Night of the Living GREAT Plan

The House is currently debating HR1246. The latest plan (according to the Speaker’s floor speech) is that it would get rid of the car tax, cap reassesments, and add $10 per registration for Trauma Care.

Oh, just as I post this the close debate and voted. Results are: 166-5 getting well beyond the 2/3rds necessary to pass.

All Hail the Tax Jesus!

6 comments

  1. BobG says:

    For an ignorant fraction of a man, Richardson sure talked big. He declared shame on local government for opposing the tax bill, accused them of wasting tax dollars on lobbyists and not-so-gently reminded local politicians that THE STATE gives them their taxing authority.

    Richardson claimed that HR-1246 will eliminate the so-called “back door tax increase,” which is an increase in the individual tax bill resulting from an increase in assessments. I can easily prove that he is ABSOLUTELY WRONG on this point.

    I can also easily prove that an assessment `freeze` will kill the tax cut. Because of a deficiency in the current tax law, local governments will never again lower the millage rate if this passes.

    Finally, I can easily prove that an assessment `freeze` will benefit the affluent and slowly shift the cost of government to those less able to pay.

    Not only was the final vote total disappointing, but I was angered and ashamed to see 166 equally ignorant individuals give the bill’s passage a standing ovation.

  2. suwtiger says:

    I have to agree with the above from BobG. Everyone reading this will get thier house tax notice in 2009 and say, great my tax value went up only 2% and then when the tax bill comes out, the will say damn, how did my property taxes go up 4%. Its easy, since the legislature didnt enforce tax rate caps, your commissioners just raised the millage rate to get the money they wanted anyway. Why do you think the Co. Commissioners union agreed to the part about removing the tax rate cap. And no, no one will show up at commission meetings and vote them out because of it, it wont happen becuase we have 30 second memories.

  3. BobG says:

    suwtiger, to make my point clear… I do not advocate a millage rate cap. Like an assessment ‘freeze,’ that would be just another artificial influence on the process that would further hamstring local government.

    I simply advocate fixing the flaw in the current law and require taxing authorities to adopt a mathematically-correct millage rate according to the procedure taught by the Dept. of Revenue for decades. (See http://www.millagerate.com/howto.htm). Then….

    As assessments (the Net Tax Digest) increased, the tax rate MUST decrease simply as an operation of the math as long as the politicians hold the line on the cost of government. The millage rate becomes a transparent and reliable indicator of the local politicians’ ability to control spending and/or replace property taxes with non-tax revenue sources AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

    Most importantly, the “back door tax increase” would be ELIMINATED, since the millage would fall AUTOMATICALLY as assessments increased.

  4. jsm says:

    “Its easy, since the legislature didnt enforce tax rate caps, your commissioners just raised the millage rate to get the money they wanted anyway.”

    Usually, the school board is responsible for the lion’s share of most property tax increases.

    Also, what is the current plan for counties to make up the ad valorem tax revenue? Maybe I should already know the answer to this as much as this has been discussed, but I don’t remember. I noticed that my county’s motor vehicle revenue was about 8% of its total ad valorem income in 2006, about 1/8 as much as the residential figure.

Comments are closed.