PA Governor Wolf Has a New Excuse for Double Tax on Natural Gas

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Derek Peterson on Tuesday, May 21st, 2019, 5:03 PM PERMALINK

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf has once again proposed a severance tax on natural gas drilling, this time to pay for “Restore Pennsylvania”, a $4.5 billion infrastructure plan.

The thing is, Pennsylvania already taxes natural gas extraction. The state imposes what is called in impact fee on gas installations which is already used for state expenditures. A severance tax is a double tax, and any claims that the natural gas industry is avoiding taxes is a lie.

This is not the first time he has called for such a tax. In 2014, Gov. Wolf called for a severance tax designed to help balance budgets, or pay for the growth of benefit programs when the state was in a bad place financially. He has called for severance taxes every year he has been in office, however these proposals have not been considered by the Republican-controlled Legislature.

Gov. Wolf is now using “infrastructure” as an excuse to implement this long-desired severance tax. His proposal, which should be appearing in the form of a bill soon, calls for borrowing the $4.5 billion needed for the projects immediately, and paying off the debt over a 20-year time period using revenue from the severance tax.

David Spigelmyer, president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, said the following about Gov. Wolf’s proposal:

“Pennsylvania’s tax on natural gas – the impact fee – generates hundreds of millions of dollars annually for critical infrastructure programs across the entire Commonwealth. This existing annual tax revenue, when combined with other business taxes paid by the industry as well as lease bonuses and royalties tied to natural gas development on state land, has provided nearly $5 billion in revenue since unconventional shale gas development began.”

Pennsylvania’s existing impact fee achieves the same goal severance taxes set out to do in other states. Adding a severance tax on top of the impact fee would create a massive burden on the natural gas industry in Pennsylvania, making it a very unattractive state for future development.

Natural gas has been a boon to Pennsylvania, not just economically, but it has lowered carbon emissions. The state produces 20 percent of the natural gas in the United States, and Pennsylvania’s carbon emissions have gone down by 30 percent as natural gas use has grown in recent years.

It makes no sense to risk this progress with a double tax.

When asked if he would consider any other methods of funding for his proposal, Gov. Wolf stated he was open to other proposals, but was skeptical they would be able to raise the revenue needed for his project. “If you have another way of raising $4.5 billion, that are going to be dollars directed toward doing things that the people of Pennsylvania really need to make their lives better, I'm all ears”, he said.

Gov. Wolf’s severance tax has been defeated before, and it must be defeated again.

Photo Credit: Nicholas Tonelli


ATR Signs Coalition Letter Urging Congress to Reject the Fed’s Real-Time Payments Proposal

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted on Tuesday, May 21st, 2019, 1:55 PM PERMALINK

ATR recently joined a coalition letter led by the National Taxpayers Union to oppose the Federal Reserve considered proposal to operate a real-time payments system. The Fed’s system would directly compete with the private sector, putting nearly all customers at risk of delayed financial transactions by forcing financial institutions to choose between doing business with an existing private structure or waiting until their regulator builds a clearing system in the next five years.

In the past few years we have seen how technology has played an important role in facilitating faster payments between individuals compared to the long-established model of using checks to pay for goods and services. Aaron Klein from the Brookings Institution helps illustrate the delay in this outdated check cashing system:

If your payday was Friday, March 1 and you deposited your paycheck, it may not clear until sometime on Tuesday, March 5th. What do you do if the rent, childcare, and other fixed expenses are due the same day you get paid? Unless your paycheck is available the instant you deposit it (and that is not the case with direct deposit) you are stuck with a gap.

With technology advancement becoming cheaper and more widely available, customers can access the money immediately once it is received. Take Zelle for example, a person-to-person real-time payments system created by financial institutions for their customers to access funds sent to their bank accounts near-instantaneously. In other words, if David owes Ethan his portion for the lunch bill and both of them use Zelle, Ethan can pay David back immediately and those funds are available just about as fast as receiving a text message and opening it to read.

In 2014, The Clearing House Payments Company (an institution that provides much of the technological “plumbing” or “infrastructure” for conducting financial transactions) began the process of creating the real-time payments system in use today. The system would go live in November 2017, after large financial institutions put up the funding to build the system and has actively been attracting banks of all sizes to join the network. This benefits customers across multiple financial institutions who can send and receive payments to use near-instantaneously. The goal of The Clearing House and banks joining the system is to have all deposit holding banks using the service by the end of 2020, making the system “ubiquitous.”

A year after The Clearing House’s real-time payments system went live, the Federal Reserve published a request for comments to review and consider feedback of how the current privately created system is operating and if there was a need for the Federal Reserve to enter the market and create its own version. As George Selgin of the Cato Institute correctly points out, there would be several chilling effects the Federal Reserve would have in the marketplace should it move ahead with its own network:

No less importantly, unlike private sector providers the Fed does not have to convince shareholders that it can recover the costs involved in any new payments venture it undertakes. Thanks to its unique powers, the possibility that the Fed might compete head on with the private RTP network is likely to have an exceptionally chilling effect on RTP’s ability to attract new members, and to do so even despite RTPs first-mover advantage, and also despite any real efficiency advantages it might enjoy. Banks faced with substantial network-interface investment costs will hesitate to join RTP until they are certain of the Fed’s intention. Even if the Fed does not ultimately enter the market, this hesitation will itself be costly, because it will delay the achievement of a ubiquitous system. The likelihood that the Fed will take several years to establish its own RTGS system will compound this delay. The case of rival private-sector entrants differs, both because such entrants are only likely to contemplate entering the market if their stakeholders believe them to be capable of operating more efficiently than established rivals, or of offering services that are clearly superior to theirs, and because they must in fact offer superior or less expensive services to gain market share.

For these reasons, Americans for Tax Reform opposes any entrance of the Federal Reserve into the real-time payments market and is proud to join the coalition of organizations who share this view.

Click here to view National Taxpayer Union’s coalition letter.

Photo Credit: Sébastien Bertrand


Trump Reaches Deal with Mexico & Canada to End Tariffs

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Tom Hebert on Tuesday, May 21st, 2019, 1:38 PM PERMALINK

President Trump recently announced a deal with Mexico and Canada to remove steel and aluminum tariffs on imports and remove retaliatory tariffs imposed on American businesses. This is a big win for American workers and paves the way for swift ratification of the president’s United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

Ending the 25 percent tariff on steel and the 10 percent tariff on aluminum from Mexico and Canada will have broad, positive effects. On net, the tariffs impacted over $400 billion of traded goods on an annual basis. According to a report released by the American Action Forum, steel tariffs increased imported steel costs by $5.8 billion, and aluminum tariffs increased imported aluminum costs by $1.7 billion.

Retaliatory action by Mexico has adversely impacted the cost of American exports by $3.7 billion. Furthermore, Canadian retaliatory action has adversely impacted the cost of American exports by $16.6 billion. 

Trump has been steadfast in his desire to renegotiate trade deals for the benefit of American workers and businesses and the end of these tariffs should pave the way for approval of the USMCA. 

The USMCA updates NAFTA to include new automotive rules, new protections for intellectual property rights, and modernizing agricultural trade to benefit American farmers.

A recent report shows that the USCMA would raise U.S. real GDP by $68.2 billion and create approximately 176,000 American jobs. 

The USMCA would increase U.S exports to Canada by $19.1 billion, and increase U.S. exports to Mexico by $14.2 billion. Under the new agreement, U.S. imports from Canada are projected to increase by $19.1 billion, and U.S. imports from Mexico are projected to increase by $12.4 billion. The report estimates that the USMCA would have a positive impact on all U.S. industry sectors, with the manufacturing and services sectors experiencing the most gains. 

The trade deal would also be a boon for the automotive industry. The Office of the United States Trade Representative estimates that USCMA ratification would add $34 billionin new automotive manufacturing investment, $23 billion in new annual purchases of U.S. automotive parts, and 76,000 jobs in the next five years. 

If implemented, the USMCA would contribute to already robust economic growth. 

In April, the economy added 263,000 jobs, and unemployment is at a 50-year low of 3.6 percent. Over the past year, the economy has added an average of 218,000 jobs per month, and unemployment for key demographics are at all-time lows. Families all across the country are seeing direct tax reduction — on net, households are paying an average of 24.9 percent in lower taxes according to a report released by H&R Block based on their clients’ tax returns. 

Trump’s removal of tariffs on Mexico and Canada is a huge win for American workers. Now, it is time for Congressional Democrats to work with Republicans in a bipartisan fashion to ratify USCMA.

Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore


Bernie Sanders: I will raise your taxes


Posted by Adam Sabes on Tuesday, May 21st, 2019, 11:39 AM PERMALINK

2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders has repeated multiple times that he will impose a tax increase if elected.

“You’re going to pay more in taxes,” Sanders said during a Fox News town hall in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania on April 15 . At the same town hall he said, “Are people going to pay more in taxes? Yes.”

[Click here for video]

“And yes, we have to raise individual tax substantially higher than they are today,” Sanders said during an interview with Jake Tapper on July 5, 2015. 

On a separate CNN townhall hosted by Chris Cuomo in Des Moines, Iowa on Jan. 25, 2016, Sanders promised that “yes, we will raise taxes, yes we will.”

See also:

Biden: “First thing I’d do is repeal those Trump tax cuts.”

Joe Biden broke his middle class tax pledge

“Mayor Pete” Calls for Steep Tax Hike on Homes and Businesses

Kamala Harris Vows Repeal of Tax Cuts “on Day One”

Biden: “When I’m President, if God willing I am, we’re going to reverse those Trump tax cuts.”

 


NJ Gov. Murphy Wants $447 Million Tax Hike

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Derek Peterson on Tuesday, May 21st, 2019, 10:46 AM PERMALINK

Taxes. Whatever the question, Governor Phil Murphy’s answer is taxes.

New Jersey’s second-year governor is back with his second budget proposal and it’s all about the benjamins, AGAIN.

Murphy has proposed a radical budget to fund the state through the 2020 fiscal year that will hurt the hardworking men and women of the state with a whopping $447 million in tax hikes. New Jersey lawmakers are currently negotiating a budget to fund the state beginning on July 1.

Gov. Murphy presented a budget of $38.6 billion, a 3 percent increase in spending from the previous year. This disparity would allegedly be funded through the “Millionaire’s Tax”. This tax would hike New Jersey’s top marginal income tax rate to 10.75 percent, up from 8.97 percent for income over $1 million. This tax would cost taxpayers an estimated $447 million.

Remember, just last year Murphy pushed through a $1 billion-plus tax hike. Which included taxes on businesses, ride-sharing, rental homes, and “high-earners”, which sounds like the same thing he wants to do this year. If you want new ideas, you’ve come to the wrong place. That, despite the fact current policies are ruining New Jersey.

The Garden State has been seeing residents fleeing in record numbers, in part due to the radical tax structure in the state. People “vote with their feet”, and 2018 saw New Jersey become the No. 1 state to move away from in 2018.   

While calling for large tax increases, the budget also aimed to remove $33 million from the New Jersey Fireman’s Association fund. This fund provides financial assistance to firefighters, including volunteers, to fund burial services, retirement homes, and in-home medical care. The proposal called for moving the $33 million from the firefighter fund to the state’s general fund as revenue. It was only amid public backlash that Gov. Murphy announced he would not carry out the transfer of money from the fund.

In an attempt to tax away your Second Amendment rights, Gov. Murphy has also proposed aggressive fee hikes on firearms. Under current New Jersey law, a firearm permit is $2, a firearm identification card is $2, and a permit to carry a gun is $20. Under Gov. Murphy’s budget proposal, a firearm permit would cost $50, a firearm identification would cost $100, and a permit to carry would cost $400.

You can take action to stop these unconstitutional fees on firearms by signing our petition.

Lastly, Gov. Murphy’s budget calls for “increasing fees on opioid drug distributors and manufacturers to help support our fight against the opioid epidemic”. Make no mistake about it; this is a tax increase that will lead to higher healthcare costs for patients, pharmacies, caregivers, and businesses. This increased fee does not take in account those with a legitimate need for opioids. Opioids allow patients dealing with cancer, chronic pain to live pain-free lives. Imposing punitive fees will not deter the demand of opioids. These fees don’t address the over-prescription of opioids and the lack of education that contribute to the epidemic.

Murphy’s Law states: “Whatever can go wrong, will go wrong”, and the New Jersey FY2020 budget proposal is further proof of that.

Photo Credit: Edwin J. Torres/ NJ's Governor Office


Why the T-Mobile–Sprint Merger is Good for America

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Bethany Patterson on Tuesday, May 21st, 2019, 9:44 AM PERMALINK

Yesterday, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai publicly announced his support for the merger between telecommunications companies T-Mobile and Sprint.

While Chairman Pai’s blessing isn’t an official approval of the merger, it’s one big step forward to realizing the benefits a combined T-Mobile and Sprint—which, if approved, would create a new company, the New T-Mobile—would bring.

The merger will also be instrumental to helping the United States maintain its position as the global leader in innovation and technology.

In particular, the New T-Mobile would help America win the global 5G race. According to a recent CTIA report, while the United States assigns the most low- and high-band spectrum for wireless, there is room for major improvement regarding mid-band assignment. Both T-Mobile and Sprint have committed to a significant build-out of their mid-band spectrum holdings.

A merger between the two companies would also lead to a more connected America. According to Chairman Pai’s statement, their combined network would cover at least two-thirds of the nation’s rural population with high-speed 5G. In fact, within three years, 85 percent of rural Americans will have access to reliable wireless service. T-Mobile and Sprint have also said they will create an in-home broadband product, which would also serve rural areas.

This will help Americans in typically underserved areas stay connected online. In other words, this will help school kids do their homework, businesses expand and families keep in touch with relatives across the country.

Detractors point out that a merger could lead to decreased competition or job losses. To address the first point, a T-Mobile–Sprint merger would actually lead to more competition. The New T-Mobile will have approximately 126 million subscribers, allowing it to compete better with Verizon and AT&T, which have 150 million and 142 million subscribers, respectively.

Speculations that the combination will result in a loss of 28,000 jobs are flat out wrong. Currently, Sprint has 30,000 employees. If the New T-Mobile eliminates 28,000 jobs, the company would not be able to maintain its expanded operations. Rather, the new company will likely create 5,600 new customer care jobs.

Don’t listen to the naysayers, and think of the future. Not only will 5G connect more Americans to the internet, it will boost the United States’ global competitiveness and improve our standard of living.

The FCC should formally approve the T-Mobile–Sprint merger—it would be a boon for the economy and America as a whole.

Photo Credit: Mike Mozart


Former GOP Congressman who voted against a carbon tax, now leads group lobbying for one.

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Michael Palicz on Monday, May 20th, 2019, 5:43 PM PERMALINK

Former Republican Congressman Ryan Costello refused to support a carbon tax up until the point he was paid to.

Ryan Costello, the former Congressman from Pennsylvania who retired at the end of last Congress, is now the Managing Director of Americans for Carbon Dividends - a group which lobbies Congress to enact a carbon tax.

What makes Costello’s new employment advocating for a carbon tax particularly interesting is that he voted against a carbon tax while still a member of Congress.

In June of 2016, Costello voted for the Scalise anti-carbon tax resolution which stated, “a carbon tax will increase energy prices, including the price of gasoline, electricity, natural gas, and home heating oil,” and “that a carbon tax would be detrimental to American families and businesses, and is not in the best interest of the United States.”

However, when the same legislation came up for a vote again last July, Costello was the sole Republican who refused to go on record for the vote and answered “present” rather than giving an up or down vote.

Costello’s decision to vote “present” was made after he decided to not seek reelection for Congress after serving only two terms, which he announced on March 25, 2018. On January 7, 2019 – just four days after his term in office officially ended – Costello announced he would be joining the Americans for Carbon Dividends, the advocacy arm of the Climate Leadership Council.

As a sitting member of Congress, Costello was only ever on record as opposing a carbon tax. Now he is paid to convince other Congressmen to back one – something he himself refused to do.

In 2018, Americans for Carbon Dividends spent $300,000 lobbying on a carbon tax and has spent $150,000 in the first quarter of 2019 alone. All lobbying expenses are for hiring the lobbying firm Squire Patton Boggs. Conveniently, former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and former Senate Deputy Majority Whip John Breaux are Co-Chairs of Americans for Carbon Dividends – both of whom are Senior Counsels at Squire Patton Boggs.

You can view the details of the carbon tax that Costello now advocates for here.

Photo Credit: PACB

More from Americans for Tax Reform

There are no related posts.


Pennsylvania Can't Afford Biden's Tax Increases

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Kartch on Saturday, May 18th, 2019, 1:03 AM PERMALINK

 

Today at 1:00 p.m. Joe Biden will host a major rally in Philadelphia, where he will repeat his vow to repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

“First thing I’d do is repeal those Trump tax cuts,” said Biden on May 4 in South Carolina.

"When I'm president, if God willing I am, we're going to reverse those Trump tax cuts," Biden said this week in New Hampshire.

Biden's promise to repeal the tax cuts is a threat to raise taxes. Repeal of the tax cuts would hit Pennsylvania hard:

  • Pennsylvania households would lose their tax cut -- a 24.5 percent tax cut on average, according to data reported by H&R Block.
     
  • Pennsylvania residents would again be forced to pay the highly regressive Obamacare individual mandate tax. 166,680 Pennsylvanians paid the tax totaling $108,842,000 according to the most recent IRS annual statistics ((2016). 81 percent of people hit with the tax made less than $50,000 a year, and 40 percent made less than $25,000 a year. This tax was one of the many violations by Biden of his pledge against any and all middle class taxes.
     
  • 840,000 Pennsylvania households who claim the Child Tax Credit would see the credit slashed in half from $2,000 to $1,000.
     
  • 4.4 million Pennsylvania households who claim the standard deduction would see it slashed in half. (TCJA nearly doubled the standard deduction from $6,300 to $12,200 for an individual and from $12,600 to $24,000 for a family.)
     

The tax cuts are helping a long list of Pennsylvania businesses give pay increases, benefit increases, and bonuses. For example:

  • Uncle Charley's Sausage (Vandergrift, PA) hired new employees, purchased new equipment including a new sausage stuffer, and added a new production line.
     
  • Hudson Facades (Linwood, PA) increased base pay and put $3,000 into every factor worker's 401(k) account.
     
  • Almo Corporation, the Philadelphia-based appliance distributor, is investing in a new distribution center and an ongoing headquarters renovation that can accommodate 65 additional employees.
     
  • Guy Chemical Company (Somerset, PA) increased wages, bonuses, and investment in new equipment including a new forklift, new laboratory furnishings, updated computer equipment, and a new software system.
     
  • Dollar Bank (Pittsburgh, PA) gave $2,000 permanent raises for employees making $60,000 or below.
     

If Biden repealed the tax cuts, Pennsylvanians would also be stuck paying higher utility bills because the corporate tax rate would revert back to 35 percent. Thanks to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the corporate rate was reduced to 21 percent, and as a direct result PA utility companies passed on these savings to customers in the form of lower electric, water, and gas bills.

Examples include Pike County Light & Power Company, PPL Electric Utilities Corporation, Wellsboro Electric Company, West Penn Power Company, PECO Energy Company, Peoples Gas Company, UGI Central Penn Gas Inc., Pennsylvania American Water Company, and Citizens Electric Company of Lewisburg.

From a nationwide perspective, if Biden repeals the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the following would happen:

  •  A family of four earning the median income of $73,000 would see a $2,000 tax increase.
     
  • A single parent (with one child) making $41,000 would see a $1,300 tax increase.
     
  • Millions of low and middle income households would be stuck paying the Obamacare individual mandate tax.
     
  • Utility bills would go up in all 50 states as a direct result of the corporate income tax increase.
     
  • Small employers will face a tax increase due to the repeal of the 20% deduction for small business income.
     
  • The USA would have the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world.
     
  • Taxes would rise in every state and every congressional district.
     
  • The Death Tax would ensnare more families and businesses.
     
  • The AMT would snap back to hit millions of households.
     
  • Millions of households would see their child tax credit cut in half.
     
  • Millions of households would see their standard deduction cut in half, adding to their tax complexity as they are forced to itemize their deductions and deal with the shoebox full of receipts on top of the refrigerator.
     

As noted by the New York Times, thanks to the GOP tax cuts, “Most people got a tax cut.”

The NYT also stated: “To a large degree, the gap between perception and reality on the tax cuts appears to flow from a sustained — and misleading — effort by liberal opponents of the law to brand it as a broad middle-class tax increase.”

The Washington Post also stated: “Most Americans received a tax cut.”

More evidence of the benefits flowing from the tax cuts can be found in a recent H&R Block report, which stated, “overall tax liability is down 24.9 percent on average.”

In Biden's home state of Delaware, the report found that residents received a 24.6% reduction in their taxes, on average.

Biden and the rest of the 2020 Democrats have thoroughly convinced themselves the tax issue is dead, but Americans will have their own say at the ballot box.

"Joe Biden is not Methuselah. He is Walter Mondale part deux," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. In 1984 Mondale famously promised to raise taxes if elected. He lost to Ronald Reagan in the electoral college 525-13, winning only his home state of Minnesota and the District of Columbia.

See also:

Biden: “First thing I’d do is repeal those Trump tax cuts.”

Joe Biden broke his middle class tax pledge

Kamala Harris Vows Repeal of Tax Cuts “on Day One”

“Mayor Pete” Calls for Steep Tax Hike on Homes and Businesses

Biden: “When I’m President, if God willing I am, we’re going to reverse those Trump tax cuts.”

 

 

Photo Credit: Marc Nozell/Flickr

More from Americans for Tax Reform


Biden, Harris Threaten New Hampshire with Tax Hikes

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Adam Sabes on Friday, May 17th, 2019, 2:36 PM PERMALINK

Democrat presidential candidates Joe Biden and Kamala Harris both promised to repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act while making campaign stops in New Hampshire this week, a move that would impose massive tax increases on New Hampshire households and businesses.

“When I’m president, if God Willing I am, we’re going to reverse those Trump tax cuts,” Biden said Monday in Manchester.

“On day one, we gonna repeal that tax bill,” Harris said on Wednesday in Nashua.

Their promise to repeal the tax cuts is a promise to raise taxes. Repeal of the tax cuts would hit New Hampshire hard. If Biden or Harris repeal the tax cuts:

  • New Hampshire households would lose their tax cut -- a 25.2 percent tax cut on average, according to data reported by H&R Block.
  • New Hampshire residents would be forced to pay the highly regressive Obamacare individual mandate tax. In 2016, 24,350 New Hampshire residents paid the tax totaling $17,392,000. 76 percent of people that paid the individual mandate tax made less than $50,000 a year, and 33 percent made less than $25,000 a year.
  • 91,000 New Hampshire households who claim the Child Tax Credit would see their credit slashed in half from $2,000 to $1,000. 
  • 476,000 New Hampshire households who claim the standard deduction would see it slashed in half. (The TCJA nearly doubled the standard deduction from $6,300 to $12,000 for an individual and from $12,600 to $24,000 for a family.)
     

From a nationwide perspective, if Biden and Harris repeal the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the following would happen:

  •  A family of four earning the median income of $73,000 would see a $2,000 tax increase.
  • A single parent (with one child) making $41,000 would see a $1,300 tax increase.
  • Millions of low and middle income households would be stuck paying the Obamacare individual mandate tax.
  • Utility bills would go up in all 50 states as a direct result of the corporate income tax increase.
  • Small employers will face a tax increase due to the repeal of the 20% deduction for small business income.
  • The USA would have the highest corporate income tax rate in the developed world.
  • Taxes would rise in every state and every congressional district.
  • The Death Tax would ensnare more families and businesses.
  • The AMT would snap back to hit millions of households.
  • Millions of households would see their child tax credit cut in half.
  • Millions of households would see their standard deduction cut in half, adding to their tax complexity as they are forced to itemize their deductions and deal with the shoebox full of receipts on top of the refrigerator.
     

As noted by the New York Times, thanks to the GOP tax cuts, “Most people got a tax cut.” The NYT also stated: “To a large degree, the gap between perception and reality on the tax cuts appears to flow from a sustained — and misleading — effort by liberal opponents of the law to brand it as a broad middle-class tax increase.”

The Washington Post also stated: “Most Americans received a tax cut.”

See also:

Biden: “First thing I’d do is repeal those Trump tax cuts.”

Joe Biden broke his middle class tax pledge

Kamala Harris Vows Repeal of Tax Cuts “on Day One”

“Mayor Pete” Calls for Steep Tax Hike on Homes and Businesses

Biden: “When I’m President, if God willing I am, we’re going to reverse those Trump tax cuts.”

 

Photo Credit: Marc Nozell/Flickr


Buttigieg Wants Carbon Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Kartch on Friday, May 17th, 2019, 2:08 PM PERMALINK

Democrat 2020 presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg wants to impose a carbon tax on the American people, his campaign announced Thursday.

The Issues tab of the Buttigieg campaign site states:

Implement a Green New Deal with all available tools including a carbon tax-and-dividend for Americans, and major direct investment to build a 100% clean energy society.

A carbon tax would make life more expensive for all Americans, and would hit working households especially hard.

In Canada for example, the carbon tax has proven so expensive that a school district had to cut bus service for 400 children. The school district is struggling to pay a $3.3 million carbon tax bill.

As reported by the Calgary Herald:

A public school trustee is asking if the province would consider exempting school boards from the carbon tax after administrators revealed this week that the Calgary Board of Education paid about $3.3 million last year for the levy and has been forced to take buses off the roads.

A recent audit detailed the burden of the carbon tax on school fuel costs, school heating costs, and school electrical costs:

Breton, in response to questions from Davis about the CBE’s audited financial statements from 2017-18, estimated the CBE pays about $300,000 in a given school year for the carbon tax on transportation fuel, including school buses, about $1.4 million a year for natural gas to heat CBE buildings and a rough estimate of about $1.5 million for electricity, totaling up to about $3.3 million a year.

400 students were kicked off buses, creating a difficult situation for families. As noted by the Herald:

As a result, fewer buses have meant fewer stops, longer commutes and more difficult schedules for families. Many students have also been transferred to public transit.

Busing has been such a challenge for families, adjusting to schedules. It’s a bit challenging that we’re in a situation where we’ve had to remove almost 400 students from buses in order to pay for the carbon tax in addition to the other impacts on the organization.

The Buttigieg call for a carbon tax is in lockstep with the official Democrat party platform, which endorses a carbon tax. The Republican platform is opposed to any carbon tax.

“Mayor Pete” is shaping up to be a big fan of tax increases. He recently endorsed a steep tax increase on homes and businesses while kowtowing to union bosses in Los Angeles.

Already overtaxed local residents shot back: “It will make my increased property taxes very difficult for me to pay. I’m struggling. Just because I own a home it doesn’t mean I have deep pockets, it’s the exact opposite and this could break me,” said resident Maria Fischer, on Twitter.

Voters have consistently rejected carbon taxes, even in blue states. Carbon tax-imposing politicians are routinely defeated at the ballot box, as shown by this Americans for Tax Reform timeline.

See Also:

“Mayor Pete” Calls for Steep Tax Hike on Homes and Businesses

Biden: “First thing I’d do is repeal those Trump tax cuts.”

Joe Biden broke his middle class tax pledge

Kamala Harris Vows Repeal of Tax Cuts “on Day One”

Biden: “When I’m President, if God willing I am, we’re going to reverse those Trump tax cuts.”

Photo Credit: Andrew Brau/Flickr


×