Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Rell Proposes Car Tax Compromise

Eh. It's nothing to get excited about, but Rell is moving slightly on the car tax proposal.
The Rell administration Tuesday extended an olive branch to Democratic Party critics of its plan to repeal the property tax on individual taxpayers' cars. Gubernatorial Chief of Staff Lisa Moody (pictured) said the administration would support a change in the plan to allow seniors to keep their $350 property tax credit -- which is otherwise a casualty of the car-tax plan. (Bass)

It sounds like they want to use some of the surplus for this. Dangerous...

I still like the idea of the car tax, if only as a way to make the state a slightly more bearable place to live and to get the ball rolling on real property tax reform. The idea of keeping the homeowners' credit for the elderly is nice, but it also seems like, as some of Rell's opponents are saying, an election-year gimmick.

I'm noticing that the New Haven Independent and other, related online sources like The Corner Report and CT News Junkie are all having excellent coverage lately. Let's hear it for online newspapers!

Source

Bass, Paul. "Car Tax Compromise Floated." New Haven Independent 28 March, 2006.

33 comments:

Anonymous said...

Perhaps it would be nice if suburban working families also qualified for tax relief....

naw, we're TOO BORING

Anonymous said...

Show me three Republican or Demacratic Mayors or Selectman who have come out strongly for the Auto Tax repeal GC.

This is another way the state will screw local governments and anyone with a half a brain will oppose it.

Anonymous said...

This "olive branch" would have gone a lot farther if it wasn't coupled with a picture of "Mood-swing".

Anonymous said...

RELL as the ELIMINATOR!

It's just swell that Governor-replacement Rell takes a page out of the Gropinator's playbook and says, "let's eliminate the car tax!"

Why not go further and propose the elimination of the sales tax, the state income tax..fwiw.

Anonymous said...

I see teachers around the state are out demonstrating this morning before class for penison promises and a constitutional amendment... A- Picketing in front of bus drivers and kids that can't vote seems odd... And B - Don't they have their labor-supported Dem legislators to thank for the shortfall in the fund?

Has their been banter about their PR campaign here recently, GC?

Franks said...

Rell's plan simple doesn't return enough money to taxpayers.

With a projected $617 MILLION SURPLUS FOR 2006, up from any earlier $536.8 MILLION, the efforts to cuts taxes should do better.

bluecoat said...

Eliminating the car tax was never property, or any kind of, tax releif. The only real tax releif is to lower spending by improving service. Eliminating the car tax would lower the cost of government but nobody ever put a price tag on it because nobody in state government has ever worked in a business where you have to honestly score the cost or savings with a proposal - it's all inuendo. Even the tax collector in Stamford has repeatedly called for an elimination of the car tax - and he's being calling for it for forty yearons.

It's an election year so we will be treated to duelin' soundbites as usual - but nobody will ever get down to busines until after the election.

turfgrrl said...

The car tax as it is presently structured is inefficient. If revenues need to be collected on car ownership then up the registration fees and collect them at that point directly by the DMV. And make them uniform. Then keep those monies working on transportation infrastructure.

One of my pet peeves is that if you lease a car you pay a tax calculated on the whole value of the car, not the leased portion.

I bet you could eliminate the car tax and double the car registration fees and see no net loss, once you factor in the administration savings.

bluecoat said...

My sentiments exactly there turffgrrrl. Turfgrrrll for governor of the great State of CT.

disgruntled_republican said...

turfgrrl -

Good idea only problem is the money still goes to the state. That is the problem with the Gov's propossal. We could mandate that that money collected at the DMV is to go to the towns but again, I am willing to bet 4 - 5 years down the line they change that too.

The one thing I will say of your idea is that it eliminates the need for assesors to keep tabs on cars and will show clear cost savings to towns.

Fact is, its a sham. It is clearly election year politics not only for the gov but for any R's wanting to run for state rep/senate. It gives them a clear issue to run on that will no doubt be different then a D opponent and will sound great to an uninformed voter.

I do have to give Rell credit for that...she created an issue, one of the R's weekest attribute in year's past.

turfgrrl said...

disgruntled_republican,

Yes, the money would go to the state, but that wouldn't be such a bad thing, if the state then used a percent of what it collected as a pass back to the towns, and that passback should be earmarked to transportation items.

We after all carry state issues drivers licenses and our car registration is managed by the state. I don't see how the present system a) benefits CT residents and b) invests in our transportation infrastructure.

Having towns use car tax revenues to fund speed bumps, as an example, is not aiding the regional traffic congestion.

u guys are ridiculous said...

Wow, this is so much fun listening to everyone agree with each other. Its like a internet Democratic Caucus.

For the last ten years legislative Democrats have triumphed local property tax reform. In that time they have delivered us a number of Blue Ribbon Commissions (gee thanks) and a proposal that would have added a overly burndensome tax on local businesses. A proposal to simply shift the local propert tax burden from residential to business property owners (great idea!).

Now, the Gov has offered a REAL proposal. A concrete way reduce property tax payments for the MAJORITY of CT's payers. Furthermore, the proposal to include the $350 credit for seniors directly addresses a serious problem with this legislation. And liberal's rail on her? What a joke. Is Rell's proposal perfect? No. Is it the only real proposal for property tax relief we've seen in the last decade. Yes. Lets see Democrats bring something better to the table. (Like a Red Ribbon Commission!)

u guys are ridiculous said...

I think I'd almost rather talk about ROy O

disgruntled_republican said...

u guys are ridiculous -

Thanks Ms. Moody for that stirring rendition.

The proposal is bullshit. Plain and simple. It maybe more than the Democrats have every offered but it is crap. It is a totally screw job to the municipalities, plain and simple.

I am a registered Republican and will vote for Rell but I don;t support this one bit. Ever since I can remember anytime I have heard a promise from the state it has been broken, plain and simple. This will be too. 52% think its a great idea. Of that 52%, 25% dont know what it really means so take the statistics and chuck em, they dont mean a lick. Make it a constitutional amendment, then I'll buy into it. Until then, pound sand.

u guys are ridiculous said...

I'm much more handsome than Lisa (and Roy O)

Anonymous said...

The better idea would be for Gov. Rell to adopt Rep. Berger's plan to have a uniform tax in the state to bring down the car tax in the cities and make the suburbs pick up the tab.

Anonymous said...

Roy Ouch O Grosso...The ouch is what the clients say after their elections and frankly, the O is for how many wins he has. Amazing how he can find suckers dumb enough to hire him.

u guys are ridiculous said...

Great idea annymous! We already ask the suburbs to finance the majority of the citie's education costs. Lets defer more urban municipal exspenses to working and middle class suburbanites.

bluecoat said...

And don't forget that the cities finance the hospitals and state & federal courts along with the trash plants for all the suburbanites who work in the cities or send their sick and trash to them. Penis envy is not good government.

Anonymous said...

Democrats have been speaking of property tax reform because it is a tax system that is pitting our towns against oen another, ruining our school systems, encouraging unwise, unplanned suburbia which harms our environment and because it punishes people as they attempt to achieve the American dream.

When D's say real property tax reform...they mean real in both senses of the word, not just taxable property. If you dont understand that notion, then you are not worth debating and should stop reading.

Re: blue ribbon commissions, in case you hadn't noticed, the Rowland/Rell administration has been in charge fighting for the rich whenever a progressive tax of any kind comes to fruition. Don't get me wrong, Governor Compacent or Complicit was brillint in proposign what she did, but she was counting on the voters being stupid and in CT they are not.

Anonymous said...

So...New Haven pays for Yale? You're out of your mind

turfgrrl said...

The problem with the D's version of talking about property tax reform is that like much policy that comes from committees, its death of a thousand paper cuts.

Simplicity is real reform. Eliminate the special taxes, and tax the transactions. Apply that to just about any scenario and you get consistent revenue generation based on consumption.

Anonymous said...

Car Tax Proposal 2.0:

"We're going to screw all middle/low income people EXCEPT seniors."

Gettin' there, Jodi.

You'd think if the Republicans cared about helping out middle income people they'd give the tax credits directly to the middle income people instead of propping up CT's regressive tax structure.

Anonymous said...

"Great idea annymous! We already ask the suburbs to finance the majority of the citie's education costs. Lets defer more urban municipal exspenses to working and middle class suburbanites.

Yeah, because
1) Cities don't have uniquely urban problems that require more more funding than suburbs
2) The people who live in the suburbs don't work in, play in and generally rely on the cities
3) What goes on in the cities has absolutely NO effect on the suburbs who exist on their own, separate happy little islands and are in no way altered by the quality of life in area cities.

This attitude is one of the top problems w/ the governmental structure and politics of this state. 169 cities and towns fiercely protective of their own borders. NO regional cooperation whatsoever. Suburbs completely UNWILLING to support the nearby commercial centers that keep their homes in such high demand. Cities a fraction of the physical size of suburbs are supposed to finance 5 times as many people through the PROPERTY tax. As if they could do that if left to their own devices.

Get over it people. We're ONE CONNECTICUT. We need meaningful, not silly gimicky property tax reform.

Anonymous said...

yes, and it seems like the rest of the state looks at my wallet as they way to pay its bills

as Roanld Reagan said "when you tax something , you get less of it"

Perchance that is why young married working couples leave the state?

bluecoat said...

turfgrrl said:The problem with the D's version of talking about property tax reform is that like much policy that comes from committees, its death of a thousand paper cuts.

Simplicity is real reform. Eliminate the special taxes, and tax the transactions. Apply that to just about any scenario and you get consistent revenue generation based on consumption.


Simplicity is the word. Taxes are supposed to fund the government not promote peace and prosperity.

sdRay said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Aerial Z said...

yeah, im sick of the nj dmv hassles too, so i checked this out nj dmv

Anonymous said...

Lookup u dmv reports online here: dmv reports

auto leases said...

Hi Fellow! I was just searching blogs,and I found yours! I like it!
If you have a moment, please visit my auto leases site.
Good luck!

Anonymous said...

turfgrrl said...
One of my pet peeves is that if you lease a car you pay a tax calculated on the whole value of the car, not the leased portion.

YES! This property/excise tax on a leased car is bullshit especially in New Britin (aka the highest tax bracket city in the state & NOTHING to show for it). I think if you lease a car the dealer should be upfront and tell you you are the one paying the property tax on the car you are borrowing from us or fucking get them to pay it. Yeah right like that'll ever happen in the process.

Earn A LifeTime of Income From Anywhere! said...

Appreciated your info. Thanks,Steve @Car Tips

Anonymous said...

I moved to CT from NY 14 years ago and was totally shocked when I had to pay tax on my car. I hear only CT, MA, and RI are the only states in the Union that have a car tax. After 14 year of waiting for the car tax to be repealed in CT, I'm moving back to NY.