Today the Arizona Free
Enterprise Club released a new study evaluating the cost of Low-Income Housing
Tax Credits (LIHTC) in Arizona and Washington and how LIHTC have performed
compared to other government backed housing affordability programs. The review determined
that in both states, LIHTC have led to a significant increase in the cost of development
and construction when compared to similar market rate housing.
In his analysis, economist Everett
Stamm determined that a “lack of oversight and transparency, requirements to
pay higher wages and inadequate cost control measures all attribute to the
higher development costs” associated with LIHTC. Stamm concludes that even if proper reforms
were implemented with LIHTC, other tenant-based programs, such as the Housing
Choice Voucher Program, are better suited to provide housing for low income residents
than LIHTC.
Evidence that LIHTC drive up
construction costs and fail to keep housing affordable add to the list of
concerns that exist with the program. “There is ample evidence, both from
the Government Accountability Office and the US Department of Justice, that the
Low-Income Housing tax Credit Program has been rampant with fraud and other
criminal activity and lacks basic oversight to determine any tangible benefits,”
said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club.
“If the legislature is
serious about addressing housing affordability, they should look at options
that are tenant based and that drive down the cost of construction. Low income
housing tax credits accomplish exactly the opposite,” Mussi
continued.
In Arizona, there is
currently a
proposal to spend $8 Million to expand the LIHTC program, which is being
aggressively pushed by developers and investors that will financially benefit
from the tax credits.
The complete study by the Club on LIHTC can be viewed by clicking HERE.
For years Democrats have
complained that virtually every government program in Arizona is underfunded
because of all the “draconian” tax cuts that have occurred. Given that most
national rankings show Arizona is middle of the pack among
states when it comes to overall tax burden on individuals and businesses, it is
difficult to see how they reach this conclusion.
Nevertheless, there has been a
lot of discussion in political circles and in the media about Democrats winning
majorities in the State House and Senate, meaning they might have a chance to
implement their tax hike agenda.
Just how much do Democrats plan
to increase taxes if they win control of the State Legislature?
The Answer: $5.73 BILLION
DOLLARS!
This three-year budget total includes a wide range of tax increases that have been actively supported by Democrat leadership and their caucus. Through votes taken at the legislature, bills introduced by the caucus and tax increases proposed in their own budget plan, the entire Democrat tax hike agenda has been put on display for the public to see. And it would mean billions in new taxes that would cripple the state’s economy and send businesses and families fleeing to other states. Tax Increases the Dems would LOVE to implement include:
VLT Registration Fee
Last year Democrats unanimously voted against ending the VLT registration fee, a widely despised fee that has generated fury among the vehicle owning public. If it were up to the Democrats, the fee would still be in place, and likely would be increased since the amount of the fee wasn’t capped (the Arizona Department of Transportation director had sole authority to annually set the amount of the fee). Taxpayers are lucky Democrats didn’t get their way on this one.
Online Sales Tax
Last year Republicans approved a
plan to allow for the taxing of remote online sellers, with the intention of
providing an offset to prevent a net tax increase. Democrats fiercely opposed
the plan, speaking out against the proposal and made the bizarre argument that
somehow providing offsets was a “tax cut.” They even presented an alternative
budget proposal that included keeping all of the money from the
tax increase, which totals at least $900 million dollars over three years.
Conformity Income Tax Increase
Similar to taxing online sales,
Democrats were fierce in their opposition to any plan that didn’t include the
government keeping the $300 Million in annual revenue generated from the
Conformity Tax hike. They introduced their own conformity legislation and
proposed in their own budget
plan
keeping the money generated from the tax increase. Even the media, which is
normally sympathetic toward government keeping more of our money, didn’t bite
on the Democrat spin and consistently reported this as a significant tax increase.
Income Tax Hikes on
Individuals, Businesses and Entrepreneurs
The Democrats don’t want to stop
with just one income tax increase. In addition to the conformity income tax
hike, they also are pushing a
massive tax increase similar to Invest in Ed from 2018 to double the
individual income tax rate to 9 percent ($2.82 Billion), eliminating
inflationary adjustments on deductions ($9 Million), increasing taxes
on corporate businesses by imposing
a moratorium on all tax credits ($390 Million) and raising
taxes on capital gains ($12.2 Million).
Arizona Can’t Afford the
Dems Radical Tax Agenda
This is a mind blowing portfolio
of record breaking tax hikes, and it doesn’t even include Democrat leadership’s
support for increasing
the gas tax, increasing the insurance
premium tax and imposing a minimum
tax
on every corporation regardless of size or if they are even profitable.
Democrats will attempt to run
away from this record, hoping voters won’t take a closer look at their plan to
enact California-level tax rates that will turn Arizona permanently blue. Republicans
shouldn’t let them—taxpayers need to know about the radical left turn Democrats
have in store for the state if they are in charge.
As the Club highlighted last week, through a combination of economic growth and tax and fee increases, Arizona is likely to have a budget surplus this year approaching $1 Billion dollars. Adding to this figure was news announced on Friday that the state expects to collect an additional $95 Million from the VLT registration fee increase that went into effect in 2019.
Knowledge that Arizona is collecting around $1.3 Billion from VLT fees, online sales and income tax hikes over the next 3 years is likely an irritating fact to lawmakers looking to spend the surplus, but it is a reality that cannot be ignored.
A plan needs to be crafted to start rolling back these tax increases, one that is designed to maximize growth, create jobs, prioritize families and build on the success of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act that has been an undeniable success during President Trump’s first term.
We will
find out today what Governor Ducey wants to do on the tax front, a
package that his aides have been hinting will involve ‘significant’ tax relief.
If his proposal is similar in size and
scope to the one
released by Sen. Javan Mesnard last Thursday, it would be a
good first step toward rolling back the tax hikes in a pro-growth fashion.
Given the details of the plan,
the Free Enterprise Club currently is in support of Senator Mesnard’s Arizona
Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which intends to return $400M to taxpayers over 3 Years.
Some of the key provisions in his
plan include:
Full Repeal of VLT Registration
Fee on Dec. 31, 2020
Though lawmakers
were successful last year in convincing Governor Ducey to repeal the VLT
registration fee in the budget, it came with an expiration date
of July 2021. That means an additional $373M is being paid by taxpayers to pad
the surplus and create capacity for more spending. Ending the fee at the end of
this year would return nearly $100M back to taxpayers and also address the
fairness issue of penalizing vehicle owners that need to register their
vehicles in the first 6 months of 2021 (while not assessing the same fee to
people over the last 6 months of the year).
Property Tax Relief
Included in Senator Mesnard’s
plan is a proposal to cut the state equalization property tax rate and reduce
Arizona’s uncompetitive business property assessment ratio rate to 17 percent. This is a sensible idea that addresses two
issues:
Since
most of the surplus money being taken from taxpayers is from the VLT fee and Online
Sales Tax increases, giving it back through a property tax cut is a
fair approach that is broad-based and equitable. Additionally, housing
affordability has been a major issue raised over the last year. Cutting property taxes is a much more
intelligent way to reduce the cost of housing than the myriad of tax
credit/subsidy programs being floated at the capitol by politically
connected developers mainly interested in enriching themselves.
Arizona’
business property taxes are uncompetitive compared to other states. Due to the state’s high Class 1 business assessment
ratio of 18 percent (residential is at 10 percent), there is consistent
pressure on small and medium sized employers that pay nearly double the amount as
everyone else when property taxes (or valuations) increase. Reducing the assessment ratio without shifting
the cost onto other taxpayers is a smart policy that should be embraced.
Capital Gains Tax Reduction
If
the goal is to encourage both investors and investment to relocate to Arizona,
there is no better approach than a broad-based cut in the capital gains tax
rate. Senator Mesnard’s plan would reduce the state rate to 50 percent of the
personal income tax rate, a similar formula used by the Federal Government to
tax capital gains. The cost of this reduction is small, yet the benefits will
be substantial. Additionally, supporting a cap gains tax cut would hopefully
end the parade of millions being given away in targeted
tax credits and subsidies to wealthy investors and
politically connected businesses to encourage them to invest in our state.
168K Full Expensing for
Businesses
Though full
expensing is not a tax cut, it is one of the most
important tax reforms that the legislature can pass to incentivize
investment and manufacturing in the state.
This tax change would allow companies that purchase machinery and other
large assets to fully expense the equipment in the first year, rather than
depreciating the asset over several years.
The result is a reduced initial
cost for purchasing equipment, making it easier for businesses to expand
operations. And since these businesses
will no longer receive the tax depreciation on the equipment, what looks like a
cost to the state in the first year is revenue positive by year four. It’s not often that policymakers have an
opportunity to pass pro-growth tax policy that is revenue neutral. Full expensing provides that opportunity.
Since 1994, when Arizona passed
legislation to allow students to “open enroll” in a district school outside
their boundary, families have been taking advantage of the power of school
choice.
Open enrollment’s popularity is
evident when you consider approximately half of Arizona kids do not attend
their designated district school. Of
these migrating students almost
half of them are choosing one district school over
another.
Recently, the Arizona
Republic wrote a story about hundreds of parents waiting in line for
up to 36 hours outside Sunnyslope High School with the hope of capturing a slot
for their child. The Glendale Union District operates on a ‘first come, first
register’ basis, and parents were not going to risk missing out on the
opportunity to get their kid into this high-ranking school.
This should be recognized for
what it is: evidence that school choice works.
No longer are children trapped in underperforming schools by virtue of
their zip code, parents are free to exercise their right to vote for their
preferred school with their feet, and schools are getting market feedback on
the quality of their product.
Yet, the AZ Republic gets the
narrative all wrong:
“Educational inequality continues in Arizona despite
a 2018 teacher strike that pushed Gov. Doug Ducey and the Legislature to
give educators a three-step, 20% raise that will conclude this year. Even with
tens of millions more in tax dollars going to Arizona public schools, the state
remains among the bottom five for educational funding.”
The implication being made is that parents are camping outside of Sunny Side high school to flee the Phoenix Union District because of lack of funding and “educational inequality”. This story proves exactly the opposite!
According to the state Auditor
General, Phoenix
Union High School District (PUSD) received $13,853 per student. If
Phoenix Union was its own state it would be #15 in
the country in per pupil funding. By any metric they do not
qualify as an “underfunded” district.
By contrast, Glendale Union receives $10,385 per student. Think about that: every parent lining at SunnySlope is willing to take $3,500 less to educate their child.
It’s easy see why parents are
willing to forfeit the extra funding after comparing the performance of the two
districts. According to the Arizona Department of Education, only 4 Schools
in Phoenix Union (28%) are rated an A or a B.
Six others are a C and four a D. State assessment scores corroborate
these ratings with only about 20 percent of PUSD students passing math, English
and science. Glendale scores double and
even triple these statistics when it comes to science testing.
You can’t blame demographics
either. Poverty rates are similar in both districts, and Phoenix has much
smaller class sizes (17.7) than Glendale (21.6). The bottom line is the
district that should have a distinct advantage is failing to compete. GUSD
is simply producing better academic results with less money. Families in the area are savvy enough to
understand this.
As for educational inequality,
the only unfairness that exists in this situation is an
entrenched school financing model that allows under-performing
districts to receive the more funding (and be rewarded for this failure) than
successful ones. Perhaps these parents should be able to take a portion of the
$3,500 they lose when they relocate. That would help address funding inequality
in a hurry. It could also go toward helping expand capacity in Glendale so that
parents don’t have to camp out for days in the hopes of providing their child
with a better education.
But don’t expect the education
establishment or their media enablers to support any real reform. Even when all
of the facts point toward the need to reward success and tying reforms to
funding, they will never abandon their ‘throw money at the problem’ narrative.
Strong hospital and insurance lobbies have long strived to block efforts in the state to give consumers more information about what health care services cost. Just last year, there was a bill at the legislature to require hospitals to provide the relative costs of services to a database that would allow consumers to discern high cost versus lower cost providers in the market and therefore make more informed decisions about their healthcare.
House Bill 2603 would have
been particularly helpful for businesses and organizations that are
self-insured and engineering their networks for employee insurance plans. Armed with even just the weighted average
payor rate and the annual rate of growth would have facilitated major shifts in
behavior by these more sophisticated insurance plan architects, forcing
premiums down over time and saving the end user money.
This bill was killed last
year by the healthcare lobby in the legislature.
Just a couple months after, President
Trump filed his executive order requiring Health and Human
Services set regulations requiring the disclosure of the secret rates insurers
pay hospitals. Since then his
administration has been promulgating
rules to prevent “surprise billing” as well as requiring
hospitals to share the discounts they give cash-paying patients.
This isn’t the only step
Trump has taken to administratively unwind the massive red tape of the
ACA. In
the summer of 2018, they loosened rules to allow for short term
health plans. A measure Republicans
rightfully codified
in Arizona in the 2019 legislative session.
What Trump understands that
Republican lawmakers should learn in Arizona – is without a repeal of Obamacare
– policymakers must find alternative ways to empower choice and
flexibility in the marketplace.
Without incremental changes
that put consumers in the drivers’ seat, the ratchet will only turn more toward
government run, single-payer healthcare, accompanied by the price controls and
rationed care that comes with it.
Luckily, Arizona lawmakers
will have an opportunity to redeem themselves next session when an updated
version of HB 2603 will be introduced. We will see once again who supports
price transparency and who will carry the water for the healthcare lobby.
With the 2020 elections
looming, healthcare is on the mind of voters.
Absent a major righting of the ship in the way of repealing Obamacare,
Republicans must provide market and consumer-driven solutions to lower costs
and increase choice and quality. The
President has the right idea. Hopefully lawmakers
in Arizona continue to follow his lead.
Here is an under-reported education fact: K-12 schools in Arizona have received over $1 Billion in new funding from the state over the last two years. This infusion of cash is the largest education spending increase in state history, boosting per pupil funding by 20 percent. Even adjusting for inflation, we are now back to the pre-recession funding levels for education last reached in 2008, which was the previous high water mark for K-12 spending by the state.
One
would hope that our policymakers are keeping close tabs on this massive
expansion of funding and scrutinizing how our tax dollars are being spent. Instead,
it appears that state lawmakers are preparing to skip this step and commit more
dollars to K-12, no questions asked.
Hopefully
this attitude will change with news that the largest school district in the
state decided to use their K-12 funding boost to go on an administration spending spree:
“Even
as teachers were canvassing neighborhoods, fighting to pass a budget override
in the state’s largest school district, new documents reveal Mesa Public
Schools Governing Board members were handing out hefty bonuses and spending
record amounts on administration in the district’s front office.
Budget
documents and memoranda obtained by ABC15 show the district’s administrative
spending soared more than 42 percent from 2018 to 2019, exceeding its own
budget by more than three-quarters of a million dollars.
The
new revelations about administrative spending come just a day after the governing
board voted to put Superintendent Ember Conley on administrative leave, signaling
it is parting ways with the district’s leader, who has only been on the job
since March of 2018. The board is expected to buy out the remainder of her
contract – a cost which is expected to exceed $500,000.”
A
large chunk of the payouts went toward bonuses to employees close to embattled
Superintendent Ember Conley. Twelve members of her executive team received
$22,500 bonuses, while several others had large amounts put into tax sheltered
annuities.
Adding
insult to injury is all of this largesse occurred behind the scenes while the
district actively pushed for more funding through a budget override. Voters in the East Valley are outraged
and one ex-school board member has filed a criminal complaint with the Attorney General’s office to
investigate the matter.
Taxpayers
deserve answers, but it’s unclear if they will ever get any. At last week’s district meeting, the Mesa
school board refused to discuss why Superintend Conley was placed on
leave, and provided no explanation as to why the district spending spree was
hidden from the public. They did, however, attempt to defend the payouts and
declared that exceeding the approved administration budget wasn’t really an
issue.
The
lack of candor isn’t surprising given the current political environment
surrounding K-12 funding. There is tremendous hubris among the education establishment,
based on the belief that policymakers are afraid to hold them accountable.
That
is how you end up with several education groups openly bickering on what tax hikes (sales, property,
income, all of the above?) to send to the ballot in 2020. It appears they have concluded
it is politically unnecessary to explain how the additional $20,000 per
classroom provided by the state has been spent or justify why a tax increase is
required given the news that Arizona has amassed a $500 Million (and growing)
budget surplus for next year.
The
only way this cycle ends is if Governor Ducey and the State Legislature send a
clear signal that future K-12 appropriations will be tied to results,
accountability and reform. If they don’t, then taxpayers should expect more
demands for additional education spending and higher taxes with no explanations
or expectations that it is being used wisely.
Recent Comments