The mayor of Fargo, ND, has announced a special election, set for June 30, to vote on a tax which will fund permanent flood control measures.
Mayor Dennis Walaker, joined by City Commissioner Tim Mahoney, has proposed an increase of a half-cent sales tax that would start next year and run for 20 years. The revenue raised from the increase could pay for home buyouts, land purchases, levees, floodwalls, river channels and diversions as part of a permanent flood prevention program; the federal government is expected to pay the lion’s share of the program but a portion will be picked up by local and state coffers.
The tax must be approved by 60% of voters before heading to the state tax commissioner. The prospects for the bill passing appear favorable. The bill, of course, is directly tied to the massive flood damage experienced by the state earlier in the year.
There’s even more good news for the victims of severe flooding in Minnesota and North Dakota. Not only is the weather getting better but residents get some extra breathing room from IRS.
Since the flooding occurred so close to the April 15 due date, taxpayers and relief workers directly impacted by the flooding will have until May 15, 2009 to file and make payments for their 2008 returns. Taxpayers affected by the flood will not incur late filing or payment fees and interest. To take advantage of the extension, affected taxpayers should mark paper tax returns with the words “severe storms, flooding.” Taxpayers who file their returns electronically can use the “disaster” feature in the software, if available.
This relief applies to flood victims in Clay, Kittson, Marshall, Norman, Polk, Traverse and Wilkin counties in Minnesota.
It also applies to the following counties and Indian Reservations in North Dakota: Adams, Barnes, Benson, Billings, Burleigh, Cass, Cavalier, Dickey, Dunn, Emmons, Foster, Grand Forks, Grant, Hettinger, Kidder, LaMoure, Logan, McIntosh, McKenzie, McLean, Mercer, Morton, Nelson, Oliver, Pembina, Ramsey, Ransom, Richland, Sargent, Sioux, Stark, Stutsman, Walsh, and Williams counties, and Standing Rock and Spirit Lake Indian reservations
And, of course, if you are affected by the flooding, our thoughts are with you.
It was a historic day on yesterday with the election of President Elect Barack Obama. It’s almost easy to forget that there were other elections and ballot issues to consider but voters in some states faced a laundry list of issues. Among those were several state tax measures, including:
In Arkansas: Voters supported an amendment to the Arkansas Constitution which, among things, eliminated a reference to the poll tax.
In Colorado: Voters said no on several tax measures, including a state sales tax increase. Amendment 58, which would end a property tax credit for Colorado’s oil and gas industry and boost severance tax revenue by $321 million a year – seven companies, including Chevron and Conoco each contributed $1 million towards the opposition campaign. Severance taxes are imposed on minerals extracted from the state, or “severed,” to compensate for nonrenewable resources.
In Florida: Voters defeated Amendment 8, which would have authorized counties to ask voters if they want to increase the sales tax for up to five years to aid the local community college. Voters approved Amendment 4, which would give conserved property a lower tax assessment; the amendment also eliminates property taxes on lands placed in a perpetual conservation easement.
In Louisiana: Voters said no to a bill that would dedicate additional state severance taxes to parishes (like counties) of origin (See Colorado above).
In Maine: Voters approved a measure vetoing a new tax on beer, wine and soft drinks, which would help finance a state health care program.
In Massachusetts: Voters rejected another measure that would have cut, and then eliminated, the state’s personal income tax. A similar measure was rejected in 2002.
In North Dakota: Voters rejected an income tax cut. Measure 2 would have cut income taxes in half and corporate income taxes by 15%.
In Nevada: Voters shot down an attempt by the Nevada Legislature to amend or repeal the sales and use tax without voter approval.
In Oklahoma: Voters overwhelmingly approved an exemption from personal property tax for injured veterans and veterans’ surviving spouses. Voters also approved a measure that would require a person or business to file an application in order to receive a property tax exemption.
In Oregon: Voters said yes to an exemption that required 50% voter turnout to pass property tax increase measures. Voters turned down a measure that would have allowed federal taxes paid to be deducted from Oregon taxable income.
(Note: Findings were based on local newspaper and media reports. If you have additional information, please share!)
Not right now. But there’s a chance that you might in the future: the moratorium on an internet tax expires November 1. The moratorium is sometimes referred to as the Internet Tax Freedom Act, or ITFA.
ITFA has been extended twice since 1998. It bans taxes on certain internet transactions at the federal level, but also prohibits state and local governments from passing similar taxes with the exception of nine states which were allowed to keep existing internet taxes. The internet transactions are: internet access (including dial-up, DSL, cable modem and wi-fi); “double tax” for products or services bought over the internet; and discriminatory taxes that treat internet purchases differently from other types of sales. Those nine states which are current exempt from the ban are Hawaii, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin; not surprisingly, most of the governors of these states appear to oppose making the ban permanent since the exemptions will not be included in a permanent bill.
Nonetheless, a handful of Senators, including John McCain (R-AZ), Trent Lott (R-MS) and John Sununu (R-NH) have suggested a permanent internet tax ban. Not surprisingly, fearing both loss of revenue and potential for abuse, there is opposition to a permanent ban on both sides of the political spectrum who have offered a number of alternatives. One suggestion is to limit the length of the moratorium rather than make the ban permanent – but so far, that isn’t getting much support.
What do you think? You pay tax on your phone connections, why not the internet? That is the loudest argument, after all, against the permanent repeal – the fact that cell phone service is taxed and is at an all time high. So, the thinking goes, how bad can it be? Well?
digg_url = ‘http://www.digg.com/tech_news/Do_You_Owe_Uncle_Sam_for_Reading_This’;
