News
On Other Blogs Today
There wasn't much on other blogs that we didn't cover here today, so I decided to muse a little bit on one misguided editorial post from a local conservative think tank. Enjoy.
Over at the blog for the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy (a conservative think tank that advocates for conservative economic policy in government), Richard Davis rails against the high earners income tax proposal, Initiative 1098
He looks to Oregon to see what possible effects the high earners income tax—which Oregon voters increased (along with business taxes) in 2009 and 2010—might do to the business climate in Washington. Stick with him, he argues from the perspective of business executives; the fat cats.
Since the Oregon measures passed , both wealthier individuals and many businesses have bad-mouthed Oregon, coming to a head, as Davis notes, in a Chief Executive magazine annual poll of business executives about the best and worst states to do business where Oregon plunged from 24th best to 38th, the biggest drop of any state. Nike's founder Phil Knight called the tax increases "Oregon's business assisted suicide plan."
So, Davis, pushing a sort of trickle down theory where CEO's disgust will eventually hurt the business climate, he quotes an Oregonian editorial:
He then warns himself: "As clipboard-toting activists seek signatures for Washington's Initiative 1098, a homegrown version of the 'millionaire's tax,' look to just over the Columbia. We don't want to make that mistake here."
What Davis failed to mention, however, is that in the same poll of business executives, Washington climbed from 40th best place to do business to the 30th despite the batch of B&O tax increases levied this year by the legislature. That's the biggest gain from 2009 to 2010 in the country. And let's not forget that Initiative 1098 should eliminate the B&O tax for 80 percent of businesses in Washington and another 10 percent will get a tax cut, which is perhaps one of the most attractive elements of the proposal.
I think Davis fails to make distinction here, so let me make it for him. There is a difference between being pro-business and pro-wealth. I don't know if the executives of Oregon are being pro-business or pro-wealth, but railing against I-1098 is certainly the latter, not the former.
Another critical argument for supporting I-1098 that Davis does not address at all is that Washington state has the most regressive tax system of any state in the nation. The portion of their incomes that poorest 20 percent of Washingtonians pay is over five times the portion that the top one percent of Washington earners pay. The only unfortunate aspect of I-1098 is that it does not lower the regressives sales tax burden on the poorest residents of Washington.
Over at the blog for the Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy (a conservative think tank that advocates for conservative economic policy in government), Richard Davis rails against the high earners income tax proposal, Initiative 1098
He looks to Oregon to see what possible effects the high earners income tax—which Oregon voters increased (along with business taxes) in 2009 and 2010—might do to the business climate in Washington. Stick with him, he argues from the perspective of business executives; the fat cats.
Since the Oregon measures passed , both wealthier individuals and many businesses have bad-mouthed Oregon, coming to a head, as Davis notes, in a Chief Executive magazine annual poll of business executives about the best and worst states to do business where Oregon plunged from 24th best to 38th, the biggest drop of any state. Nike's founder Phil Knight called the tax increases "Oregon's business assisted suicide plan."
So, Davis, pushing a sort of trickle down theory where CEO's disgust will eventually hurt the business climate, he quotes an Oregonian editorial:
"...to those who delight in pointing out that no major business has cited the January tax vote as a reason to leave or invest outside the state: These things take time. Businesses with lease agreements, delivery contracts and personnel issues can't turn on a dime. But over time, they will make choices that will demonstrate their confidence in Oregon as a place to do business. That should concern Oregon's political leaders."
He then warns himself: "As clipboard-toting activists seek signatures for Washington's Initiative 1098, a homegrown version of the 'millionaire's tax,' look to just over the Columbia. We don't want to make that mistake here."
What Davis failed to mention, however, is that in the same poll of business executives, Washington climbed from 40th best place to do business to the 30th despite the batch of B&O tax increases levied this year by the legislature. That's the biggest gain from 2009 to 2010 in the country. And let's not forget that Initiative 1098 should eliminate the B&O tax for 80 percent of businesses in Washington and another 10 percent will get a tax cut, which is perhaps one of the most attractive elements of the proposal.
I think Davis fails to make distinction here, so let me make it for him. There is a difference between being pro-business and pro-wealth. I don't know if the executives of Oregon are being pro-business or pro-wealth, but railing against I-1098 is certainly the latter, not the former.
Another critical argument for supporting I-1098 that Davis does not address at all is that Washington state has the most regressive tax system of any state in the nation. The portion of their incomes that poorest 20 percent of Washingtonians pay is over five times the portion that the top one percent of Washington earners pay. The only unfortunate aspect of I-1098 is that it does not lower the regressives sales tax burden on the poorest residents of Washington.
Filed under
Share
Show Comments
