Thursday, December 14, 2006

Referendum Recommended for EIT Increase

From today's Post-Gazette South Route 19 Briefs

The school district tax study commission has recommended that the school board place a referendum on the primary ballot to increase earned income tax in the community by 0.9 percent, an amount that commission Chairman Christopher Brewer called "modest."

Mr. Brewer said the commission studied the effects of increasing either earned income tax or personal income tax. He said commission members realized that an increase in earned income tax would hurts renters, but that they felt that, given the confines of the legislation, it was the fairest recommendation.
Bookmark and Share

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmm. I believe we are paying 0.013000 right now. Does this mean we would be paying .022?

Basically, if you are making $50K a year that would mean $37.50 a month extra. Is this accurate?

Are they really talking about almost doubling it? Wow.

December 14, 2006 11:10 AM  
Blogger Bill Matthews said...

I just watched the Tax Commission presentation on Channel 19 - and believe the Post Gazette incorrectly reported on what Mr. Brewer referred to as "modest." Mr. Brewer was referring to the possible $280 tax relief (per residence) to come from slots, NOT the .9% increase in EIT.

He then appropriately characterized the legislation as a tax shift, rather than tax relief. The increase in EIT to all EIT payers would be offset by homestead relief for all homeowners. In the end, the total "take" will be the same - with some homes paying substatially more, while others pay less.

Mr. Brewer reported the Tax Commission recommended the EIT increase against their druthers but within the constraints of the legislation. If the Tax Commission had “no change” as an option - - that would have been their recommendation.

This is a big issue that is to appear on the May 2007 ballot. The Tax Commission’s recommendation is non-binding on the Board, which will be working to formulate the final ballot question.

December 14, 2006 10:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think the Almanac had a good article about this yesterday.

I guess Lebo is required to do this (part of some state law passed?) They are giving us the option to either get property tax relief and pay it via income taxes or not.

Basically, it seems like a fight between households making $100K or more (this would hurt them) against those making less (this would help them)

December 15, 2006 7:55 AM  
Blogger Greg Daubner said...

I don't think it's necessarily $100,000 earners versus those making less.
Let's assume that you've got two homeowners. One is wealthy, retired, and has passive income. The other is working and making $75,000 annually. In this case, and I don't believe it's too unusual in Mt. Lebanon even though I've got no figures to back that up, the rich person gets a tax break on the back of the working household. The real estate tax drops for both and is made up by the working person's increased earned income tax.
In less affluent neighborhoods this may be a good idea. However, in Mt. Lebanon I'm not so sure. It certainly needs to be looked at. Without income figures and without knowing how many wealthy rerirees there are in Lebo, I for one just don't know about this.

December 18, 2006 10:44 AM  
Blogger gina said...

Greg,
I have similar reservations. The shifting to income tax helps those who rent pay more into our educational system. Perhaps some sort of personal income threshold could be established before those living on fixed incomes would have their rates hiked? I was told that there were a lot of restrictions put on this group in coming up with their formulations. I would like to hear the proposals made by other municipalities similar to Lebo.

December 18, 2006 4:47 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home