Sunday, March 29, 2015

NO! NO! NO! to the Sales Tax Increase


Legislative Tax Action Day

Wednesday, April 15 at 1:00 pm
Michigan State Capitol in Lansing, Michigan

Mark your calendars. You can go to either or both of these events. At least
try to make it to one. Pass this on to others in your address book.

Protest against Proposal 1 in front of Troy City Hall


Wednesday, April 15 at 5:00 pm
City of Troy, Michigan Government in Troy, Michigan

I don't know about you, but I am sick and tired of being talked to like I am a child.  There really are a lot of people out there who are gullible, but I would like to think that I am not one of them. Those of us who know better have an obligation to share with those less informed. Not as a test of our superior intellect, because we all have our short comings, but because if they go down we go down with them.  

How people can have faith in their elected officials after they have lied to them over and over again Is beyond my understanding. No matter how good something looks, you need to have a look at what the other side has to say. It is especially important if their are a lot of commercials for one side or the other. Lots of commercials is an indication of how important the issue is and a clue that the results will definitely effect you.
++++++++++++++

 7 Reasons to Vote “NO” on the May 5 Tax Hike Proposal 

1.We can't afford even higher taxes. Michigan residents already pay among the highest gas taxes in the country, and most of that money isn't even spent on roads. We pay a 4.25% state income tax where other states have no income tax. The ballot proposal would raise the Michigan sales tax to 7%, whichwould make it the 2nd highest state sales tax in the nation. The proposal would raise taxes about $200 per year for every man, woman, and child in Michigan. $800 for a family of four. 

2. It doesn't solve the budget problem. Lawmakers increased Michigan's state budget by $4.7 billion in just the last four years. The sales tax hike is only projected to take in $2 billion. Raising the sales tax only pays for part of the growth of government! The problem is too much new spending, not too little taxes. If voters approve these tax increases, soon enough we'll be asked for even more.

 3. We can fix our roads and fund our schools without raising taxes. The state House passed a plan last December that would have increased public school funding $2.5 billion over the next eight years and added about $1 billion in road funding each year – with no net tax increase. 

4. Half of the new tax money isn't even for roads. The proposal's backers insist Michigan's roads need to be fixed, but only half of the new tax money would be spent on roads. The rest goes to various special interests that benefit from the new tax money. (Source: michigantaxpayers.com/ newtaxes.php) 

5. Raising prices makes Michigan less competitive. Raising the sales tax effectively makes all goods more expensive: we all inevitably have less money to spend and save. Essentially, it increases the cost of living in Michigan – people need to earn more to live here – and this affects costs at all stages of production, distribution, sales, and service. Higher taxes hurt us all. 

6. The proposal misleads voters and does a lot more than tax and spend. The proposal passes ten laws and a constitutional amendment, with language totaling over 46,000 words: a novel's worth of legalese. These laws include tax credits for low-income wage earners, affirmative action rules in certain state transportation contracting, funding for reading programs, $102 million in new federal income tax liabilities for vehicle registration, and much, much more not reported on the ballot to voters. 

7. Make Lansing do its job. It's wrong for lawmakers to punt to voters a 46 thousand-word legislative package, kicking off a massive political battle and costing us a $10 million election, because lawmakers couldn't agree on a solution to fund roads. Road funding should be a normal, ordinary, completely standard aspect of budget negotiations. 


Vote “NO” to tax hikes on May 5 because Michigan is T AXED E NOUGH A LREADY

Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan, PO Box 211, Milan MI 48160. Permission to reproduce


Friday, March 20, 2015

Detroit School Board President Opposes Sales Tax Increase



For many years conservatives have taken for granted that support for issues we endorse would not be supported by most in the liberal City of Detroit. We can never plan to win over liberals if we do not make an attempt to explain our positions clearly. Below is a cry for help from former Rep. Lammar Lemmons,presently Presedent of the Detroit Board of Education.


Lamar Lemmons
President of the Detroit Board of Education

"The strategy for Detroit will be different than in other parts of the State. Our rational for opposing the Proposal will be different. We need resources. You can use my name in opposing this Proposal. The elected school Board is ready to come out against this proposal. What is happening? There is not a No Vote presence in the city of Detroit. Meanwhile, I am being inundated with vote Yes literature and T.V. Radio adds."

 You need to come out to the press. You are a stimulus to everyone's resources. Tell us what your reasons are. We are pleasantly interested. Our resources are limited as well and the city residents will be much more responsive to you as an elected official.  You can hardly expect people to give you money without knowing if they can can support your reasons and what you want to do with the money.

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Vote NO For Sales Tax Increase May 5


The Board of State Canvassers is scheduled to meet this Thursday to adopt final language for the proposal.
Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan is on the Web athttp://michigantaxpayers.com.
The letter delivered by Rep. McMillin reads:
Christopher Thomas, Director of Elections
Bureau of Elections
430 West Allegan St
Lansing, MI 48933
CC: State Board of Canvassers
Dear Director Thomas:
Thank you for providing draft ballot proposal language to the public this past Friday and providing an additional opportunity for public comment before the language is finalized.
The new language makes many significant improvements over the language suggested by the state House in HCR 39 of 2014. First, it clearly states that the state sales tax is increased to 7%. Second, it notes that the motor fuel taxes and vehicle registration fees are increased. Third, it notes some of the other laws that go into effect if and only if the proposal is passed.
However, there are still several shortcomings in the proposed language in the view of Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan, an organization I represent.
First, while the proposed explanatory language does mention of some of the ten laws activated by the proposal, it remains our position that the effect of all ten of these laws, including affirmative action for transportation companies, must be noted in the proposal language.
Each of these laws was distinctive enough to have its own bill number, its own vote by both chambers of the legislature, and its own governor's signature.
There is no mention of Public Act 473, which requires the Department of Transportation to accord preferential treatment to "disadvantaged" businesses. Voters have the right to know that they are activating affirmative action laws in this proposal.
Second, while the language of the explanatory statement is improved, the title of the proposal itself is still misleading, particularly by noting the repeal of sales taxes on gas while omitting mention of the replacement wholesale taxes found in the ten laws activated by the proposal.
I note that the title refers to these ten laws as: "OTHER LAWS THAT INCLUDE DEDICATING REVENUE FOR ROADS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION PURPOSES."
Yet in the explanation that follows, dedicating revenue for roads is the last point of the second bullet in a list of what these other laws do.
The language of the explanation affirms that the most important aspects of these ten additional laws are the sales tax increase, gas tax increase, and vehicle registration tax increases. Furthermore, to describe the other laws as including "dedicating revenue for roads and other transportation purposes" suggests that each of the laws relates to dedicating revenue for roads, when several of them have nothing to do with roads.
The title should reflect this by saying, for example "OTHER LAWS THAT INCLUDE INCREASED TAXES ON SALES AND FUEL, AND UNRELATED MATTERS."
Third, there is no mention anywhere in the ballot language that a major portion of the revenue is going to mass transit, which is of interest to the large portion of Michigan residents who do not live in an area served by any mass transit (or do live in such area, but feel it is a massive waste of taxpayer money).
The explanatory language comes to exactly the maximum 100 words if each of the four slashes are counted as their own words. Removing the spaces surrounding the slashes reduces the word count to 96. Therefore, it is simple to insert "mass transit" into the bullet point: "Increase motor fuel tax on gasoline/diesel fuel and vehicle registration fees, and dedicate revenue for roads, mass transit, and other transportation purposes."
Fourth, regarding the earned income tax credit, it would be more specific to note it is doubled, not just increased.
Fifth, there is no mention that the vehicle registration fees will no longer be tax deductible for federal taxes, costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. This is an important cost for voters to be aware of.
Sixth, it is an oversimplification to note the proposal requires competitive bidding and warranties for road projects, which applies only in particular circumstances.
Seventh, the language mentions dedicating money for the SAF, but not increasing money to schools.
Eighth, a statement of the total tax/revenue increase, per the Senate or House fiscal agency, would be appropriate to convey to voters the total cost of all the tax increases contained in the proposal.
While I applaud your efforts to improve upon the language of the proposal from what was recommended by the state House and other actors interested in raising these taxes on Michigan, more is needed to present voters with an accurate presentation of the effect of the proposal.
At the minimum, it should be clear that the taxes on fuel being replaced, not simply "repealed" or "eliminated." Each of the ten laws, including the law requiring affirmative action for road projects, must be mentioned, as must the increased funding for schools and public transportation.
Failing these changes, we must maintain that the language misleads voters by omitting these important facts.
Thanks again for your continued work on this issue. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance.
Best regards,
Rep. Tom McMillin (ret.)
Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan
###
Copyright © 2015 Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan, All rights reserved.
You were signed up for this list via MichiganTaxpayers.com, opposing tax hike schemes in Michigan.
Our mailing address is:
Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan
Paid for by Concerned Taxpayers of Michigan
PO Box 211
Milan, MI 48160
Add us to your address book
unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Suffer NO Fools

Along with a discussion of the efforts that are gathering steam to oppose a constitutional amendment to raise the sales tax from 6% to 7% and a few other current events, we will be presenting a video about Walter Williams at 7:00 pm at our January 28, meeting at Leon's Family Dining on Michigan Ave.just east of Telegraph.

This video was first presented on public television and is an interesting autobiography as well as a primer on economics.

I was lucky enough to attend a dinner at which Mr. Williams spoke and he distributed videos to those in attendance.

Please extend an invitation to your friends and family. I have seen the video and I think that everyone will enjoy it.

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

A note from a friend




As one of my favorite people, Rosanne Roseannadanna, often said, “It just goes to show ya, it’s always something!”  I don’t think she realized at the time that truer words were never spoken.  Every day it’s something.  I wish I could say it was something good.  It’s gotten to the point where every turn in the road leads to lies and deceit.  Are you uneasy with the state of our country?  I’m filled with disbelief that we Americans have allowed a small percentage of bureaucrats, protestors, activists, racists and political hacks to shove their agendas down our throats.
What is going on?  Are we afraid of these people?  Do we not care anymore what happens to our country?  Has eliminating God from all things important to us made our lives better?  Hello!  Is no one listening?  Take a look around you; the VA now has to cover religious statues etc. so as not to offend those who are not Christians.  In Texas, a mayor now wants to see all sermons by pastors to be sure they are not offensive to those who do not believe the words of the Bible.  There are even those who are pressing for the phrase “Under God” in our Pledge of Alliance to be replaced by “Under Allah”. 
Our present administration has had one scandal after another and yet we sit idly by and allow these crooked politicians to continue on their merry way; after all, we’re nothing but a bunch of dumb hicks who don’t care about much except free contraceptives and recreational marijuana.  Nixon was impeached for a lot less than any of these government atrocities.  It’s time to clean out the House and the Senate.  Get rid of every last one of those self-serving politicians.  None deserve to keep their seats and I’m tired of listening to their party line blathering.  I firmly believe most of us want what’s best for our country but that takes hard work and perseverance and we’ve become a nation of lazy and complacent do-nothings. 
We are now saddled with the Ebola virus and a lot of finger pointing as to who caused it.  Democrats say it’s the Republicans; Republicans say it’s the Democrats.  I say it’s OUR fault.  We have allowed our government to strip medical research funding for life threatening diseases without batting an eye.  What do we give our tax dollars to?  How about “determining if cocaine makes Japanese quail engage in sexually risky behavior;” or the “National Institute of Health spending our hard earned money to study the impact of a “genital-washing program” on men in South Africa”.  Or here’s a real pressing issue, “funds to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly”.  We allow our politicians to tell us that they have cut spending as much as they could; those darn superfluous programs like medical research.  President Obama continues to calm the hysteria over an Ebola outbreak by assuring us (wink, wink) that all is under control and we need not worry. 
For goodness sake, people, WAKE UP!  Is anybody home?  We’ve got mid-term elections coming up and unless we begin to voice our discontent in the voting booth, we’re going to be in for a lot worse than we’ve already encountered.  You’re right, Roseanne Roseannadanna; “It just goes to show ya, it’s always something!”
Diane L. Schabo
511 West F Street

Iron Mountain, MI  49801`

Wednesday, July 02, 2014

I'm Convinced NO on Proposal 1

I have read the Policy Brief put out by the Mackinac Center, the Citizen Research Center Report and reread SB 821 and I am still more convinced than ever that this is bad for individual taxpayers.
From the Mackinac Policy Brief:
"The Use tax is similar to a sales tax — both are assessed on the price of a purchased product. The difference is that a sales tax is levied on the sellers of goods and services, whereas a Use tax is levied on the
user of a good or service. Some items that are subject
to Michigan’s Use tax include vehicles, boats,
snowmobiles and aircraft, in addition to goods
purchased over the Internet or via catalog."
This means they can come after you instead of the business.
There is also a description of the duties of the Authority responsibilities in SB 821 I think you should read. Just ask and I will send you the bill. Believe me when I say I am not anti business. But, if they are going to do this they should do it right.

Thursday, June 26, 2014

Proposal 1 August 5, Primary



Wayne County Taxpayers Association Position Paper

Proposal 1
APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF AMENDATORY ACT TO REDUCE STATE USE TAX AND REPLACE WITH A LOCAL COMMUNITY STABILIZATION SHARE TO MODERNIZE THE TAX SYSTEM TO HELP SMALL BUSINESSES GROW AND CREATE JOBS
The amendatory act adopted by the Legislature would:
1. Reduce the state use tax and replace with a local community stabilization share of the tax for the purpose of modernizing the tax system to help small businesses grow and create jobs in Michigan.
2. Require Local Community Stabilization Authority to provide revenue to local governments dedicated for  local purposes, including police safety, fire protection, and ambulance emergency services.
3. Increase portion of state use tax dedicated for aid to local school districts.
4. Prohibit Authority from increasing taxes.
5. Prohibit total use tax rate from exceeding existing constitutional 6% limitation. Should this law be approved?
************(*
I want to state that the Personal Property Tax is a horrible tax and a burden to business and employment. If I were to say to the average taxpayer that their stove, refrigerator, washer, dryer and any other appliance or furniture were all subject to personal property tax for 10 years after purchase with a reduction each year for depreciation, we would have a revolt.
Anyone wishing to understand how the tax works and its effects can go to Personal Property Tax Reform in Michigan The Fiscal and Economic Impact of SB 1065-SB 1072, Anderson EconomicGroup  http://www.andersoneconomicgroup.com/SearchAEG/tabid/59/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/8021/Personal-Property-Tax-Reform-in-Michigan-The-Fiscal-and-Economic-Impact-of-SB-1065SB-1072.aspx or the Citizen Research Council at  https://crcmich.org/TaxOutline/index.html
This is not just an elimination of the Personal Property Tax for some small businesses. It is about much more.  It is my estimation that it was not necessary to place anything on the ballot to allow the reduction of that tax. Everything they needed is presently included in the State Constitution as defined in the Headlee Amendment.
Article IX  Michigan Constitution
§ 25 Voter approval of increased local taxes; prohibitions; emergency conditions;
repayment of bonded indebtedness guaranteed; implementation of section.
Sec. 25. Property taxes and other local taxes and state taxation and spending may not be increased above the limitations specified herein without direct voter approval. The state is prohibited from requiring any new or expanded activities by local governments without full state financing, from reducing the proportion of state spending in the form of aid to local governments, or from shifting the tax burden to local government. A provision for emergency
conditions is established and the repayment of voter approved bonded indebtedness is guaranteed.
Implementation of this section is specified in Sections 26 through 34, inclusive, of this Article.

§ 26 Limitation on taxes; revenue limit; refunding or transferring excess revenues;
exceptions to revenue limitation; adjustment of state revenue and spending limits.
Sec. 26. There is hereby established a limit on the total amount of taxes which may be
imposed by the legislature in any fiscal year on the taxpayers of this state. This limit shall not
be changed without approval of the majority of the qualified electors voting thereon, as
provided for in Article 12 of the Constitutio n……. If responsibility for funding a program or programs is transferred from one level of government to another, as a consequence of constitutional amendment, the state revenue and spending limits may be adjusted to accommodate such change, provided that the total revenue authorized for
collection by both state and local governments does not exceed that amount which would have
been authorized without such change.


§ 29 State financing of activities or services required of local government by state
law.
Sec. 29. The state is hereby prohibited from reducing the state financed proportion of the
necessary costs of any existing activity or service required of units of Local Government by
state law. A new activity or service or an increase in the level of any activity or service beyond
that required by existing law shall not be required by the legislature or any state agency of
units of Local Government, unless a state appropriation is made and disbursed of Local Government for any necessary increased costs. The provision of this section shall not apply to costs incurred pursuant to Article VI, Section 18 to pay the unit. 

There are 10 Senate Bills connected to this proposal. Nowhere in the ballot language is a Personal Property Tax mentioned specifically. The bills range from SB821 through SB830. For brevity and simplification I will address SB822 which must be passed for most of the others to take effect.
 .

We start our problem with the establishment of yet another Authority which would be granted enormous power. Since this new Authority would not be elected by the voters, there would be no true accountability but they would have the responsibility of handling a huge amount of our money.   
“BEGINNING ON OCTOBER 1, 2015, THE SPECIFIC TAX LEVIED UNDER SUBSECTION (1) INCLUDES BOTH A STATE SHARE TAX LEVIED BY THIS STATE AND A LOCAL COMMUNITY STABILIZATION SHARE TAX AUTHORIZED BY THE AMENDATORY ACT THAT ADDED SECTION 2C AND LEVIED BY THE
AUTHORITY, WHICH REPLACES THE REDUCED STATE SHARE AT THE FOLLOWING RATES IN EACH OF THE FOLLOWING STATE FISCAL YEARS”

Legislation then goes on to define the state’s portion of “THE LOCAL COMMUNITY
STABILIZATION SHARE TAX RATE TO BE LEVIED BY THE AUTHORITY IS THAT RATE CALCULATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY ON BEHALF OF THE
AUTHORITY… THE STATE SHARE TAX RATE IS THAT RATE DETERMINED BY SUBTRACTING THE LOCAL COMMUNITY STABILIZATION SHARE TAX RATE FROM 6%.”

The state then declares the revenue portion from 2015-2016 through 2029 without knowing the accuracy of the amount listed. They will also be committing future legislatures to a dollar amount.
This Authority would be granted an enormous responsibility. That cannot be good for taxpayers.  The line in the proposal that limits the used/sales tax to 6% does not address the expansion of the sales tax to, for example, internet purchases or fines or penalties for failure to comply. It does not address other things that they may choose to include as taxable by the sales tax which they seem to think they have the authority to adjust.
Whatever your feelings on taxes, this proposal does not give the taxpayer more security. The language does not reflect the full nature of the outcome if it passes.  If you have concerns, I will be glad to forward copies of the bills.  Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments.  wctaxpayers@comcast.net .  313-278-8383.

The Wayne County Taxpayer Association suggests vote NO on Proposal 1