IBJNews

Governor backs alternative business tax cut

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence threw his support behind House Republicans' watered-down business tax proposal Tuesday amid outcry from local leaders over the potential to damage their already cash-strapped budgets.

Pence originally sought the elimination of the state's business personal property tax, which is levied on business equipment, when he announced his 2014 legislative agenda last month. But Chris Atkins, director of the Office of Management and Budget, told members of the House Ways and Means Committee that the governor would back an alternative measure crafted by House Republican leaders.

"I'm here with you to share the governor's support for House Bill 1001," Atkins said. "He believes that while we made substantial progress on our tax climate in recent years, the business personal property tax remains an outlier that we need to deal with if we're truly going to attract jobs and investment moving forward."

The announcement marks one of the first clear signs of what the governor is seeking on an issue that's been at the center of his legislative agenda.

Pence wrote in his 2014 policy "roadmap" that he wanted to "eliminate the business personal property tax to spur new investment." But as opposition among local leaders grew, Pence began saying he would support a "phase-out" matched with undefined aid for localities.

Absent a proposal from Pence, Republican legislative leaders crafted their own proposals. House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, announced the chamber's plan would give counties the option to eliminate the tax on all new business equipment.

Senate Republican leaders, including the chairs of the tax and budget committees, submitted their own plan that would eliminate the personal property tax for small businesses and cut the corporate income tax. Atkins made no mention of the Senate plan on Tuesday.

The House bill's author, Rep. Eric Turner, R-Cicero, called the business tax one of the worst for the economy because it stalls the type of business growth and expansion lawmakers should encourage.

"The problem with the business personal property tax is it taxes capital investment," he said.

Chad Pittman, executive vice president for the semi-private Indiana Economic Development Corp., said the state is at a disadvantage when competing for jobs with neighboring states such as Illinois, which have eliminated the tax.

But the complete elimination of the tax, which is used to fill local coffers, came with a $1 billion price tag and no clear way to cover the budget holes it would create at the local level.

A parade of Indiana mayors told the panel those states found ways to refund localities the money lost without the tax. Evansville Mayor Lloyd Winnecke, a Republican, noted that a referendum being placed before Michigan voters also provides for replacement funding from the state.

"We hear that surrounding states have eliminated the business personal property tax, but let's not leave out this one important piece of the question," he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Be so glad when Pence is gone.
    Just to not let him put his name in for president.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. If I were a developer I would be looking at the Fountain Square and Fletcher Place neighborhoods instead of Broad Ripple. I would avoid the dysfunctional BRVA with all of their headaches. It's like deciding between a Blackberry or an iPhone 5s smartphone. BR is greatly in need of updates. It has become stale and outdated. Whereas Fountain Square, Fletcher Place and Mass Ave have become the "new" Broad Ripples. Every time I see people on the strip in BR on the weekend I want to ask them, "How is it you are not familiar with Fountain Square or Mass Ave? You have choices and you choose BR?" Long vacant storefronts like the old Scholar's Inn Bake House and ZA, both on prominent corners, hurt the village's image. Many business on the strip could use updated facades. Cigarette butt covered sidewalks and graffiti covered walls don't help either. The whole strip just looks like it needs to be power washed. I know there is more to the BRV than the 700-1100 blocks of Broad Ripple Ave, but that is what people see when they think of BR. It will always be a nice place live, but is quickly becoming a not-so-nice place to visit.

  2. I sure hope so and would gladly join a law suit against them. They flat out rob people and their little punk scam artist telephone losers actually enjoy it. I would love to run into one of them some day!!

  3. Biggest scam ever!! Took 307 out of my bank ac count. Never received a single call! They prey on new small business and flat out rob them! Do not sign up with these thieves. I filed a complaint with the ftc. I suggest doing the same ic they robbed you too.

  4. Woohoo! We're #200!!! Absolutely disgusting. Bring on the congestion. Indianapolis NEEDS it.

  5. So Westfield invested about $30M in developing Grand Park and attendance to date is good enough that local hotel can't meet the demand. Carmel invested $180M in the Palladium - which generates zero hotel demand for its casino acts. Which Mayor made the better decision?

ADVERTISEMENT