The D’s have unveiled their proposed income tax increases and, while it doesn’t go as far as I’d like, I see it as progress. The proposal would create a new top rate of 6.95% for those earning over $150,000 a year. From the News-Journal article, here is how the current rates would be changed if this proposal becomes law:
Annual income — Current rate — Proposed — Change
$0 – 2,000 — 0 percent — 0 percent — 0 percentage points
$2,001 – $5,000 — 2.2 percent — 2.4 percent — 0.2 percentage points
$5,001 – $10,000 — 3.9 percent — 4.2 percent — 0.3 percentage points
$10,001 – $20,000 — 4.8 percent — 5.2 percent — 0.4 percentage points
$20,001 – $25,000 — 5.2 percent — 5.5 percent — 0.3 percentage points
$25,001 – $60,000 — 5.55 percent — 5.7 percent — 0.15 percentage points
$60,001 – $150,000 — 6.6 percent — 6.8 percent — 0.2 percentage points
$150,000 and up — 6.6 percent — 6.95 percent — 0.35 percentage points
I have a question, and maybe there’s a legit answer for it: Why are those earning between $10-20,000 a year subject to the highest increase? Is there some sort of offset?
Yes, this is painfully incremental. But the top rate wasn’t cut from 11.4% to 6.6% in one year. It was done over a course of two decades. While I understand Rep. Kowalko’s frustration, it makes no sense to try to scuttle this in search of greater purity of purpose. I agree with what Rep. Baumbach said: “”I like this one a lot better than nothing, which is what’s going on now.” It moves the ball in the right direction. Do it.
Here is yesterday’s Session Activity Report. You will note that there are virtually no committee reports. That’s because the House generally does not reconvene after committee meetings, meaning the reports will be read into the record before the ‘changing of the legislative day’. It’s standard procedure. However, you may still find bills that were considered in committee meetings yesterday on today’s agendas. So let’s check out today’s agendas.
Today’s House Agenda doesn’t appear to feature too much controversy. Every day that I don’t see the CZA overhaul on the agenda is a good day. I sincerely hope that the sponsors press the ‘pause’ button and allow for public hearings during the legislative recess before proceeding. It wouldn’t hurt if they announced that this was their intent now.
Maybe I’m just ‘legislatived out’, but the Senate Agenda doesn’t intrigue me much either. HS1/HB 113 (Rep. K. Williams) changes education licensure provisions. The bill unanimously passed the House. HB 189 (Mitchell) seeks to ‘accelerate investment in mobile broadband infrastructure and ready the State for the next wave of economic development in the digital economy.’ This bill also unanimously passed the House. Every day that I don’t see the Lonnie George Community College Slush Fund bill on the Agenda is a good day. I sincerely hope that legislators rise up and just say no to this bill. The bill would have virtually no chance of passage if those legislators who are/were affiliated with Del-Tech recused themselves. Let’s see if that happens.
That’s it for me. What’d I miss, and whaddayathink?