Comments on: Governor Forgot Most Important “Stakeholders”

By: Ateam88

Ateam88 — Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:00:05 +0000

idaholc, I would suspect that the tax shift from commercial to residential that has taken place over the past 20 years has a lot to do with the fact that residential growth has far out paced commercial growth. Additionally, the county has a higher percentage of non-owner occupied housing (not using the HOE) today than it did 20 years ago.

I couldn’t argue a bit that business failure or success is driven by the PPT. I would argue that sales tax on personal property would satisfy the constitutional requirement to tax corporate personal property.

The biggest concern I have with the real vs personal property tax is the way counties enforce payment of each. with real property tax, owners are given three years to make up delinquent tax payments before there property goes to a sherrif sale, with little or no consequence to the owner other than loss of property. With personal property tax an owner is given about 30 days of delinquency before not only a sherrif sale is scheduled on the personal property but an arrest warrant is also issued for the owner. Seems to me like we treat the “business guy” as a different class of citizen than the “homeowner”.

By: rabula

rabula — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:57:01 +0000

in 2008 a law was passed to exempt the first $100,000 in business personal property. The legislation would push the $20 million cost to local governments onto the general fund to eliminate the tax for about 89 percent of Idaho businesses. In 2009 lawmakers delayed implementation until state revenue begin growing again.

The Idaho associations of counties, cities and school boards want the 2008 law implemented now but oppose a further shift of the personal property tax.

Sounds like a reasonable solution.

By: idaholc

idaholc — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:07:56 +0000

Wow! Some folks don’t have any historical perspective on sharing the cost of local governments.

Facts are that over the past 20 years the tax shift has been predominantly away from business to homeowners. Changes in the HOE only partially ameliorated the discrepancy.

The PPT has been on the books for decades and businesses have thrived, and some have failed. But business failure has little to do with the PPT.

Guardian readers should be aware that repeal is not as simple as IACI would like. It is in the Constitution:

SECTION 8. CORPORATE PROPERTY MUST BE TAXED. The power to tax corporations or corporate property, both real and personal, shall never be relinquished or suspended, and all corporations in this state or doing business therein, shall be subject to taxation for state, county, school, municipal, and other purposes, on real and personal property owned or used by them, and not by this constitution exempted from taxation within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax.

If the Govenor’s office and IACI don’t abide with the constitutional directive that the PPT “…shall never be relinquished”, then we will confirm that in the general election.

By: Ateam 88

Ateam 88 — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:50:32 +0000

The governor didn’t forget the homeowner. The homeowner already is exempt from personal property tax and gets the second largest real property tax exemption in the form of the homeowners exemption. The HOE has been dealt with (increased) several times in the last decade resulting in a shift away from the homeowner to the very same businesses that are trying to get relief now. The personal property tax needs to go. The only proposal better than the governor’s would be to repeal the tax and not replace the revenue to local governments. If the locals can prove the true necessity of the services impacted by the loss let them replace the revenue at the local level through real property tax raises voted on by the people.

By: dog

dog — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 07:38:59 +0000

You pay the personal property tax for the “SAINT” hospitals because they are exempt. Don’t forget the churches too.

By: Werner

Werner — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 02:45:00 +0000

Debie Wilson clearly explains the ritual that all business owners have to perform every year. The response from The Guardian is similar to most John Q. Public out there. All they care about is where the new source of revenue comes from. Lets not forget the tax is ridiculous! Imagine a wealth tax on everything you own. That new lawnmower, bicycle, cars, and your kids bed was all taxed every year. That means you pay sales tax when you buy it and every year you pay taxes again and again. Trust me the pitch forks would have been out a long time ago.

Well that is how small business owners feel. This tax is fundamentally unfair. Deal with the Microns and HP’s however you want, but remember they can always move somewhere else.

I understand the lost revenue will have to be made up, but the existing revenue it currently generates does not justify an unfair tax.

By: Rod in SE Boise

Rod in SE Boise — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 21:43:11 +0000

Dave, Idaho state income tax maximum rate was reduced from 7.8% to 7.4% for CY 2012, for taxable income OVER $100,000. Increasing that to make up for repealing sales tax and property tax would make the tax rate larger but overall it would be more fair. And it would avoid the need for local option sales taxes for trains to nowhere, if you catch my drift, here. In effect, the state would be collecting taxes for the cities and counties (revenue sharing).

If businesses want to have the business personal property tax repealed, they should expect for that to be made up on business income taxes. Fairness – long missing from the USA.

By: Mame

Mame — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 16:55:02 +0000

Editor puts it smartly:
“…the only really fair way to get some relief is to simply exempt the first $100,000 worth of personal property for everyone. That way the little folks like you wouldn’t be hurt, the big boys would see some relief, but the big value property like power lines, substations, phone switching facilities, mining equipment, etc. would still contribute to local revenues.
But will it get changed rationally???

By: Brian Vermillion

Brian Vermillion — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 16:50:51 +0000

Otter once again desperately trying to find some voting block that he can appease to. He has seen the success that Obama has had by b.s.ing the gullible voters.

By: Rod in SE Boise

Rod in SE Boise — Sat, 16 Feb 2013 02:06:09 +0000

The legislature could, if they were so inclined, repeal the per prop tax while requiring that the difference be made up by state income tax. That would be much more fair than property taxes or sales taxes.

EDITOR NOTE–Rod, that would be a pretty stiff tax since we are at about 8% already on state income tax.