can we lose the state income tax already???

[edcrunk]

so we don't lose aubrey to ft. worth...

plus, how many businesses haven't located here due to that?

[mmonroe]

A few questions, how does the state of texas get by without one.. and what is funded in the state of oklahoma by the state income tax?

[soonerguru]

Texas is a "fee you to death" state. They get you with tags, etc. Also, the people there were in near open revolt a couple of years ago about the increase in their property tax, the tax they use in lieu of the income tax.

Yes, they still tax their citizens -- even more when you include all of the fees and taxes they impose, they just hide them.

The income tax is not impeding economic development here, despite what the Aubreys and the State Chambers of the world might say. Businesses want infrastructure and workforce quality -- and they want to be able to sell our quality of life to their employees if they are to relocate here. The state income tax isn't even in the top five or so concerns.

[mmonroe]

What are the concerns?

[PennyQuilts]

State income tax hits the employees, primarily they are home grown and not going anywhere just to avoid the tax. A fee based system, like Texas, hits consumption, business, etc. Seems to be working for Texas. Personally, I like a consumption based system. It doesn't seem to be slowing Texas down in terms of bringing in business but I am not prepared to debate it because I'm not really sure.

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

State income tax hits the employees, primarily they are home grown and not going anywhere just to avoid the tax. A fee based system, like Texas, hits consumption, business, etc. Seems to be working for Texas. Personally, I like a consumption based system. It doesn't seem to be slowing Texas down in terms of bringing in business but I am not prepared to debate it because I'm not really sure.

Same here...As far as not being sure enough to debate it anyway. I simply don't know enough. At first blush...I prefer an income tax though. Otherwise, renters are living off the backs of those responsible enough to buy a house (property taxes down there are HUGE). My mom's house in Dallas cost 60k less than mine here cost, yet her mortgage payment wasn't all that much less.

[Kerry]

I would prefer a consumption tax. Don't be fooled by anyone that says income taxes don't drive decision where to live. The people at the top of the economic food chain care a lot about it because they have the most to lose. I know 3 high income people that live in Florida for the sole purpose of avoiding income taxes in Georgia and Kentucky.

[Midtowner]

Same here...As far as not being sure enough to debate it anyway. I simply don't know enough. At first blush...I prefer an income tax though. Otherwise, renters are living off the backs of those responsible enough to buy a house (property taxes down there are HUGE). My mom's house in Dallas cost 60k less than mine here cost, yet her mortgage payment wasn't all that much less.

Not really... renters just pay more rent.

[OKCMallen]

Not really... renters just pay more rent.

Exactly.

[Midtowner]

This is really an interesting topic.

Oklahomans shouldn't bitch about their tax situation. *MAYBE* we could redo some of our corporate taxes, but we'd have to go somewhere else.

According to the Tax Foundation, who bases its statistics on The Department of Commerce's Bureau of Economic Development, Oklahomans, on average pay 9% of their money to state and local taxes. That number puts our tax burden when it comes to state and local taxes at 45th in the country.

Add the federal taxes to that and with Oklahoma's low average income, we come in *dead last* in the country when it comes to tax burden per capita.

The Tax Foundation - State and Local Tax Burdens Compared to Other U.S. States, 1970-2007

If you do want to get the income tax, what to replace it with? Why? The government is going to have to collect the same amount of money.

If the argument is that we should be asking different people to pay a different share, a more "fair" share of the burden, great. Make that argument.

If the argument is that we're over taxed, then at least compared to other states, that's not a very easily defended proposition.

[SoonerDave]

We may be dead last in per-capita taxation compared to other states, but aren't we also at the lower end of the per-capita income charts, too? That is, it would necessarily be harder for us to be taxed at a higher per-capita rate than a state with higher incomes that necessarily project payers into increasing tax brackets.

That is to suggest that the "lower" tax burden here probably hits more people a lot harder than the "higher" tax burden elsewhere - or, pur another way, a 9% tax on someone making $15,000 probably hurts them a lot worse than, say, a 12% tax on someone making, say, $50,000 (conjectural numbers only). I realize the example is extreme, but the point is still relevant....

[Midtowner]

We may be dead last in per-capita taxation compared to other states, but aren't we also at the lower end of the per-capita income charts, too? That is, it would necessarily be harder for us to be taxed at a higher per-capita rate than a state with higher incomes that necessarily project payers into increasing tax brackets.

That is to suggest that the "lower" tax burden here probably hits more people a lot harder than the "higher" tax burden elsewhere - or, pur another way, a 9% tax on someone making $15,000 probably hurts them a lot worse than, say, a 12% tax on someone making, say, $50,000 (conjectural numbers only). I realize the example is extreme, but the point is still relevant....

In other words, the tax burden is apportioned to lower income-earners to a greater degree than in other states.

I'm not a big fan of "progressive" tax systems, so I'm just fine with that.

Hopefully our more even allocation of the burden can be sold to lure higher-income workers.

[SoonerDave]

Hopefully our more even allocation of the burden can be sold to lure higher-income workers.

Be nice to have the higher-income jobs to attract them...

[Markbb]

Florida doesn't have a income tax, tourism pays for that and I thought Oklahoma was rich with oil and natural gas, and with the lottery in place why am I still paying a school tax and have no children attending nor ever attended public school, and why are teachers asking for more money when we supposingly have all this revenue from the lottery????

[OKCMallen]

Florida doesn't have a income tax, tourism pays for that and I thought Oklahoma was rich with oil and natural gas, and with the lottery in place why am I still paying a school tax and have no children attending nor ever attended public school, and why are teachers asking for more money when we supposingly have all this revenue from the lottery????

As though you don't benefit in any way from public schools. Give me a break.

[Midtowner]

Florida doesn't have a income tax, tourism pays for that and I thought Oklahoma was rich with oil and natural gas, and with the lottery in place why am I still paying a school tax and have no children attending nor ever attended public school, and why are teachers asking for more money when we supposingly have all this revenue from the lottery????

I suppose the teachers are just greedy. Wanting to be compensated at about $10K less than the national average. Preposterous.

[Markbb]

I don't know what your problem with me is since I've been posting on this site you've been ragg'n my ass, and if your gonna post a benefit name one

[Midtowner]

I don't know what your problem with me is since I've been posting on this site you've been ragg'n my ass, and if your gonna post a benefit name one

"Ragg'n," eh?

No, I merely disagree with some of your assertions. Many of your posts have shown a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues you think you have an opinion on. I reserve the right to disagree with you, and in some cases, point out the flaws in your argument.

The word you use implies I hold some sort of animus against you. Frankly, I don't care who posts things I disagree with. If I disagree and feel like doing so publicly, I'll do it.

I do endeavor to be as agreeable as possible most of the time.

[Markbb]

I suppose the teachers are just greedy. Wanting to be compensated at about $10K less than the national average. Preposterous.

My wifes mother is a retired school teacher and most of her friends are teachers and they deserve to be equal or better then the national average, I'm just saying the lottery passed with hopefully extra income for the public schools and to my understanding to increase teachers wages so a certian percentage of the lottery goes to schools and we pay a school tax, where is all this money going? I its not going to increase wages so we can keep good teachers from leaving the state to a higher paying job....

[Markbb]

"Ragg'n," eh?

No, I merely disagree with some of your assertions. Many of your posts have shown a fundamental lack of understanding of the issues you think you have an opinion on. I reserve the right to disagree with you, and in some cases, point out the flaws in your argument.

The word you use implies I hold some sort of animus against you. Frankly, I don't care who posts things I disagree with. If I disagree and feel like doing so publicly, I'll do it.

I do endeavor to be as agreeable as possible most of the time.

Well I'm waiting for the benefits that you mentioned......

[Markbb]

Midtowner I'm not directing the ass raggin toward you I was talken about OKCMallen

[Midtowner]

Well I'm waiting for the benefits that you mentioned......

You don't know how you benefit from public schools? REALLY?

Did you go to one?

Lottery revenue was never targeted at raising teacher pay. I believe the intent there was for improving infrastructure and supplies.

[Markbb]

You don't know how you benefit from public schools? REALLY?

Did you go to one?

Lottery revenue was never targeted at raising teacher pay. I believe the intent there was for improving infrastructure and supplies.

Yes I went to public school in Lawton, O.k. so then that frees up the money for infrastructure and supplies monies to stay in the school system or else where...and lets not go with this pot of money does this and this pot of money does that, got that run around in the military

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

Not really... renters just pay more rent.

See...I don't see them paying THAT much more in Dallas. My sister lived there for several years, and wasn't paying much more down there for an equal apartment here.

But like I said...I don't know enough about the whole thing to really have a strong (or valid for that matter) opinion on it.

*shrugs*


*keeps reading thread*

[Midtowner]

Yes I went to public school in Lawton,

Okay, so you benefited directly from the taxes paying for public education. You continue to benefit from it because literacy and basic education are crucial elements of a free society; not to mention the fact that no employer would ever seek to locate in a state which doesn't support public education.

To think that you do not benefit from public education in any way is simply ludicrous unless you think that only the well-to-do should have access to education, that literacy is no big-ass-deal, etc.

O.k. so then that frees up the money for infrastructure and supplies monies to stay in the school system or else where...and lets not go with this pot of money does this and this pot of money does that, got that run around in the military

I checked the act. I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong -- the money going to primary/secondary education can be used for salary increases (but what to use it for is at the discretion of the legislature.

There isn't really enough money there to make a significant dent in teacher salaries though. Infrastructure is another story.