Correction 17:21 CST: Holy cow! I misread the bill! On first read, I thought Section 1 of SB 179 applied to agticultural property taxes. Incorrect! It applies to property not subject to the ag and owner-occupied residential property tax provisions, as explained to me by a generous Pierre expert. I regret the error and have corrected references below. I have also reset the comment section to focus the conversation on the commercial properties targeted by this parliamentary maneuver.
Did you know that all but two Senators voted to increase commercial property taxes this week?
Senate Bill 179 is the annual revision of the maximum property tax levies for school districts. We generally reduce the maximum levy per thousand dollars in value, so that even though your property is worth more thousands, we take a smaller portion of each thousand to keep your total bill from skyrocketing.
The current maximum levy on commercial (i.e., not agricultural, not residential owner-occupied) land is $7.001 per thousand dollars in in taxable value. On Monday, February 25, Senator John Wiik (R-4/Big Stone City) moved to amend that levy to $7.821. The amendment passed, and that levy increase passed 33–1. Senator Justin Cronin (R-23/Gettysburg) was the only Nay; Senator Phil Jensen (R-33/Rapid City) was excused but surely would have joined Cronin and not excused that tax hike.
Everybody else, including my professedly anti-tax Senator Al Novstrup (R-3/Aberdeen), voted to raise taxes on a business with a $500,000 building and lot from $3,500 to $3,910.
Now the Legislature has been gaming that number just to keep it open for discussion and force a conference committee vote. Yesterday House Taxation quickly erased the Senate’s commercial property tax hike and restored the max commercial levy to the $6.821 originally requested by the Governor.
But a vote is a vote, and businesspeople, on Monday, 33 Senators voted to raise your property taxes 12%. Be sure to ask about that at crackerbarrel tomorrow.
“Read my lips, no new taxes”.
The biggest threat to the nation is not socialism (which we have plenty of and more won’t hurt us) – but crony capitalism.
https://ritholtz.com/2019/03/its-not-capitalism-its-crony-capitalism/
Amen. Corporate capitalism
Leslie,
Let’s start with the big Tech Corporations.
How many have liberal CEO’s?
Don’t think too hard on this one.
I remember when Rush was advertising Gateways, and Republican Governor Janklow was demanding school districts buy Gateway products. Oh, yeah, Rush and Bill Janklow were steeped in liberalism. Actually, techies tend toward libertarianism, not liberalism.
A tax increase on commercial property is a bit more troubling than an ag increase since, with some serious exceptions, it appears commercial property is already taxed at much higher rates than other property (again, I could be wrong and if so, I hope someone can post the correct facts about current commercial tax burdens).
And if this tax increase applies to residential rental property, which is typically occupied by low and middle income families unable to afford a home purchase, this tax increase likely will be passed on by increased rent. Thus, this new tax increase looks like another regressive tax that will fall on the shoulders of those least able to afford it.
If the above suppositions are correct, not only is this tax increase hypocritical and contrary to Republican campaign promises, it also looks to be extremely bad public policy.
Jason: “Don’t think too hard on this one.”
Trust me Jason, none of think (or need to think) too hard about much any of the nonsense you post.
On the topic of property taxes, it has always stuck me as inequitable that ag land and commercial property are income producing, but residential property is not (mostly – some is rental/income property). So farmers are using their land’s ability to produce to pay those taxes; businesses are using their land to produce income to pay those taxes; my home does nothing to help me pay the taxes on my home. Property taxes are income taxes for some and not for others.
Regarding taxes, the Strib has an article about the ethics of paying them. The subject is tax avoidance and whether that is fair.
goo.gl/z6urix
Avoiding taxes used to be a hush, hush secret because it was embarrassing to let it be known that one weaseled out of paying their fair share. SD’s tax system throws fairness out the window and picks winners and losers with every tax bill they write. In SD, the more $ you have, the more the tax laws pick you to win, especially by making it easier for you to avoid taxes.
Is it ethical, is it fair to avoid every cent of taxes possible, knowing that others, very likely to have less, have to make up the difference and suffer hardships as a result?
(Keep in mind I’m talking about SD’s top 25% or so.)
This will make farmers feel much better. [Sarcasm]
In Ohio they’ve voted to give a river legal rights. It’s a fight over a city’s drinking water and farmers. It’s already challenged in court. If the challenge is unsuccessful, it could create enormous problems for farmers.
goo.gl/k5Udxg no paywall
Don the Con is an accomplished tax avoider. Avoiding taxes is avoiding the obligation we all have to improve the welfare of the group. Trump is a group of one and thus sees no such obligation. (My tax attorney and accountant relatives shudder when I talk like that.) It’s we voters obligation to close loopholes not elect those who want to ream them out larger. Tax loopholes are socialism for the rich. Having to pay what the rich avoid is the hearty individualism dumped down on the middle class.
Porter
As I listened intently to the testimony of Michael Cohen before a congressional committee this past week, one of the many things he testified to was when Trump got a IRS refund in the amount of $10 Million.
Upon receiving the check Trump said to Cohen, and I’m paraphrasing, ” This is a stupid country for giving a guy like me a refund like that”.
Roger
Just like he cheated in the election (and isn’t really a legitimate President), it’ll be revealed that he cheated on his taxes to get that refund. Last week Nancy P. emphasized the point that we’re not out to impeach the President. Bankrupt him? Sure. A year in the pokey for tax fraud? Sure.
VOTE HIM OUT!
Really well put Porter: “Tax loopholes are socialism for the rich. Having to pay what the rich avoid is the hearty individualism dumped down on the middle class.”
Because an action is legal doesn’t make it moral, right or ethical. The GOP at this time is neither moral, right, ethical, nor legal.