Sen. Trahan: Update on Peoples Veto of Tax and Shift Plan

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
Editor
Offline
Joined: 04/18/2009 - 3:43pm
Sen. Trahan: Update on Peoples Veto of Tax and Shift Plan

NOTE: This item’s also posted for discussion in this ongoing thread here.

Wed, 02/03/2010 - 4:19pm
Posted by Statehouse Republican Video Project

Senator Dave Trahan talks about The Peoples Veto of LD 1495 the democrat Tax and Shift plan. The Referendum question will be on the ballot this June.

Moving Forward
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2005 - 7:35pm
Nice video update! For more

Nice video update! For more details about the upcoming People’s Veto effort against LD 1495,
which will be on the June 8th ballot, please visit us at www.MaineTaxpayers.com and on Facebook (Maine Taxpayers United).

In light of the question's odd wording, please remember, Vote YES to axe-the-tax!

J. McKane
Offline
Joined: 05/22/2005 - 12:01am
BRUNSWICK, Maine (NEWS

BRUNSWICK, Maine (NEWS CENTER) -- In June, Maine voters will decide whether or not to repeal a tax overhaul bill passed by the legislature last spring. But just in case voters still have questions on it, Democrats are holding forums throughout the state to offer up more information. "

Check out the story, video and comments - http://www.wcsh6.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=114668&catid=2

FXSTC
Offline
Joined: 11/13/2003 - 1:01am
Why isn't Trahan running for

Why isn't Trahan running for governor?

Editor
Offline
Joined: 04/18/2009 - 3:43pm
He's painfully shy.

He's painfully shy.

Moving Forward
Offline
Joined: 12/27/2005 - 7:35pm
Have you noticed that some

Have you noticed that some Maine democrats have been claiming that LD 1495 is "revenue neutral" when asked about the tax increases in that so-called "tax reform" plan? Well it's time for their lies to get answered with some facts. Here are two reports which illustrate they're telling lies:

1) MONTHLY NEWSLETTER OF THE OFFICE OF FISCAL AND PROGRAM REVIEW JUNE 2009
--> See the chart on Page 4 of FI$CAL NEW$
--> http://www.maine.gov/legis/ofpr/other_publications/fiscal_news/FiscalNew...
From: Grant T. Pennoyer, Director
Office of Fiscal and Program Review
5 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0005
Phone: (207) 287-1635
Fax: (207) 287-6469
E-mail: grant.pennoyer@legislature.maine.gov

2) Maine’s State & Local Tax Burden: Recent Trends and Tax Reform
--> See the Top Chart on Page 8 - Fiscal Impact of LD 1495 ($ Million)
--> http://www.mecep.org/documents/MichaelAllen-Slides-011110.pdf
From: Michael J. Allen, Ph.D. (Tel: 207-624-9570)
Economic Research Division
Maine Revenue Services
Presentation to MECEP Tax & Budget Conference
January 11, 2010

mainemom
Offline
Joined: 03/09/2004 - 1:01am
From the Office of Fiscal and

From the Office of Fiscal and Program Review report linked above, the tax reform is projected to result in a net increase of $14.8 million in tax collections over the first 4 years. This number doesn't say anything about how much of that net increase will come from non-residents, but it does give the lie to the revenue neutral claim.

ewv
Offline
Joined: 04/19/2000 - 12:01am
mainemom: This number doesn't

mainemom: This number doesn't say anything about how much of that net increase will come from non-residents, but it does give the lie to the revenue neutral claim.

Their numbers claiming how much would come from non-residents are fictitious anyway. They ignore the distortions on the economy in the form of price shifts, believing that someone will pay an indirect tax simply because they say so. Their whole unethical, demagogic campaign against "non-residents" counts on a combination of that economic fallacy and the additional factors of xenophobia, envy, 'class warfare', etc.

Who actually 'pays' a sales tax does not depend on what the government decrees about who is paying. It does not because prices and volume change when a sales tax is increased. Depending on the type of commodity and the kind of demand for it, the prices shift in different ways to reach a new 'equilibrium'.

If the total price sustainable in the market were to somehow go up by exactly the amount of the tax increase then the buyer would be paying; if the total price were to remain the same as what it otherwise would have been without the tax increase then the seller would be absorbing and paying the entire tax increase -- with other intermediate changes possible in different regions of the state and all kinds of other ripple effects throughout the economy also occurring.

If a price could be arbitrarily increased above the current market value without diminishing volume then the sellers would already be doing that and the market value would have been higher than it is.

MRS's decrees insisting that the buyers are paying the whole tax increase are unrelated to these economic market phenomena, which depend on consumer choices not subject to the dictates of government. For discretionary spending with alternatives available, such as is the case with this tax increase, it is highly unlikely that non-resident customers would be paying the full or tax increase or close to it -- more than what they otherwise would have been paying without the tax -- just because the little authoritarian dictators at MRS say so in their accounting reports. Then they wonder why "revenues" go down, either in total or with respect to what they predicted, when taxes go up.

mainemom
Offline
Joined: 03/09/2004 - 1:01am
Frankly I'm not even looking

Frankly I'm not even looking at the MRS projections because their track record is so poor.

ewv
Offline
Joined: 04/19/2000 - 12:01am
MRS projections are about as

MRS projections are about as good as those used to hype the old Soviet 5 Year Plans, which always seem to be foiled by "the weather" (now "globulwarming"?). The only part that could be predicted (by others) was overall decline in the economy and the brutality they were imposing on innocent citizens.

Log in to post comments