NFIB chief fears sales tax talk

September 3, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Small business is being treated better and better by the Indiana General Assembly, says the state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, but the coming session could be tough.

Barbara Quandt noted in the group’s report from the 2010 session this week that 28 of the 100 members in the House voted with the NFIB all of the time on issues of greatest importance to the organization. That was better than last year, and she thinks the rate might climb in the coming session because legislators appear to want to help create jobs.

“We’re very fortunate in Indiana to have a legislature that by and large listens to small business,” Quandt said.

Still, she’s concerned about Statehouse chatter of extending the 7-percent state sales tax to services. That would clobber her members from two directions: Small firms would see their sales get hurt, and, because they buy lots of outsourced services, they’d also pay the tax.

“We’re going to have to be watching really, really closely,” she said.

The state is certainly desperate for revenue. What are your feelings about taxing services?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • stupid idea
    INDIANA FISCAL POLICY'S JOHN KETZENBERGER SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR PUSHING THIS.
  • Equity and Fairness
    Just as an income tax is more appropriate than property taxes in today's economy, so a sales tax that treats the purchases of services equally with the purchases of goods is also more appropriate to the structure of our economy, and better reflects the elements of society that put a demand on the provision of government services.
  • BAD for IN
    On paper, it may look as if Indiana could raise more revenue if it starts taxing professional services. In reality, a service tax will put Indiana businesses at a huge disadvantage. Taxing professional services is a bad idea. Those in the service industry compete for jobs regularly with out-of-state companies. If Indiana companies are taxed for their work, they�ll be at a competitive disadvantage. A service tax will hurt local firms and drive away large firms with branch offices here, costing Hoosiers jobs. None of the surrounding states (Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan or Illinois) impose a tax on professional services, it will be tempting to go there for lower-cost services.

    In fact, only a handful of states across the country have such a tax. Florida, Connecticut and Michigan were forced to repeal the service tax, because the tax is difficult to manage, and did not bring the states the additional revenue windfall they had envisioned.

    If Indiana is serious about economic development ââ?¬â?? about promoting the benefits of working in Indiana and supporting Indiana companies ââ?¬â?? then state lawmakers quickly will dismiss any thoughts of taxing the service industry.
  • New Frontier
    If the government is so hard up for money, why don't they tap a new cash crop (marajuana) or legalize prostitution which isn't much different than what they do with lobbyists?

    Both would provide plenty of cash and create new jobs;)
  • Hey Mike
    Thanks for paying attention to what they Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute has to say, but please read the report before reaching a conclusion. The report, issued last October and available at www.indianafiscal.org, analyzes the state's sales tax, puts it in perspective of the rest of the country and estimates the revenue potential if the tax was extended to more services. We even include a scenario of what the state could do with that additional revenue. Nowhere in the report, however, does the IFPI advocate for its extension. That decision is best left to the General Assembly and those who do advocate for or against an extension.

Post a comment to this blog

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
  1. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

  2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

  3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

  4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

  5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.

ADVERTISEMENT