Vision 2025 Extension - Package Details

[swake]

I think we worked it out before, it's technically 65%, but who's counting 

The issues you brought up NEED to be a primary focus of this next mayoral campaign.  Bartlet (sic) claimed at the town hall last Weds. at TCC he's actually either doing something about changing the municipal funding mechanism or is planning to.   If I understood correctly, one thing he referenced was trying to harness sales tax on internet purchases.  It was also mentioned that Tulsa's sales tax remittance has been relatively flat for 30 years.

I call that fiscal insanity.  We've been doing the same thing over and over and the net result has not changed in 30 years.  The national internet sales tax initiative is DOA unless someone can figure out a way to A) Make it compulsory for everyone; B) Make it enforceable; C) Come up with a simplified method for small businesses to track, calculate, and remit the proper sales tax to literally thousands of taxing authorities or at the very least the 40-some-odd states that have sales tax.  I own an on-line retail business and the idea of tracking, ensuring we collect the correct % for the state and city or county is daunting.

Whomever the next mayor is, they need to make lobbying for a change in municipal funding one of their top three priorities and they need to be held to that.  If it were me, I'd make that my economic development director's primary function lobbying for that change until it happens.  We simply cannot cheap-sell our way to prosperity with retail projects which do not import enough sales tax dollars to produce a noticeable gain in revenue.

The problem we have in this is exactly what Bartlet (sic) is afraid of with the public safety tax and what every GOP legislator in Oklahoma is afraid of: "tax increases".  Whether it's personal income-based or property tax-based they don't want to be labeled with raising taxes even if it means abolishing one method of funding for another they still consider it an increase even if the net cost is negligible to most people.

Sales tax is regressive, and it places all the tax burden on citizens, none of it on business. It especially taxes the poor because such a large percentage of their income is spent on retail goods. We even tax food! There is no way we should have sales tax on groceries. I do support sales tax on internet purchases, but that's not the real long term answer.

This is why I have such a hard time with Boren's sales tax proposal for schools. He's letting the state off the hook for destroying the state tax base by giving schools more money from an expanded regressive tax that disproportionately impacts the poor. Schools need more money, but the path to do that is by a graduated income tax on personal income and property taxes on everyone including business.

[cannon_fodder]

In the last 30 years, the City of Tulsa has gained 40,000 people. BUT --- thirty years ago everyone within 50 miles came to Tulsa to do their shopping, to go out to eat, or to see a new release movie.  The fact that you can do all of those things in any suburb now probably accounts for the wash. Add in the fact that the internet is a thing, and I'm surprised it is at break even.

Conan hit the internet sales tax on the head. If it was workable, lets talk about it. But it isn't workable. Worse yet - it often isn't legal. The reason I pay sales tax at Walmart is because the City is provide infrastructure, police, and other services to Walmart. The employees contribute to the local economy. The shoppers live in Tulsa. Everyone is part of the community, and everyone is subject to City of Tulsa tax jurisdiction. That isn't true for retailers outside of Oklahoma, I bought a candle from garage based company in Minneapolis - how is it fair to require that person to remit funds on my behalf to Tulsa?

I'm not opposed to taxes in general, I get that we need taxes.  But sales taxes are a predictably unreliable source of revenue. Our continued reliance on sales tax revenue encourages stupid behavior (like tax incentives to attract a Walmart) and discourages development opportunities by hindering tax policy.

Small government, right? Then let cities set their own tax policies.

[PonderInc]

Personally, I have no problem with the idea of internet sales taxes.  And I think it would be possible to set up a national database of tax rates based on zip code that could be used by all vendors and updated by local taxing authorities as needed.

One could argue that every time you get a shipment from an out of town retailer, their deliveries arrive via local infrastructure.  It wouldn't be possible to sell to you without that public benefit.  Until they start delivering by drone, all those trucks still travel (and damage) our roads. 

But if you follow that logic (a shipping tax?), you'd have to pay taxes on every road you traveled.  Which would essentially require every single road to be a toll road.

Which would be a royal pain, but would at least only affect people who use the roads.  I am currently being waaaay overtaxed for road widening and maintenance for streets I will never (or rarely) drive on.  And I'm not receiving a break for bicycling, even though I cause 1/65,000th of the damage a car does every time I traverse a street by bike.

So... back to property taxes as a simple and logical alternative.

[Townsend]

I believe both The Tulsa Mayor and OKC mayor lobbied to allow the cities to collect on other sources and were smacked on the nose with a newspaper.

[Conan71]

Personally, I have no problem with the idea of internet sales taxes.  And I think it would be possible to set up a national database of tax rates based on zip code that could be used by all vendors and updated by local taxing authorities as needed.

One could argue that every time you get a shipment from an out of town retailer, their deliveries arrive via local infrastructure.  It wouldn't be possible to sell to you without that public benefit.  Until they start delivering by drone, all those trucks still travel (and damage) our roads. 

But if you follow that logic (a shipping tax?), you'd have to pay taxes on every road you traveled.  Which would essentially require every single road to be a toll road.

Which would be a royal pain, but would at least only affect people who use the roads.  I am currently being waaaay overtaxed for road widening and maintenance for streets I will never (or rarely) drive on.  And I'm not receiving a break for bicycling, even though I cause 1/65,000th of the damage a car does every time I traverse a street by bike.

So... back to property taxes as a simple and logical alternative.

The only way I could see that even remotely working is if a commerce host like eBay or Amazon handled collection, withheld and performed distribution of sales taxes to the proper taxing authorities.  Up to now eBay has lobbied heavily against such a tax and they are arguably the biggest mom & pop online mall with thousands if not millions of people making part or all of their income on there. 

As it is right now MC and I are pretty covered up on time between our day jobs and this business.  If we needed to hire someone to handle sales tax compliance I'd be better off shutting the business down and with it would go the income tax we pay on our profits.  The business allows us to accelerate our retirement goals, pays for some nice vacations, and some toys.  We could survive quite well without it if it got too complicated.  Many others are in the same boat.  Plus you'd still have a regressive tax.

The talk of a national sales tax is a non-starter as well.  That would fall into a black hole in DC and wouldn't benefit cities or states where they need it.

[cannon_fodder]

Ponder: the two issues you are overlooking is 1) there is a lack of legal jurisdiction by Tulsa to tax someone in Minneapolis and 2) practicality: A) the poor candle maker in Minneapolis would have to send sales tax checks for $1.50 to a thousand different jurisdictions every month (assuming a database existed allowing them to collect the tax)  B) other retailers would have to know if it was a taxable transaction in each jurisdiction (in Iowa a pumpkin or gourd is taxable if sold as decoration, but not taxable if sold as food)  C) still others would have to verify the tax exempt status of whole sellers, Indian tribes, etc. and D) the retailer is now subject to audit from every jurisdiction it sold goods to.

As Conan pointed out, for a small business it just simply isn't possible. If, as you say, there was a better system --- I have no issue with it as a practical matter of needing to raise revenue. But there are better sources that are not regressive and don't touch upon those issues.

[Red Arrow]

Sales tax is regressive, ...   It especially taxes the poor because such a large percentage of their income is spent on retail goods. We even tax food! There is no way we should have sales tax on groceries.

We should not have sales tax on groceries, clothes and prescription drugs.  I think we do not have sales tax on prescription drugs already (or it is included in the price).

I do support sales tax on internet purchases, but that's not the real long term answer.

I agree it is generally unworkable.

but the path to do that is by a graduated income tax on personal income and property taxes on everyone including business.

I could support a modified flat tax on income.  Allow a basic deduction for living to everyone.  A higher deduction for family dependents would be easy, we already do that.  Above the threshold, everyone pays the same percentage.  No additional deductions.  I might consent to a deduction for interest on a primary house that the family actually lives in full time.  No summer homes included.

[Red Arrow]

But if you follow that logic (a shipping tax?), you'd have to pay taxes on every road you traveled.  Which would essentially require every single road to be a toll road.

We've had that discussion several times.

Which would be a royal pain, but would at least only affect people who use the roads.  I am currently being waaaay overtaxed for road widening and maintenance for streets I will never (or rarely) drive on.  And I'm not receiving a break for bicycling, even though I cause 1/65,000th of the damage a car does every time I traverse a street by bike.

I am being waaaay over taxed for bike trails I cannot drive my car on.

[Vashta Nerada]

"And then, instead of using Vision for the big, fancy stuff, we are lopping off part of Vision to take care of operations. Do we see the vicious cycle?"

TPD has no intention of working within is budget, and every intention of making it everyone else's problem.

Just for fun, has anyone accounted for how much $$$ they regularly siphon off of the city's Sinking Fund to pay off settlements and lawsuits?

[rebound]

I could support a modified flat tax on income.  Allow a basic deduction for living to everyone.  A higher deduction for family dependents would be easy, we already do that.  Above the threshold, everyone pays the same percentage.  No additional deductions.  I might consent to a deduction for interest on a primary house that the family actually lives in full time.  No summer homes included.

That is almost exactly what I've been discussing in a different circle.   Basic principle, every adult (or working person) gets the first XX dollars of income tax free.  Tie that to poverty rate, or similar. (The idea being "it costs this much, at a bare minimum, to live...)  After that, each individual gets taxed the same rate regardless of income.  No deductions at all.  Not for being married, not for kids, not for houses, none.  It gets the govt. out of indirectly managing behaviors, and would be incredibly easy to manage. 

[Vision 2025]

Ponder: the two issues you are overlooking is 1) there is a lack of legal jurisdiction by Tulsa to tax someone in Minneapolis and 2) practicality: A) the poor candle maker in Minneapolis would have to send sales tax checks for $1.50 to a thousand different jurisdictions every month (assuming a database existed allowing them to collect the tax)  B) other retailers would have to know if it was a taxable transaction in each jurisdiction (in Iowa a pumpkin or gourd is taxable if sold as decoration, but not taxable if sold as food)  C) still others would have to verify the tax exempt status of whole sellers, Indian tribes, etc. and D) the retailer is now subject to audit from every jurisdiction it sold goods to.

As Conan pointed out, for a small business it just simply isn't possible. If, as you say, there was a better system --- I have no issue with it as a practical matter of needing to raise revenue. But there are better sources that are not regressive and don't touch upon those issues.

Regardless of my day job, I respectfully disagree.  

Sales Tax is already a point of delivery tax.  Take for instance a load of lumber or concrete ordered for a construction project.  The materials may be loaded from a yard in Broken Arrow however the tax is applied and remitted at the rate and point of delivery in say Glenpool... happens every day.

As for internet purchases they have to be delivered, and with legal authorization the seller could easily provide the shipper (USPS, FedEx, UPS, etc.) with the actual sale amount and since they already have the point of delivery (to the customer) they could easily remit the appropriate sales tax using add-on software to their delivery system and make a small percentage for the processing.  Seems like the Postal Service could use it.

Sorry but I don't see the challenge for the butcher, the baker or the candlestick maker and increasing the tax base is a great way to reduce the burden by eliminating it on groceries if purchased at a local store.

KHC

[Cats Cats Cats]

Regardless of my day job, I respectfully disagree.  

Sales Tax is already a point of delivery tax.  Take for instance a load of lumber or concrete ordered for a construction project.  The materials may be loaded from a yard in Broken Arrow however the tax is applied and remitted at the rate and point of delivery in say Glenpool... happens every day.

As for internet purchases they have to be delivered, and with legal authorization the seller could easily provide the shipper (USPS, FedEx, UPS, etc.) with the actual sale amount and since they already have the point of delivery (to the customer) they could easily remit the appropriate sales tax using add-on software to their delivery system and make a small percentage for the processing.  Seems like the Postal Service could use it.

Sorry but I don't see the challenge for the butcher, the baker or the candlestick maker and increasing the tax base is a great way to reduce the burden by eliminating it on groceries if purchased at a local store.

KHC

I sell things online.. I sell things in Oklahoma.  Trying to pay tax at point of delivery just in Oklahoma is pain in the donkey.

First off the list changes quarterly
I have to enter a code for the county and for the city tax.
In places like Oklahoma City to be accurate I have to figure out which of the four counties it is to get the correct tax rate for that person.
https://www.ok.gov/tax/documents/copo1Q16.pdf

Now I have to do that for every state.. That will work great.
Places like Amazon know the tax rates for Oklahoma.  But I am the one that has to actually pay the state.
As far the previous thousands of jurisdictions. At least in Oklahoma we pay the state and they send out the city/county payments.  Hopefully they do the same elsewhere.

[Vision 2025]

My method moves the burden from the seller to the Shipper, for a small fee.

[AquaMan]

Shippers like FedEx are increasingly utilizing third party contractors to deliver. So, the burden is partly or entirely theirs. If it takes them more time, that is money.

Does Uber and their drivers collect tax or are they exempt?

[Cats Cats Cats]

If I'm not responsible for taxes they can do what they want. I still don't think they will put the burden on shippers.