Blue Ribbon Tax Commission - an unbiased and clear look at our tax structure

[Gary Gilbert]

The Blue Ribbon Tax Commission has its site up and running a http://www.vermonttaxreform.org/. It is a nonpartisan group created by the legislature to make recommendations as to how to design a tax system that is fair and stable. It is must reading for anyone who is interested in what exists today and why it was created as well as options that might exist. The site contains the commissions basic guiding principals and discusses some tax reform ideas in the areas of personal income, sales and use, statewide educational property and corporate income tax in a way that is much clearer than anything that the tax department has put out. It also identifies some misconceptions that exist about education funding. It then makes some general comments about the role of the legislature when changes are made that create new winners and losers.  This commission approach is very promising because it takes a look at the entire system rather than look to reform only one part at the expense of others as Montpelier usually does.

[rod anode]

now if it had been created by the governor would you still be calling it nonpartisan then tell me why it is so damn expensive to live here ?...oh I see shumlin eliminated the clothing tax ,but doubled if not tripled everyother tax ,fair and stable tAX SYSTEM,CONTROL YOUR SPENDING.........................

[cedarman]

I'm in favor of tax revenue being generated more by sales tax than income - makes me feel like I have a little bit of choice in how much tax I pay.  But, I realize that system isn't really stable, and can be counter productive to economic growth and in this era of being able to e-purchase almost anything you need, higher sales tax certainly puts local vendors at a disadvantage.

I expect this to be an interesting experiment that the legislature will consider the results, and cast them aside, choosing to increase the load/burden on the current system instead of a cut to the bone (then cut a little deeper) mentality that should be considered.

I don't mind paying taxes for things that our society needs: roads/bridges, schools, national defense (not international offense) and even a LITTLE bit for those who truely CAN'T provide for themselves. 
I  hate being forced to contribute to a government program which promises to provide a basic standard of living to me when i retire, but in all likelyhood, will NOT be around when I retire.  I hate seeing people abuse public services and being told "there really isn't much we can do" when reporting the abuse to the agency providing the service/$$$
I've vented enough for now.  Hopefully something good will come fromt his study, AND actually be implemented.

[suze]

Thank you, Gary, for sharing the link!

[Carolyn Branagan]

The attractiveness of using the Sales/use tax as a larger component of state revenue collections has definitely caught the eye of legislators. It has been discussed many times in the Ways and Means Committee, where I have served for 6 years. The problem is not which tax we use to generate money. The problem is we are spending too much.

Estimated revenue from the Sales/use tax for fiscal year 2010 was $312 million. One third of it goes to the Education Fund, so  that leaves about $209 million for the General Fund. Personal income tax estimates were for $527 million and Corporate income taxes estimated at $68 million. So, the Sales/Use tax doesn't bring in nearly enough money unless we cut our expenses  drastically.

And that's the problem, isn't it. Vermonters are known for being generous to a fault. There are only 640,000 of us trying to  raise enough money to provide all the goods and services used by states much larger. In Vermont we even provide more  generous benefits than many other states with more than half of all Vermonters on some kind of state assistance. That leaves  the rest of us to raise the money required to provide for those in 'need'.

Gary's right that this tax study is much needed and, like him, I am anxious to read the results. They should be available by January.

Rep. Carolyn Branagan

[rod anode]

THANK YOU carolyn for sharing this info

[mkr]

Thank you Carolyn.  I have also wondered, like cedarman, why little attention is paid to those who abuse the system.  I am all for a helping hand when truly needed, however when I see people out there who are clearly abusing the system and I have seen many, it frustrates me to no end that nothing is done.

[al brodeur]

a word of caution first check the surrounding states sales tax rates because if they are much lower or non existant there will be lots of large items bought out of state where a title is not issued .IE automoblies, trucks which have titles usually require proof of sales tax payment or require it to be paid when the item is registered

[Thor]

Just what we need, another commission, committee, review board, blah, blah, blah... What we really need is a balanced budget. We don't need to change the current tax law, we need some people in Montpelier who are willing to "live within their means" like the rest of us are forced to do! We need to get rid of the people who have been handling the checkbook and put some fiscally responsible folks in there. We elected these people to office, to make hard decisions in tough times. If they cannot do that, we should get rid of them. We don't need anymore lip service about the difficulties of these decisions, because all they are really trying to do is please everyone in the hopes of getting their vote the next go round. What is amazing to me is that of the 640,000 folks in VT, Carolyn states that "more than half are on some type of state assistance". Maybe we should begin by reducing that number! How about no COLA increase for them. And a reduction in benefits next year and so on. What Montpelier needs to recognize is perhaps instead of increasing taxes, perhaps reducing benefits is a good start to balancing the budget.

[rod anode]

thor i dont know who you are but your a;most my best friend

[j_gluck]

Just a couple of comments

What we really need is a balanced budget.

Vermont's constitution does not mandate a balanced budget, but every year the Legislature passes and the Governor signs a balanced budget for that year. The year that the Legislature overrode the Governor's veto, the Legislature passed a balanced budget. They made hard decisions in tough times.

How about no COLA increase for them.

There will be no COLA increase for those on Social Security this coming year. Just like last year.

I work for the agency on aging - some of the Vermonters getting assistance are seniors who live in this town. Their benefits have been reduced over the past few years and their expenses are increasing.

Others are people who have lost jobs during this recession - who would rather be working.

Please try to put yourself in their situation.

Thank you.

[Thor]

Okay, so Vermont constitutionally doesn't require a balanced budget. And that has proved to be a fantastic help here in recent years. J_gluck, I think you're missing my point. If they don't stop spending the way they are spending, are they just going to keep increasing the taxes on those of us who pay taxes? I work 2 jobs, in order to be able to provide for my family. Should I be punished because there are so many people requiring state assistance? Should I and the other tax payers have to continue to foot the bill? You say that the Legislature has made the hard decisions in tough times? Well guess what; it wasn't enough and the hard times ain't over. With a deficit like we have, they are going to have to do some more cutting.

And with regards to the seniors who are on state assistance. I have always said that they are the ones who we should be taking care of first. Those that have paid into the system, tried to do the right thing their entire lives, and now struggle to make it. The frustrating thing to me, as has been mentioned here a couple of times, is the corporate / career welfare recipients. The folks who do nothing, but get a tremendous amount of subsistance and support. That is the criminal part of the whole system.

Anyway, my point is simply this. Don't raise my taxes because the leadership cannot live within their means. What our leaders have to do is prioritze things. And to be a good leader, you have to recognize that if you have fifteen things on your list, you cannot have fifteen #1's. That is not prioritization, that is canvasing for votes while trying to give the appearance of working. So again, I digress to this.... make the hard decisions.

Sorry if I am beating the infamous dead horse.

[rod anode]

this horse is very much alive and kicking that is what this whole election is about ,do you want your government spending or do you want your government livivng within it`s means?

[Thor]

I'm with you Rod. I am so over the political double talk.  I work my butt off to make sure my family has what it needs, while maintaining a budget. Save for retirement, save for college, etc... But people are getting so used to big Gov't, and their handouts. They are now seeing that it is unsustainable. The writing is on the wall now. If they would stop and look, they would see that the wheel on the cart is about to come off. Everyone agrees that we need cutbacks, but no one thinks a program they are tied to or affiliated with should be the one that is cut. "No, no... don't cut my program, cut that other one"!! To me, it is simple. Don't change anything about the taxes. Make the necessary cutbacks. If they cannot prioritize what gets cut and what doesn't, then make an across the board cut. But you and I should not be held accountable or liable for the legislatures inability to get something done.