http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/01/30/were-number-one-washington-retains-most-regressive-tax-structure-honors Comments On: We're Number One! Washington Retains "Most Regressive Tax Structure" Honors! by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Thu, 23 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Thu, 23 May 2013 16:00:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by Swiss Cheeze]]> Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:43:46 -0700 The Stranger Posted by jeffy]]> Thu, 21 Feb 2013 20:59:18 -0800 The Stranger
Posted by sloegin]]> Thu, 07 Feb 2013 13:07:14 -0800 The Stranger If you are truly an accountant and auditor remind me to be glad that I don't live in your area.

First: When doing this exercise you have to run the numbers for both renters and homeowners. If you don't do this you are deliberately skewing the numbers to the low end. Altho by not taking the portion of their rent that goes to the property owners taxes into account you are also being deliberately dishonest in running the numbers. Everyone with a dwelling that they pay for is paying that property tax. Rent may be non-taxable but that is only because the tax is built into the price. Anyone that doesn't understand that really needs a lesson in economics.

Next: When you note that low income earners can apply for a credit or discount on some taxes you are assuming that a) they know they can apply and b) that they actually will do so. Figure out how many qualify for those credits and discounts and how many actually take advantage of them when running your numbers.

Same section: You are quite correct in noting that taxes on the internet are low. By Federal law they are non-existent. You can be taxed on things you purchase over the internet (subject to current and future lawsuits by various companies on the internet) but internet access in and of itself has ZERO taxes on it. This is something you should know. If you want to know what happens when a fee of any sort (and yes the Federal Government considers fees and taxes to be identical in some situations) gets applied to internet access just ask the cell phone companies how many millions they paid out. But then again as an accountant and auditor you knew all that and were just sloppy in typing it out right? You can charge all you want for the phone and cable but you don't get to tax internet access. If state of WA is taxing internet access without Federal approval (and it would take an act of congress to get that approval) then I really pity your state budget when the feds tell the state to a) refund ALL of those taxes and b) pay the feds x amount in penalties for doing something they know they aren't allowed to do.
Posted by Romial]]> Sat, 02 Feb 2013 00:10:00 -0800 The Stranger
So lets start with the premise that low income equals a family of 4 making $30,000 a year.
16.9% of that is $5,070.

So lets say a low income family of 4 making $30k a year in Seattle had this budget

Rent - $9000 - ($750/month) (non taxable) For this exercise they are not homeowners. Sure if they owned a million dollar mansion they would pay a ton of property taxes.

groceries - $7800 ($150/week) (non taxable)

Eating out/taxable grocies $4200 - Cigerettes & liquor have an extremely high tax rate. Soda is the usual 9.5%. Eating out has the normal sales tax rate of 9.5%. It was 10% until September of 2011 (expiring stadium taxes) I assume some of that data went into their analysis. Well thats assuming that they did any analysis and didn't just make up a number.

Utility Bills - $3000 (gas, electric, water&sewer, garbage, phone, tv, internet)
The taxes on gas, electric, water & sewer are not super high and low income earners can apply for a credit or discount. TV , Internet taxes, and phone are moderate (less than 5%)
There are also low income programs available to get free cell service.

Consumer goods - $5000 (taxable) (clothes, school supplies, makeup, electronics, appliances) are generally taxed at 9.5% in seattle.

Gas/Transportation - $3000 We do have the highest gas tax in the nation, but our public transporation is heavily subsidized. So if your driving a car you're definitely paying more in taxes, if taking the bus you're paying next to nothing in taxes on your transportation dollars.

So in a nutshell if we start with $30k, throw out rent & groceries, we are left with $13,200.
The original premise is that this family would have to pay $5070 in state & local taxes to equal 16.9%. So the effective tax rate on the remaining $13,200 of income which i illustrated above is hardly completely disposable would have to be 38.4%.

I'm not making an argument for or against regressive taxes. I'm just saying those that do make an arguement should be be honest with the data they provide.


Posted by Skeptical of these numbers]]> Fri, 01 Feb 2013 11:10:34 -0800 The Stranger
Even in your post about the bridge tolls you posted 39 minutes before you put up this asinine comment, you failed to mention regressive taxes, when tolls and fees are some of the most severely regressive taxes in existence. Thank god for some of the commenters.
Posted by TheMisanthrope]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:05:22 -0800 The Stranger
Also, I know some might disagree, but we're a NEWSpaper. That means that our primary obligation is to cover the news, not create it. On Slog I'm free to do all the advocacy I want, as long as I get my other chores done. But in the paper, we mostly write about current events. And currently, there's little opportunity to write about implementing an income tax.
Posted by Goldy]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:24:51 -0800 The Stranger
Oh yeah, that's a strong drum beat. BTW, 10 links over the course of 3 years is 3.33 links per year (and that's INCLUDING slog). That's a HUGE drum beat man. Really fucking loud. /Sarcasm

Look, Dominic, if The Stranger spent as much ink bleating about the progressive tax structure as they do about bikes vs cars (two columns in the paper in two weeks), or pot (you alone have 3 pot-exclusive articles over the past year), or even as much digital ink and real ink as you guys spend bitching about Eyman's initiatives, I wouldn't be on here bitching about how you're not beating the regressive tax structure drum hard enough, or loud enough.

You're entitled to your opinion, but the drum you beat for regressive taxation is quiet and small.
Posted by TheMisanthrope]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:38:43 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Soupytwist]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 11:58:17 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Theodore Gorath]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 11:42:00 -0800 The Stranger TheMisanthrope @ nearly every other comment: You're completely wrong to claim we haven't adamantly supported progressive taxation--I've made it a priority of our coverage since I became news editor. From before the 2010 campaign, in our endorsement, through the election cycle, and even after the vote, we supported a high-earners income tax as a way of ending the regressive tax structure. We even kept up the drumbeat for progressive taxation the year after that initiative failed. There's tons more over the years: op-eds, polling analysis, frequent posts about regressive taxation, etc. I'm not going to waste any more time on your fake argument except to say that the SECB even based many of its endorsements last year primarily on those candidates who we believed were capable of advancing an income tax, both in our primary election and in our general election endorsements. Your line of attack, as usual, is easily disproven bullshit.

Posted by Dominic Holden]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 11:32:41 -0800 The Stranger
It then mentioned that people came from out of state to buy things like fur coats and luxury items without paying the sales tax. But, it was a fucking poorly written article, which put the two things together like there was a sales tax exemption specifically on fur coats.

Stupid crappy articles.
Posted by TheMisanthrope]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 09:48:56 -0800 The Stranger
No sales tax on high end cars and furs? Just make shit up why don't you.
Posted by Sugartit]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 08:27:48 -0800 The Stranger
I need citation for that last two bits because I'm not sure what was getting tax breaker or if it got repealed (or if it existed in the first place, but I'm sure I read about it in Seattle Times or P-I).

@49 That logic is "I've got mine, fuck you." It's terrible and it should be stated as terrible. We're all in this together...or we should be except the rich people and people like you keep saying fuck you to the people they're above.
Posted by TheMisanthrope]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 07:08:34 -0800 The Stranger
Well if the poor are paying 16% of their income in taxes in WA state, mainly in sales and excise taxes (aka cigarettes and Colt 45), they are spending more on consumer goods than they earn apparently. It's those fucking rims and sound systems I guess.
Posted by Sugartit]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 06:57:07 -0800 The Stranger
The key takeaway is: don't be stupid and let the government take a bunch of your money.

However, because the poor use more government services than the rich, its only fair they pay more...
Posted by GeneStoner]]> Thu, 31 Jan 2013 01:03:08 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Emilie Rensink]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:02:45 -0800 The Stranger Posted by dmanjam]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:20:56 -0800 The Stranger
Do me a favor. Test that theory if you have the balls.
Posted by Sugartit]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 21:05:29 -0800 The Stranger
Don't nobody own property. You didn't build that, that land/property was here for millions of year before you. Want to put something on it, like a house or a building or parking lot or dirt farm? Pay up, you owe society for the right to claim that land.
Posted by Westlake, son!]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:45:37 -0800 The Stranger
Then surely you know 2/3s of this great state voted against an income tax just 2 years ago? Stay where you are why don't you, and don't lecture the Great State of Washington on how we should run our affairs.
Posted by Surgatit]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:39:53 -0800 The Stranger
Goldy, and Emma's Bee, here's a link for ease of clickitude.
Posted by TheMisanthrope]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:29:34 -0800 The Stranger
If you believe that bullshit, you'll believe anything.
Posted by Sugartit]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:28:39 -0800 The Stranger Posted by skjaere]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:24:42 -0800 The Stranger Posted by TheMisanthrope]]> Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:19:43 -0800 The Stranger