No on Mearsure 66 & 67

[The_Lillard_King]

These are two measures coming up for a vote in Oregon. They are about increasing the corpotare tax and personal income tax for those making $250 or more.

Good god I must be a republican because I say vote no on 66 & 67!

How do you intend to vote and how do you think the measures will pass.

No X2 for me.

 

[Buzz Killington]

baller

 

[hasoos]

Are you kidding me? Why don't you post some beef to your argument? The purpose of these bills is to revamp the current minimum tax for businesses in oregon. The current minimum tax of a business in Oregon is $10/Year. These bills raise that to $150/Year. That is completely reasonable, considering many businesses are so good at skirting taxes that they pay $10/year in taxes, which is totally ridiciulous considering how much they use our infrastructure more than the everyday Joe Shmo. When I see the ads which say "Oh we will have to lay off workers because of this bill" I have to laugh. How many employees do you have to lay off when you pay $150/year instead of $10? What do you lay somebody off for a day?

 

[The_Lillard_King]

Are you kidding me? Why don't you post some beef to your argument? The purpose of these bills is to revamp the current minimum tax for businesses in oregon. The current minimum tax of a business in Oregon is $10/Year. These bills raise that to $150/Year. That is completely reasonable, considering many businesses are so good at skirting taxes that they pay $10/year in taxes, which is totally ridiciulous considering how much they use our infrastructure more than the everyday Joe Shmo. When I see the ads which say "Oh we will have to lay off workers because of this bill" I have to laugh. How many employees do you have to lay off when you pay $150/year instead of $10? What do you lay somebody off for a day?

This state is business unfriendly as it is. I have watched major corporations move to other states. It is going to take Nike to move (real possibility) before the legislature realizes that you can't take make up a sales tax by increasing taxes on high income earners and corproations.

Feel free to laugh, people being laid off aren't laughing. And in this economic environment, corporations aren't shy about letting employees go for many reasons . . . including incresed overhead.

President Obama stated, “The last thing we want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession.””

 

[yakbladder]

Actually, I heard somewhere that when you consider all taxes we are among the top five or ten business friendly states.

Normally I'd vote for this bill, if it were just to raise the minimum tax amount.

However this bill has a clause that I find disturbing. They want to raise the tax based upon your sales, not upon your profits. That's just some shady math right there to me. Sure, some businesses run circles trying to find ways to hide their profits but if that is the issue then those circles should be eliminated and taxes restricted to profits. No reason to tax a company making zero.

 

[GrandpaBlaze]

As I work frequently in SoCal, I often hear people lament about how the state government "chased" businesses away by both raising taxes on businesses and enacting laws that made the business environment less friendly (read, go elsewhere). The problem with chasing away businesses is that they often take their best workers with them and leave behind those who are easily replaceable, thus adding to the employment woes, welfare woes, etc.

I'd hate to see Oregon go the same way.

Gramps...

 

[Buzz Killington]

Yup! LA is losing Northrup Gruman soon! What a fuck!

 

[blazerboy30]

This is the most idiotic, bind-boggling dumb tax measure I have ever seen. Taxing REVENUE?? Are you absolutely kidding me?

If Oregon wants to stimulate business, gain jobs, and help small business, they better do away with this. I don't see how any moron could vote to tax REVENUE in addition to profit.

Small businesses will hurt. Starting a business will become so much harder if you have to pay taxes even if you don't make any profit. It is just utter stupidity.

 

[blazerboy30]

Are you kidding me? Why don't you post some beef to your argument? The purpose of these bills is to revamp the current minimum tax for businesses in oregon. The current minimum tax of a business in Oregon is $10/Year. These bills raise that to $150/Year. That is completely reasonable, considering many businesses are so good at skirting taxes that they pay $10/year in taxes, which is totally ridiciulous considering how much they use our infrastructure more than the everyday Joe Shmo. When I see the ads which say "Oh we will have to lay off workers because of this bill" I have to laugh. How many employees do you have to lay off when you pay $150/year instead of $10? What do you lay somebody off for a day?

Perhaps you should read the bill before just blindly voting along your party line.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I'll vote no on both. Oregon needs to learn to not be a tool for unions and learn to tighten their belts like the rest of us. There has never been accountability in Oregon since it went socialist. Not to say I haven't voted for socialists (I've voted several times for socialist governors), but they have 'tax & spend' on the brain and it gets on my nerves sometimes. Why not a more creative way to govern?

 

[Eastoff]

This state is business unfriendly as it is. I have watched major corporations move to other states. It is going to take Nike to move (real possibility) before the legislature realizes that you can't take make up a sales tax by increasing taxes on high income earners and corproations.

Feel free to laugh, people being laid off aren't laughing. And in this economic environment, corporations aren't shy about letting employees go for many reasons . . . including incresed overhead.

President Obama stated, “The last thing we want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession.””

they move to two places, OK and DL. You're not going to undercut those two, so why bother? The big names here like wieden + kennedy, Nike, FLIR systems aren't going to abandon Oregon.

 

[Eastoff]

why wouldn't you want to tax profit? would you want to tax their revenue in general!? If it wasn't revenue, that would directly hurt the business and payroll

voting yes on both! there is no reason (unless you are mega rich yourself) to not vote yes on 66. 67 is the one about business, 66 is only if you make more than 250k$

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

why wouldn't you want to tax profit?

Of course we should tax profit! But raising the minimum tax is not taxing profit. It's punitive to certain businesses. If they want to tax profit, that can easily be accomplished. The idea companies making millions of dollars of profits and only paying $10 is so asinine that anyone who really believes it should probably have themselves commited.

 

[Eastoff]

As I work frequently in SoCal, I often hear people lament about how the state government "chased" businesses away by both raising taxes on businesses and enacting laws that made the business environment less friendly (read, go elsewhere). The problem with chasing away businesses is that they often take their best workers with them and leave behind those who are easily replaceable, thus adding to the employment woes, welfare woes, etc.

I'd hate to see Oregon go the same way.

Gramps...

SOCAL is fucked because of their property "value" and the cost of living because of this. So they have to pay their employees more too.

 

[Eastoff]

Of course we should tax profit! But raising the minimum tax is not taxing profit. It's punitive to certain businesses. If they want to tax profit, that can easily be accomplished. The idea companies making millions of dollars of profits and only paying $10 is so asinine that anyone who really believes it should probably have themselves commited.

OH NO! the businesses are going to go belly up because they have to pay an extra 12$ a month

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

OH NO! the businesses are going to go belly up because they have to pay an extra 12$ a month

Are you high? Seriously. You neither read my post or understood it at all.

 

[Eastoff]

Are you high? Seriously. You neither read my post nor understood it at all.

Of course we should tax profit! But raising the minimum tax is not taxing profit. It's punitive to certain businesses. If they want to tax profit, that can easily be accomplished. The idea companies making millions of dollars of profits and only paying $10 is so asinine that anyone who really believes it should probably have themselves commited.

OH NO! the businesses are going to go belly up because they have to pay an extra 12$ a month

So which "certain businesses" are you worried about, ie small businesses or theoretical big businesses that can't support this? Perhaps I did jump the gun.

 

[Eastoff]

Perhaps you should read the bill before just blindly voting along your party line.

Under current law, corporations conducting business in Oregon pay $10 minimum income tax; tax has not changed since 1931. Some corporations pay a profits tax of 6.6%. All other businesses pay no minimum or profits tax. Beginning in tax year 2009, the Measure increase $10 minimum corporate tax to $150; some corporations with over $500,000 in Oregon revenues will pay minimum tax of approximately 0.1% of Oregon revenues. Limits tax to $150 for S corprations and partnerships. Sole proprietors are not impacted by this measure. Raises tax rates some corporations pay on profits by 1.3 percentage points until 2011; increase then drops to 1 percentage point and as of 2013, applies only to profits over $10 million. Corporations pay minimum tax or profits tax, not both. Increases filing fees by $50 for Oregon businesses, by $225 for out of the state business. Raises estimated $255 million to provide funds currently budgeted for education, health care, public safety, other services. Because some state money brings in federal matching funds, Oregon will likely receive more federal money if measure passes than if the Measure fails. Other provisions. http://ballotpedia.com/wiki/index.php/Oregon_Measure_67_(2010)

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

So which "certain businesses" are you worried about, ie small businesses or theoretical big businesses that can't support this? Perhaps I did jump the gun.

I think we should change the tax codes as needed to ensure all businesses pay their fair share. It's disgusting if any business is skipping out. But I also have a concern for keeping small businesses afloat to allow them to grow. This measure seems to address both unequally.

I also would like to see more business tax enforcement. I think those people pay for themselves in that they keep more businesses honest and paying their fair share.

 

[Eastoff]

I also would like to see more business tax enforcement. I think those people pay for themselves in that they keep more businesses honest and paying their fair share.

give them a commission?

 

[blazerboy30]

why wouldn't you want to tax profit? would you want to tax their revenue in general!?

Sorry, but you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. This tax bill DOES tax REVENUE, in addition to profit.

If it wasn't revenue, that would directly hurt the business and payroll

Do you understand the difference between "revenue" and "profit"? For low-margin companies, they could pay tax even though they made NO money (profit) for the year (under this tax bill).

voting yes on both! there is no reason (unless you are mega rich yourself) to not vote yes on 66. 67 is the one about business, 66 is only if you make more than 250k$

This is why we should require a minimum level of intelligence in order to vote.

 

[Eastoff]

Do you understand the difference between "revenue" and "profit"? For low-margin companies, they could pay tax even though they made NO money (profit) for the year (under this tax bill).

i actually said the wrong thing

 

[Eastoff]

This is why we should require a minimum level of intelligence in order to vote.

In case you're curious, I am going to vote for EVERY bill that raises taxes not on the lower class.

 

[blazerboy30]

That's a great theory. Who will those "lower class" work for when businesses leave, or don't come to Oregon?

 

[Eastoff]

That's a great theory. Who will those "lower class" work for when businesses leave, or don't come to Oregon?

you mean when you stop needing your plumbing fixed or your cable installed or your car fixed?

 

[blazerboy30]

you mean when you stop needing your plumbing fixed or your cable installed or your car fixed?

Nice. You think Oregon can have a strong, competitive economy with only the service industry.

 

[Eastoff]

Nice. You think Oregon can have a strong, competitive economy with only the service industry.

Nice. You think the economy will collapse if the taxes go up slightly, and companies will stay here or come here if our taxes are slightly lower than somewhere else in the country. Because that initial investment of moving an entire company is worth the savings in taxes.

 

[blazerboy30]

Nice. You think the economy will collapse if the taxes go up slightly, and companies will stay here or come here if our taxes are slightly lower than somewhere else in the country. Because that initial investment of moving an entire company is worth the savings in taxes.

Yep. it's always just a "little bit more", "just a little bit more". Nothing bad will happen if we just have people pay "a little bit more".

You clearly have no idea what implications taxes have on corporations and where they decide to do business.

 

[Eastoff]

Yep. it's always just a "little bit more", "just a little bit more". Nothing bad will happen if we just have people pay "a little bit more".

You clearly have no idea what implications taxes have on corporations and where they decide to do business.

you clearly have no idea what the taxes were like under clinton's "AWFUL depression" or even Reagan's.

 

[blazerboy30]

All of the above aside...

Do you really think companies should be taxed on REVENUE in addition to profit?