Category Archives: Taxation

How did this happen?

Posted on by
http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/555b43eb69bedd9a5c891f68-1200-858/461553325.jpg

NJ Governor Chris Christie

I usually don’t think much of Chris Christie. He isn’t a conservative and isn’t much of a ‘Pub, either. But today, he uttered a statement that I can agree upon. Finally!

“Some colleges are drunk on cash and embarking on crazy spending binges, just because they know they can get huge revenues from tuition.” — WSJ

In this case, Christie is right. College tuition is caught in a feed back loop. Colleges charge thousands of dollars for tuition, far beyond the means of most families. The students then file for student loans and get them. The student loans pays for the tuition. The colleges and universities, realizing they have a cash cow available in the form of government sponsored student loans, feel no restraint on raising tuition again each year.

In the mid-’60s when my wife and I went to college, we both had a teaching scholarship. Southern Illinois University, at that time, was on the quarter system, Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer quarters. My tuition costs—which included text book rental, $112 for an in-state resident. The scholarship paid for all of that except for a $12 Student Activity fee. I paid more for room and board, $298 per quarter, than I did for tuition. I also worked 40 hours/week, part-time for the university for the grand sum of $0.95 per hour. I went to school full-time and then worked 40 hours for those expenses not covered by tuition nor dorm.

Tuition for today’s colleges and universities should be investigated for RICO violations because today’s tuition is a racket.

***

You’ve heard, no doubt, that St. Louis and Kansas City want to raise the minimum wage. Regardless of all the nonsense about a ‘living wage’ that such entry level jobs were never meant to fulfill, there are other reason why these metro areas want the pay increase—more money in the city coffers.

Higher minimum wage would increase city’s tax revenues, too

Letter-to-the-Editor, June 12, 2015

Mayor Francis Slay of St. Louis is asking the Board of Aldermen to pass legislation mandating a near doubling of the current minimum wage from $7.65 to $15 an hour for certain businesses operating in the city by 2020 (“Slay seeks to increase minimum wage in city,” June 3). Naturally, this will undoubtedly appeal to all those who buy into this demagogic charade of equality and “fairness” by politicians and their followers of the Left.

But aside from undeniable economic facts, that prices will go up and seniors on fixed income will be hurt, there is something else that will result that I have not heard being talked about.

Consider, when you virtually double the current minimum wage, can you guess what benefits the city of St. Louis will receive? If you said that with higher wages comes higher tax revenue from the city earnings tax along with increased payroll tax revenue that will go to the state of Missouri, then go to the head of the class. If you add that increase wages mean higher sales taxes, you are clearly a summa cum laude candidate.

What Sleight-of-Hand Slay is attempting to do without saying so is to generate additional revenue while seeking to avoid being accused of raising taxes. Wonder if anyone else has caught on to this?

In the case of Kansas City there is an additional tax, the 1% (or is it higher now?) city income tax. If the minimum wage is increased, the city will get more revenue from its income tax.

When you get to the bottom line, it’s always about collecting more taxes. Involuntary taxation is nothing more than theft by other means.

Facebook

Taxes…and more taxes.

Posted on by

One way or another, Spring is tax time. This year could be like no other in our country’s history. More taxes will become effective—more taxes to be paid, than at any other time since George Washington was inaugurated.

You won’t hear about it from the MSM, nor from any mainstream news outlet. You won’t know the extent of these taxes until it comes time for them to be paid. And, pay you will.

The first item is, unsurprisingly, Obamacare. This is the first time you will pay your Obamacare tax. If you don’t have health care, you will have to pay a penalty. If you do have health care, your employer will have to pay a tax to support Obamacare. If you’re self-employed, your tax will be the increased cost of individual healthcare. Regardless of your circumstances, you will pay more.

Obamacare penalty may come as shock at tax time

By Tom Howell Jr. – The Washington Times – Sunday, January 18, 2015

http://media.washtimes.com/media/image/2015/01/19/obama_s877x585.jpg?321c9d70daf99fc888c0b24f70eed91a13ac78bc

In a scene reminiscent of Pontius Pilate washing his hands after sentencing Jesus, President Barack Obama wipes his face with a cloth handed to him by White House Butler Von Everett in the Blue Room of the White House following an event with business leaders in the East Room, Jan. 28, 2009. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Those Americans who didn’t get health insurance last year could be in for a rude awakening when the IRS asks them to fork over their Obamacare penalty — and it could be a lot more than the $95 many of them may be expecting.

The Affordable Care Act requires those who didn’t have insurance last year and didn’t qualify for one of the exemptions to pay a tax penalty, which was widely cited as $95 the first year. But the $95 is actually a minimum, and middle- and upper-income families will actually end up paying 1 percent of their household income as their penalty.

TurboTax, an online tax service, estimated that the average penalty for lacking health insurance in 2014 will be $301.

“People would hear the $95, quit listening, and make an assumption that that was what their penalty was going to be,” said Chuck Lovelace, vice president of affordable care for Liberty Tax Service. “I think that a lot of people will be surprised when they get in there and find out that their penalty is [based] on their household income.”

The penalty is designed to prod Americans to buy insurance and the penalty for not having it is scheduled to rise considerably: to a $325 minimum or 2 percent of income in 2015, and to a $695 minimum or 2.5 percent of income in 2016. (The column continues on to a 2nd page at the Washington Times website.)

It may not have been in the forefront of everyone’s mind about Obamacare taxes (note: that’s plural,) we did know they were coming. Other taxes, or tax proposals are more recent.

With the dropping price of gasoline at the pump, a by-product of the Oil War between the US and OPEC, the Congress is considering raising the gas tax for the first time since 1993. The belief in Washington is that people will have more disposable income due to the lowering cost of gas at the pump so they can afford to pay a higher tax.

Corker calls for federal gas tax hike

Mary Troyan, Tennessean Washington Bureau 4:04 p.m. CST January 11, 2015

WASHINGTON – Low gas prices have rekindled talk on Capitol Hill about raising the federal gas tax to eliminate huge annual deficits in the federal Highway Trust Fund that pays for road and bridge work around the country.

While some top Republicans remain adamant a tax hike is not the answer, there are signs that the idea, including one from Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, is at least getting a fresh look.

Corker and Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., have proposed raising the federal gas tax by 12 cents over two years and indexing it to inflation. To make the concept more palatable to fiscal conservatives, the measure would lower other taxes.

The 18.4-cent-per-gallon gas tax hasn’t been raised since 1993. As vehicles have become more efficient, the revenue generated by the tax has dropped. Current stopgap funding for the Highway Trust Fund expires in May, and transportation officials in Tennessee and other states are holding back projects until uncertainty about the federal money is addressed.

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., chairman of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, said this week a gas tax increase could not be ruled out. Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, agreed. (Read more at the website.)

The feds aren’t the only ones eying consumers’ wallets, a number of states are covetously thinking the same as the feds. As usual, the excuse is the crumbling transportation infrastructure and dwindling Highway Trust Fund. The root cause isn’t insufficient taxes, the root cause is that, like the Social Security Trust Fund, the Feds have been robbing the Highway Trust fund to pay for more welfare.

The highway crumbling infrastructure isn’t due to a lack of taxes, it’s due to redirecting the money to other non-transportation projects. Cut those other projects, stop robbing the trust funds, and there would be plenty of funding to rebuild the highways and bridges.

The same reasoning applies to the states.

States look at hiking gas tax as fuel prices plunge

Aamer Madhani, USA TODAY 12:09 p.m. EST January 17, 2015

With gas prices dipping to their lowest level in years, lawmakers in state capitals throughout the USA are increasingly open to the idea of raising fuel taxes to help rebuild crumbling roadways and bridges.

The movement at the state level comes as House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said last week that he’s doubtful that there will be enough backing for a bi-partisan push to raise the federal gas tax, which has stood at 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993.

The Obama administration has also declined to endorse raising the federal gas tax to finance road funding, but says it will take a look at anything Congress comes up with.

State legislators and governors, however, aren’t waiting for Washington.

Republican leaders who typically find talk of raising taxes a non-starter are making the issue a priority in 2015, even though polling consistently has shown broad opposition among Americans to fuel tax hikes.

“The states have shown that they are more likely to act on the gas tax than the federal government is,” said Carl Davis, a senior policy analyst at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a research group in Washington. “The states have to balance their budgets. If they see, their roads are in bad shape or their bridges are literally falling down—in some cases—they need to come up with a way to pay to improve that. And there’s a limited number of things you can do at the state level.” (Read more here.)

The column notes that a number of states have raised gas taxes in recent years. I also note that most of those states are in the liberal north-east, the area commonly known as the rust belt for good reason—tax flight by businesses.

The final example of taxes for this post comes from Missouri. At least one bill has been filed to convert the state to the ‘Fair Tax.’ I’m of two minds on this. I don’t like consumption taxes, sales taxes. Sales taxes have many unintended consequences, the least of which is to drive consumers to buy large ticket items out-of-state where taxes may be lower. On the other hand, I wouldn’t mind seeing Missouri’s Department of Revenue taken down a very large peg.

A bill has been filed for the 2015 Missouri session that would reduce Missouri’s income tax by 25% per year until it is eliminated. It also proposes an increase of the current 4% sales tax to 7% sales tax on “retail sales of new tangible personal property and taxable services.” It idea is that the sales tax would be gradually increased as the income tax is decreased to make the scheme, “revenue neutral.” Frankly, I’ve never seen a bill work as it was envisioned. Something always goes wrong. It is the unintended consequences that make our lives harder and they are never fully corrected.

Be that as it may, we must be eternally vigilant on taxes. I’ve yet to meet a tax I liked. Every tax I’ve ever seen failed to meet its original purpose.

 

Facebook

Words for Wednesday

Posted on by

Somedays it is hard to write a post. The difficulty is caused by a number of reasons, repetitive news cycles, ignorance of the MSM and in many areas the ignorance and apathy of the public. At other times, a lack of motivation or time conflicts conspire to push me to not post.

Today is one such day.

Be that as it may, today’s lead item is about stupidity. John Boehner’s bartender—a man who has been Boehner’s bartender for over five years, is accused of plotting to poison the Representative from Ohio.

The bartender must be an astoundingly poor planner. He had opportunities to shuffle off Boehner’s mortal coil for five years…but he just couldn’t get his act together.

When I read the article, it triggered my disbelief tripwire. After a facing mutiny in the GOP ranks, Boehner and the FBI reveal this incompetent. It just seems to be a misdirection ploy to get some positive media for Boehner. I wonder how many American have trouble with this news item?

***

Guns and Taxes

From WMSA.NET…

From the PoliticMO Newsletter for January 14, 2015.

GUNS — ‘Gun groups vow to fight Missouri lawmaker’s bill taxing guns to pay for police body cameras,’ Raw Story: “A Missouri state legislator has drawn criticism from gun enthusiasts for introducing bills that would pay for body cameras for police officers through a tax increase on firearm and ammunition sales… House Bills 75 and 76, which were introduced by state Rep. Brandon Ellington (D), would implement a 1 percent tax raise on gun sales, with the money going to the “Peace Officer Handgun and Ammunition Sales Tax Fund,” to be used to buy the cameras. Officers would then be required to wear the cameras during any interaction with the public, and keep the footage in their records for at least 30 days. Undercover officers and detectives would be exempt from wearing the cameras. …

“The National Rifle Association (NRA) has already come out against Ellington’s proposal. ‘Forcing law-abiding Missourians to pay an additional tax on firearm and ammunition purchases is unmerited. Gun owners and purchasers should not be responsible for funding these projects,’ the group said in a release. ‘The NRA will continue to fight against such misguided encroachments on those who exercise their Second Amendment rights.’” — PoliticMO Newsletter, Jan 14, 2015

We continually hit with taxes and more taxes. A new tax to one thing or another, another hand in our pocket stealing our money under the guise of law. Every tax has some benefit, we’re told. I just don’t believe it. We don’t need a new tax to fund body cameras now, especially one that taxes guns and ammunition.

***

The rank and file of our military do not like Obama. Who’da thunk it?

AMERICA’S MILITARY: A conservative institution’s uneasy cultural evolution

The force is changing — often reluctantly — alongside the civilian society it serves

In his first term, President Obama oversaw repeal of the controversial “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

Then he broke with one of the military’s most deeply rooted traditions and vowed to lift the ban on women serving in combat.

And the commander in chief has aggressively sought to change military culture by cracking down on sexual assault and sexual harassment, problems that for years were underreported or overlooked.

Obama is an unpopular president in the eyes of the men and women in uniform. Yet his two-term administration is etching a deep imprint on the culture inside the armed forces. As commander in chief, he will leave behind a legacy that will shape the Pentagon’s personnel policies and the social customs of rank-and-file troops for decades to come.

Go visit the Military Times and read the complete article. It confirms the opinions of many now serving and some fears as well.

Facebook

Strike! While the price is low.

Posted on by

The price of crude dropped to $45 a barrel yesterday. A gas station in Texas posted a pump price of $1.499 a gallon. We all rejoice at the lowering prices. Long-haulers see their costs dropping, and the economy begins to pick up. ‘Course, Washington takes credit of all of it while doing nothing but talk.

Oh, they are talking. Talking about raising gasoline prices by at least another 12¢ as gallon. Why? Because consumers can afford to pay more since they aren’t paying as much per gallon!

Incredible! But, not completely unexpected from the crazed spending lusts of those in Congress and in the administration. I expect our local congresscritter, Vicky Hartzler, who supports massive welfare spending in her voting for the yearly Ag bill (SNAP/Foodstamps), will get in line with her rubberstamp.

It’s not as if the taxes collected has decreased. No, in fact the gas tax revenues has increased. With the lower gas prices, people and businesses are driving more, buying more gas. The federal gas tax is 18.4¢ and 24.4¢ for diesel fuel. It is a fixed tax per gallon. If the tax was a percentage of the cost of a gallon, then a lowering price would reduce the tax revenue—but it is not.

The Daily Signal, a news website and newsletter of the Heritage Foundation posted an article today that delves deeper in the push for more taxes. Surprise, Surprise! It’s not just democrats pushing for a higher tax.

Why Washington Politicians Want to Hike the Gas Tax

Stephen Moore / /

Suddenly everyone in Washington wants a gas tax hike—apparently so consumers don’t save too much money at the pump. As prices keep falling, the politicians and the moochers in Washington want a piece of the action.

Rather than raise the federal gas tax, a better policy would be to repeal the federal tax and let states pay for their own road projects.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and even Republicans such as Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee have linked arms with the entire road-building industry and green groups that want the cost of fuel to go up.

Pelosi won’t even hide her cynical motivation: With gas prices low, maybe motorists won’t notice that we’re gouging them.

“If there’s ever going to be an opportunity to raise the gas tax, the time when gas prices are so low—oil prices are so low—is the time to do it,” she explained.

That’s rich coming from Pelosi, who has done everything she can to stop the shale oil and gas revolution that made prices fall in the first place.

Apparently if OPEC can’t keep prices high, the feds will. And these are the folks who say they want to help the middle class.

Every penny increase in the gas tax will take about $1 billion out of the wallets of consumers. So a 10-cent or 20-cent gas tax will take about $10 billion to $20 billion from consumers.

The politicians like to point to studies by road builders and civil engineers that insist America’s infrastructure is crumbling and we must spend hundreds of billions of dollars to fix our roads, highways, bridges and airports. Now there’s an impartial jury. Who do you think is going to get all this money?

Corker adds that we are “just stealing from future generations out of the general funds to pay for infrastructure because Congress is going to fund infrastructure but not in the appropriate way.”

Corker is right that America needs more roads and needs to fix the ones we have to reduce congestion and potholes. But this isn’t because the 18.4-cents-a-gallon gas tax raises too little money—$34 billion a year should be plenty and infrastructure spending is near an all-time high.

The “stealing” that is going on is from the trust fund. Congress siphons tax dollars away from roads to worthless mass transit systems with tiny ridership.

Why should motorists see their gas tax dollars go to transit projects they don’t use?

If Washington would simply devote all gas tax dollars to roads, we wouldn’t need a tax hike.

Don’t be surprised if gas tax hike dollars help fund California’s $68 billion high-speed rail white elephant. The program has been so riddled with cost overruns, it may go down in history as one of the most absurd transportation projects in U.S. history.

There’s no bigger hypocrite when it comes to infrastructure than President Obama. He wants $300 billion for a federal infrastructure fund even as he announces he will veto a bill to create needed pipeline infrastructure and some 42,000 jobs at virtually no cost to taxpayers. Pelosi and Durbin are against Keystone, too.

Rather than raise the federal gas tax, a better policy would be to repeal the federal tax and let states pay for their own road projects.

The interstate highway system was completed 30 years ago, and there is no more need for a national tax at 18.4 cents a gallon to fund bridges and high-speed rail projects to nowhere. Devolving transportation projects back to the states will ensure that gas tax money is used for the highest value-added projects.

The column continues at the website. You can read it in it’s entirety here.

***

“Don’t Get Stuck on Stupid!”

That was a quote from Lt. General Russell Honeré from the Katrina cleanup when the military had to come in to help state and federal officials in New Orleans. While the circumstances and reasons for the quote has been forgotten, the quote itself has not.

The dems in Washington have not taken that advice. No, they, after their massive losses last November, continue with their failed agenda. Only now, they are pushing that failed agenda harder.

Dems double down on liberal populism, push bolder wealth redistribution

By S.A. Miller and David Sherfinski – The Washington Times – Monday, January 12, 2015

House Democrats, fresh off massive election losses, say the problem is they didn’t make a bold enough case for tax increases and wealth transfer to the poor. They rectified that Monday with a speech by Rep. Chris Van Hollen proposing tax increases on the wealthy with the money going straight to tax cuts for the poor and middle class.

The plan uses tax laws to encourage employee wage increases, reduce tax breaks for Wall Street and slap another fee on financial transactions. The government would dole out $1,000 tax credits for most workers and increase a slew of other tax credits for poor and middle-class families.

“This is a plan to grow the paychecks of all, not just the wealth of a few. This proposal attacks the chronic problem of stagnant middle-class incomes from both directions. It promotes bigger paychecks and lets workers keep more of what they earn,” Mr. Van Hollen, the ranking member on the House Budget Committee, said in a speech announcing the plan at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington.

The Maryland Democrat said the proposal would restore balance to a tax code that “is now skewed in favor of people who make money off of money and against those who make money off of work.”

The plan built upon the liberal populism that dominates the Democratic agenda for confronting a Republican-controlled Congress, such as the push to raise the minimum wage and reducing student loan debt. But it went further by offering workers a direct cash payment. (The column continues at the website.)

The scheme will probably be DOA in Congress. At least it should be. With the current push by the establishment GOP for accommodation with liberals, who knows, really, if this is dead, or, like Frankenstein’s monster, will suddenly gain life again.

It’s time for a resurgence of those, currently out of favor by the establishment, to gather again under the name of, “Taxed Enough Already!”

Facebook

Election Issue: Sales Tax Increase

Posted on by

August 5, 2014 is the Missouri Primary. In addition to selecting candidates for the general election in November, there are a number of other issues added to the ballot. I’ve mentioned one Missouri Constitutional amendment passed in the legislature as SJR 36. That is Constitutional amendment #5.

There will be another issue on the ballot—raising the sales tax for Transportation. The state and counties like St Louis, has been wasting their highway maintenance money for decades. A couple of years ago, the state started repairing a number of small bridges throughout the state.

St Louis, on the other hand, did not. They just continued to whine for more state money. And…they have the unions and construction companies on their side; lusting after that tax money.

If you read the description from Ballotpedia above and scroll down the page, you will see the list of supporters for this tax increase. There is a wide spread surge of political ads across Missouri in support of this tax increase. Most of the funding is by MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC. This organization is a front created by the construction unions in Missouri.

I was given a link yesterday that disclosed the contributions to this orgranization. Here is the contributions for one day, June 25, 2014.

C131133 06/26/2014 MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC The Monarch Cement Company PO Box 1000 Humboldt KS 66748 6/25/2014 $10,000.00
C131133 06/26/2014 MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC Central Plains Cement LLC 2200 North Courtney Road Sugar Creek MO 64050 6/25/2014 $25,000.00
C131133 06/26/2014 MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC Ash Grove Cement Company PO Box 25900 Overland Park KS 66225 6/25/2014 $10,000.00
C131133 06/26/2014 MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC Continental Cement Co LLC 10107 Highway 79 Hannibal MO 63401 6/25/2014 $20,000.00
C131133 06/26/2014 MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC Pace Construction Company 1620 Woodson Road St Louis MO 63114 6/25/2014 $17,500.00
C131133 06/26/2014 MISSOURIANS FOR SAFE TRANSPORTATION & NEW JOBS INC Massman Construction Co PO Box 8458 Kansas City MO 64114 6/25/2014 $50,000.00

If you add the contributions, it adds up to $132,500 in just one day! If you want a real eye-opener, use the Advanced search option on that webpage, enter the month of June 2014 for the beginning and end search dates, with the Committee ID (MECID) of C131133.

Never let it be said the dems—and a few RINOs, never saw a tax increase they didn’t like. Especially if they can grab some of it for themselves. Unions are having trouble justifying their exorbitant pay scales. Here, they have a captive supplier and they see an opportunity to seize taxpayer money and they’re willing to spend millions to get it.

Facebook

Legislative Session Roundup

Posted on by

Democrat Governor Jay Nixon has been using his pen to veto some bills. His biggest veto, the HB 509, the Tax Cut bill, was overridden before the 2014 session ended. He waited until the session was over to veto these bills.

A number of these bills contain tax cuts or reforms in one fashion or another. Nixon’s constant screed was that the bills would cut revenues and unbalance the budget. Nixon did not acknowledge that it is the Legislature that creates the budget, not the governor. These vetoes prove, once again, that Nixon has never met a tax he didn’t like.

• HB1296 – Allows a seller to advertise that the required sales tax will be assumed or absorbed into the price of the property sold or the services rendered if the amount of the tax is separately stated

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• HB 1455 – Changes the laws regarding burdens of proof for the director of revenue in ascertaining tax liability of a taxpayer

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• HB 1865 – Modifies provisions of law relating to sales and use tax exemptions for utilities used or consumed in the preparation of food

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 584 – Modifies provisions relating to taxation

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 612 – Modifies provisions relating to taxation

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 662 – Requires the Department of Revenue to notify affected sellers of certain decisions modifying sales tax law

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 673 – Modifies the duration of unemployment compensation the method to pay federal advances, and raises the fund trigger causing contribution rate reductions

06/17/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 693 – Modifies provisions relating to taxation, fire sprinklers and merchandising practices

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 727 – Modifies provisions relating to farmers’ market and SNAP (Food Stamps) benefits

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 829 – Modifies provisions relating to burden of proof in tax liability cases

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

• SB 860 – Modifies provisions relating to taxation

06/11/2014: Vetoed by Governor Nixon

If you read any of the veto letters, you will find a common theme.

“…the General Assembly disregarded the normal legislative process, slipping in costly provisions without public hearings and without fiscal notes reflecting the impact on the state budget. And, as legislators ignored the legislative process, so too did they ignore the budget process…”

The budget process is owned by the Legislature. They are constitutionally required to submit a balanced budget. Nixon, however, by withholding funding to a number of areas, such as Education, has artificially created short falls in areas of state responsibility. The money was available. Nixon just chose not to spend it according to the budget. His hypocrisy is not surprising; he’s a democrat.

 

 

Facebook

Voting with their…

Posted on by

Feet.

Sean Hannity is off the air in Kansas City. He has been for months. The local station dropped him after his last contract expired. He was replaced with Michael Savage. I believe Savage may have two or three listeners.

Due to Hannity’s absence, you may not have heard the news. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said conservatives weren’t wanted in New York (Hannity lives on Long Island.)

Hannity soon received offers to relocate by the governors of Florida and Texas.

Sean Hannity Becomes Another High-Profile Tax Refugee

By STEPHEN MOORE AND TRAVIS BROWN, Posted 06/06/2014 06:31 PM ET

The TV host can save as much as $1 million a year just by escaping New York's tax regime.

The TV host can save as much as $1 million a year just by escaping New York’s tax regime.

Now we can add Sean Hannity to the growing list of celebrities to abandon their New York residencies in favor of states with better economic climates.

The popular TV and radio host has long been a New York resident with second and third homes in both Florida and Texas, two of the brightest stars in our nation’s economic constellation.

But on his primetime Fox News show, he recently told Florida Sen. Marco Rubio: “You’re soon going to be my senator.” He will split his time between a home in Naples, Fla., and a small ranch in Texas and end his New York residency, which means he’ll no longer be taxed by the Empire State.

Why this move after so many years as a New Yorker?

Well, in January of this year, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo created a firestorm when he contended that conservatives have “no place” in his state. In response, both Florida Gov. Rick Scott and Texas Gov. Rick Perry invited Hannity to consider a move to their states — invitations Hannity has gladly accepted.

It’s quite obvious why Hannity would not want to live in a state where his party is vilified by the governor. Yet there are many compelling financial reasons that favor Florida and Texas.

For one, neither Florida nor Texas levies a personal income tax — quite appealing considering that New York’s marginal income-tax rate for top earners like Hannity is over 13%. For New Yorkers making over $1 million a year, a move to Florida and Texas will let these top earners take home at least $130,000 more after taxes.

Hannity no doubt pulls down an income that will save as much as $1 million a year by saying so long to New York.

He isn’t alone in choosing sunny economic climates over New York’s shakedown tax system. Between 1992 and 2011 (according to data from the Internal Revenue Service), New York lost $71.36 billion in net adjusted gross income (AGI). By comparison, Texas gained $27.34 billion, while Florida gained a whopping $100.53 billion.

With population growth outpacing New York’s nearly 3-to-1, Florida has now passed the Empire State as the nation’s third-most populous.

The annual state report by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation confirms that Hannity is making a wise financial decision. Its 2014 State Business Tax Climate Index places New York dead last on the list as a result of high income, corporate, sales and property taxes.

The article continues onto a second page, here.

Hannity’s operation pays a significant amount of taxes to New York and well as to the local government. Now Cuomo’s bombast has lost the state and Long Island. Hannity could save as much as $130,000 a year by some estimates. A drop in the bucket, perhaps, for New York—if Hannity’s decision was the only one involved. However, it isn’t. Hannity isn’t along leaving New York. Rush Limbaugh moved out several years ago after a series of harassing tax audits that netted New York nothing.

***

Photo-ID. Last Tuesday was the primary election in Mississippi. The media was focused on the race between Chris McDaniel and Thad Cochran. They conveniently overlooked another significant event in the election—the requirement for a photo-ID to vote.

The Biggest Non-Story in Tuesday’s Elections? Mississippi Voter ID Implemented With No Problems

Hans von Spakovsky / / Jameson Broggi /

It wasn’t the biggest story following Tuesday’s elections in various states, but it was the biggest and most-ignored non-story.

Mississippi’s new voter ID law got its first run in the June 3 primary, and the sky did not fall. Despite the tiresome and disproven claims by opponents that such laws cause wholesale voter disenfranchisement and are intended to suppress votes, Mississippi “sailed through” its first test of the new ID requirements, according to The Clarion Ledger, the newspaper of Jackson, Miss.

Aside from being able to use any form of government-issued photo ID, like every other state with ID requirements, Mississippi provides a free ID for anyone who does not already have a government-issued photo ID.  Contrary to the claims of those who say large numbers of Americans don’t have an ID, Mississippi estimated that only 0.8 percent of Mississippians lacked an ID.  In fact, even that may have been an overestimate since the state had to issue only about 1,000 voter ID cards. All those who forgot their ID on Tuesday also could vote by an affidavit as long as they returned and showed an ID within five days.

The Clarion Ledger reported how few problems there were in the implementation of the new requirement. Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann said the state “devoted countless hours of time and training to election officials across the state” and the result was that there were hardly any complaints. There was only one reported case of a man mistakenly being turned away for lack of an ID, at which point an election commissioner was sent to solve the problem. But this was one of the few reported problems across the entire state in which almost 400,000 voters turned out to cast their ballots in the primary elections, including in the fiercely contested Republican U.S. Senate primary where incumbent Thad Cochran faced off against challenger Chris McDaniel in a razor-thin election.

As Sid Salter from the Clarion Ledger put it, the voter ID law was a “non-event” and “voters expressed little, if any, inconvenience at the polls due to the new law.” So how is the new law being covered by the media? Instead of reporting that the voter ID law is “sailing through,” the mainstream media has instead elected to remain silent. As Hosemann said, “No news is good news.”

An interview of Sharyl Atkission, formerly of CNN and under attack by Media Matters, slams the current crop of journalists as being tools, easily manipulated by Obama and the liberal establishment. Atkission left CBS because of the restrictions by CBS on her reporting. She was immediately attacked by CBS and Media Matters for her claims of liberal bias in the news.

Facebook