ATR Supports H.R. 1104, the "Fair Treatment for All Donations Act"

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Ryan Ellis on Thursday, March 12th, 2015, 5:48 PM PERMALINK


Congressman Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) recently introduced H.R. 1104, the "Fair Treatment for All Donations Act."  ATR strongly endorses this legislation, and urges all Members of Congress to vote for and otherwise support it.

H.R. 1104 would prevent the IRS from assessing gift tax on contributions to certain non-profit organizations.  Americans for Tax Reform and most other free market groups are organized under Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, and are therefore affected.

The IRS has, in the past, sought to tax donors to politically-selected non-profit groups on the conservative side of the spectrum.  The mechanism to do so has been a perverse enforcement of the federal gift tax.  H.R. 1104 precludes this tactic in the future.

Under federal gift tax rules, a gift giver must file a gift tax return and pay any applicable taxes for any gift of at least $14,000 to any one person over the course of a year.  The intention behind this is to prevent wealthy taxpayers from divesting their estate before they die, and before that estate is potentially subject to the death tax.  The gift tax was never intended to affect voluntary donations to non-profit groups.

The IRS has tried to assert that 501(c)(4) groups are "persons" under the tax code, and therefore any donations to them in excess of $14,000 should trigger tax consequences to the donor. No serious tax expert would say that this interpretation holds water, but it was nonetheless asserted by the IRS as recently as 2011.

It was clear then that the IRS was seeking to pervert the gift tax and use it as an intimidation device against potential donors to conservative non-profits.  This was happening at the same time as Lois Lerner was denying conservative and Tea Party non-profits the ability to organize and get tax status, so it's clear the gift tax gamesmanship was part and parcel of the same conspiracy against the conservative movement by the IRS.

The gift tax arrow needs to be permanently removed from the IRS' political quiver. H.R. 1104 would do just that.  The IRS should not be used as a political tool by any president, from either party.

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


ATR Opposes Onerous Restrictions on Vapor Market in Indiana

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Paul Blair on Wednesday, March 11th, 2015, 3:00 PM PERMALINK


When the debate over electronic cigarettes and vapor products started months ago in Indiana, the Attorney General presented a misguided idea aimed at raising the cost of these innovative products. He suggested e-cigarettes be subjected to the same rate of taxation as smokeless tobacco and other tobacco products. They are currently subjected to the sales tax. As we noted at the time, this would have created an incentive for people to continue smoking traditional tobacco cigarettes instead of making the switch to a much healthier alternative. 

The tax debate seems to have stalled but a more nefarious proposal has taken its place. Senate Bill 539 and its companion House Bill 1432 have both passed their respective chambers of the Indiana legislature. Americans for Tax Reform opposes these bills and recently sent a letter to Indiana lawmakers and Governor Mike Pence explaining why. 

Click here to read the letter. 

These pieces of legislation create a state-based regulatory framework for vapor product packaging and labeling, a framework that is best left to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). If every state imposed its own set of guidelines for good manufacturing practices, labeling, and packaging, companies who sold products in multiple states would have a compliance nightmare on their hands, likely reducing the availability of products on the market. 

Additionally, the FDA is better suited than the state to regulate and test ingredients and batches of products in this industry. 

There is a more sinister motive behind the push to regulate these products that has nothing to do with protecting consumer or the general public. These regulations are being pushed by a company intent on establishing a monopoly on vapor product sales in Indiana. 

The Indiana Vapor Company LLC would be set up to be the sole manufacturer of e-liquid (the product consumers use to refill their "open system" vapor products) in Indiana. Small businesses in the state could not afford the expensive security systems SB 539 and HB 1432 mandates, security systems far more complex than ones required by the federal government for tobacco companies. Indiana Vapor Company has suspicious ties to a Centaur Gaming, a company that is no stranger to the benefits of a monopoly on the market. 

Click here to review Centaur's 2014 list of registered lobbyists.

Click here to view Indiana Vapor Company's 2015 list of registered lobbyists. Hint: same people. 

We urge the legislature to reject this blatant act of crony capitalism and defer to the FDA for the appropriate set of guidelines for vapor products. Any set of state-based regulations should acknowledge that when the FDA releases their minimum level of product guidelines, they will trump state laws to ensure simplicity and conformity for all companies who do business in multiple states. This will benefit consumers, who seek a wide range of available flavors and options in the vapor market in their journey to quit smoking. 

The letter from ATR president Grover Norquist can be read in its entirety here. 

Photo Credit: 
E-Liquid by Five Pawns

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

GingerGrantUSSMinnow

That's your government for ya! BS!!!


Hillary’s Emails May Cost Taxpayers Millions

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Jordan Haring on Wednesday, March 11th, 2015, 11:51 AM PERMALINK


An investigation into how Hillary Clinton handled her email is underway, at a great expense to taxpayers, according to a Bloomberg article by Josh Rogin and Eli Lake.
 
According to Congressman Mike Pompeo, sorting through more than 55,000 pages of emails could involve “hundreds and thousands of man hours.” He stated:
“I think the effort of reviewing these documents will greatly exceed a million bucks. The United States taxpayer is going to pay for that.”
Senator Lindsey Graham demands to know how much it cost for Clinton to work outside the system and play by her own rules. He stated:
“I’m going to be asking the State Department how many man hours of work this will require, how much money it will cost and whether or not they think they should pay for it.”
Now Clinton has to explain her handling of emails and the unnecessary burden it may place on taxpayers.
Photo Credit: 
Michael Kovac

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Judy

I think she should pay for cost of going through her email to see if she has hurt USA with her policies or votes

Robert L

They of course don't have to spend any money on Hillary's emails, we can just trust what she says, gag !

Me

Child killing by Planned Parenthood is also tax payer funded. What a shameful reality for Hilary Clinton to be associated with Planned Parenthood. What a shamful disgrace for us taxpayers to be associated with the child killers at Planned Parenthood. God help us all to repent from funding child killing through our tax monies.


National Science Foundation Spends $1.97 Million on Website for Fossil Enthusiasts

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Alexander Hendrie on Wednesday, March 11th, 2015, 10:00 AM PERMALINK


Love fossils but struggling to interact with your fellow enthusiasts? The federal government has got your back. Last year, the National Science Foundation awarded a grant of $1.97 million to create a social media platform for fossil enthusiasts according to the 2014 Wastebook released by now-retired Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

The grant aims to “create a new communication network for fossil enthusiasts and professionals" and provides a “web-based education community that connects people with a shared interested in paleontology” and allows users to easily input and share data.

But as the 2014 Wastebook points out, this funding is both unnecessary and duplicative. While the grant recipients claim that fossil enthusiasts desperately need a communication network there are many ways to facilitate discussion in today’s digital age without spending millions.  In fact, there are already several online fossil communities including the “Fossil Forum” with 11,000 registered members.  

It is not surprising that the NSF has wasteful spending habits. The agency has faced criticism for its spending decisions for years. In 2011 reports found that the NSF wasted nearly $1.2 billion of its $6.9 billion budget due to waste, fraud and duplication.

Defenders of the NSF tout its contribution to scientific research and advancement and have urged congress not to cut funding. However, recent projects of the NSF have included $200,000 to determine why Wikipedia is sexist, $850,000 to teach mountain lions to walk on treadmills and $50,000 to watch sea monkeys swim. 

With such ludicrous projects, it is difficult to see what exactly they are contributing to science. 

Photo Credit: 
Mike Beauregard

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Guest

The


Governor Abolishes Cover Oregon After Wasting $350 Million in Taxpayer Funds

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Alexander Hendrie on Tuesday, March 10th, 2015, 5:49 PM PERMALINK


After spending $305 million of federal grant money on the construction of Cover Oregon, the state’s health exchange was officially dissolved last week. Oregon Governor Kate Brown announced she was signing SB 1, legislation to dissolve the health insurance system with a short tweet Friday afternoon. 

Cover Oregon has been marred by numerous problems during its construction and rollout, and eventually state officials decided to scrap the exchange and move to the federal system, at an estimated cost of $41 million.  

Oregon was awarded its first round of “early innovator” funding from the federal government in February 2011, a total of almost $60 million.

However, weeks after the November 2013 deadline, Cover Oregon had failed to enroll a single person.  In fact, the only innovation that Cover Oregon displayed was through its bizarre acid trip themed TV ad that cost taxpayers $3.2 million. The unusable website prompted the state to ask Oregonians to compare plans online and then fill out a 20 page paper application. 

The disaster that was Cover Oregon prompted multiple federal agencies and organizations to launch investigations including the FBI, the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Government Accountability Office, and the U.S. House Oversight Committee.

Eventually, Cover Oregon signed up 68,308 individuals, mostly through paper applications – just 29% of its goal of 237,000. All together, Cover Oregon spent almost $4,464 per enrollee only to return to the federal exchange.

This debacle was not limited to Oregon – many other states rolled out disastrous healthcare exchange systems. Massachusetts enrolled only 13% of its target in 2014 and Hawaii spent nearly $24,000 per enrollee on construction of its exchange. 

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Utah Legislators Attempting to Raise Gas Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Sven Werner on Tuesday, March 10th, 2015, 5:12 PM PERMALINK


The Utah state legislature is pushing forward on several gas tax increase proposals as a means to plug a projected $11.3 billion shortfall in transportation funding through 2040. Not content with finding savings and efficiencies in the state budget, Utah lawmakers are looking for the easy way out by increasing taxes.

Both the Utah State Senate and the House of Representatives agree on raising taxes, but they differ on the specifics. The senate proposal raises the gas taxes from 24.5 cents to 34.5 cents, whereas the House is looking to implement a percentage based tax.

SB160 would raise $130 million for maintenance. For the average driver the tax means an additional $48 per year in taxes. Diesel fuel taxes would be raised by 5 cents a gallon, the gas tax would be raised by 10 cents a gallon.

Utah House Rep. Johnny Anderson (R-Taylorsville)’s HB 362 would convert the state's per-gallon gas tax to an ad valorum sales tax.

According to Rep. Anderson’s plan, the state’s per-gallon gas tax will be converted to a sales tax with a local option, meaning that counties can hold referendums to raise the general sales tax 0.25 %. The additional revenue would go directly into funding and supporting local transportation projects and needs.The State Tax Commission would adjust the gas tax prices once a year – basing the rate off the average wholesale price from the previous year.

Under Anderson’s plan, in te the first year, the ad valorum tax rate would be revenue-neutral, but over time, Utah motorists would see an increasing rate as gas prices rose.

One of the most dubious components of HB 362 would be the false choice it presents local taxpayers. The local option would stick voters with the choice of the potentially higher state ad valorum rate or an even higher rate if a local option is enacted. There is no option for localities to lower the gas tax rate.

Billy Hesterman, Vice President of Utah Tax Payers Association has responded to Rep. Anderson’s call for higher taxes:

If I'm living in Davis County and I work in Salt Lake County and Davis passes it and Salt Lake doesn't. My purchasing decision is going to be decided. I'm going to purchase gas in Salt Lake County instead of in Davis. And we would rather see the market drive where I decide to purchase instead of a tax policy.

Even Rep. Anderson admits that with his proposal, "We're not fixing the whole problem. We’re taking steps toward it.” This sounds an awful lot like Rep. Anderson is leaving the door open for future tax hikes to fund transportation in Utah.

Utah taxpayers and motorists would be better served if the state legislature tackled state spending, prioritized transportation needs, and explored the possibility of future public-private partnerships to ensure an adequate transportation infrastructure. Between 2000 and 20009, state spending in Utah outpaced inflation and population growth by nearly $9 billion. That $9 billion overspending problem could have been avoided with revenue going to better use on needs such as transportation. To put it bluntly, the gas tax measures being pushed through the Utah legislature are not the solution Utah needs.

Photo Credit: 
Riza Nugraha

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

jethrObama

My household will be voting against Senator Niederhouser... who was one of the senators who voted for this. We won't forget.


Another Massachusetts Town Goes Rogue on “Tobacco” Products

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Paul Blair on Monday, March 9th, 2015, 2:59 PM PERMALINK


Four months ago, the town of Westminster, Massachusetts considered an outright ban on all tobacco products. The Board of Health’s proposal was so absurd that the Boston Globe said, “There are radical proposals, and then there’s Westminster’s plan to ban tobacco sales within town limits.”

The Board also lumped non-tobacco products like electronic cigarettes into the proposal, putting on display their utter lack of common sense or concern for public health. Here is a copy of the letter that we sent to the Board at the time. 

The public was outraged; tobacco and e-cigarettes are legal products after all. The Board of Health was met with the full fury of local citizens who wanted the nanny-staters to step off. They dropped the proposal. Common sense prevailed.

Now, less than an hour’s drive away in the town of Winchester, Massachusetts another Board of Health has gone rogue. After increasing the minimum age to purchase tobacco from 18 to 21 exactly one year ago, they’re looking to further control local citizens lives with restrictions on tobacco product sales and electronic cigarette use.

In their meeting tonight, the Board of Health will discuss proposals that include banning the sale of flavored tobacco and e-cigarettes, implementing a minimum cost on cigars of $2.15 and $5 for a two-pack, and banning smoking and vaping in public places and workplaces.

Welcome to the theater of the absurd.

If the Winchester Board of Public Health’s goal is to ensure that smokers continue smoking traditional tobacco cigarettes, all of these proposals make perfect sense. If, however, their goal is the overall improvement of public health, restricting the availability of options for e-cigarettes does not help accomplish this goal.

Adults prefer flavors to traditional tobacco and menthol. A recent survey indicates that more than 65 percent of non-smoking vapers (consumers of non-tobacco e-cigarettes and vapor products) consider flavors other than tobacco to have been important or very important in helping them quit. For women, that number is more than 70 percent.

Prohibiting flavors ensures that smokers have fewer options when it comes to quitting an unhealthy habit. Electronic cigarettes and vapor products are estimated to be 99% less hazardous than smoking.

Restricting the availability of options to adult consumers under the guise of “protecting children” puts at risk a publicly stated goal of the public health community for decades: getting people to quit smoking cigarettes.

We urge the Winchester, Massachusetts Board of Health to reject these proposals and to focus on education initiatives supported by facts instead.

Contact Jennifer Murphy, Health Director of the Winchester Board of Health, by email at jenmurphy@winchester.us or by phone at 781-721-7121 before 6 PM tonight. 
 
Photo Credit: 
CJ GUNTHER/EPA

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Lisabelle

I smoked for 43 years, and thanks to the affordability, availability and accessibility of Electronic Cigarettes and the variety of flavors I am now SMOKE-FREE for the past 5 years. Please see how important it is that smokers have their rights to smoke or quit by their own decision and that those deciding to use a saFER alternative have their choices in flavors.

Anja M ERF vaper

great article on electronic cigarettes and the silliness and dangers of nanny statist prohibitionism. Well written letter in the link, as well. THANK YOU!

By the way, I stopped smoking tobacco completely over 3 years ago, the day that I switched to e-cigs. I have been a 100% vaper ever since. And not smoked one tobacco cigarette, nor had the desire for one. After 35 years as a heavy smoker.

Yeah, "great idea" by the statists to try and ban the sales of the most wonderful alternative to smoking. Duh...Might as well ban the sale of booze AND SOFT DRINKS. How about illegal drugs AND SUGAR?

Easy to see that this nonsense is not about health. It is about control.
And I most certainly hope that more citizens of the land of the free will stand up and say "Enough! This is not North Korea!"

Janet Wambold-Buraik

What happened to "government for the people, by the people"??? the government is employed by the people. I am strongly opposed to government involvement of our day-to-day lives. We are already self- regulating the vaping industry. My choice is mine. The government works for ME. If the government chooses to control my rights, I will vote to change the government. I Vote, I Vape!!!


With Walker Signature, Wisconsin Becomes 25th Right-to-Work State

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Matt Patterson on Monday, March 9th, 2015, 9:45 AM PERMALINK


Today Governor Scott Walker signed legislation (SB 44) making Wisconsin the 25th state to adopt a Right-to-Work law, which forbids the forced collection of union dues as a condition of employment.

The Wisconsin Assembly approved the legislation Friday 62-35 after more than nearly 20 hours of contentious debate. Governor Walker signed it this morning at Badger Meter -- a flow measurement and control product manufacturer -- in Brown Deer, Wisconsin.

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) and the Center for Worker Freedom (CWF) congratulate Gov. Walker for joining with his state's legislature and making Wisconsin's labor market freer and more competitive.    

"For decades, Wisconsin workers have been forced to join labor unions and pay dues — often two percent of their paycheck or $1,000 for a person earning $50,000 — with no choice,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. "The ability to say 'no thank you' to union control and union dues is a basic civil right that is restored today to the people of Wisconsin."

CWF executive director Matt Patterson noted, "Right-to-Work means more jobs and, more importantly, more freedom."  

Patterson noted that Right-to-Work can be good for unions as well as workers. "When unions are forced to attract workers with persuasion instead of force, they become more responsive to their members."

Wisconsin joins Indiana and Michigan as recent Midwest adopters, in large part due to Right-to-Work's role in driving economic growth.

Key data points regarding Right to Work:

  • Between 1977-2012, employment growth in Right-to-Work states outpaced the national average, 105 percent to 71 percent. 
  • A 2012 Rasmussen poll found that 74 percent of Americans support Right to Work.
  • "Incomes rise following the passage of Right to Work laws,” according to an interstate analysis of Right to Work conducted by economist Richard Vedder.
  • Indiana can thank its recently passed Right to Work law for 107 new business projects responsible for a projected 10,000 new jobs and over $3 billion in investment, according to the Indiana Economic Development Corporation.
Photo Credit: 
Gateway Technical College

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

magic1114

I would have liked to be looking at the faces of the Union leaders. I'll bet they threw a hissy fit!

bullet2354

Win!


Remembering M. Stanton Evans

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Beattie McEwan on Friday, March 6th, 2015, 3:46 PM PERMALINK


M. Stanton Evans, famed journalist and author, died Tuesday, the New York Times reported. He was 80.

Known for a combination of biting wit and carefully reasoned critiques, Evans made a career out of educating the American people on the importance of conservative values and ideas. To call him a trailblazer would be disrespectful. He served as the only voice for conservatives twenty years before Ronald Reagan proudly proclaimed himself to be an American conservative during his 1980 presidential campaign.

Evans sought to establish greater opportunities for young conservatives. He established Young Americans for Freedom as an outlet for university students to garner information and express their opinions at a time when Liberalism was firmly entrenched in the American collegiate system. He outlined his manifesto for Young Americans for Freedom in the Sharon Statement, known today as a unifying message for many American conservatives.  His ideas helped spurn on a rapid growth in conservative thought on college campuses across the United States.

M. Stanton Evans engaged America’s aspiring young journalists by creating the National Journalist Center, a non-profit organization dedicated to the instruction of ethical journalism through conservative ideas. To date, the National Journalist Center has succeeded in producing thousands of graduates, a testament to the movement and ideas Evans helped build.

His efforts were not limited to creating charity organizations. M. Stanton Evans devoted much of his time challenging the American conscious through moving books. In 1961, Evans released Revolt on Campus, wherein he sought to encourage young conservatives to express their opinions on campus. His book was well received, as more and more youth joined the center-right.

Indeed, M. Stanton Evan’s contributions to conservatism, journalism, and collegiate youth will be unmatched for years to come. The conservative movement lost one of its forefathers on Tuesday. Americans for Tax Reform would like to express its deepest condolences to his family and wish them well in the future.  

Photo Credit: 
http://fee.org/blog/detail/rip-m-stanton-evans

Top Comments

Rednecksrule

Hey Grovie he also said that immigration was going to be the death of the Republican party... but what do you care? You will still collect your millions form corporations...

You must have been delighted that the chicken excrement GOP caved on Obama's amnesty. You won son!

You and this organization are complete fools. You are helping Barack to import a voting block that will be more socialist than today's democrat. You are a complete traitor to conservatives. You are a quisling.... peddling amnesty to end the possibility of small government... Barack knows he gets 70 to 80 percent of the people you want to import.

So you know what you can do with your no tax pledge while you support amnesties and massive open door immigration...


Texas Lawmakers Look to Increase the Lone Star State’s Tax Advantage

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Sven Werner, Patrick Gleason on Friday, March 6th, 2015, 2:35 PM PERMALINK


Texas has been a role model in terms of governance, tax reform and job creation, but it still has a major flaw: a gross receipts tax on employers known as the margin tax. The Texas margin tax is complex, unnecessary and keeps small and mid-size businesses from creating jobs. It even applies to companies who don’t make a profit.

Its elimination would move Texas from being currently ranked 10th at Tax Foundation’s Business Tax Climate Index to 3rd best in the nation.  A Texas Public Policy Foundation Report  found that, based on dynamic econometric models, repealing the margin tax would lead to the creation of 129, 200 jobs in the first five years after its elimination.

The good news is that legislation to get rid of the margin tax, Senate Bill 105, is being considered by legislators. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott stated that he “will reject any budget that does not include genuine tax relief for Texas employers and job creators.” A great way for legislators to send Gov. Abbott what he has requested is to pass legislation to end the margin tax.

Other states are working to make their tax codes more competitive by cutting rates and providing relief to individuals, families, and employers. As such, Texas lawmakers cannot rest on their laurels. Americans for Tax Reform reached out to Texas legislators today to urge them to repeal the margin tax. A copy of s letter can be found below:

March 6, 2015

Dear Members of the Texas Legislature,

On behalf of Americans for Tax Reform and our supporters across the Lone Star State, I urge you to keep taxpayers in mind as you consider the issues that will come across your desk during the 2015 legislative session. There are two main things that you can do to protect Texas taxpayers and stoke economic growth: 1) rein in the unsustainable trajectory of state spending, which can be accomplished by instituting a true and unbustable state spending cap; and 2) eliminate the state’s business tax, otherwise known as the margin tax.  

As has been noted in Forbes, even relatively-well governed states like Texas face significant fiscal challenges. A Texas Public Policy Foundation report titled “The Conservative Texas Budget,” outlines a series of smart policy recommendations and reforms to rectify Texas’s overspending problem that, while not as bad as that of some states, is still a major problem. One of those proposed reforms, the institution of clear and achievable spending limits, is the best step that lawmakers could take to protect Texas taxpayers.

I also write today to urge you to use the 2015 session to rid Texas of the margin tax. As you know, legislation, Senate Bill 105, has been filed that would do just that. The Lone Star State has been a model for other states on numerous matters of governance, and for good reason, but the margin tax is the one major blight on the state’s otherwise stellar business tax climate and now is the perfect time to unlock the state’s full economic potential by repealing this misguided tax.

The margin tax reduces the job-creating capacity of Texas businesses and does so in an incredibly onerous way at that. As the Texas chapter of the National Federation of Independent Businesses put it, the margin tax is "crippling the small and mid-sized businesses” throughout the state. In addition to the harm it does to employers, economists of all political stripes agree that it is one of the worst ways to raise revenue. Professor John Mikesell, an expert in public finance at Indiana University, has described the margin tax as a "badly designed business profits tax...combin[ing] all the problems of minimum income taxation in general—excess compliance and administrative cost, penalization of the unsuccessful business, undesirable incentive impacts, doubtful equity basis—with those of taxation according to gross receipts."

The tax is so complex – it applies variably to different industries and types of businesses – that the costs to comply with this levy for some employers are actually greater than their tax liability. One of the more egregious aspects of the margin tax is that it applies to companies without regard as to whether a profit was generated, meaning businesses that lost money can still end up having a margin tax liability.

A recent TPPF report found that, based on dynamic econometric modeling, eliminating the margin tax could result in a gain of $10.8 billion in new real personal income in the first year and a personal income boost of $16 billion in the first five years. The report also found that repealing the margin tax could generate an additional 129,200 jobs over the next five years. Texas is currently ranked as having the nation’s 10ths business tax climate the 3rd best in the country.

 

Other states are eager to compete with Texas for jobs. In fact, a number of states have passed tax reform in recent years that seeks to make them more competitive with Texas, and over a dozen are set to pursue such policies in 2015. It’s important for Texas lawmakers to not rest on their laurels. In order to stay ahead of states that wish to entice employers away from Texas, it would behoove legislators to repeal, or begin phasing out, the margin tax in 2015. It’s time to eliminate this unnecessary impediment to private sector growth and job creation. It’s also time to right the unsustainable trajectory of state spending, which can be accomplished with a robust spending cap, like the one proposed by TPPF.

 

When good ideas come out of Texas, such as smart criminal justice reform, it’s easier to take them elsewhere because other states rightfully want to emulate Texas. But that can cut both ways. For example, a Texas-style margin tax was on the Nevada ballot last year. The pro-margin tax campaign there basically had one talking point: “Texas has a margin tax, so it must be a good idea.” Fortunately Nevada voters were smart enough to reject that ballot measure. Killing the margin tax will be good for the Texas economy, but it will also make it less likely that such a damaging tax will be adopted elsewhere.

I urge you to use the 2015 session to give a boost to the Texas economy by getting rid of the margin tax. Americans for Tax Reform will continue to follow these issues closely throughout session and will be educating your constituents as to how you vote on these important matters. If you have any questions, please contact Patrick Gleason, s director of state affairs, at (202) 785-0266 or pgleason@atr.org.

Onward,

Grover Norquist

      President, Americans for Tax Reform

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


hidden
×