$nbsp;

Group hopes to cut income taxes

 
LOADING
May 30, 2007 - 04:05:19 CDT
By JONATHAN RIVOLI
Bismarck Tribune
North Dakotans may get a chance to vote next fall to reduce their own state income taxes.

Americans for Prosperity, an advocacy group that promotes low taxes and fiscal conservatism, announced Tuesday that it will be attempting to get such a measure on the ballot.

The proposal calls for a 50 percent reduction in North Dakota's personal income tax rate and a 15 percent reduction in its corporate tax rate. It would cost the state $280 million over two years, according to Americans for Prosperity.

To get this idea on the ballot, supporters will have to collect at least 12,844 signatures by March 11, 2008, according to the Secretary of State's Web site.

Duane Sand, a former Republican candidate for the House and Senate who now serves as state director of Americans for Prosperity, said he expects a lot of support for the idea. He said a tax cut would help stimulate business investment in North Dakota and provide a financial incentive to curb population loss.

"We believe people in North Dakota know how to spend their money better (than the government)," Sand said. "And we believe this is going to make the state a better place to live, raise a family and run a business."

North Dakota's state income taxes vary from 2.1 percent for those who make less than $30,650 to 5.54 percent for those who make more than $336,550, according to the Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C. based tax research group. In terms of overall state and local tax burden, North Dakota ranks 37th, according to the group.

"I think most people view the North Dakota income tax as being fair," said state House Minority Leader Merle Boucher, D-Rolette.

Boucher said the Legislature already provided relief for a bigger problem property taxes when it passed a $120 million tax relief bill in April. That bill provides property tax owners with an income tax rebate equal to 10 percent of their property tax liability.

Boucher also predicted that they measure may not be widely supported because corporations have already received many specifically targeted tax breaks and subsidies in the last few legislative sessions.

"I don't think people are going to get all that enthused about it, though it's not at all surprising that there's a measure or that it's coming from this group," Boucher said.

Tax Commissioner Cory Fong told the Associated Press that he could not assess the impact until he sees the proposal.

Because the announcement came at around 5 p.m., other state officials could not be reached for comment.

(The Associated Press contributed to this report. Reach reporter Jonathan Rivoli at 223-8482 or jonathan.rivoli@;bismarcktribune.com.)
News > Topnews
   Printer friendly version
Group hopes to cut income taxes
Comments

rich exploiting the poor wrote on Jun 6, 2007 7:16 AM:

" Wait a second, I am middle class yet I do not feel exploited. Bill Gates has billions of dollars and yet I could care less. Can I have the huge mansion on snob hill or any car I want? No, but I live a good life in which money doesn't mean everything to me. I am happy and thankful for what I have and I do what I can to help others. According to you all though I should be so angry at some CEO making millions, why? Everyone seems to think the jobs that the rich do are so easy anyone can do it and they are stealing. I would like to see any one of you try to be the CEO of a large corporation, I can tell you it wouldn't be easy. And to compare the poor and middle class to slaves, please. No one is selling me, forcing me in to marraige for my offspring, or beating me. If you are all so unhappy being middle class or poor, do something about it. Make something more of yourselves, in this country it is possible! Don't give me this BS about the greedy rich man holding you down though, that is an excuse and a poor one at that. Another interesting note, some of you talk about the republicans and how greedy they are. That is interesting except the republicans granted tax cuts to ALL. Every democratic candidate wants to RAISE all of your taxes, but I can guarantee they will put even more loopholes in for the rich. John Edwards himself has loads of money that he earned as a trial lawyer. What charitable good has he done? "

Wait a minute wrote on Jun 5, 2007 10:37 PM:

" Let me get this right. If Jesus was a socialist, then he could not have been a Republican. Do I understand this correctly? "

Amazing wrote on Jun 5, 2007 9:56 PM:

" The concept of the poor stealing from the rich is amazing. Wouldn't that make the poor a lot better off. Have you ever considered that the rich are stealing from the poor? History is replete with examples of the poor being exploited by the rich, when did it happen the other way? There were times when the rich got so greedy they had to have their heads removed as in the French Revolution, were you against that, or are you of the "Let them eat cake" philosophy. South America is a splendid example of the rich exploiting the poor, is that what you advocate? Perhaps it is the poor that need to be protected from the rich? Look what Republicans have done to the middle class "

The good old days wrote on Jun 5, 2007 9:51 PM:

" In the good old days the guest workers came from Africa. In exchange for a place to live and a little to eat, they were entitled to pick all the cotton they wanted. In those days everyone knew it was the slaves that produced the wealth, no one pretended the plantation owners were producing the wealth. Now we are supposed to believe that wealthy people make their money on their own. They do it the same way it was done in plantation days. The slaves only get enough to sustain themselves, and the owner walks away with everything. Now we call the owner a CEO or a stockholder, but the system is exactly the same. However, we don't use slaves, stupid people work just fine. "

Jesus no communist wrote on Jun 5, 2007 7:25 PM:

" Jesus may have been an advocate of socialism, in fact we know for fact the early apostles were, but communist is a completly different thing. Communists have socialist views it is true, but they go beyond to a lack of belief in religion, lack of belief in free will, and a basic downgrade of a person as an individual. In the scripture it is plain to see that this was not Jesus stand. And also according to Scriptures, Jesus never forced anyone to give up their wealth via tax or any other means. He simply told them if they wanted to follow him they should help the poor. It would be a wonderful thing if we could all live as Jesus would want us to, there would be no wars, everyone would love one another. But the fact of the matter is, not everyone beleives in that or lives that and so until the day they do, the government has no business stealing from the rich and giving to the poor. Let the rich make their own decisions with their money "

Why Jesus? wrote on Jun 5, 2007 4:13 PM:

" Jim we need to bring Jeeesus into this to show what hypocrites the conservatives are. The Republicans are all for Jesus when they need to fool the fundamentalist, but when it actually comes to sharing they want no part of him. You are a classic case. Jesus is just a Sunday guy, and we would not want his thoughts to get in the way of our life style. There is plenty for everyone were it not for the piglets. But the whole concept of equity and sharing makes you nervous. So it is plain to see why you would not want Jesus involved in your day to day consumption. I think Jesus may have been a communist, if not at least a liberal. "

Jim S wrote on Jun 5, 2007 2:51 PM:

" All you ritchous do gooders should leave jesus out of these discusions. I seriously doubt you really know who he is and only use his name when you think you bennefit. None of us know what Jesus would drive or pay in taxes or anything else. You are really being offensive to some. "

Teichthesen wrote on Jun 5, 2007 2:26 PM:

" Taxes wouldn't be so bad if every citizen would take their responsibility seriously. When you've got cultures like northern Minnesota White Trash who rely on back injury law suits and welfare it puts a burden on the honest working people. "

greed wrote on Jun 5, 2007 12:23 PM:

" Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are both good men who give way millions to the less fortunate. That is a great thing. I also hate the whiney brats that inherit daddy's money and do nothing with their life. That being said, it is not the government's place in a free society to A. redistribute wealth, B. prevent parents from giving their wealth away, or C. tell anyone the "proper" thing to do with their money. The truth is, we do not live in a socialist society so all any of us really has the power to do is move someplace else where we think it more fair, or earn our own money that we can pass on to our own kids or give away as we see fit. "

Real People wrote on Jun 5, 2007 8:07 AM:

" The two wealthiest men in the United States, Warren Buffett, and Bill Gates support the death tax for two reasons, they know it is fair, and they are intelligent. Why should someone get a free ride because daddy hit it big? Warren Buffet is not giving his fortune to his children. Unrestrained greed is the biggest problem our country faces. Republican rhetoric that tries to rationalize this greed fails to recognize that it is ordinary working people who produce wealth. The real irony is that all these conservative right wing fundamentalist claim to be Jesus driven. Now you have Bible thumpers saying greed is great, how does this work? "

dark tax? wrote on Jun 4, 2007 1:37 PM:

" How do you figure racisim becomes part of it? Are you saying all poor people are of a different skin color and all rich people are white? If that is your assertment then you yourself are being the racist one. In this country anyone can achieve anything they want no matter what their ethnicity. It's all about if they want it. Now what half people in these postings are saying is you should work hard to make it and then have the government take it away from you because you worked hard. That makes no sense. And as for what Jesus would want you to do, I believe if you dont do what is right with your wealth, he will take care of that on his own on judgement day. "

darktax wrote on Jun 4, 2007 9:33 AM:

" Why "fair" tax and not dark tax. Or brown tax. Subtle racism becomes part of the language. "

to jesus tax system wrote on Jun 1, 2007 1:46 PM:

" if that is the case why is it I actually get back more money than I paid in? And you whine about investors, they pay the tax eventually, lets also not forget the double taxation, death tax, etc. I am all for everyone paying fairly, what I am not for is the so called "rich" person paying substantially higher rates. The fairest way is a sales tax "

Jesus Tax System wrote on Jun 1, 2007 12:19 PM:

" Right now the top one percent of the people in the county own seventeen percent of everything. I am sure Jesus would think this was just dandy. Where are the preachers when it comes to fairness. Didn't Jesus use a little violence when he attacked the money changers in the temple. Maybe he was trying to tell us something. I just did a tax calculation using Turbo Tax. If you earn money, you will pay 12.3% tax, if you make the same money by investing you only pay 7.3%. The investor pays not social security, the poor working man or woman pays 7% for that, this is the Bush system. Take from the poor give to the rich, just like Jesus said. "

to Amen Lemmings wrote on Jun 1, 2007 9:34 AM:

" I don't recall Jesus ever advocating the forceful taking of money from the rich and giving to the poor. As I recall he wanted the rich to voluntarily give. "

Amen Lemings wrote on May 31, 2007 5:09 PM:

" You are right it was the Lemings that put Bush in. The Republicans have made an art of ripping off the Lemings. They promise them protection from Satan, and rob them blind every time. You can sell the Lemings anything. It is strange that the Lemings worship Jesus, and then vote for the party that goes against everything their god stood for. Would Jesus support tax breaks for the rich, or trickle down economics? "

to fairest tax wrote on May 31, 2007 4:24 PM:

" I agree 100%. That is the fairest way to tax, the people that make more money spend more money, and thus would pay more taxes. I would think there would have to be some exceptions for things like food, otherwise I am all for it "

The Fairest Tax wrote on May 31, 2007 2:31 PM:

" The fairest tax you could do is to iliminate the income tax and impliment a sales tax. This would put all of the money we earn in our pockets, and our tax burden would be left up to ourselves and how much we want to buy. If you want to soak the rich, here is your chance, because the rich obviously would be buying the most, so they would be taxed the most. And think of what this sudden explosion in purchasing power would do to the economy. "

Tim from Bismarck wrote on May 31, 2007 2:18 PM:

" It's time to address the problem! If this state is to prosper, we need more TAXPAYERS not tax rebates or decreases. Our current legislature was more interested in padding their own pocketbook than it was in serving the people of ND with real long term tax relief and solutions. The current surplus happened because of the current energy economic climate not because of their so called politics. It will be interesting to see if they will be High-fiving and praising themselves when the bottom falls out. This economic winfall is cyclical and the good times will depress as it always does and has as history has proven. How soon we forget!! "

Deb wrote on May 31, 2007 2:11 PM:

" I like how another top commented story is about higer crime and the need for more cops and then this article about the crack staff at AFP who want to lower taxes by 50%. Talk about reverse trickle down economics: $280million less to distribute to the municipalities for social programs & safety - roads, schools, fire & policemen. So the city commissions need to raise property taxes, which will affect those who can least afford to pay for it, and those who will benefit the least (if at all) with the income tax cut. BRILLIANT!! "

Republican Discrepancy! wrote on May 31, 2007 1:56 PM:

" I have a problem with anything political that a Republican presents to me. There is alway a "catch" or something dishonest about the facts. The Republicans seem to always prey on the naive and the disillusioned lemming voters, that follow their leaders over a cliff. "

Rich and Honest wrote on May 31, 2007 1:15 PM:

" By some standards I would be considered rich, consequently I have seen how the tax system really works. Any person with money who remotely understands the system knows the wealthy are actually taxed at a lower rate than working people. Check what Warren Buffett has written on this subject. He is the second richest man in the country and wrote an article to the Washington Post explaining how he pays a lower tax rate than his receptionist. It is just not true that the wealthy are paying a higher rate. It is the illusion they would like you to believe. Do your homework. "

jealousy wrote on May 31, 2007 11:24 AM:

" What I see here from the people advocating taxing the rich is pure jealousy. You can't make more money so you feel the need to hold down someone who is doing well? Here is an idea, instead of taxing the rich at well over twice what the working class is taxed, how about you work hard and become rich yourself? This is a free society where anyone can make anything of themselves, one just needs the drive and fortitude to accomplish it! "

Complicated Taxes wrote on May 31, 2007 11:19 AM:

" The reason we keep the tax system complicates is so the average person does not understand it. All my income is from investments, and capital gains. I pay only 7.6% tax. I love your George Bush. However, my daughter and her husband made exactly the same amount working for it. They pay 12.6% tax, plus 7% social security, which is just a clever hidden tax the wealthy don't pay. So working people pay 20% and rich pay 7.3%. Remember there is no Social Security paid on any income over $94,000.00. So there you have it, a system just for the rich. George and the Republicans have successfully attacked the middle class and won. "

Republicans can get it done wrote on May 31, 2007 10:56 AM:

" The Republicans have made the top one percent of our society richer than they have ever been by cutting their taxes, they know how to do it for the rich, let them try it for the poor. Lets try trickle up once and see if it works. How come Republicans only know about trickle down. You cannot give a huge tax break to the wealthy, like the Republicans did and not expect everyone else to suffer. Vote for them one more time. "

Practical wrote on May 30, 2007 10:59 PM:

" For the most part, the only reason that we had a surplus and our property taxes are going sky-high is that after the Republicans took over the Legelature they reduced state funding to schools from 70% to 40%. The wealthy and corperations just love it that way, because the middle class and retiriees pay the bulk of the taxes and the big shots pay less and we get poor services as a result. If low wages and abundant resources aren't enough to attract businesses here, neither are lower income taxes, they are already fairly low. "

Paulie wrote on May 30, 2007 10:45 PM:

" To Oil & Corporate Payoff> The lowest tax bracket pays 2.1% currently, a 50% cut will bring it to 1.05%. Corporations pay 6.5% on anything over $30,000. A 15% cut will bring that to 5.54%, the same percentage that "the richest 1%" pay now. So your "evil corporations" will pay twice as much as "the richest 1%, and the "richest 1%" will pay 2.5 times as much as "the working class." So corporations will pay over 5 times as much as the "working class." Isn't that enough Marxist class-warfare? Who cuts the checks for "the working class"? Why are you trying to hold down wages? A family making $70,000 which is middle class will have an extra $1000 a year - to pay their property tax or to buy some gas. "

Oil & Corporate pay Off wrote on May 30, 2007 7:30 PM:

" Americans for Prosperity as mentioned in other Tribune articles is sponsored by the oil companies. 15% decrease in taxes for oil companies is at least 45 million. The lowest paid wage earners would get 1% tax cut on income tax =$100 and those making $ 336,550, would get around $9325 income tax break. It's the same as the "property tax that is really income tax break for those making $75,000 get $1000 income and $1000 business and the retired people get nothing as they pay no income tax but their property taxes went sky high with nothing in return. They need to change their name to Americans for Prosperity for the Oil Companies and Corporate America. The top rate was around 8% for the top so they cut the richest taxpayers many times to get down to 5.54 "

Dustin wrote on May 30, 2007 3:09 PM:

" There are two and only two reasons that oil production dries up in North Dakota. 1)OPEC increases production to drive up supply and drive down price. 2.) The state of North Dakota taxes the industry out of the state, again. The first we have no control over, the second we have total control over. "

taxrelief wrote on May 30, 2007 2:01 PM:

" As long as the oil economy in the western part of our state continues to grow strong, the state will have a surplus. Once that dries up, as it did in the 80's, the state will need to make some hard choices. I say cut taxes, Why do legislators think they need to spend all of our money? If they want to increase state revenues even more, give the companies that want to explore for oil more breaks so they come here instead of Montana! As for the joke called property tax relief, please. The legislature can give us some money back, but there is nothing that says local areas can't raise our taxes 20, 30, 50 percent! And it isn't like they rais the rate, rather they decide to be sneaky and raise the "appraised value" of your property. One last note, of course those that pay more taxes get more relief, they pay more! Duh, if I pay 1000 in taxes and you pay 10000, and we both get a 10% reduction, you get more back, do some basic math! "

Paul wrote on May 30, 2007 1:09 PM:

" I agree that reducing any tax or eliminating a targeted tax altogether is good for individuals and companies since it's their money to begin with; however, we as a state need to be careful not to reduce general fund income too extremely just because we had one fantastic biennium and a huge surplus - remember what happened in the 80's? We need to look at this with a studied approach - planning to reduce individual and corporate taxes over a period of time is wise.....but we must balance this with our needs in ND; more specifically, our infrastructure needs, i.e. roads. ND is a rural state, with a sparce population - revenue needs to come from some source - we must be careful not to act recklessly only to realize we actually shifted a tax burden instead of elimiantely one. "

Dustin wrote on May 30, 2007 10:36 AM:

" This is not the state's money. This is your money. Everyone that owns property pays income tax, this will allow you to pay your property tax bill more easily. Not everyone owns property, those that do not are completely left out of the discriminatory "property tax relief" plan that the legislature passed this session. Why should only property tax owners benefit from from the surplus that ALL taxpayers created. "

WD2 wrote on May 30, 2007 9:57 AM:

" Those suggesting this is not a very good idea are right. This makes no sense. The legislature struggled with how the State's surplus could be used to reduce property taxes. They got it done. If such a proposal would pass the net effect would be the shifting of the tax burden to our property taxes. This is what we don't need. "

Ed wrote on May 30, 2007 9:57 AM:

" You can cut taxes, but North Dakota unlike other states has been very fiscally responsible. I bet elected officials will say too bad when a road needs fixing or addiitonal funds for social services are reduced becasue we have less money to work with. Remember there are always consequences as well as rewards when things change too much. "

Dustin wrote on May 30, 2007 9:15 AM:

" Every dollar that the state extracts from the wallets of the people of North Dakota is a dollar the working folks of this state can not use to pay for things such as record high gas. The legislature increased spending by 24% and threw a couple hundred million "under the mattress" into various "trust funds." Folks, when you are paying $3.50/gallon for gas do you really think the government should be taking your money and putting it away in the government's savings? "

surplus wrote on May 30, 2007 8:25 AM:

" How much of a surplus did the state of ND have for tax money? I would vote for a tax reduction. "

DoNotSign wrote on May 30, 2007 7:57 AM:

" This looks like just another tax cut for the rich. Trickle down economics does not work. The theory that if people making over 300,000 a year get more tax breaks equals increased business expansion and higher wages for the lower and middle class does not hold water. It has been tried and tried again and what has been found was that the rich just got richer, the working poor get poorer, and the middle class gets squeezed just a little more to make up for the tax shortfall. No, if we want to keep the out migration of our youth from continuing we need to have some cultural activities, sporting facilities, music forums, and places to visit and enjoy. And in turn those young people who do not move out of this State will stay to raise their own families here as well. The last thing we need is a smaller tax base and fewer dollars that will be needed to build those facilities which will keep our young people from leaving. "

BabyT wrote on May 30, 2007 7:51 AM:

" Hmmm, wonder how this will turn out, hopefully not like the 10% rebate for property tax. Received my invoice for my Mandan property taxes several days ago, around a 35% increase. So, I get a 10% reduction, but a 35% increase on top of that. I'm sorry, I can't afford any more tax decreases! "

allen wrote on May 30, 2007 7:48 AM:

" Morons! I'm all about fiscal responsibility, but if you look at the state tax burden in North Dakota I would think the only conclusion you could reach is that we have it pretty darn good here! It could be a lot worse, you all could live in Minnetucky. "

Norm L. wrote on May 30, 2007 6:54 AM:

" Go ahead! Go ahead and cut the taxes by $140 million per year. Heck, even cut them by $1.4 billion a year. But be ready to have the services from state agencies reduced drastically. I really don't think we need an out of state group to tell us North Dakotans how to spend our tax dollars. "

Post Your Own Comment
(optional)
   
All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.
Local Headlines:

Bismarck News

North Dakota News

Recent Headlines:
LOADING

Copyright © 2009 Bismarck Tribune, a division of Lee Enterprises.  -PRIVACY POLICY