Which Way To Vote On Proposal 1 ?

[Restorium2]

It's a tax break for businesses, which could be good, fix the roads and the schools first, or businesses will not even exist.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

The police support it because the PPT would be replaced fully by the essential services tax on businesses (EST).  It is a more even handed approach on businesses and would eliminate the uncertainty that communities experience based on the PPT.  In other words it allows communities to plan and budget better because they know how much they would get where with the PPT they don't.  So a police dept (fire, emt, etc) will better be able to budget because they will know how much cash is incoming.

 

The proposal will phase out the PPT by 2023 and replace it with the EST.  Small business can apply for immediate exemption from PPT if they have less than $80,000 worth of personal property.  This is a shot in the arm for small business and it is still providing for the money that PPT brought in through the new EST which is supposed to fully cover the amount PPT got by evenly taxing industry.

 

So it isn't something to be afraid of.  It doesn't take tax money from the state because it provides the EST on businesses.  So stop trying to scare people.  It is better from municipalities and for businesses, especially small businesses.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

And no Rrestorium2 it isn't a tax break for businesses.  It is a restructuring of the tax money collected.  It is still collected just in a different manner so it can be distributed more evenly.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Correction, it is a tax break for very small businesses.  But the money is made up for by the EST on big industry.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

So vote yes.

[Restorium2]

Correction, it's a tax break for big industry too. Places like NEXTEER. They already have so many tax breaks it's crazy. They can simply move a machine around the same building and not have to pay taxes on it. But you can't work there if you smoke cannabis ever. So vote NO.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Cannabis has nothing to do with it.  It isn't a tax break as it builds in a different tax and eliminates the PPT.  The new tax brings in just as much as the PPT.  How is that a tax break? Read up on it.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

It only restructures the tax scheme and allows even distribution of the taxes to municipalities.  Without it you will end up with municipalities like Carson City getting more than 70% of their essential services funding from the PPT while others get zero or close to that.  The PPT is a state tax that benefits some municipalities and not others and leaves some with uneven funding and uncertainty.  This proposal makes it so the tax can be restructured and get around the Headlee amendment.  It LEVIES A DIFFERENT TYPE OF BUSINESS TAX to make up for the PPT.  Read the proposal.  Go on ballotpedia and read it.  Saying this is a tax cut for big business couldn't be further from the truth.  It is an elimination of an unfair tax on business and a levy of a more fair tax.  THE STATE COFFERS WILL GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY FROM BUSINESSES IF THIS PROPOSAL PASSES.  The only difference is that it cuts very small businesses a break and passes the burden onto large industry.

 

Why do you support a STATE tax that benefits communities unevenly?  And the argument that the communities deserve it because of increased road use and infrastructure due to the businesses is dumb.  They already can get money for that through property taxes.  Leaving it the way it is allows a city to give real property tax incentives to bring in businesses but recoup the money through PPT.  That is pure gamesmanship and gives some cities more advantage over others.  It is a very manipulative way to draw in businesses by getting the PPT and discounting the real property taxes. I don't think you understand proposal 1 in the slightest.

 

The current scheme is manipulation at its best. 

 

Vote yes on prop 1 to change that.

[imiubu]

http://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Use_Tax_and_Community_Stabilization_Share,_Proposal_1_%28August_2014%29

[beourbud]

Yeah,  Still No

[Restorium2]

This proposal makes it so the tax can be restructured and get around the Headlee amendment.

The Headlee amendment made it so the tax burden of the state can't be shifted to local government.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Precisely my point.  The proposal imposes a new business tax that can then be collected and distributed evenly to municipalities without a municipality being constrained in raising real property tax which is capped by the headlee amendment in order to make up the loss of PPT.

 

All I hear is a bunch of No votes with no reasoning behind it.  Why?  Because you like the current disparate treatment of municipalities?  That makes no sense.  So you are in favor of what is basically an unfair tax to begin with and are against repealing that in favor of a fairer tax?  The new tax on businesses is required to be high enough to cover the loss experienced by the PPT repeal.  You don't understand that though I guess.  You prefer uncertainty in local funding and disparate impact based on business location.  That makes sense I guess.  Why not keep the tax law screwed up since so many other laws are as well.

Edited August 4, 2014 by FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana

[beourbud]

Because? 

Because I am convinced it sucks

[Restorium2]

Personal Property Tax

 

Proposal 1 would exempt commercial and industrial personal property from the "Personal Property Tax" (PPT).[1] The PPT has been described as having a “misleading name” and being "an inaccurately named levy" because the tax is not levied on an individual's personal property, as the tax's name would suggest.[3][4] The PPT is an annual business tax levied by municipalities on property that is not part of a structure, such as machinery, equipment, and furniture. Proposal 1 would phase out the tax on all industrial personal property and a portion of commercial personal property by 2023. Businesses with total personal property valued at or below $80,000 would be able to file for exemption from the PPT immediately, rather than waiting for the phase out to be completed.[1][2]

 

Some municipalities rely heavily on revenue from the PPT for local school districts, community colleges, public libraries, transit authorities, ambulance services, police and firefighters. Proposal 1 would replace revenue local governments would lose without the PPT with revenue from a portion of the use tax, known as the Local Community Stabilization Share Tax. Revenue lost by the state government due to reallocating some use tax revenue to local governments would be replaced, in part, with revenue from the Essential Services Assessment (ESA).

[Restorium2]

I'm really not seeing a reason for a change....

[Restorium2]

Lets see who benefits the most;

Proposal 1 would phase out the tax on all industrial machinery and equipment.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

Restorium2 you aren't making any sense.  All you do is point to the phase out of the PPT but ignore the fact that a NEW tax is then levied on businesses that is more even handed.  I'm not going to type it all out and I can't cut and paste on here for some reason so I'll leave you to your conclusions that are based on parts and pieces of laws, the proposal, and a weak understanding of the tax scheme.  You just aren't getting it and I suppose some people refused to be educated.  Keep the broken system.  At least I am only here in the summer months and in Florida the rest of the year.  May just have to make that a permanent residence based on how messed up this state is.

[Restorium2]

Restorium2 you aren't making any sense.  All you do is point to the phase out of the PPT but ignore the fact that a NEW tax is then levied on businesses that is more even handed.  I'm not going to type it all out and I can't cut and paste on here for some reason so I'll leave you to your conclusions that are based on parts and pieces of laws, the proposal, and a weak understanding of the tax scheme.  You just aren't getting it and I suppose some people refused to be educated.  Keep the broken system.  At least I am only here in the summer months and in Florida the rest of the year.  May just have to make that a permanent residence based on how messed up this state is.

What I said was simple and true. I understand that shifting around the tax burden is how the little guy always gets shafted. And proposal 1 is all about that. Like calling all industrial machinery 'personal property', it's a sham. Then expand on the incorrect discription of the 'personal property' to make comercials on TV that would make someone believe that this is not an across the board tax elimination for industry, it's just giving some guy tax relief for his grandpa's lathe.

[beourbud]

Restorium2 you aren't making any sense.  All you do is point to the phase out of the PPT but ignore the fact that a NEW tax is then levied on businesses that is more even handed.  I'm not going to type it all out and I can't cut and paste on here for some reason so I'll leave you to your conclusions that are based on parts and pieces of laws, the proposal, and a weak understanding of the tax scheme.  You just aren't getting it and I suppose some people refused to be educated.  Keep the broken system.  At least I am only here in the summer months and in Florida the rest of the year.  May just have to make that a permanent residence based on how messed up this state is.

 

 

Why as i read this do i here a whiny spoiled kids voice threatening to take  his ball out of play and go home.  .

 

Oh and Florida....please.  

 

Resto got it right.

 

The madness got to stop and now is as good a time as any.

Edited August 4, 2014 by beourbud

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

2 types of property.  Real property and personal property.  How is it you are fitting machinery into real property?

 

How is the little guy getting shafted?  Seriously are you that thick headed?  Did you read the ballot language?  Did you read the ballotpedia write up?  The PPT is replaced by another business tax that is more even handed. How is shafting this little guy?  It isn't.  It is allowing small businesses to be removed from the tax and it is taxing big business with the new ESA tax which will amount to the same incoming as the PPT.  I swear you're an unthinking robot designed to blurt out no without using reason.  May as well just run Michigan as a socialist state I guess.  Then the little guy is protected 100%.

 

Voting yes on this relieves small businesses of the tax burden and shifts it to big business.  It also provides incentives for big business to move to this state.  But I guess you are right we should nevermind all of that and leave it the way it is.

[Petyr]

I am voting no.  They are taking away revenue and not replacing it.  This will remove $600 million and replace it with new taxes of $100 million.  The $500 million shortfall is going to be made up for by stealing from the general fund in the form of expiring tax credits for businesses.  Those expiring tax credits could be used for roads, schools, and other important things.  Instead it will be used to fund more corporate welfare.

 

They don't have a way to pay for this, so they are going to steal the money from the expiring business tax cuts that should be going into the state budget.

[FranksHotPeppersAndMarijuana]

They are replacing it.  Read the details.

 

Also, how is it stealing?  Impose an unfair tax and if it gets repealed then that is stealing?  If they drop the sales tax back to 4% I guess they are stealing too.  Maybe they should impose a personal property tax on everyone's person property?  Maybe a dollar a year for your bed?

[beourbud]

FranksHotPeppers....where are you registered to vote, Michigan or Florida

[Restorium2]

Municipalities already have the option to give businesses a break if they want to. It's a bargaining tool. No sense in taking away the local leverage over industrial business. If a municipality is cash strapped they may need the taxes for schools and libraries. If they want to attract business they give 'tax breaks'.

[Petyr]

They are replacing it.  Read the details.

 

Also, how is it stealing?  Impose an unfair tax and if it gets repealed then that is stealing?  If they drop the sales tax back to 4% I guess they are stealing too.  Maybe they should impose a personal property tax on everyone's person property?  Maybe a dollar a year for your bed?

 I did read the details.  They are "replacing" the revenue with money from expiring tax cuts.  I wouldn't really consider that a replacement, but whatever.  

 

To me, replacing a tax means you do away with one tax for X amount of dollars, and replace it with another tax that brings in the same X dollars.  You don't get rid of a tax, and make up the difference by stealing the money from other parts of the budget.  This state could use that $500 million of additional revenue for things other than corporate welfare.

Edited August 4, 2014 by Petyr