By Melissa Daniels/PA Independent
HARRISBURG — Exchanging school property taxes for hikes in other taxes could come with a bigger increase in personal income tax for Pennsylvania wage earners than previously suggested.
The House Finance Committee on Monday held a second public hearing on House Bill 1776, or the Property Tax Independence Act. The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Jim Cox, R-Berks, aims to achieve the long-discussed goal of eliminating property taxes to fund public schools by creating increases in sales and personal income taxes, as well as the inclusion of previously untaxed goods and services.
But new figures from the state Department of Revenue show a $3.5 billion gap between the estimated $12.5 billion earned by property taxes, and what the new tax structure would raise. In response, Cox said he and bill co-sponsors would consider increasing the personal income tax even further to meet the mark.
Given the new figures, some representatives were uncertain about the plan's ability to support the needs of public education. At a public hearing for the bill two weeks ago, the funding gap was estimated at $500 million, said state Rep. Phyllis Mundy, D-Luzerne, House Finance Committee chairwoman. But leaving a gap of at least $3.5 billion puts districts in “a horrible bind,” Mundy said.
“We do need to shift sales and income tax or some sort of revenue to replace property taxes,” Mundy said at the hearing, “but in your bill, there seems to be, even now, a lot of confusion on exactly how much revenue your bill will generate.”
Cox said eliminating property taxes isn’t about sticking school districts with a shortfall. Revenue neutrality is the goal, he said, though he doubted the $3.5 billion figure. "We’re in agreement the personal income tax is the place we would need to look to fill that void,” Cox said.
Cox has generated support for the bill among 70 co-sponsors, 20 of whom are Democrats, as well as state residents.
Pennsylvania's personal income tax rate is just more than 3 percent, the lowest flat tax rate personal income tax in the nation. Cox’s original plan would boost that rate to 4 percent, a nearly 33 percent increase, which, according to estimates from Cox's office, would bring in $3.46 million annually.
A sales tax increase would be from 6 percent to 7 percent statewide, with the exclusion of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, which would see 8 percent. Mark Robyn, an economist with the Tax Foundation, a national taxation research group, said that while other states dedicate a specific tax to a specific need, focusing on income tax is a unique choice because it usually funds general government services.
“You don’t know where your public service demand might change in the future,” he said.
But to Cox, changing the funding from property taxes to sales and income taxes along with expanding taxes on goods and services makes the system more fair.
"The goal of this legislation is about getting the question before the House and before the Senate: Do we want to change the source from a local school district tax which is burdening homeowners, driving people out of their homes, to something we feel is more fair and more stable and more able to directly reflect the economy, the ebbs and flows the economy more directly, without compromising home ownership?"
Citing the 10,000 homeowners who lose their property annually because of inability to pay property taxes, Cox reminded lawmakers they were elected to represent taxpayers, and not the special interests.
Those who opposed the legislation Monday included the Pennsylvania Bar Association on the grounds of expanding taxes to legal services and the Pennsylvania Retailers Association because of potential negatives effects of an increased sales tax.
Groups that support the act include the Pennsylvania State Grange, Pennsylvania Farm Bureauand Pennsylvania Coalition for Taxpayers Associations.
The committee is scheduled to vote on the act Monday.
-What makes you think that the state won't take the money they bring in from this plan and spend it on their pet projects, depriving our children of a quality education (Like how the Fed takes Social Security money and use it elsewhere?) -People complain that those who don't have kids have to pay for kids they don't have. But aren't these the same people who are beneficiaries of an education system paid for by our taxes? Using their logic, I should't have to pay for welfare or social Security because I never collected from it. -Under this plan, businesses are not going to have to pay for school taxes anymore, so where is that money going to come from that they once paid? Same for landlords. So be wary of supporting 1776, it's going to be making a deal with the devil.
This new method is going to make it mush easier for the state to raise sales tax to close a deficit. In the long run, if this goes through we will be paying more for everything. Unless that is, you live close to Delaware where they have no sales tax and will be doing all of your shopping over there as opposed to supporting Pennsylvania businesses.
You are right about that. Many people choose the location of their homes based on the school district in which the home is located. If this were to go through, eventually there could be less money coming into the better districts and good money thrown after bad into poorly mismanaged districts. The result of this, is that after awhile the homes in the more desirable districts are going to lose value and the ones in the not so desirable districts are not going to be any better. There are so many people that think that this is the best thing since sliced bread, and it is quite the opposite. People need to learn what is really going to happen if this bill passes.
Currently, school boards come up with what they are going to spend and stick property owners with higher taxes to cover their lack of spending control. If they raise taxes significantly, businesses and associated jobs will leave, forcing home owners to pay more. My current school tax is more than double what the total of school, city and county taxes were when I bought my house, but my income is half of what it was 10 years ago. The property tax system has no controls put in place to adjust for economic situations. When there is a downturn in the economy as there is now, those that continue to work have the ability to pay property taxes, but if you retire, have a lower paying job or lose a job, your taxes continue to rise even though you have fewer funds available. A family that has paid off their mortgage and no longer owe on their house, may lose their home because property taxes continue to rise uncontrollably.
If the law is properly written so that prejudice and politics are removed from the amounts each school district receives, a sales tax and income tax would be more responsive to individuals financial conditions and would allow homeowners with financial setbacks to have a better chance at keeping their homes. Without their ability to increase their income on a whim, It would also require school boards to use imagination and ingenuity to fund programs that are productive rather than just fluff.
1) EPSD gets only half of the average in return of state income tax to its school. In PA, the total support for public education is essentially equal to the total personal income tax. However, EPSD taxpayers pay almost $50 million for state personal income tax while EPSD gets barely $20 million back from the state. Asking for more from the state may get EPSD more, but it will cost EPSD's taxpayers twice as much! 2) The same is true for the gambling for property tax rebate. Compared to the average in the state, EPSD's return is about half of the average. There may be some indirect social benefits from this revenue sharing, but the direct financial result of increasing state funding will be to hurt EPSD taxpayers.
If high end properties were properly assessed, there would be a significant increase in revenues.
HB 1776 also lets bigger businesses off the hook, while shifting tax incidence to small business (beauty parlors, restaurants, funeral homes, accountants, etc. that can’t escape the new sales and use subjects of tax. If school expenses are too high, then cut expenses. What tax is used is not as relevant as the expense side. Moving to sales and income taxes would unfairly burden the poor, the elderly, and working families just starting out. If property taxes are so bad, why do states that use it more than other taxes do so well economically (Texas, New Hampshire, Virginia, etc.) . The property tax can be fixed not dumped, and anti-capital measures like sales and income taxes avoided. Granting the State of Pennsylvania decision making powers over local decisions is not the way to go; I am surprised that supposed free-market advocates want to tax people’s work and capital, and at the state level at that. I wrote a longer piece on the subject: http://www.urbantoolsconsult.org/blog/2012/04/20/Eliminating-the-property-tax-It-must-not-happen-but-well-see-what-happens.aspx