Letter: Jindal tax plan a bad idea

Gov. Bobby Jindal wants to eliminate state income taxes on individuals and corporations and replace that revenue by raising the state sales tax — to the highest in the nation.

This will leave Louisiana’s least-affluent paying a higher portion of their income in taxes, while the highest earners pay a lower portion. In other words, the governor wants to increase taxes on the poorest to fund tax cuts for the richest.

Gov. Jindal’s tax increase will hit hardest those who can least afford it: working families, students working their way through school, seniors and anyone living on a fixed income. Make no mistake, this tax hike will also hit middle-class families.

This scheme will make Louisiana a graveyard for retirees. They pay little or no income taxes. The governor’s plan is just a tax increase for Louisiana retirees, most of whom can least afford it. Our state retirees pay no income taxes on their state pension payments. This plan is nothing but a tax increase for them.

The governor’s numbers don’t hold up to scrutiny. In last fiscal year, the state brought in about $2.9 billion from income taxes on corporations and individuals. The sales tax revenues the same year were about the same $2.9 billion. To keep this swap “revenue neutral” the governor will have double the state sales tax from four cents to eight cents.

Yet, the administration claims they can achieve their goals by raising state sales tax by a mere 1.6 cents. That’s either gross incompetence or deliberately misleading. Even if the plan includes subjecting additional goods and services to the sales tax, that 1.6 cents cannot make up the difference.

Significant questions remain about this scheme. Where will a drastic increase in sales taxes leave local governments who rely on their own sales taxes to fund vital government services? Tourism is Louisiana’s second-largest industry. How many tourists will sky-high sales taxes scare off? Is it wise to have the bulk of our state revenues dependent on consumer spending? How many mom-and-pop stores will close when this tax increase sends Louisiana consumers to the Internet or out of state to do their buying?

The governor’s office has offered few details on his scheme to create the highest consumer tax in the nation. What we do know should worry us, not just for the future of the state but for the future of our most-vulnerable citizens.

John Bel Edwards

state representative, District 72

Amite

Comments

1) Comment by InPVille - 25/01/2013

I'd be much more concerned about who has money in this country and who doesn't if the same families held the wealth for generations. However, studies indicate that 80% of the wealthy came from the lower economic classes. Who is in that group changes over time because there is no sure way to pass on the values and work ethic it takes to become wealthy in the first place. Since it is possible to be wealthy in this country IF YOU ARE WILLING TO DO THE NECESSARY HARD WORK IT TAKES TO GET THERE. It didn't mean that much to me. Some live to work and others work to live. The constant chirping class envy rhetoric from "you know who you are" comes off sounding to me as subjective wishes to foist off on someone else the burden of supporting government. It is easy to be for taxes when someone else has to pay them.

2) Comment by postscript56 - 24/01/2013

Oh boy. Here we go again. You know what? I'm gonna call it for what it is. This "taker" idiocy is just plain ignorant. People who talk like that, reason like that, believe like that are just plain ignorant. Does that include some folks who posted here? Sure does. The wealthiest 25 percent of Americans own 82% of the wealth in this country. Don't take my word for it. Research it yourself. That means the poorest 75% of all Americans - which include all the so-called "takers" - are sharing a whopping 18% of the nations wealth. You know what? That group probably includes most of the posters here. What could be more ignorant than that?

3) Comment by DMJ - 24/01/2013

Only a Republican can keep a straight face while claiming that shifting the tax burden from the most affluent to the least affluent is fair and moral. And only a rube would agree. No offense.... well...some offense.

4) Comment by DMJ - 24/01/2013

"This will leave Louisiana’s least-affluent paying a higher portion of their income in taxes, while the highest earners pay a lower portion. In other words, the governor wants to increase taxes on the poorest to fund tax cuts for the richest." Of course. What did everyone think would happen when electing a Republican who made his bones by cutting funding to education, health care and social services? And you know the dumbest part about all this? The sales tax projections (after the increase) are based on what they are normally (before the increase)....get that? Jindal thinks some of us are dumb enough to think that people will by the same amount of stuff despite everything being 3-4% more expensive. Well....perhaps he is right. Some of us are dumb enough to buy this stupid scheme. What a shame.

5) Comment by agagent - 24/01/2013

I will concede the plan puts retirees at a disadvantage and maybe that can be addressed just like concerns for the poor. With that said our tax policy works best if everyone pays something. Otherwise the takers will soon outnumber the taxpayers paying the bills.

6) Comment by agagent - 24/01/2013

Okay, I meant to say attracking new businesses, unlike a federal government which is attacking businesses.

7) Comment by agagent - 24/01/2013

The tax plan is worth looking at if you want the economy to grow while limiting government’s attempts to control the economy through manipulating the tax code. Government has proven inept at that. The tax proposal eliminates some government bureaucrats who enforce the income tax code and reduce the cost of filing. It also improves Louisiana's competitive advantage in attacking new businesses. I am not inclined to taking economic advice from a personal injury lawyer who is working to increase liability limits on medical law suits. That is a conflict of interest for Edwards, a personal injury lawyer and legislator.

8) Comment by tradewinns - 24/01/2013

***** now there is an idea worth listening to. ever notice regardless of what tax program is being discussed, the rich and poor somehow escape and the m/c gets the pony's droppings? even jindals sales tax plan contains a way to "reimburse" the poor for any money it may cost them. everyone should have a dog in the fight. regardless of where you stand economically, you should have to participate in funding the government. we can start by reducing all welfare programs 10% a year for the foreseeable future.

9) Comment by Being_Stupid - 24/01/2013

This letter makes a good point. What if we could eliminate income tax without raising sales or property taxes? Perhaps cutting all these social and welfare programs for the parasites on Government Welfare, now there is the answer.

10) Comment by [e-mail] - 24/01/2013

Yeah, it was so much better before, right? The whole state was on the verge of going down the tubes while paying out the nose for all of those extremely worthy, save the children, save the animals, save whatever but all that was happening is that Democratic special interest groups pocketed more and more money.

11) Comment by postscript56 - 24/01/2013

Prior to the 2012 legislative session Jindal gave a speech about education reform and raised the specter of the crackhead teacher with tenure who couldn't be fired. With no more details than that his hired guns then rammed through voucher legislation, the end of tenure, etc. This year he gives a speech about getting rid of income taxes because he wants a "flatter" and "fairer" tax code (as if flatter is fairer). Like last year we won't get any more details before the start of the legislative session. It isn't Jindal's style. Hopefully our elected officials will grow a pair this year.

12) Comment by Bighug - 24/01/2013

Representative Edwards makes sense. How did he get elected in Louisiana?