Advertisement

Kansas legislature

Kansas Legislature

Fairness of Brownback’s tax proposals debated

February 7, 2013

Advertisement

— Republican Gov. Sam Brownback’s administration released an internal report Wednesday showing that his latest income tax proposals would benefit Kansas’ poorest taxpayers more than its wealthiest ones, but the new analysis failed to quiet criticism from legislators who believe his policies are weighted toward top earners.

The Department of Revenue disclosed its figures ahead of a House Taxation Committee hearing Brownback’s proposals to further cut individual income tax rates after aggressive reductions last year.

The report did not consider a Brownback proposal to change the state’s sales tax law to raise additional revenues to bolster the budget while Kansas works to phase out individual income taxes. The department also excluded from its analysis tens of thousands of taxpayers — almost all of them with adjusted gross incomes of $25,000 or less — who don’t owe taxes under state law.

Revenue Secretary Nick Jordan told the House committee that lawmakers should note that poor families receive help from the state in buying food tax-free, and he said afterward that the department excluded non-paying income tax filers from its analysis because the governor is proposing no changes this year for them.

But House Minority Leader Paul Davis, a Lawrence Democrat, was skeptical of such arguments.

“I don’t think they’re cooking the books, but they’re definitely maneuvering the numbers to show the outcome they want to show,” Davis said.

Jordan shrugged off such criticism, saying of the governor’s opponents, “Everyone’s trying to find a crack in the wall.”

The House committee expects to wrap up hearings on Brownback’s proposals Thursday, and its Senate counterpart already has concluded testimony. But Republicans, who hold supermajorities in both chambers, have conceded that they’re also looking for alternatives to some of Brownback’s initiatives.

“We’re not going to be able to kick that bill out for a while,” said Senate Majority Leader Terry Bruce, a conservative Hutchinson Republican.

The governor’s goal is to eventually phase out personal income taxes, but he and lawmakers also must stabilize the budget over the next few years.

Brownback wants to keep the sales tax at its current 6.3 percent rate, rather than letting it drop to 5.7 percent in July. That decrease was scheduled in 2010, when the state boosted the tax to balance its budget under Brownback’s Democratic predecessor.

He’s also proposing to eliminate two popular income tax deductions for homeowners, for the interest on their mortgages and the property taxes on their houses.

The department’s figures showed that the income tax changes would reduce the collective income tax burden of tax filers with adjusted gross incomes of $25,000 or less by 41 percent for 2017. Other groups of taxpayers would see smaller overall reductions, with a collective cut of 39 percent for those earning more than $250,000.

The proposed income tax changes are weighted even more toward the poorest taxpayers before 2017, delaying their biggest benefits for the wealthiest taxpayers until that year, according to the department’s analysis. That’s in contrast to last year’s income tax cuts, which resulted in the top earners getting the largest percentage decrease in their collective tax burden.

The department released the report to the Kansas Legislature’s research staff and to key legislators, providing a copy to The Associated Press before formally making it public.

“It’s more balanced,” Jordan told the AP during an interview. “We’re trying to take a balanced approach. Obviously, we’re trying to go to zero for everyone and grow the economy through doing that.”

Under last year’s cuts — even according to Department of Revenue figures — taxpayers earning more than $250,000 saw a much larger percentage drop in their collective personal income tax burdens than those earning $25,000 or less. The state cut rates but also exempted the owners of 191,000 businesses from income taxes.

According to the latest analysis, when last year’s tax cuts are factored in, income tax filers earning more than $250,000 would still make out the best after five years, with a decrease in their collective burden of 60 percent phased in for 2017. However, the poorest taxpayers would see their burden drop 51 percent — and the gap between how they and the wealthiest taxpayers fare would narrow considerably from the changes made last year.

The least benefit overall after five years would go to taxpayers earning from $75,000 to $100,000. After five years, they’d be paying 49 percent less in income taxes.

However, they analysis covers fewer than 1.1 million of the state’s 1.4 million income tax filers, or almost 289,000 fewer than the number listed on similar reports last year. Reports last year listed about 564,000 filers earning $25,000 or less; the figure in the latest analysis is about 285,000, or 49 percent lower.

“There are fewer and fewer legislators who are putting a great deal of credence in the kind of numbers the Department of Revenue is producing,” Davis said.

Comments

Richard Heckler 1 year, 10 months ago

Unfortunately ALEC and a large majority of the republican party got married to the idea that working class blue and white collars make too much money. Talk about living in glass houses. Right to Work means lower wages.

ALEC and Repubs Busting unions is about YOU working for less money Union or NOT = monster corporate profits!!.

ALEC is not a lobby; it is not a front group. It is much more powerful than that.

Through the corporate-funded American Legislative Exchange Council, global corporations and state politicians vote behind closed doors to try to rewrite state laws that govern your rights.

These so-called "model bills" reach into almost every area of American life and often directly benefit huge corporations.

In ALEC's own words, corporations have "a VOICE and a VOTE" on specific changes to the law that are then proposed in your state. DO YOU?

United States of ALEC – Bill Moyers http://www.democracynow.org/2012/9/27/the_united_states_of_alec_bill

ALEC – The Voice of Corporate Special Interests in State Legislatures http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/alec-the-voice-of-corporate-special-interests-state-legislatures

ALEX EXPOSED – The Koch Connection http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/alec-exposed-koch-connection

ALEC – Ghostwriting The Law for Corporate America http://www.justice.org/cps/rde/xchg/justice/hs.xsl/15044.htm

ALEC EXPOSED http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed

ALEC Private Schools - Corporate Education Reformers Plot Next Steps at Secretive Meeting http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/02/02-9

question4u 1 year, 10 months ago

Jordan shrugged off such criticism, saying of the governor’s opponents, “Everyone’s trying to find a crack in the wall.”

There, in a nutshell, is the problem. Looking at anything so complicated as a radical reshaping of tax structures as if it were as simple as a wall is, to put it bluntly simpleminded. Jordan, no doubt, isn't simpleminded, but he must think that most Kansans are. He certainly knows that the report has major flaws. Ignoring the effects of Brownback's sales tax hike is not a crack, it's a chasm.

Education provides the surest means of getting out of poverty. Even Brownback's staunchest allies can't call him a friend of education and keep a straight face. Tax policies implemented through actions like cutting educational programs meant to help at-risk students cannot be said to benefit the poor.

The part of Jordan's metaphor that does make sense is the implication that Brownback's tax plan is less than transparent and that every effort has been made to keep anyone from looking into it too closely. If you have to throw up a wall around your ideas, how strong can they really be on their own?

Cant_have_it_both_ways 1 year, 10 months ago

I would like it a whole bunch if those that made their living on state services would select a different state to mooch off of. Imagine how much better the state would be.

Thinking_Out_Loud 1 year, 10 months ago

CHIBW, let me be sure that am I understanding you correctly. When you say you want people making their living from state service should leave the state, do you mean that you would like to see our Highway Patrolmen, corrections officers, college professors, judges, road workers, restaurant inspectors, and the like leave for other states?

Cant_have_it_both_ways 1 year, 10 months ago

I should have been more clear. The welfare types. If those who have no desire to work for what ever reason would leave the state, then there would be much more money for our Highway Patrol, mental health and the things we actually need.

Thomas Bryce 1 year, 10 months ago

When they leave, will You Do It ALL? Did not think so.Your post makes ABSOLUTELY No Sense Whatsoever.Since when is a Full time job Taking care of The Infrastructure of Kansas Mooching? You need to THINK before hitting that SEND Button, Can't.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.