by admin | Jun 4, 2019 | Free Market, News and Updates
Phoenix, AZ (June
4th)–Today the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, in collaboration with the Economic
Research Center at The Buckeye Institute, released “It Ain’t Easy Being Green: A
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Electric Vehicles in Arizona.” The paper is a comprehensive study
examining the pros and cons of electric vehicle (EV) subsidies in Arizona and
whether these inducements are worth the cost to taxpayers and utility ratepayers.
The
analysis was conducted in response to several proposals being considered by
policymakers in Arizona to encourage more drivers to purchase EVs, including a current proposal at the Arizona Corporation
Commission to require utility companies build EV charging stations, with the
cost of these stations being passed along to all ratepayers through higher
utility rates.
The
study reveals that EVs are already heavily subsidized by taxpayers in Arizona
and that creating a new mandate for the construction of charging stations would
only exacerbate the status quo, distort the market for EV technology and redistribute
wealth to a few affluent EV car owners at the expense of every electricity user
in the state.
“After a comprehensive analysis, our research
clearly shows that—in an effort to encourage the purchase of more electric
cars—Arizonans are being over taxed to subsidize wealthy owners of electric
cars, which disproportionately hurts those who can’t afford to purchase a new
electric car. Taxpayers are seeing
little return on these subsidies, paying on average more
than $6,000 more per electric car on the road than they are realizing
in benefits over the course of five years,” said Andrew J. Kidd, Ph.D., an economist with the
Economic Research Center at The Buckeye Institute and one of the authors of “It
Ain’t Easy Being Green.” “Furthermore, if a new proposal by the
Arizona Corporation Commission is adopted, Arizonans will pay more on their
electric bills to subsidize the building of more electric charging
stations—even though there are currently 12 public chargers for every electric
car on the road in Arizona.”
Some of the other key
findings in the study include:
- A Charging Station
Mandate would act as a regressive tax on low and middle-income households to
benefit more affluent EV drivers.
- Over 83% of EV tax
credit subsidies went to households earning above $100,000. Conversely, less
than 1% of those subsidies were accessed by households below $50,000.
- In Arizona, EV car owners
pay on average $500 less each year than non-EV drivers for road maintenance.
“Mandating the construction of EV charging stations, paid for with an increase in utility rates, is both unnecessary and unfair,” said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club. “Taxpayers are already overpaying based on the benefits provided by Electric Vehicles. Instead of handing out another subsidy to EV drivers, policymakers should explore other options that avoid picking winners and losers among ratepayers.”
by admin | May 20, 2019 | News and Updates, Tax
As the Club has covered for
over a year, Arizona taxpayers are facing the largest income tax increase in
state history if a proper federal tax conformity plan is not adopted by the
legislature. The department of revenue estimates that the conformity tax
increase would be over $200 million dollars in the first year, with some
estimates as high as $300 million.
The good news is that
policymakers appear to be on the same page that any additional conformity
revenues must be given back. This is a big win for taxpayers. What remains an
open question is the manner in which the money is returned.
The second issue is just as
important as the first. Though a simple
approach on stopping the tax hike (such as cutting all the tax rates) could be
done, the Club has advocated that the conformity issue be used as an
opportunity to reform and simplify our income tax code.
Reforming Arizona’s income
tax code is long overdue, and if done right could be bring us closer to
neighboring states Utah and Colorado with a simple flat income tax. If we can’t
eliminate the tax, a simple/flatter system is the next best choice.
Unfortunately, most of the
discussions related to conform and reform have been behind closed doors in
budget meetings, with little input from the public. Though various components
have been leaked, it has been extremely difficult to determine which proposals
are best without reviewing the projected impact on taxpayers.
For example, adopting a
reform model that cuts taxes for some taxpayers while raising taxes on others
(picking winners and losers) would be suboptimal. The only way to figure this
out is through modeling from the Department of Revenue. Yet most of this data is only accessible to
lawmakers and the executive branch; it leaves interested observers and
stakeholders at a disadvantage on making an informed decision.
Without a front row seat to
the debate or access to modeling, the Club has been seeking out a reform plan
that both returns all of the money and holds taxpayers across all income ranges
harmless.
The
3 Bracket Solution
Last week a conform a reform
plan was released that appears to do the trick (The plan can be viewed by
clicking HERE).
Developed by Senate Finance
Chairman JD Mesnard, his 3-Bracket model would implement the following income
tax reforms:
- Offset the entire conformity income tax
increase and return the money to taxpayers.
- Provide an offset for additional tax revenue
generated by the proposed implementation of an online sales tax (a.k.a.
Wayfair) thereby preventing another tax increase.
- Collapse Arizona’s income tax brackets from 5
to 3
- Mirror Federal Tax Reform by doubling the
standard deduction for all taxpayers.
- Keep the medical deduction and add a new
charitable deduction.
- Implement a new child and new family tax
credit
Why the 3-bracket plan? This
is only plan so far released that will hold individual income taxpayers (which
include small businesses) harmless across all income thresholds and stops
multiple tax increases, saving taxpayers over $300 million per year. Other reform
plans, though well intentioned, appear to shift taxes across income levels that
would trigger a tax increase on thousands of Arizona families and small
businesses.
As structured, the 3-bracket
plan would provide taxpayers making $50k or less with a substantial income tax
cut. Taxpayers in this income group would see their tax bill slashed by an
average of 20 percent.
Finally, the 3-bracket
solution would simplify our tax code while flattening out the brackets.
Reducing the progressivity of our income tax code should be the cornerstone of
any reform package.
As the legislature
(hopefully) heads into the final stretch, it the Club’s hope that the 3-bracket
plan is seriously considered and adopted as the conform and reform solution in
the budget.
by admin | Apr 29, 2019 | News and Updates, Tax
The
Arizona Republican Party has decided to become the party of tax hikes. Yesterday,
party Chairwoman Kelli Ward announced that the GOP is officially backing an amendment to the
Arizona Constitution to impose a permanent $500 Million dollar sales tax
increase for education. This is both bad policy and bad politics that will
inflict irreparable harm on our state economy and sales tax code.
Arizona Doesn’t Need to Raise
Taxes
As
the Club has chronicled for months, there has been a steady drumbeat at the
legislature by political insiders to raise taxes for education. This is despite
the fact that Arizona is enjoying incredible economic growth and record state
revenues.
Since
the economic boom began two years ago, state revenues have increased by $1.7 Billion. By comparison, from FY 2009 to FY 2017 state
revenue grew by only $1.2 Billion. This rapid revenue growth wasn’t an
accident—it is a result of pro-growth reforms by a new administration in
Washington, Governor Doug Ducey and a conservative state legislature.
Thanks
to the surge in tax receipts, Arizona is in the process of implementing the
largest increase in K-12 spending in state history. Over a billion dollars has
been injected into schools for teacher pay increases, district additional assistance
restoration and new school construction.
Even
with this large increase in education spending, Arizona will have nearly a $1 billion dollar surplus for FY 2020. It proves that the problem
was a lack of taxpayers, not tax increases.
Amending Our Constitution to
Raise Taxes?
Even
if the State GOP believes that a tax hike is needed, the idea that it should be
referred to the voters as a constitutional amendment is simply reckless.
If
changes to our tax code are deemed necessary, the most sensible approach would
be to approve a tax hike through the normal legislative process. Like our
Federal Government, Arizona is a republic, which means taxing authority has
been vested with the legislature. It is their responsibility to determine the
appropriate levels of spending and taxation. Punting the issue to voters is
nothing more than a way for politicians to avoid accountability for their
actions.
But
even if it was determined that the issue must go to the ballot, then it should
be a statutory proposal similar to Proposition 301 that was approved nearly twenty years ago.
Instead, they want to declare that the state government has a constitutional
right to $500 million dollars in sales tax revenue.
Also
unclear is whether the language has been vetted to ensure that it won’t lead to
unintended consequences. Since this is a constitutional amendment, each word or
syllable could face significant judicial scrutiny.
One
such example is the provision to dedicate “twenty percent for maintaining an
in-state tuition rate” at our state universities. The drafters of SCR 1001
probably thought this was a politically clever maneuver since voters like the
idea of keeping in state tuition low (knowing full well that it is a
meaningless mandate).
What
is not considered is that “in-state” is not defined in the measure, meaning the
courts could decide how this applies to various populations, such as illegal
immigrants. The Free Enterprise Club does not have a position on the DACA
issue, but it is unclear whether the Arizona GOP considered such issues when
endorsing this proposal. Perhaps they trust that judges won’t expand the
meaning of new language being written into our constitution.
What about the Polling?
A
common response from the tax hike lobby is that voters overwhelmingly support
higher taxes for education. Periodically an education group will trot out a poll showing support for a tax increase, which
is then gleefully used by the political establishment to spook lawmakers into
believing that they need to get on the “right side” of the issue.
It
is true that most public opinion polls have voters saying they would be willing
to pay more in taxes for education. But what about the only poll that matters,
the one that occurs on election day when people actually vote? Are tax
increases passing at the rate that the polling indicates? Let’s take a look:
- At the
height of the Red4ED movement in AZ last year, there were several education
spending proposals for voters to consider. Most were in the form of bond
proposals for school districts. Virtually every bond question had organized
support and little opposition on the ballot. Plus, these measures can be sold
to voters as a way to get more money for schools “without raising taxes.” Yet nearly half of the education bonds on the ballot were
rejected by voters. If support for education funding was as high as the
so-called experts claim, they should have been approved at a 9-1 clip.
- In
2018 Colorado voters had their own version of ‘Invest in Ed’ income tax
proposal on the ballot in Initiative 73, a “soak the rich” measure that would have
raised taxes on the wealthy to put $1.6 billion into education. Supporters of
amendment 73 claimed that polling showed voters supported the proposal, and it
was heavily backed by the teacher’s union and education community. The measure
was overwhelmingly rejected by voters.
- Oregon
voters in 2016 had an opportunity to raise taxes on Corporations to pay for
early childhood development and K-12 education. Measure 97 was another “free lunch” education
spending plan rejected by voters by a wide margin 59-41.
- In
2016 Arizona voters had an opportunity to support more spending for education
with no tax increase under Proposition 123. The measure was backed by Governor
Ducey, most of the education community, the entire legislature, and faced no
real opposition while raising over $4 million dollars. The measure barely passed 51-49.
As
the evidence shows, when November rolls around and voters actually have to make
a decision, support for tax increases is much lower than what the polling
indicates.
Muddled Message Heading into
2020
Now
that the AZ GOP has joined the tax hike chorus, it is difficult to know what
the party will stand for heading into 2020. Two days ago the AZ GOP posted a tweet declaring that “Tax Cuts Work” and that Republicans
believe taxpayers should be able to keep more of their money. How they plan to reconcile their support for
the Trump tax cuts while pushing for tax hikes on the Arizona ballot should
make for some entertaining political gymnastics.
It
will also be interesting to see how various GOP leaders respond to the new
party platform. Governor Doug Ducey has been a consistent and vocal opponent to raising taxes, as well as a vast
majority of the Republican legislature who know and understand how tax
increases can derail our economic recovery. It is in their best interest to
hold firm against this disastrous proposal so voters know that there are at
least some elected officials that care about protecting their wallet.
The
only reason the Republican Party exists is to help get people elected. By
declaring they support SCR 1001, they are sending the message that the only way
Republicans can win in 2020 is if they support a massive tax hike at the
ballot. We wish them luck on their bold new strategy to try to tax Arizona into
prosperity.
by admin | Apr 20, 2019 | Corporate Welfare, News and Updates
For
months now, the AZ Attorney General Mark Brnovich and the Arizona Board of
Regents (ABOR, the governing body for Arizona State University) have been in
embroiled in a hot legal battle over taxpayer subsidies for wealthy developers.
At
the center of the legal dispute is whether ABOR has violated several provisions
of the Arizona constitution designed to protect taxpayers from crony capitalist
giveaways.
Evidence
suggests that they have.
The
framers of Arizona’s constitution understood that property taxes are a zero-sum
game, and that any levy assessed should be as fair and equitable as possible. If someone pays less as a result of a special
interest carve-out, everyone else will be forced to pay more. To prevent picking winners and losers
through the property tax code, the framers installed several key protections in
our constitution:
- Uniformity
Clause, “all taxes shall be uniform upon the same class
of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax, and
shall be levied and collected for public purposes only.”
- No Evasions, “no property shall be exempt which has
been conveyed to evade taxation”
- No Exceptions, “All property in the state not exempt under the laws of the
United States or under this constitution or exempt by law under the provisions
of this section shall be subject to taxation to be ascertained as provided by
law.
- No Gifts, “Neither the state, nor any county, city,
town, municipality, or other subdivision of the state shall ever give or loan
its credit in the aid of, or make any donation or grant, by subsidy or otherwise,
to any individual, association, or corporation.”
Governmental entities, including public
universities, do not pay property tax. This makes sense as the
money to pay the taxes would have to be taken from taxpayers in the form of
more taxes. But for decades now, local cities as well
as ABOR have devised creative solutions to exploit their exemption from
property taxes and “lend” it to private developers.
ASU Projects: Research Park, Marina Heights,
and Omni Hotel Are Evidence of Gamesmanship:
“Research Parks”
In
the 1980’s ASU formed a “research park” which strived to have private business
and students working alongside each other in educational pursuits to launch
ideas into the marketplace. This was
permitted legislatively, and the university paid the same rate of taxation as
other users in the same classification but on a mere 1 percent of their
property value. It soon became quite
obvious that the mission of the research park was creeping beyond the original
intent of the legislation and as a result, major corporations were enjoying
major tax deference for what was their normal business operations.
Between
the research parks of University of Arizona and ASU, they host approximately 50
companies in 4 million square feet.
These companies don’t pay property taxes but instead pay a “tariff” to
the university as well as the city. All
the other jurisdictions, including the State of Arizona who rely on property
taxes, get absolutely nothing.
Marina Heights
Marina
Heights is located on Tempe Town Lake and includes the well-known “State Farm”
building. In December 2017, with a deal that captured headlines in the state, the building’s “lease-back”
was sold to a business partnership that includes Arizona icon and business
insider Jerry Colangelo for almost $1 Billion – one of the largest commercial
land transactions in state history.
One
of the most valuable assets of the property was the value of not paying taxes. In fact, that value is approximately $12.1
Million a year of which $3.45 would be owed to the State, $6.6 to the Tempe
Elementary and Tempe Union school districts, and $1.2 million to the Maricopa
Community College District. Not only do
these jurisdictions have to back fill their budgets and other property owners
make up that difference, but other like businesses must try to compete with a
colossal tax advantage.
Omni Hotel
Brnovich’s latest suit filed in January of
this year centers around a project called Omni Hotel (located on Mill Ave and University) and
predominantly argues the deal included a massive violation of the state
constitution’s gift clause.
In
typical ABOR fashion, the Omni Hotel transaction is a sweet deal for developers
and less so for taxpayers as a whole. ASU
will spend $19.5 Million to construct a conference center and parking garage
and pay $8 Million to the hotel for use of that parking garage to the profit of
the hotel. ASU will only be allowed use
of the conference center 7 days out of the year.
It
is a 60-year lease with an express provision of evading taxes by requiring a
“in lieu of taxes” payment of $1 Million a year. The hotel is only on the hook for $85 per
square foot for rent even though within two blocks there are other hotels that
sold for a market rate of $212 – 216 per square foot – a seemingly $9 Million
subsidy.
This
major injection of corporate welfare does not even account for the $21 Million in tax incentives being given
by the City of Tempe.
Justice for Taxpayers
Given
the explicit intentions of the state constitution to protect the property tax
base from chicanery of the system; ABOR’s long-standing history of using their
tax-exempt status to shield corporate entities should not be ignored. AG Brnovich is doing a service to every taxpayer
in the state by calling for an end to this blatant illegal practice.
Afterall,
ASU is also constitutionally bound to make tuition “as nearly free as
possible.” Year after year of tuition hikes on Arizona
students are certainly hard
to square with hundreds of millions of dollars in corporate giveaways.
by admin | Mar 12, 2019 | News and Updates, Tax
An interesting paradox has developed at the legislature this year. Even though state policymakers are sitting on record tax revenues and a robust Arizona economy, they seem more obsessed with tax increases than ever before.
So far this session there are efforts by Republicans to increase the sales tax by $600 million, raise the gas tax by $750 million, increase income taxes by $200 million, impose taxes on most internet transactions at a cost of over $250 million, retain the $190 Million VLT registration fee and allow political subdivisions to increase sales taxes at the local level. All together it would amount to over $2 billion in tax hikes, a mind-blowing amount that would dwarf any previous tax increase enacted in the State.
The arguments in favor of each of these tax hikes vary, but most surround the topic of additional funding for K-12 schools. This sentiment was understandable. As Arizona stumbled through eight years of job killing policies under the Obama Administration, there was mounting pressure to find new funding sources for education to address the state’s anemic revenue growth.
Fortunately, this is no longer the case. Between the change in administrations in Washington and a consistent focus on pro-growth policies here at home, our economy has taken off. Arizona now has the 3rd fastest growing economy in the country. People are once again flocking to the state, and the Arizona Office of Economic Opportunity projects that 165,000 new jobs will be created by 2020.
This has created a gusher in new tax revenue, most of which is going to K-12. Lawmakers are in the process of funding Governor Ducey’s ‘20by20’ teacher pay plan and restoring District Additional Assistance, which combined will add over $1 Billion in new dollars for public schools by next year.
When fully implemented this will be the largest increase in K-12 funding in state history, and will push per pupil funding so high that lawmakers will be forced to override the education spending limit in the Arizona constitution. This is only the 2nd time in 40 years that such an override vote will be required, a fact that should please everyone that has worried that not enough emphasis has been placed on education funding at the legislature.
And here is the best news yet—even after this large infusion of cash into the classroom, Arizona will still have a projected $1 Billion dollar surplus for FY 2020. It proves that the problem was the need for more taxpayers, not tax hikes.
Yet our political class appears ready to go all-in on job crushing tax increases that will derail Arizona’s economic recovery. While this may excite states like Texas looking to poach our entrepreneurs and job creators, it is bad news for everyone else that wants to keep prosperity here in the state.
Lawmakers instead should be looking to embrace our success, maintain the course and continue to pursue pro-growth ideas that work. Now is not the time to surrender to policies or politics that will move Arizona in the wrong direction.
by admin | Mar 1, 2019 | Elections, News and Updates
Every American, no matter their political party, should have a significant interest in the wholesale integrity of the election process. And yet the business of ensuring citizens voting is honest, clean and untampered with, has been a fiercely partisan issue, dividing Republicans and Democrats into two camps: the party for election integrity and the party against “voter suppression.”
The integrity of the elections systems is two-fold: ensuring there are legal and procedural safeguards to maintain clean and accurate voting rolls and preventing, discovering and deterring fraudulent activity.
One would think that maintaining up to date voter rolls would be an innocuous issue. After all, neglecting to do so all but guarantees records will be cluttered with deceased persons and those who have moved out of state. In a 2012 study, the Pew Research Foundation found that 24 million voter registrations in the United States were either invalid or significantly inaccurate – that is one in every eight registrants. This vast vulnerability directly dovetails into susceptibility of election fraud.
The issue of election fraud is as old as elections themselves and take form in a variety of ways including – double voting, ineligible voting, and voter registration fraud, etc. Yet, this type of crime is notoriously difficult to catch, document, and enforce, which makes the problem significantly underreported.
Following the Arizona general elections of 2018, many voters voiced concerns over how specifically the Maricopa County recorder’s office conducted operations. And given the thin margins in many of the state-wide races, a little bit of fraud can have a big effect.
As a result, several Arizona lawmakers have introduced legislation to insert more practical checks into the system to both scrub voter rolls and fills cracks where the system is susceptible to fraud.
The best batch of election integrity bills have been introduced by Senator Michelle Ugenti-Rita (R) and include:
- SB 1046 requires voters who receive a ballot by mail to return that ballot by mail. If they do not, they may vote in person on election day with a standard ballot. Practically, this bill helps prevent the illegal practice of ballot harvesting.
- SB 1072 requires voters to show identification when voting at an early voting location. This makes the identification requirements consistent across all methods of in-person voting. And although Democrats want to claim the basic function of showing I.D is burdensome to voters, 76 percent of Americans believe such requirements should be mandatory.
- SB 1188 requires a county recorder to remove a voter from the permanent early voting list and cease sending them early ballots if the elector has not voted in two consecutive primary or general elections.
- SB 1090 requires electors voting at an emergency voting center to sign an affidavit under penalty of perjury that they did in fact suffer an emergency. Also requires the County Board of Supervisors to sign off on location, quantity and hours of emergency voting centers.
Given the reasonable proposals being suggested, one might be surprised by the very vocal fidelity of the left to the notion that 1. Fraud doesn’t exist, 2. When it does it is insignificant, and 3. Any legal framework that inserts predictable rules and guidelines into the system disenfranchises voters.
This is less surprising when you consider the bills drafted by Democrat legislators this year which take a free-for-all approach. Their philosophy seems to be the more votes cast the better – even if those votes are duplicative, unverified, or non-citizens. These bills include repealing the prohibition of ballot harvesting, same-day voter registration, and automatic restoration of voting rights for felons.
These election integrity bills are important steps to shore up weakness in Arizona’s election process. Despite the left’s effort to diminish the relevance of the election integrity issue, the real disenfranchisement of voters comes from diluting the votes of honest electors. Allowing for the erosion of the system casts doubt into the minds of citizens as to if their vote even counts – and that is true voter suppression.
Recent Comments