Stop the Madness: Increase
Vermont Taxes 2.5% of Gross State Product
Vermont and national numbers
for median household and family income remain down now well into the Great
Recession of 2008-2009 “recovery”—$52,600 in 2013, slightly above the U.S.
average, but down $3,800 from its peak in 2008.
This drop gives absolute proof to the concerns about a declining middle
class and middle class incomes. But
manufacturing wages, a key income indicator, remains little changed from 1980
suggesting a much longer historic tale of income woe for the nation and
Vermonters. A major study in Vermont in
the 1990s revealed the eroding of incomes and increase in poverty associated
with the decline in manufacturing jobs which fled to low wage countries. U.S. and Vermont long term unemployed numbers
today remain far above normal along with depressed incomes compared to previous
recoveries. Since “government” during
the 2008 to date period has regularly declined in terms of employment and
discretionary funding cuts, maybe the role of government needs another look. The right wing mantra of “starving the beast”
of government apparently working quite well, but a government starved does not
meet ever growing demands on it services and support. Should there be more government and taxes or
less? (The Department of Numbers website
provides lots of information on U.S./Vermont income data http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/vermont/ ,)
The Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) regularly chronicles the
performance of its member nations comprised of developed nations, mostly
European plus the U.S., Canada, Japan, South Korea, etc. The first thing that strikes an observer is
the U.S. ranking last among 14 developed nations in income equality (11
European nations, Canada and Japan).
Current U.S. governments spending at all levels overall actually
contributes to the inequality because it tends to benefit the upper income
groups. Also, more importantly, low U.S.
household tax burden stands out like a sore thumb. Reform of existing government spending to
benefit the low and middle income needs immediate attention, and so does the
amount of taxes—taxes need to move up about five percent minimum in terms of
gross state and federal government support.
Note the current news from
Montpelier regarding how exciting it is with our economy growing, a low
unemployment rate and no seeming obstacles in the path of a good life for
Vermonters. With Vermont continuing for
years now boasting of its near lowest unemployment rate among states and our
nation five years into recovery, why Governor Peter Shumlin announcing delay of
his signature universal pre-kindergarten, a $100 million dollar budget deficit
facing lawmakers, and demands by the Vermont middle class for some form of
relief from a $3,800 drop in median income suffered from a 2008 peak through
2013 which seems to be moving toward a permanent state?
For the Greater Burlington
Chamber of Commerce leader Tom Torti the recipe is simple: “Let’s stop raising
taxes. Stop the madness” (Seven Days,
November 19). Actually, the opposite is most
likely true—Vermont can and should increase its taxes and at some point expect
the federal government to do the same.
The reason is quite simple—the U.S. already has some of the lowest tax
rates among developed nations measured in both the overall economy and
household tax burden while attaining the highest level of income inequality, an
inequality seeping swiftly into the middle class in a process dating back to
the 1980s when U.S. manufacturing jobs began to flow to low wage destinations. (See the New York Times piece by Steven
Ratner November 15 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/17/opinion/inequality-unbelievably-gets-worse.html?emc=eta1&_r=0
Yes, Vermont may well throw
money down the drain in education administration and lack of performance while
spending more than practically any other state to attain under achievement in
primary and secondary education--but curing that does not solve the need for
additional taxation. As Vermonters
decrease their driving or just throw away the keys, for example, they choose to
move to downtowns and village centers.
Consider the needed infrastructure investments—intercity and commuter
rail, higher education, and urban walk/bike facilities to further the demand
from the movement of the “new workforce” and the doubling senior population who
together increasingly choose to work, play, retire and shop without being car
dependent.
Right now U.S. taxes are
split roughly 50 percent state/local and 50 percent federal. If the overall tax burden were raised in the
U.S. 5% of gross national product (GNP) to the average 32% of a group of 14
developed nations (11 European plus Canada and Japan) the State/local and
federal coffers would each gain from Vermonters and Vermont businsesses roughly
$750 million each yearly, $1.5 billion overall.
Since Vermont’s Gross State Product (GSP) in 2013 amounted to $29.5
billion, devoting 5% more of that GSP to government means about shifting $1.5
billion from non-government activity to government activity which means
additional taxes to support that shift.
The Ratner analysis shows
the current typical $100,000 U.S. earner paying an effective tax rate of 26% or
$26,000 toward government—a rule of thumb of federal versus state/local taxes
is 50/50, about $13,000 federal and $13,000 state/local. Clearly the total is far more federal than
state since federal Social Security taxes are included here—but this makes the
argument a conservative one here since the majority of increased taxes
suggested here would go to non-retirement areas even if the U.S. did establish
a needed long term care insurance program under Social Security and expanded
overall retirement and disability benefits modestly as well. Assuming a 5% increase of hypothetical
individual with a $100,000 income shifted to federal and State/local taxes
means an increase of $5,000 to a total of $31,000. Again, it is assumed that half the $5,000
increase--$2,500--goes into federal tax coffers and half to Vermont State and
local taxes.
Just raising our $750
million additional taxes a year for Vermont compares to the current general
fund budget for this year passed by the Legislature of $2.5 billion—an
additional $750 million in State revenues amounts to a 30% increase. From another standpoint our State and local governments
now try to provide a full range of services with one third less the funds of a
typical developed OECD country. Yes the
“beast” of State and local government starves.
Meanwhile one would expect a similar 2.5% increase would occur allowing
federal programs such as research, infrastructure, housing assistance, food
support, and long term care would get attention instead of inflation and/or
outright cuts experienced over the last several years and clear expectations
this trend continues in the foreseeable future.
While the federal government sleepwalks, Vermont State government can
begin to take judicious steps to bring needed relief using the taxing power to
benefit the needy and the middle class without the loss of employment.
Perhaps the proper response to Tom Torti is: “Let’s start raising taxes. Stop this
madness.”
No comments:
Post a Comment