No, you are not confusing revenue with sales in this case. What % of the 683 million is listed as Oregon revenues? That's what they'll be taxed on - "the total sales of the taxpayer in this state during the tax year". Given that they'll most likely have a team of accountants taking every write-off known to man, according to the voters' pamphlet, they'll end up paying $100K in taxes (unless I'm reading the minimum provision wrong). Now the screwy part - that I agree is screwy - is it is based upon revenues, not sales. But I have a hard time believing that a corp that makes $600 million+ doesn't have more than $100K in pure profit off the top of that. What they actually should be doing before raising the minimum tax is to cut off many, many loopholes and write-offs that are unnecessary...but then again I'm sure some of the same people would be screaming and hollering about how Oregon is killing business and being sneaky by killing loopholes. Everyone's favorite escape is the one they are using. What people should do immediately following this bill is draft a bill that somehow begins reorganization of some core piece of government for "efficiency" purposes and then every couple of years add another core piece. Then each side could get what they want.
These cuts are not scare tactics like M 66 & 67 opponents would like you to believe. It's real this time. This is the crux of the problem I have with the measures. I have lived here long enough to have heard multiple times that if a measure doesn't pass they will close down courts and convicts will be let out of jail. I have even watched them close courts on Friday (when one measure didn't pass). . .. 3 weeks later all of a sudden they find a rainy day fund or some other money and what do you know . . . courts are open five days a week, they aren't letting poeple out of jail and public services continue. Even this writer acknowledges that gov't will throw out a lot of threats to get tax increaes passed. These scare tactics are used every election . . . but apparently this time it is "real" . . . they say that every time!
Does this sound familiar: February 27, 2009, 9:26PM Oregon's courthouses will close Fridays starting next month to save an estimated $3.1 million by slashing the pay of 1,800 state workers by 20 percent. The closure, which begins March 13, will affect more than 12,000 trials and other proceedings in the next four months, threatening the courts' ability to meet statutory deadlines and causing long delays in cases. Landlords trying to evict tenants, tenants trying to protest poor living conditions, businesses trying to collect unpaid debts, drivers fighting speeding tickets, couples going through divorces, and single parents seeking child support will be among the many who will be affected. Then: March 12, 2009, 9:19PM SALEM -- State courts are shuttered today, but they will re-open next Friday after lawmakers and Chief Justice Paul De Muniz struck a late deal to keep courts open five days a week. De Muniz ordered the Friday shutdowns two weeks ago, saying it was the only way to deal with $11 million in cuts to the Judicial Department's budget ordered by lawmakers. The agreement struck Thursday shifts $1.7 million from a project to put more court documents and procedures online. The Judicial Department also agreed to submit a plan later this month on other ways it can reduce its budget as the state grapples with an $855 million shortfall this year.
The WSJ weighs in on our choice. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...83989209884.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop
I am shocked. I can't believe the WSJ would be against a tax raise on the wealthy. OOPS I meant our job creators!
Okay. Please name for me the entities that should create our jobs. This country is about an equal opportunity, not an equal outcome.
Oregon at the Tax Crossroad A ballot showdown over higher rates. A great beauty of the American federal system is that any of the 50 states can offer its policies as an experiment for others. So the nation owes some gratitude to Oregon for testing whether it is possible for a state to tax its way from deep recession to prosperity. Oregon's unemployment rate is 11.1%, among the nation's highest. But Oregonians are now voting by mail whether to endorse a pair of tax increases passed by the legislature last year: one to raise the state's top personal income tax, to 11% from 9%, and another to raise the business income tax, to 7.9% from 6.6%. Both tax hikes would be retroactive to January 1, 2009. The legislature and governor argue that only the state's wealthiest 2.2% percent of residents will pay this tab. Nonetheless, the liberal Portland Oregonian has editorialized against the new taxes... Only a far-right totalitarian isolationist could perceive The Oregonian to be "liberal", although I do believe they editorially condemned the practice of lynching way back in the late 60's.
A friend of mine who works for a small/local car dealership says that if this passes it will probably put them out of business. They'll have to pay tax based on what they sold the car for, not what they actually profited from the sale... and the taxes are retroactive, so they'll have to pay taxes on cars they sold last year. Not sure if this is true, just what I was told.
C'mon, it's just "a little more". It's funny that the only entity that can't seem to do with less is the government.
With 72% of ballots counted, both measures appear to have passed. http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/01/oregon_measure_66_measure_67_e.html
Not if your a small buisness and you make 250k/yr in revenue but only a couple thousands of dollars in net income.... sigh
If that's your situation you are a horrible failure as a businessman and should probably just be working for someone who knows how to run one. America cannot afford to subsidize your desire to "play" businessman.
