[Vision2020] Legislative Newsletter 11, March 20-24

[lfalen]

Cynthia
I would agree that the rate of assessed value should be restricted. I am not so sure sales tax is regressive as it is a consumption tax and the people with the most money spent more. Some relief for low income people should  be addressed. This could be done by excluding some of the basic staples from a sales tax. Another method might be a card issued to low income people that they could present at the store in order to not pay tax on food items. This might be cumbersome and subject to abuse. No system will be perfect.


Roger

-----Original message-----
From: cynthia nichols cynthiann0 at mac.com
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 09:26:42 -0800
To: ttrail at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Legislative Newsletter 11, March 20-24

> 
> On Mar 25, 2006, at 6:26 AM, ttrail at moscow.com wrote:
> 
> >   The major property tax relief measure which passed the House would
> >  increase the sales tax by ½ cent to replace 0.15% of the property tax
> >  for school M & O. This would still leave a gap of about $35  
> > million to
> >  come up with, and there are serious doubts of the state's commitment
> >  to maintain this funding.  Other measures discussed in the Senate  
> > relate
> >  to increasing the sales tax to 1 cent and replacing all of the M &  
> > O.  It
> >  will be interesting to see how this plays out.
> 
> My concern is that at least property taxes are tax deductible from my  
> federal taxes. Sales tax is not. This doesn't seem like relief to  
> me!! Since sales tax is regressive, it just shifts the burden to  
> those who are least able to pay (especially since food is taxed too).  
> We need an initiative (like Prop 13 in California) which  further  
> limits the annual property tax rate increase. It should also freeze  
> the property's  assessed valuation until the property is sold (after  
> all, my property is not worth more to me until I can sell it for a  
> higher price).
> If the legislature can't do it, shouldn't we do it for them? Is  
> anything like this in the works in Idaho?
> 
> cynthia nichols
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com>
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Legislative Newsletter 11, March 20-24
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 09:52:54 -0800
Size: 2488
Url: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060327/443466ce/Vision2020LegislativeNewsletter11March20-24.eml