but I don't see this as a positive long term plan for me or the state. We've just created a looming crisis. Unless unicorns and leprechauns and fairies really do exist we are screwed as a state.

0

Catalano 2 years, 3 months ago

We don't need no steekin' unicorns or leprechauns or fairies. We've got Sam's god on our side. He obviously line-itemed Jesus without notifying anyone.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

Obama's record is extremely moderate, unlike the extremist occupying the mansion in Topeka. It's no wonder Obama is more popular in Kansas than Sammy.

0

jjinks 2 years, 3 months ago

Obama is moderate? I don't think even he would say that. You're a funny man JackMcKee. Or maybe delusional

0

Jayhawk1958 2 years, 3 months ago

This isn't about Obama and national politics. Please stay on the subject bozo.

0

Lane Signal 2 years, 3 months ago

The big winners in Obama's election were Wall Street, the banks, the drug companies and other corporations. Obama has continued the Bush Jr. policies for taxes and economic policies. But Obama's failure to change does nothing to forgive Brownback's move to give money Kansas does not have to those who financed his election. I will cry about Brownback and I'll cry about Obama as well. They are both part of the problem. They are both facilitating the concentration of wealth at the top.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Yeah, I've cancelled my long term plans for residency in this state even though I will actually see a drop in taxes. By the end of the gov's term, this place will be a hot mess unless they figure out a way to fix this. I want to sell while my house still has value. There's more to life than lower taxes.

0

booyalab 2 years, 3 months ago

Of course there is, but what else can you ask for from government? The real "simple" are those who don't seek any answers outside of politics.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

I'm holding on to optimism, maybe foolishly, that we'll get this fixed before we go over the cliff. Kansas has always had some very rational people. I hope they vote.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

I'd love to be pleasantly surprised, but most scenarios involve getting a veto proof majority in both chambers or finding pictures of the gov in compromising positions with a gibbon.

0

Katara 2 years, 3 months ago

That is not fair to the gibbon.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

I've never been seriously tempted to move because of a single law in my entire life. This is the first time. I really hope I'm wrong. That would be awesome for everyone. I didn't walk away from my mortgage and pack my belongings in the car Grapes of Wrath style, so the worst thing that happens this year is that I get an awesome job somewhere else and face the inconvenience of moving. Oh the horrors. It hardly counts as overreaction.

Where am I looking? North. States with a higher, progressive tax rate and strong schools. That's right. Higher taxes. While I'm at it, some mountains or oceans might be nice, too.

Brownie's radical and extreme tax changes will start a cascade of spending austerity and further economic depression for the state. There will be no jobs miracle. There will only be further pain. He is a fool.

0

JJE007 2 years, 3 months ago

Benjamins Frankly will turn over in his grave and wave his flagging pole, in his dangling dance of calling the golden calf. Moo e- grassy ash, Brownbeak!

0

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 3 months ago

Are you channeling FalseHopeNoChange?

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

Excuse me. If an individual's tax rate is reduced by better than 1% are they not potential winners?

0

Orwell 2 years, 3 months ago

Not if the benefits they would have enjoyed from state programs that will be cut are reduced more than the 1% tax saving. Alternatively your modest state tax saving ($600 if you have $60K in taxable income) will be more than offset by local tax increases to make up for the vanishing state investment in basics like education, health, infrastructure etc.

0

booyalab 2 years, 3 months ago

To say that anyone enjoys state programs would be a stretch.

0

Orwell 2 years, 3 months ago

"Enjoy" in the sense of "benefit from," as to enjoy quality public education through the doctoral level at affordable cost, or to enjoy safe roads and bridges. But I think you knew that.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

Did you ever stop to think that some people do not consider the programs that might be cut a benefit? They gain because they do not have to pay fro something they do not want.

0

jafs 2 years, 3 months ago

Your question was whether or not a 1% decrease in tax rate would be a gain.

The answer is no, if other factors result in a higher overall tax burden for that person.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

Are we in circular logic again. Your right of course - for some - but for many the services cut do not impact them.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

For those of you who want to live in a "low-tax country" I suggest you move to Mexico, Iraq, Afganistan or North Korea. The taxes are pretty low and the quality of life is also pretty bad. I don't want to live in a low tax country. I want to live in a "fair tax country" where 1) enough taxes are collected to pay for the services we as the public expect from government and 2) that the tax burden be borne equitably among all with the rich paying their fair share too. Governor Brownback has succeeded in making the Koch Brothers a lot richer, a few other people in this state a little richer and the rest of us will paying for this disaster for decades to come.

0

booyalab 2 years, 3 months ago

Don't you know that the quality of life in those places would be so much better if they just had higher taxes?

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

This new tax structure won't stimulate the economy because the state income tax rates were already too low. If the top state income tax rate was 85% like the federal rate was when Reagan was elected President then there the Laffer curve would make sense. As it stands, the only impact to the economy will be for the public sector to starve to death which will curtail private economic activity. You can't build bridges and highways without tax dollars and by not building bridges and highways there will be a lot of private sector engineering firms and construction firms laying people off. I'm reminded of the moving the Incredibles where the TRex has his head pressed against the wall of a building and he can't reach the kid and says "this plan wasn't well thought through...master."

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

by "too low" I mean too low to stimulate the economy by cutting them. I'm not necessarily endorsing higher taxes here...

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Geez, I of course meant "Meet the Robinsons" not "The Incredibles."

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Here is a link to a youtube clip of the TREX from Meet the Robinsons...

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

So that makes the kid the shot of adrenalin to the economy, the TREX is the tax cuts and the villain is Brownback...

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

If only there was more to the plan, it might not be so worrisome. So far it's lose 1/3 of the state's revenue then hope and pray that a whole lot of people think Kansas is suddenly the bees knees because they will save a couple thousand a year in income taxes.

It's something like jumping off a cliff and hoping that someone will break your fall.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

let me just see if I'm getting your point correctly, if Kansas goes bankrupt because of a lack of sufficient tax revenue, it's not the fault of the tax cut that caused the revenue reduction?

herp derp

0

Jayhawk1958 2 years, 3 months ago

You mean the Dictator Brownback?

0

repaste 2 years, 3 months ago

Falsie loves Brownback, he is afraid of brown people.

0

booyalab 2 years, 3 months ago

Please stop equating the people who live in Kansas with the bureaucracy that wants their money.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Gotland, if you want to live in a low tax country, why don't you move to North Korea, Afganistan, Iraq, Syria, Mexico, Venezuela, etc? I don't want to live in a low tax country. I want to live in a fair tax country that matches the costs for needed to services to taxes collected so public debt doesn't skyrocket. I also want the rich to pay their fair share, rather than shifting the burden of taxation to people like the elderly and the poor who can ill afford higher taxes. You need to wise up. Brownback and the Legislature just destroyed the Kansas economy which depends on state highways, prisons, schools, universities, etc.

0

jhawkinsf 2 years, 3 months ago

I too would like a fair tax. The problem is that if you ask 300 million Americans to define fair, you will get 300 million different definitions. So how do you get to fair when you have no idea what that is? The answer is that we throw out that silly notion of fair. Just pick a number, any number, and we all pay that percentage. Everyone. If 22% pays for what we want, then we all pay 22%. If the number is 25%, fine, we all pay that amount. If the percentage is too high, then cut spending. If we want more stuff (I mean we want more services) then increase the percentage. That, to me, would be fair.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

I agree with you about the percentage, but we need to go back to a true graduated tax system where the wealthy pay a higher percentage on total income, not a lower percentage as it is now. Everyone should pay 0% on the first 25,000 in total income, 5% on the second 25,000, 10% on the third 25,000, 15% on the fourth 25,000, and so on up to 35%. There should be no exeptions, no deductions, no lower rate for capital gains, no sheltering income due to investment losses. Any off shore income for US citizens or legal residents should be taxed at the same rate less any foreign taxes paid. The one exception I would make would be some sort of credit applied to taxes for true higher education loan interest and on the business side for research and development credit.

The down side is a lot of accountants and tax attorneys will be out of work...

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

So if you make $26,000, you pay 5% tax on only $1,000 which would be $50. If you make $24,999, you pay nothing.

I suppose the $25,000 level is arbitrary on my part so it could be set based on what the poverty level is for a family of four. I have no idea what that level is. That way only people whose income exceeds poverty level pay would pay income taxes.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

And if you make $51,000 per year, you pay

$25,000 x $50/$1,000 = $1,250 $1,000 x $100/$1,000 = $100

Total income tax of $1,350.

Effective tax rare of $1,350/$$51,000 = 26.47%

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Typing too fast the effective rate is 2.65%

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

The effective tax rate for someone making $26,000 would be

$50/$26,000 = 0.19%

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

The effective rate for someone earning $400,000 per year which is Obamas salary as POTUS would be if my math is correct

$105,000/$400,000 = 26%

Even if you earned $1 million per year, your effective rate would be

$315,000/$1,000,000 = 32%

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

In this way, everyone is treated fairly. Even billionaires don't pay taxes on their first $25,000 in income which they could easily afford....

0

jafs 2 years, 3 months ago

That is exactly the problem.

There's no objective or agreed upon way to define "fair" as it relates to taxes, and all systems have differing positive and negative attributes.

A flat rate, like the one you suggest, seems fair in a certain way, but is more of a burden for low income folks than the rest.

0

justthetruth 2 years, 3 months ago

Wow! We all know how well Kathy's plan was working for Kansas. She broke us, and ran off. I remind you all that in one year,Gov. Brownback turned things around by over one Billion.

0

pittstatebb 2 years, 3 months ago

You really should give the credit to Parkinson. He is the one that signed large spending cuts and raised the sales tax.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Typical conservative...the GOP broke the state and now blames a democrat who has not been in the state for 2 years. You must be on dope...

0

justthetruth 2 years, 3 months ago

If I use that logic then President Obama can quit blaming Bush, and admit he is a failed leader. We should hold him to his word, and make him a one term President.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Except that the economy was in great shape during the Clinton administration, tanked during the Bush administration and is recovering during the Obama administration despite the GOP's best efforts on congress to block needed programs like transportation spending.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Yes. I hear she tricked the senate into passing a radical tax cut plan that would leave the state unable to fund basic services. Oh wait, that wasn't her...

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Are you implying that we're magically going to be able to fully fund schools, higher education, and health programs on less money after many years of repeated cuts? Common sense, anyone?

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

I believe you believe what you wrote. That said many do not agree with you that further cuts can not be sustained while still maintaining acceptable levels of services.

You have a view and they have a view.. Your certitude that you are correct sways no one.

What also seems to get lost is that in many cases the group wanting service cuts pay the tax for the service the proponents demand – proponents who pay little tax. The “New Man” has not yet arrived.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Three different panels of experts with three different political leanings found this thing would lead to massive cuts in revenue. When even the bleeding Koch-funded Tax Foundation doesn't like your tax cut? You know you've done something radical.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

That is exactly what the governor wants. Starve the beast. What to you are services are waste to him and his supporters.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Which is precisely my point. Thanks for reinforcing it. He'd rather have all the bad parts of government - the cronyism and religiously-based inter-uterine regulations - while cutting all the good parts. Public schools, maintained roads, health services for the disabled, etc. It's a disaster for the state and does the opposite of what he claims it does.

"Cuts to state services not only harm vulnerable residents but also worsen the recession — and dampen the recovery — by reducing overall economic activity. When states cut spending, they lay off employees, cancel contracts with vendors, reduce payments to businesses and nonprofits that provide services, and cut benefit payments to individuals. All of these steps remove demand from the economy. For instance, at least 44 states and the District of Columbia have reduced overall wages paid to state workers by laying off workers, requiring them to take unpaid leave (furloughs), freezing new hires, or similar actions. State and local governments have eliminated over 400,000 jobs since August 2008, federal data show. Such measures are reducing not only the level and quality of services available to state residents but also the purchasing power of workers’ families, which in turn affects local businesses and slows recovery."

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1214

It's also completely deceptive. If you want to have a conversation about spending cuts, you have a conversation about spending cuts and then talk tax cuts once you've proven your system works. And you don't make radical changes like that on the fly without studying the impact. But then leaping before looking is a bit of a Brownback strong point, isn't it?

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

How do you know if proponents pay taxes or not or if opponents pay taxes or not? You don't.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

With your insight, you're either one of the Koch brothers or you're a fool...which is it? You're definitely not smart enough to be a professor.

0

Jayhawk1958 2 years, 3 months ago

I've got a concept False-pay the poor a living wage. Or is that to difficult for you to comprehend?

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

"Who is this "expert", again?"

Definitely not you. What you wrote only applies to an S Corporation.

Martin Dickinson is one of the most highly regarded experts on tax in the state of Kansas. That's why he's one of their most distinguished professors for decades. He was also the Dean for a stint.

0

jjinks 2 years, 3 months ago

Who regards him as the expert you say he is? Oh yeah the Democrats that's right, can't see nothing wrong with that assessment. LOL How many Conservative tax experts did they invite to the party at the library? Answer, none.

0

Eride 2 years, 3 months ago

I have a better question? Who are you?!

Somehow I doubt you know much of anything about the Federal or State tax code. One thing I know for sure is that you know much less than Martin Dickinson.

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

Martin Dickinson most certainly know more than me from an academic standpoint. What's your point?

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

never mind if you were responding to the B, the comment nesting is hard to distinguish. LJW please work on that. Thanks.

0

Eride 2 years, 3 months ago

Sorry JackMcKee. Yes, I was responding to The_Big_B. The comment nesting on this website is awful

0

Richard Heckler 2 years, 3 months ago

This is known socialism for the wealthy. And what we’ve gotten is preferential socialism for the politically connected rich — not all the rich, the politically connected rich. And less socialism for everybody else.

This socialism in fact impacts Governor Sam Brownback's personal bottom line as he laughs all of the way to the bank.

0

rtwngr 2 years, 3 months ago

"A nationally recognized authority on tax law."

Great, what does he know about running an economy or state budget? What makes him an expert on anything but tax law? He sounds to me like another liberal preaching to the choir. He has no real empirical evidence to prove that things will unfold as he asserts. The current president, whom shall remain nameless, didn't know anything about running an economy either and look what our country has to show for it. He was supposed to be smarter than this tax law professor. You know, those that can't do, teach.

He takes nothing into account in the way of reinvestment in businesses by those receiving tax breaks. He sees nothing in increased production, hiring, or broadening of the tax base. All we hear is more of the Keynesian nay sayers, preaching about the sky falling.

All of you will be eating crow ala mode if the economy of this state takes off as a result of Governor Brownback's efforts.

Phhhhhht!

0

jafs 2 years, 3 months ago

And, if it doesn't, will you notice and change your adherence to this ideology?

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Right-winger follows the typical GOP line. If the economy rebounds, Brownback gets 100% of the credit. But, if not, he'll give Obama 100% of the blame. Right-winger is not to be believed. He drank the Brownback coolade.

0

Bob_Keeshan 2 years, 3 months ago

It is shocking to see the tax shift defenders now try to use blatant lies to defend their positions.

This is not a tax cut; this is a tax shift.

0

Jayhawk1958 2 years, 3 months ago

Taking your hard earned money most mean you have a lot of it....

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Fhnc, I agree. You ARE a loser. Your words not mine.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

See: http://www2.ljworld.com/weblogs/loyal-opposition/2012/jun/14/winners-and-losers/

Perhaps this is why not all the people you consider losers, consider themselves losers!

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Yes. A couple hundred dollars in tax cuts will totally make the middle class rich again, especially after we pay more than that in property taxes to make up for the underfunded services we need to support.

0

Flap Doodle 2 years, 3 months ago

Is this business somewhat like the way the current regime has been channeling hundreds of millions of our tax dollars to reward people who made major donations to the Mope's campaign in 2008?

0

Patricia Davis 2 years, 3 months ago

At least Obama didn't start two wars to funnel money to his buddies like W and Cheney did.

0

yourworstnightmare 2 years, 3 months ago

Of course Brownback's tax shift will create winners and losers. This is the whole point.

Brownback is clearly saying that some types of income are special and better than others.

Sorry middle class wage earners, you lose.

0

jjinks 2 years, 3 months ago

After reading all these comments it's no wonder we're in the shape we're in. OK, I'm writing down all your handles and will be expecting apologies from all of you when you are proven wrong. Yeah right like that will ever happen. If this becomes the most prosperous state in the union you folks will still be bitching. Did any of you think that maybe IF we didn't give money to people that don't work that they might start working or go somewhere that does so we don't have to? It's funny how that works. When you give free everything to people that are not even citizens and refuse to help people that are it's a damn shame. Let's get rid of the lazy and get a work force that wants to work and we'll all be better off.

0

jafs 2 years, 3 months ago

And if you're wrong, will you notice that and change your adherence to this ideology?

0

jjinks 2 years, 3 months ago

No I'll never adhere to anything but a free nation and some day soon you will see what folks like me are talking about if this route we're on doesn't change soon. For the life of me I'll never understand why a group of people want to give up their freedom and forsake their kids future to a life that others have given up their life to establish.

0

jafs 2 years, 3 months ago

Thanks for your honesty.

So, even if this ideology is wrong, and the economy suffers, you'll continue to believe in it.

0

jjinks 2 years, 3 months ago

I take it that was a statement not a question. I will never believe that government is the answer to my personal problems, government only adds to the problem. People need to believe in themselves not some political ideology that will not be there when they need it. I've seen the way things work out when government takes over and that's not what I want for me or my family to try to rely on. I want people to believe in themselves and work for what they get.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 3 months ago

" Let's get rid of the lazy"

Which do you prefer-- Gas chambers? Or just dig a big ditch, shoot them all, and bury them?

0

bad_dog 2 years, 3 months ago

"handles"?

"Breaker, breaker." The 1970's are calling. They want their CB radio back, good buddy.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

chootspa (anonymous) replies…

Yes. A couple hundred dollars in tax cuts will totally make the middle class rich

Moderate: You are missing my point. many of the people who accept the governors possible cuts do not see themselves as benefiting from the services cut and do not anticipate their lawgivers raising other taxes to backfill..\

Only in Lawrence are you likely to successfully make an argument that cutting state taxes leads to raises in local taxes as opposed to a reduction in taxes (period)!!

In a sense you are providing positive feedback to the governor and those who think like him where you get to pay for what you want as opposed to the rest of the taxpayers of the state –[ that is his goal!!.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Moderate is not an accurate description of your positions. At least right-winger is honest in his monicker.

0

rtwngr 2 years, 3 months ago

Thank you. You may not like me, and I can understand why, but I make no bones about where I stand.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 3 months ago

Actually I neither like nor dislike you as I don't even know who you are. I admit I disagree with your posts. But at any rate, you're welcome.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

This army of strawmen you've got to support your case don't have school age children, drive on roads, have houses that could catch on fire, or things people could steal? They take their own garbage to the dump on roads they clear of snow themselves and drink well water out of home filtration systems? That's taking out the economic impact of laying off state workers which will serve to further depress the economy.

The needs for those services won't magically disappear with the shrinking of state funding. Of course it will get backfilled. Look at other states with low or no income taxes. They figure out something else to tax, whether it's tourists, energy, sales, or property. We don't have the tourism or energy base, so guess where that's going to fall?

And no, "Moderate" is only descriptive if the rest of the name is "Tea Partier."

0

rtwngr 2 years, 3 months ago

Ca ca. The services are not going to shut down. That is all ca ca. It's time to rein in big government and shrink it down to essential needs only.

0

Katara 2 years, 3 months ago

What you perceive to be an essential need may not be what the ones cutting services perceive as an essential need.

Here is an example of cutting something that someone did not feel was an essential need.

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/06/computer_crash_cripples_jeffer.html

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

Well, I could insult the silliness above but I will simply note that I took no position and I do not believe that all government services are waste. I want police, fire, paramedic, K-12 education, universities, focused research, national de fence, border control, courts and a long litany of other government services that are better done collectively then individually

Now Katara I do have reservations about Medicare even though I draw it because if I had the money I sent in I would be sure to receive it rather than face not infrequent attacks that I should not now that the government has it. Same with Medicare. Just like state and local employees I was promised medical care upon retirement. Medicare is the government’s choice to provide me what it promised. I would rather have the cash for a legacy insurance policy then put up with ever increasing rules and arguments about why I should have it after the fact.

Now I do believe that some of what we spend government resources upon is just plain waste. Money to people who will not work (there are some of those), money to selective government chosen businesses, money to help organize, money such as community block grants that is essentially looking for a cause, money in the form of “pork”. There are more.

So I am not out there with LO against all government and I am not with you who seem to never find a function you do not want to spend tax money to obtain (except defense). Frankly I find you guilty of greed as I suspect you benefit from the wide range of government programs while paying little or nothing to get them.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

So what exactly do you think is the fat that can be trimmed from the budget? People can only make due with less for so long. Brownback isn't going to cut back on his cronyism, even in the face of declining revenue. Just ask Art Laffer or the Brownback parade of under qualified carpet baggers from Florida.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

Well I listed some heer recently but I don't really talk about fat. One mans fat is anotheer mans essential service/program. I talk priorities. Not every good thing we want returns as much goodness per dollar as another good thing.

Within reason rank your good things and yes, some things you would rather not have but can not avoid and fund until you reach a level where the populace will not pay more taxes. That of course assumes we all pay taxes so we will all feel the pain of loss

Some good things will not be funded and some bad things will but a balance will be achieved. If a new good thing comes along then an old good thing must go as you havd already reached the level where people will pay no more tax.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Ironically, it's the priorities of the Brownback administration that have the lowest return on the dollar. In many cases a negative return as lack of stimulus contracts growth, lack of investment now means infrastructure repairs later, and lack of matching funds mean less purchasing power for the state taxpayer. Education spending puts money back in the community with higher wage jobs and innovation and a greater demand for services. Not spending the money now ends up costing more later down the line in terms of lower wages, debt burdens (for higher ed).

There's an argument to be made about the ROI with services for the disabled, particularly for the young, but it's also part of just plain human decency. I hear the gov claims to have some. Prove it.

My priority is not to give the Kochs a tax break that they'll just pocket.

0

George Lippencott 2 years, 3 months ago

well wihtout a enough determination we spend more than $25K per poor person and we do help people with disabilities

As far as the governator we may be arguing about how much tax is enough so as to reset the funding point.

0

Armstrong 2 years, 3 months ago

One only need to look at the author of this piece to realize what the content will be

0

Armstrong 2 years, 3 months ago

What argument ? This is pure propaganda polished to look like news

0

DeckDoctors 2 years, 3 months ago

+1 Same old daily hit job from the Libs at LJW.

0

DeckDoctors 2 years, 3 months ago

Well here it is, the daily 'Hit Job' by Rothschild on Governor Brownback. They found a liberal so called tax expert tucked away in the school of law to blast capitalism once again. The local democrats I'm sure just happened to invite this 'tax expert' who lo and behold! Hates capitalism and freedom as much as they do and shazam the left clamors out to criticize an idea that will cause business in Kansas to boom much like it is in Wisconsin and North Dakota. These people just don't get it, you don't get your golden goose to lay eggs by choking it with your high taxes and government regulation, i.e.. the democrat goal to take from the productive and give to those who yell the loudest. I had to chuckle at the punchline at the end of the story. Then Mr. 'Quick' said:The more people in Kansas learn about this, there will be an uprising, perhaps,” rofl...What does Mr. 'Quick' believe he is speaking to a people enslaved or held against their will to live in this state? Uprising? Really? These dems just don't understand that freedom from taxation and production elevates life for us all. Those willing to work hard and risk capital paved the way for the good life for all here in America.

0

WilburM 2 years, 3 months ago

You obviously have no clue who Martin Dickinkinson is. He's a restrained, fair, scholarly guy, who has the expertise and familiarity with the facts and the law to call things as he sees them. His very real expertise has provided the very best analysis of the massive tax bill to date. So you can create your own story and stick to it, this need neither facts nor expertise.

When you're in an argument about law, you can either bang on the facts, or bang on the law. When you can't do either, you just bang on the table. Good job.

0

DeckDoctors 2 years, 3 months ago

Wilburrr One gets all the clues they need by using his own words against him. His words- "Dickinson said the tax cuts were pushed by supply-side economists". of which he is not a supporter of, so he is for the failed socialist agenda of Obumble. Before the plan has taken effect he says he is not much of a believer, so he is not fair.

" the effects of the tax cuts will short the state treasury by $4.5 billion in revenue over the next six years". This is not scholarly when he is totally ignoring the increase in revenues with the increase in economic activity. The boom in this century came after Reagan's Tax Cuts which brought in more tax revenue than previous higher tax rates. So he is not scholarly, he is pushing a liberal agenda. So you are wrong on both counts, he is not fair and he is not scholarly but he is liberal.

0

jafs 2 years, 3 months ago

It's simply untrue that the choice is between a devout supply side belief and socialism.

0

mycatsrightorwrong 2 years, 3 months ago

I know Dickinson... he's a lot more fair and rational than your crazy-a** seems. Fun facts: North Dakota has a state owned "socialist" bank, Wisconsin's income tax rates are way higher than ours, Sweden & China are more productive than Somilia (comparing socialist w/ libertarian), governments have the power to utilize huge amounts of risk capital that the private sector can't (see Hoover Dam), and finally, please take the following empathy test and post your score; I'm doing a study. http://www.noanxiety.com/tests/empathy-test.html

0

tbaker 2 years, 3 months ago

So should we keep all those obstacles you describe and have everyone avoid starting a business, or should we reform the laws so the government sets favorable conditions for people who create jobs? I'm not real sure I undersrtand which one of those two positions you would rather see. I know which one the unemployed people would like to see.

0

mycatsrightorwrong 2 years, 3 months ago

I always used to respect Brownback; he was with McCain and Bush on immigration reform and has done more for Africa than most people alive. I usually either dismiss these tea party people as lacking an intelligent political philosophy (I worked hard, you work hard too or suck it!), being mean spirited, or possibly being somewhere on the autism spectrum. But I think Brownbacks deal is he's a social issues guy and never worried too much about his economic beliefs. Now the big money donors (Koch) are paying for his re-election, so he's touting their philosophy in return. Its sad, I think his hearts in the right place, but he doesn't understand how this is going to affect the least well off among us. The Democrats need to run someone against him better than that moron Holland.

0

DeckDoctors 2 years, 3 months ago

Your cat is wrong. There is an old saying about The Pot and the Kettle... You claim Tea Party Americans are 'mean spirited' and go on to call people lacking intelligence, mean, autistic or a moron. Sir/Madam please remove the log in your own eye before you try to straighten out your neighbor...

0

mycatsrightorwrong 2 years, 3 months ago

"Your cat is wrong"... that's actually pretty good. Not a great point tho. I'm just using words, not defunding essential state programs that will leave many in the cold. One's rude, the others harmful. Maybe The Pot calling the Microwave black would be more appropriate.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

Actually, he's always been into radically conservative, tea party fiscal policy. Rather than not being concerned with economics himself, he thought Kansans weren't concerned with it and would therefore ignore his radical agenda as long as he banned enough abortions to make his base happy.

0

rtwngr 2 years, 3 months ago

What is radical about telling the government that it needs to stop borrowing money to get out of debt? What's radical about being fiscally responsible? What's radical about telling our government officials that taxes are high enough? Our system of government is designed to protect its citizens and provide the opportunity to achieve success, whatever that is for each individual. It is not designed to guarantee outcomes.

0

chootspa 2 years, 3 months ago

What's radical is endorsing bad fiscal policy with willful ignorance of the consequences. If you wanted to get the country out of debt, end the Bush tax cuts for the rich.

0

tbaker 2 years, 3 months ago

Government the Business Partner

Here's the deal. You're going to start a business or expand the one you've got now. It doesn't really matter what you do or what you're going to do. I'll partner with you no matter what business you're in – as long as it's legal.

But I can't give you any capital – you have to come up with that on your own. I won't give you any labor – that's definitely up to you. What I will do is demand you follow all sorts of rules about what products and services you can offer, how much (and how often) you pay your employees, and where and when you're allowed to operate your business. That's my role in the affair – to tell you what to do.

Now in return for my rules, I'm going to take roughly half of whatever you make in the business each year. Half seems fair, doesn't it? I think so. Of course, that's half of your profits.

You're also going to have to pay me about 12% of whatever you decide to pay your employees because you've got to cover my expenses for promulgating all of the rules about who you can employ, when, where, and how.

After you've put your hard-earned savings at risk to start this business, and after you've worked hard at it for a few decades (paying me my 50% or a bit more along the way each year), you might decide you'd like to cash out.

As your partner, I'm happy for you to sell whenever you'd like… because our agreement says, if you sell, you have to pay me an additional 20% of whatever the capitalized value of the business is at that time.

I know… you put up all the original capital. You took all the risks. You put in all of the labor. That's all true. But I've done my part, too. I've collected 50% of the profits each year. And I've always come up with more rules for you to follow each year. Therefore, I deserve another, final 20% slice of the business.

Oh… and one more thing…

Even after you've sold the business and paid all of my fees… I'd recommend buying lots of life insurance. You see, even after you've been retired for years, when you die, you'll have to pay me 50% of whatever your estate is worth.

All in all, if you're a very successful entrepreneur… if you're one of the rare, lucky, and hard-working people who can create a new company, employ lots of people, and satisfy the public… you'll end up paying me more than 75% of your income over your life. Thanks so much.

I'm sure you'll think my offer is reasonable and happily partner with me… but it doesn't really matter how you feel about it because if you ever try to stiff me – or cheat me on any of my fees or rules – I'll break down your door in the middle of the night, threaten you and your family with heavy, automatic weapons, and throw you in jail.

That's how civil society is supposed to work, right? This is Amerika, isn't it? And the idiots in Washington wonder why there are no new jobs…

(from a Porter Stansberry news letter)

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 3 months ago

So where'd you move and what is exactly that you do for a living?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.