Document Actions
Tues.: "It's ALIVE..."
posted at 2009-12-01 23:18 | Last modified 2009-12-02 08:58
The 2010 Senate race revved back to life today after the holiday week. “Sources” informed various DC channels that former state senator Cal Cunningham is ready to get back into the race after bowing out last month.
There’s no official word yet tonight from Cunningham himself, but NC Sec’y of State Elaine Marshall’s consultant Thomas Mills still called the (non-)announcement “tasteless,” coming as it did on the day of Marshall’s husband’s funeral. Meantime, Dem hopeful Ken Lewis announced a press conference in Durham Thursday afternoon, when he’ll formally announce his 2010 intentions with a “key” endorsement. (Bill Bell, is that you?)
Tax-onomy
The Joint Finance Committee on tax reform met today for the third time. The morning was given over to a review of already well-trodden ground on NC tax policy. But the afternoon session was really interesting in a geeky kind of way: DOR’s Sales and Use Tax Director Eric Wayne explained to lawmakers what all actually goes into changing sales tax rates – the cost, the time, the forms, the questions. For example, the informational mailing alone for September’s sales tax increase cost $60K, and with IT and form redesign thrown in, the pricetag ran near six figures.
Wayne also sketched out some of the minefields a tax reform plan could run into. Like, say, giftwrapping. It’s currently exempted from sales tax as a form of retailer packaging, but a service tax could change that. Then there’s contractor services. Under current law, contractors pay taxes for the materials they use for projects, but their work itself is not taxed, since it’s considered a performance contract. If the state opts to tax contractor services, Wayne asked, does the state want to issue a tax-exempt ID to every contractor to avoid double-taxing materials?
Meantime, Republicans on the committee (Stam and Rucho) said they couldn’t back a reform package that doesn’t include a “significant cut” in the rate to offset widening the base. The concept itself isn’t controversial – lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are falling all over themselves to endorse “revenue-neutral” reform – but it would pretty much rule out an incremental approach. They can’t afford to cut rates without a comprehensive scheme to replace the lost revenue, especially not when the state’s already pretty much broke.
Wayne’s powerpoint is available here (PDF). The committee meets again Jan 14th, and the clock is ticking on a reform plan. At this point, I’d give it even odds.
Comments? Drop me a line.
