The Matt Denn Dividend
By leaving the LT Gov’s office empty, the state is saving $610,000. Pretty sweet.
Lt. Governor’s Office -$610,3000
Knowing this cost $610,000 it is going to be pretty hard going forward for anyone to make the case that we need a Lt. Governor.
Other than that, I don’t see anything surprising in this Markell budget power-point. Unless I’m missing it, no tax increases. Only cuts to balance the budget. Elderly property tax subsidy cut -$12 million. (Suck it old fart New Jersey losers!), lower debt service -$11.7 million (thanks low interest rates), and presumably nobody is going to get sued this year, -$2 in legal fees.
Tax increase to the elderly? ?
It depends on your perspective. But yeah..I guess so. Since we’ve all adopted this Republican world-view, who am I to quibble?
“Markell SLAMS SENIORS with huge tax increase!” I’m sure that press release is being prepared for Copeland’s signature.
shylock son of a bitch
lol
I’ve spent virtually my entire adult life in Delaware. Finally I qualify for a meaningful tax break. Now Markell wants to take it away from me.
I predict that this will come back to bite the state via the rule of unintended consequences: Seniors having to pay $500 more per year in property taxes means fewer visits to the slots parlors which means a further decrease in revenues which means a larger state rescue in a couple of years.
Markell to seniors: “Let Them Ride Bikepaths.”
This is the first volley, lets see what sort of creative accounting Leg Hall comes up with.
mediawatch, maybe they’ll move back to NJ… or never leave the garden state in the first place. Win/win
What is with this State and Culinary Arts programming? If every school district isn’t creating one with high end kitchens to go along with it–we now have the prison system wanting to set up their own for programming–and in this proposed budget?
We used to be known for chemicals. I guess we now opt for culinary.
Jason,
I don’t give a rat’s @$$ for the folks from NJ, or the DC expatriates who decided late in life to become beach bunnies. I’m ticked that after paying state taxes for more than 40 years, I finally qualify for a decent break and now he’s taking it away.
Markell going after seniors like this will hurt far more people than Gary Simpson would help with his proposal (in another thread) to do away with the estate tax.
Well since Simpson is only trying to help 5 people by repealing the estate tax, that’s not a very high bar.
must suck paying low taxes all your life, get so close to paying even less than you deserve, being able to almost taste one extra meal at golden corral…and then just like that…no trip to the cascading chocolate fountain…
I guess that’s what it’s gonna be for millions of Americans and their Social Security one day.
I hope mediawatch isn’t in the district that has to vote to raise school taxes that extra $50
He seems like exactly the kind of “GIVE ME FREE MONEY!” parasite that the GOP has been warning us about all of these years. These people are simply lazy. Driving around in their Cadillacs. Watching their Matlock. Get a job ferchristsakes!
the more I read it, the more amused I become.
It’s like the guy in Office Space handing cake out to everyone
Or being the 101 person in the line where the first 100 people get in free
can you imagine being so close to a government hand out…and not getting it. lmao
Seriously, guys, those who know me (and those who have read my posts here over the last four years) realize that I think our state tax system sucks, that we run Delaware like it’s a banana republic trying to live off taxes paid by everyone by ourselves, that we need a gas tax increase to pay for better infrastructure, that the state tax structure is incredibly weak at the high end … and on and on and on.
And I’ve happily voted for many school tax increases.
My point, very simply, and it applies to a lot more people than just me is that lots of middle-class senior citizens have been paying taxes year after year, with none of the special breaks that always seem to benefit the wealthy and then our governor, rather than asking those who have the resources to pay a little more, decides to pick the pockets of those who are retired (or who would like to be retired, if they could only afford to quit their jobs).
Mediawatch isn’t an “I got mine” person.
And I get it. He/she didn’t ask for the tax break, but it existed and when they finally got a chance to use it… poof!
I hear you mediawatch. It’s not so much “I didn’t get mine”, as it is “they moved the carrot”.
I think folks here might be confusing the state income tax on the elderly income with property taxes. Two different issues.
But seriously, if the STATE portion deduction is on the table, it would be a shame to penalize the proven wage earners who have lived here for a long time. I don’t see why, with everything else they can program, just leave it at “if you weren’t a Delaware resident prior to 201x” you are unable to take the deduction. Even with property taxes we were able to get the GA to switch the exemption to a three year residency before claiming the senior exemption in regards to schools and referendums. Reasonable to me, that tax abatement isn’t part of the Welcome Basket in moving to Delaware.
But then again mediawatch, you know all those free admission at state parks, and no charge for a sport-fishing license was bound to catch up with trying to balance the budget ! 🙂
Well since Simpson is only trying to help 5 people by repealing the estate tax
… one of whom is named Charlie Copeland…
High Income Taxes High School Taxes
Delaware = LOSERS
It would be nice if someone down there In dover would have the guts to update our income tax bracket and create a higher tax bracket for the mega rich.. Approx 60k salary and over pay the same % .. So “Joe middle class” pays at the same rate as “Joe 6 million a year” who prob has so many write offs annually his real rate is in the teens.
“I’m ticked that after paying state taxes for more than 40 years, I finally qualify for a decent break and now he’s taking it away.”
Suck it. Your property taxes are pegged to 1976 levels. Is it reasonable to expect that you’d stop paying a large portion of your already-too-low property taxes just because you succeeded in not dying?
Chest,
1. Maybe you missed this statement later in the thread:
My point, very simply, and it applies to a lot more people than just me is that lots of middle-class senior citizens have been paying taxes year after year, with none of the special breaks that always seem to benefit the wealthy and then our governor, rather than asking those who have the resources to pay a little more, decides to pick the pockets of those who are retired (or who would like to be retired, if they could only afford to quit their jobs).
2. No, our property taxes are not pegged to 1976 levels. Our tax assessments are pegged to property values from whenever the last reassessment was done (1983 in New Castle County). The property taxes are pegged to whatever rate the county has to set to bring in the money needed to balance its budget. If our property taxes are too low, as you suggest, how high should they be? Are you suggesting that the county tax us more and put the money in their bank account? Are you suggesting that the county should raise taxes and provide more services? I’ve got no problem with paying more taxes and getting more and better services.
The real problem here is that we have a state government that tries to build a budget by making adjustments around the edges rather than adjusting its tax structure in a way that impacts the vast majority of taxpayers.
I’m not a numbers expert, but let me toss something out and see if it resonates with anyone here. Here goes:
Say we increase the tax rate on incomes under $60,000 by one half of one percent (a whopping $5 per $1,000 of income); increase rates on incomes over $60,000 by one percent, and increase rates on income over, say, $100,000 by one and a half percent.
Maybe someone in the Dept. of Finance can run the numbers and see how much revenue such a relatively modest broad-based increase could generate.
Simply put, making broad-based changes that impact the citizenry at all levels (regardless of age, income level or whatever other determinants you choose) would not only be more equitable, but it would also minimize instances of special interest groups (seniors, the poor, teachers, state employees, whatever) worrying that their ox will be the next to be gored.
@craft – Don’t hold your breath. The Democrats have fully internalized the GOP talking points on taxes. Unless you happen to be a smoker, you will not be asked to increase your support for our stare government in any way.
Our legislators would never pass it…older people vote. Markell doesn’t have to run again and they do. A more progressive tax structure, with a higher bracket or two at the top, is the most obvious and agreeable solution. It is embarrassing that we have a fiscal crisis every damned year and cut vital services and discuss regressive taxes (i.e. the gas tax) instead of actually moving forward with this realistic solution to the problem.
Agreed. When ANY and ALL tax increases (except for smoking) became radioactive on both sides of the isle, reason and policy parted ways.
We should let the roads deteriorate until voters beg for a gas tax increase.
Isn’t that what we are doing? Same with the schools.
I’m getting old enough to remember when the bridge I pass to work didn’t collapse
You, sir, have mastered this art form.
Again you are conflating progressive taxation with the desire for the 1% to pay more. Dicking around with the income tax rates has no impact on the 1%! Either figure out how to structure a tax policy that gets the 1% to pay more OR get a new meme.
In a true progressive tax system, the 1% would pay more…so would the top 10%. The more brackets, the more progressive. Right now, our “progressiveness” caps out at $60,000, meaning someone who earns $1,000,000 pays the same rate on everything over $60,000 as someone who earns $75,000. Granted, upping the capital gains tax and closing loopholes would probably have more of an impact since the highest earners don’t earn much in true income, but adding a few brackets at the top would at least be a step in the right direction and would be simple enough to do if our leaders had the political courage to actually raise a tax to pay for stuff instead of not paying for stuff to pay for other stuff.
“but adding a few brackets at the top would at least be a step in the right direction”
I suppose that depends on how you define the 1%. Adding a few brackets at the top would not change line 63 of Mitt Romney’s 1040 form by a single penny. But as long as it gives the illusion of progress and makes you feel better…
A+B is good
A only is less good
B only is less good, but better than A only
Neither A nor B (where we are now) is the worst.