The Legislature Showing Resolve

You can't create jobs (0.00 / 0)

with the highest property tax in the nation ,you can't expect any company to seriously consider to move a plant here .Consider that Obama just froze the gov wages for 2 years ,that an automatic pay decrease in a state which raises property taxes yearly on a falling asset . Sweeney should realize this and get to work on the CAP which should be a reduction to really attract any business.

---

by: speedkillsu @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 10:05:36 AM UTC

you have an excuse for everything (4.00 / 1)

where was this kind of apology when it was Corzine and not Christie?

The cap is bogus and doesn't address any real issue anyway - the hard decisions that need to be made are being pushed down by Christie to the local level and he isn't taking any leadership on this in any way.

But I guess you'll give him a pass for everything because he's a loudmouth who covers up his flaws by yelling at others and pointing fingers to create a distraction from his own failures and flaws.

Scott Garrett - on the wrong side of, well, everything.

---

by: Adam L @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 13:44:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

These are good policy initiatives (0.00 / 0)

The legislation (and diary) addresses creating jobs and keeping businesses from leaving NJ - not expecting companies to move to NJ now.  Until significant demand revives it is difficult to expect companies to open plants in new states, as it is less costly to expand existing facilities.

However, seeds for recovery can be planted which lead companies already in NJ to start expanding and create new jobs. Policy initiatives such as the above bills (investment tax credits, resources for economic development projects, small business tax reform, and business relocation/retention grants) encourage companies to stay and gradually enlarge their workforce. Many of these proposals are supported not just by Democratic legislators but Republicans as well. The reality is that Christie has been behind the curve on this. Check out his economic recovery website page, which until today was blank and now only mentions the Bayonne Bridge.
.  

"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." - Sen. Ted Kennedy

---

by: Bill Orr @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 14:23:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"Christie has been behind the curve "? (0.00 / 0)

Where has our legislature been for the last 4 years ??? sorry but that dog don't hunt .We have hugely overpaid beaurocracy, unsustainable debt, huge govt obligations, we are one of the highest taxed states in the nation  and state that doesnt make much of anything the world wants to buy anymore. Not exactly what I'd call a bright future for our kids ....lets address the problem and start cutting taxes  

---

by: speedkillsu @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 14:47:18 PM UTC

Stick to the issue (4.00 / 1)

You have difficulty sticking with the issue - creating jobs and keeping businesses from leaving NJ now. In fact, some of these bills will reduce taxes for businesses.

"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." - Sen. Ted Kennedy

---

by: Bill Orr @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 15:15:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

um..... (0.00 / 0)

"state that doesn't make much of anything the world wants to buy anymore"?

Where have you been for the past decade plus as the manufacturing sector was killed and the republican party outsourced jobs overseas, giving tax credits to multinational corps for doing so?

Tax cuts are the single worst stimulator of the economy by any measure.  And for those with little to no money as is, tax cuts don't pay for the basic necessities they need.

Any tax cuts for the wealthy are kept and not reinvested in the economy or jobs - check a recent Bloomberg study on that.

Too bad that your talking points are as shallow and hollow as Christie's arguments.

And as predictable.

Scott Garrett - on the wrong side of, well, everything.

---

by: Adam L @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 15:15:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So what is the solution for NJ and the USA? (0.00 / 0)

What should NJ do to become more attractive for businesses of all sizes?  Isn't it fair to say that NJ is one of the most tax unfriendly states for businesses and wealthy (Job creators).

If things don't change in this state, companies are going to continue to leave and we are not going to be able to attract any new business.  Christie is attempting to turn the tide and it isn't going to be easy.

As far as the US is concerned, wasn't it a democratic president that signed NAFTA? How do we keep our businesses from being outsourced with out creating tariff's and inciting trade wars?

At the federal level I don't think tax cuts are the answer but at the state level I think they can go a long way.

---

by: cwood123 @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 15:46:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The legislature is trying to turn the tide (0.00 / 0)

and make taxes friendlier for businesses. Here is a brief description of the legislature's proposed bills.

Regarding the wealthy, NJ Policy Perspectives argues that the state's tax structure makes the state income tax actually lower than neighboring New York or Philadelphia - particularly for higher income earners like our governor.

You are right. None of this is going to be easy. However Republicans are collaborating with Democrats on this effort.

"The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die." - Sen. Ted Kennedy

---

by: Bill Orr @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 16:31:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And the Repubs should be... (0.00 / 0)

I think the recent legislature proposed bills are great initiatives.  NJ needs to keep the current jobs in the state and add more in the future.

Long term though the tax climate in the state needs to change if we are going to stay competitive versus other states.

As for the NJ PP tax study I find it interesting that they compare taxes for NJ State to those of two neighboring cities.  It would have been much more interesting to see state by state comparisons.  But NJPP had to get the results they wanted so they used Philly and NYC as examples.  It also didn't take into account all the other high taxes like sales and property taxes.

---

by: cwood123 @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 17:02:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

sales tax in NJ is lower (0.00 / 0)

than in NY and I believe in PA.  And gas taxes in NJ are some of the lowest in the country.

Property taxes in many areas of NY are similar or higher than in NJ too.

Scott Garrett - on the wrong side of, well, everything.

---

by: Adam L @ Wed Dec 01, 2010 at 12:16:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

NJPP (0.00 / 0)

only did that study for the governor's income which is MARGINALLY above the 500k income bracket. (540k)

The results would be quite different if they used say Gov. Corzine's 110 million income from his first year in office.


"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 17:18:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

yes, but (0.00 / 0)

Corzine put that tax in place.

And that NJPP study is correct - as compared to the Tax Foundation studies that don't get much credence in the professional tax world.

If you want, I can bore you with many stats on the NJ income tax vs other states, and some of the other taxes - but I'll spare you for now.....

But yeah, there isn't as much difference between NJ and PA given the exemption for lower levels of income in NJ and all of the local/school district income taxes in PA.  NY's rates are higher, and for any NYC or Yonkers resident there is an additional income tax too.

Scott Garrett - on the wrong side of, well, everything.

---

by: Adam L @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 17:31:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think McGreevey (3.00 / 1)

was first with the millionaire's tax. Remember the famous 'Not one penny...' quote... (which lasted for a year)... but yes, give Gov. Corzine credit for enacting a surcharge that directly impacted his own bottom line.

My point is only that at a certain point in income (and Christie isn't there), the money involved may well justify some of the well heeled to relocate.

But NJPP purposely choose the $540k salary to analyze because only 40k would fall under the 10.75 bracket.  

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 18:16:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

a little secret (0.00 / 0)

I just moved to NJ 4 years ago so I missed a lot of the pre-Corzine stuff (still trying to play catch up)....

I'm sure NJPP did this once they realized how it would impact Christie, even though it was a good exercise in how a progressive tax rate system works.

I'm not sure that taxes will make people relocate, unless you are talking about someone like LeBron James going to FL - I've had this discussion with a few others in the past and here are my thoughts:

taxes may play some role at times, but there are much bigger and more important concerns like whether kids are going to be or are out of school (since NJ public schools are excellent), whether family is close or moved (older parents, etc.), whether people are retired and need a smaller house, the job situation in the region, local services and a few more that I am sure I am forgetting.

My thought is that there may be a way to say that people are leaving and taxes are high so they must be related, but I think they are much less of a "cause and effect" and more of a relative coincidence as a direct reason.

Kind of like saying that there are no elephants roaming around NYC because there is a law outlawing elephants from roaming around NYC.....

what do you think?

Scott Garrett - on the wrong side of, well, everything.

---

by: Adam L @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 18:37:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I only think... (0.00 / 0)

that really matters for the very rich... The people with those incomes are more or less paying for access to NYC.

Schools don't really come into play because I'm thinking these people are sending their kids to private schools.

I'm just not sure how much of the tax base the 'very rich' account for... but I would agree, people with income levels of the Christie's aren't going to flee the state. They have that income because they are here, and that income is not enough yet that they can choose to live anywhere they please.

My point is that a certain income, it does become a factor. Oprah just looked at a 68 Million dollar house in Alpine, but I'll bet there is no way she's considering having that her primary residence, to her, those marginal tax rates differences are huge.

Again, we should be slightly more expensive than PA, but cheaper than NYC or CT.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Wed Dec 01, 2010 at 14:23:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

PS. (4.00 / 1)

I think we're currently playing the right game, I think we'd want to be just cheaper than NY/CT, but SLIGHTLY more expensive than PA.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 18:18:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

NAFTA (0.00 / 0)

was horrible at the time - regardless of who signed it, but wasn't it a Republican Congress as well (I may be off on that though)?  But the tax credits for outsourcing jobs was in the 2000s under the Bush Republican Congress, so there is plenty of blame to go around - as opposed to what "speedkillsu" tries to spin.

For NJ, it isn't an easy answer.  I did some posts a while back on my thoughts (maybe early this year) about public/private partnerships, certain business tax credits (like the BEIP grant that was discontinued recently for example) and a few other things.  It certainly isn't the luring of WalMart's and other large corps that pay less in wages and squeeze small businesses that Christie was focusing on late last year and early this year.

I'll try to dig up some of my old posts, but as an employment tax specialist, I have a different view from the perspective of what the tax and employment implications are of certain different "plans".


Scott Garrett - on the wrong side of, well, everything.

---

by: Adam L @ Tue Nov 30, 2010 at 17:28:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]