Corporations - Making the Public Pay Twice

Coming to a town near you – soon.

Don't kid yourself that this is a Montana problem.  Montana is the testing ground.

This is all about the corporations trying to increase their revenues at the expense of the middle class and small business owners.

Better watch out for this one!!!!!

My emphasis throughout.

The Missoulian reports that the interim committee is currently divided on the proposition — Republicans favoring the views of large corporations and Democrats in favor of small businesses and homeowners.

SNIP

The newspaper reports if Republicans control the 2013 Legislature, telecom and oil industry supporters in the state legislature are confident they can pass a bill to change property tax assessments,

AND MORE

Outgoing Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer warns that Montanans are facing a corporate lobbying snowjob that will stick them with a higher tax bill.

“What they’re proposing is a great tax shift in favor of out-of-state and multinational corporations in Montana – a shift from those paying the taxes to small businesses and homeowners in Montana,” Schweitzer told the newspaper. “They’ve decided that they can hire lobbyists on both the Democratic and Republican side and pull the wool over legislators. This is the same cast of characters that brought us utility deregulation. What could go wrong?”

The Montana Budget and Policy Center agrees, suggesting a large shift in property taxes towards homeowners, small businesses, farmers and ranchers could prove shocking when tax bills start arriving in mailboxes.

Leading to change the property tax laws are cable television, telecommunications companies, and oil refineries, with the assistance of the Chamber of Commerce and the Montana Taxpayers Association, which does not disclose its funding sources.

Prior to the introduction of the “tax reform” study, large telecom companies including AT&T, Verizon Wireless, and Cablevision routinely appealed their property tax bills to the tune of $61.3 million out of $108.2 million owed in property taxes assessed from 2005-2011.

Rep. Dick Barrett (D-Missoula) warned the Republican-backed measure could deliver tax bills packing a major wallop on unsuspecting property owners.

“They could be pretty severe, depending on what it looks like,” he said.

Lobbyists?

cable television,

telecommunications companies, and

oil refineries???????

Corporations raise their prices on the public.

Then they try to lower their taxes for use of the public commons.

They get more money from the consumers with higher prices.

They make consumers take on the additional burden of paying the corporation's share of taxes.

What a crock!

Corporations think they deserve the world.

I think the corporations deserve more regulations and less bought and paid for legislators.

Legislation that helps build corporate revenues through lower expenses

and screws the public

– sounds like ALEC “model legislation” to me.

A VERY QUICK web search came up with these other examples:

2010 in ALEC state Arizona – by ALEC member Adams

The radical Republicans will worsen Arizona's structural revenue deficit when House Speaker Kirk Adams' bogus-named jobs creation bill aka the corporate welfare tax giveaway plan is reintroduced. Corporations will be paying less in taxes, and you will be paying more as those corporate property taxes are shifted to residential property owners.

2012 in Minnesota – by ALEC member Zellers

Minnesota businesses will pay less in corporate property taxes and have an easier time obtaining state permits if Republican lawmakers have their way during the 2012 legislative session.

Senate Majority Leader David Senjem, R-Rochester, and House Speaker Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, said those measures would help create jobs and strengthen the state economy.

2011 in Iowa – by ALEC Alumni Terry Branstad

Governor Terry Branstad wanted to drastically reduce corporate property taxes. His proposal would have allowed businesses to shelter a full 40 percent of their property’s value from the property tax (by assessing commercial property at only 60 percent of its actual value for tax purposes). When fully implemented, the price tag for this measure was about $500 million. 

Coincidence - NOT