State Tax Update – California

State Tax Review:

Given the recent financial events that have hit Wall Street, real estate, and the average American consumer, the purpose of this post is to look at how our largest states have responded to this fiscal crisis with regards to tax policy. Let’s start with California.

For some background – here is a high level overview of state income taxes (circa 2006, hasn’t changed much since then on a relative basis). If you go to this section at LITGM you can see all of the tax posts we have put up over the years that cover similar topics.

California:

California is governed by a solid Democratic majority with a Republican governor. The California situation is different than most states in that a 2/3 majority is needed for tax increases, meaning that tax increases are difficult to pass through the legislature. California also has a “proposition” culture, where items are put directly to the voters (such as the famous “Proposition 13” which limited growth in property taxes).

California has a very high “graduated” state income tax (meaning that it is tied to the Federal tax liability, with some exceptions) and this forms a significant portion of their total tax collections. Per this very helpful site, in 2008 47.5% of their total tax revenues came from the state income tax, above the average of 35.7% for all states as a whole. However, this percentage is lower than its total impact – some states (like Illinois) have an essentially “flat” 3% state income tax (at 32% of Illinois state tax burden), but California’s is graduated so that they are taking 9.3% on all “taxable income” > $47,000 and another 1% on all income > $1,000,000, making their total tax burden at 10.3% for the highest earners. California is proposing to increase this rate (highest in the US of major states) by an additional 0.25% with their latest budget proposals, to a high of 10.55% (the 0.25% increase was part of Proposition 1A, which was defeated).

Reliance on a high, graduated state income tax is a two-edged sword – during “boom” times (such as the latest economic expansion) high income payers contribute a disproportionate amount to the budget (relative to other states) – but when the stock option gains evaporated starting in 2008, this portion of the state receipts is hit harder than other sorts of taxes (sales taxes, property taxes, gasoline taxes) because income and gains can fall rapidly which immediately reduces collections.

California immediate reached for the lever of increasing sales taxes as soon as the recession hit, raising the state portion from 7.25% to 8.25%, with local additions rising it up to 10.25% in some areas. Raising sales taxes is generally viewed as a “regressive” tax measure, because it hits the poorest hardest because they consume a higher percentage of their total earnings than the rich (the 1% increase was also defeated with proposition 1A).

California also has a very high corporate tax, at 8.84%, which makes up 10% of their total tax receipts. This rate is the highest in the nation, making it a dis-incentive for businesses to move into the state (unless they are able to reduce their Federal tax burden, which will result in tax relief, through various tax strategies).

The Tax Foundation (a non-profit group) wrote an excellent analysis of the California tax situation here. Per the Tax Foundation:

These tax increases are estimated to raise $10 billion, with the extensions from Proposition 1A generating a further $6 billion. California has been struggling to close a $40 billion budget gap between desired spending and expected revenues in its $92 billion 2009-10 budget.

Proposition 1A was defeated, leaving the state’s finances in a precarious state as far as balance of payments, although the state faced a huge budget gap in any case.

Read more

Online Commerce and Sales Taxes

Recently I needed a new pair of running shoes. I talked to someone who knows way more about the topic than I do and scribbled down her instructions of what to buy.

I have a few choices. There is a big sports supply store down the street, and there are various running stores within a couple of miles of my house.

Since it was crappy outside (it still is, but we have high hopes for this weekend here in Chicago) I did something else – went online to Zappos. Zappos is the famous online shoe store that is supposed to have great prices, service, etc…

I was able to pick out pretty much any type of shoe – they had the specific model I was looking for, along with online reviews of the shoe comparing it to its predecessors (and successors). I have wide feet and wanted a certain size, width and color, and no problem finding it.

The price was good and there was free shipping and no sales taxes. In Chicago, the retail sales tax rate is 10.25%, so that is a relatively big deal, it was about $12 savings relative to purchasing it in a store.

What stunned me, however, was the fact that the shoes arrived THE NEXT DAY. I don’t know if they have some sort of warehouse here in Chicago or how it happened, but I was totally amazed to find the box at the front desk of my condominium the very next morning. FOR FREE.

Read more

Our Voluntary Tax System

I’ve never been a big anti-tax person in the personal sense. I recognize lower taxes are more likely to stimulate both economic growth and personal responsibility. But when one of the paychecks in your family comes from a Land Grant university position and the other from a college supported by regional and state taxes, it is unbecoming to complain too much. Nonetheless, this Reid discussion is irritating. Of course, it was sent me by my brother who has been responsible for creating far more jobs in his lifetime than our household’s academic posts have.

What world do these people live in?

WSJ Opinion Article on Illinois Taxes

The WSJ recently wrote an opinion piece on the Illinois tax increases which I wrote about here called “The Taxing Illini”. From the article:

This is a state that does almost everything wrong economically. It is not a right-to-work state and is thus heavily unionized, repelling new business investment. It has the fifth highest minimum wage among the states, the fifth most trial-lawyer friendly legal code, the sixth highest workers’ compensation costs, and the 11th highest property taxes. It has one of the highest inheritance taxes, at 16%, so retirees flee to states with no death tax, such as Florida and Arizona. A rare Illinois advantage has been its relatively low income-tax rate, but that will shrink or vanish under Mr. Quinn’s increase.

The sad part about this article is that they failed to mention that Illinois has pretty much the highest sales tax rate of any state in the country, and in Cook County the rate is higher than 10% with relatively few exemptions. I guess they just ran out of bad things to say about the state, or figured that the “slaughter rule” was in effect, kind of like in that recent WBC game featuring the USA team.

Cross posted at LITGM

It’s Not Reform

Illinois, like most states, is in the throes of a financial crisis. Our new governor, Pat Quinn, now is leading the financial and budget process.

One of the few financial areas in which Illinois has a sensible tax policy is with regards to the state income tax. The state income tax is a flat 3%, tied to the Federal form (many other states are very complex, with graduated rates, and they diverge significantly from the Federal returns on key points of logic). Note that the state tax rate is supposed to be 2.5% but a 0.5% “surcharge” was added ostensibly to pay for transit and this was never rescinded. By contrast, Illinois has some of the highest sales tax rates in the nation, with Cook County and Chicago at over 10%, and we have high property taxes, as well.

Pat Quinn has now proposed a 50% tax hike, from 3% to 4.5%. In this requested tax hike, he is extremely deceptive and calls it tax “reform”, as noted in this headline from the Chicago Tribune. Mr. Quinn’s idea of reform, however, is reform as only a hard-core re-distributionist Democrat could see it – the structure of the tax is now being graduated so earners under a certain amount around $60,000 would pay about the same and high earning individuals and families would pay much more.

Mr. Quinn – here are some ideas for ACTUAL reform, as to how it is defined in the real world, not the act of giving some people the same tax rates and charging others a disproportionate amount:

Read more