Report: State must cut spending, hike taxes or both

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

State officials next year will have to make more spending cuts, increase taxes or both as they face the most challenging fiscal outlook in 30 years.

Those were the conclusions of an Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute report released Thursday detailing the impact of the recession on the two-year budget that goes into effect July 1, 2011.

Dwindling tax revenues will cause a projected $1.3 billion budget gap as the state enters its next budget, which would have an estimated spending base of $14.6 billion, according to the report.

That deficit equals the amount needed to pay for government functions such as prisons, police, parks and the General Assembly—essentially everything but education and social services.

To make up the gap, the state will have to look at increasing sales or income taxes, eliminating services or a combination of both, said John Ketzenberger, the Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute’s president.

“Their only choices are to make cuts and hope that the economy grows enough that cuts and growth offset the deficit—and there’s really no sign the economy is going to grow at a rate that’s enough to make that happen—or make cuts and look at increasing revenues through taxes,” Ketzenberger said.

Gov. Mitch Daniels’ administration refuted the notion that tax increases could be needed.

“We’ve proven time and again we will make the reforms and decisions required to live within our means and keep Indiana in the black without raising taxes,” Chris Ruhl, the director of the state's Office of Management and Budget said in a statement.  “We are leading the nation in recovering lost jobs in large part because we did not raise taxes while other states did. The Institute’s suggestion of a general tax increase on Hoosiers is a terrible and unnecessary idea and one the governor firmly opposes.”

The state has faced tough economic times for the last two years in the midst of a long-lasting recession. A high unemployment rate—now at more than 10 percent—and slow gross domestic product growth have made sales and income tax revenues volatile.

That’s a problem, the report says, because those two taxes make up 80 percent of Indiana’s revenue.

The result is apparent: The state’s revenue collections in 2010 were more than $900 million less than in 2008.

Indiana House Speaker B. Patrick Bauer said the report highlights the challenge Indiana faces.

"Now that we see the results of a study by an independent group of fiscal experts, the public can see that Indiana is not the island of prosperity that the governor has continually talked about these past few years," Bauer, D-South Bend, said in a prepared statement.

In the last few years, a $2.7-billion boost from federal stimulus programs and about $3 billion in spending reductions by Daniels’ administration helped the state survive the losses.

The stimulus and many of the governor’s tactics, however, aren’t sustainable. And the economy is hardly expected to rebound next year.

That means the next budget, according to the report, will require “some creative thinking and tactics.”

If there is good news in the report, it’s that Indiana is hardly alone. The national Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that 46 states faced shortfalls in their 2009 or 2010 budgets.

Compared with states such as Illinois, Ketzenberger said, Indiana is faring well.

“But tough times are on us,” he said.


  • handbagsonsales.com
    very well very well
  • saç ekimi
    it is good luck . it is very good very good.
  • x
  • That Man Mitch
    That man Mitch has been saying Indiana is doing great. The stimulus money Mitch pocketed rather than use it to add to the economy. Will the legislatures take a drastic paycut until the economy recovers. The General Assembly is a big hog, not to metion the Governor's office. Are we still funding Mitch to live elsewhere other than in the Governor's mansion?
  • Easy to fix
    Cut spending on education (we spend way too much) and social services.

    Stimulus? The Fed Govt thinks it can continue to spend $4Trillion and take in $2.5T in taxes. Is there any politician out there that is willing to say THE FREE RIDE IS OVER? No. So we are doomed.
  • Cut spending
    This is not a "budget" problem. A budget is a projected level of income vs. expenses and is not reality. It is time for checkbook accounting using what is reality and not what is merely a hope. You/the State can't spend it if it isn't in the bank and no check bouncing. Same thing applies to various depts. If they don't have it they can't spend it. That is how the citizens of this State must manage their funds and survival. The people in both State & Federal gov't positions think the taxpayers are bottomless pits of money.

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Gay marriage is coming, whether or not these bigots and zealots like it or not. We must work to ensure future generations remember the likes of Greg Zoeller like they do the racists of our past...in shame.

  2. Perhaps a diagram of all the network connections of all politicians to their supporters and those who are elite/wealthy and how they have voted on bills that may have benefited their supporters. The truth may hurt, but there are no non-disclosures in government.

  3. I'm sure these lawyers were having problems coming up with any non-religious reason to ban same-sex marriage. I've asked proponents of this ban the question many times and the only answers I have received were religious reasons. Quite often the reason had to do with marriage to a pet or marriage between a group even though those have nothing at all to do with this. I'm looking forward to less discrimination in our state soon!

  4. They never let go of the "make babies" argument. It fails instantaneously because a considerable percentage of heterosexual marriages don't produce any children either. Although if someone wants to pass a law that any couple, heterosexual or homosexual, cannot be legally married (and therefore not utilize all legal, financial, and tax benefits that come with it) until they have produced a biological child, that would be fun to see as a spectator. "All this is a reflection of biology," Fisher answered. "Men and women make babies, same-sex couples do not... we have to have a mechanism to regulate that, and marriage is that mechanism." The civil contract called marriage does NOTHING to regulate babymaking, whether purposefully or accidental. These conservatives really need to understand that sex education and access to birth control do far more to regulate babymaking in this country. Moreover, last I checked, same-sex couples can make babies in a variety of ways, and none of them are by accident. Same-sex couples often foster and adopt the children produced by the many accidental pregnancies from mixed-sex couples who have failed at self-regulating their babymaking capabilities.

  5. Every parent I know with kids from 6 -12 has 98.3 on its car radio all the time!! Even when my daughter isn't in the car I sometimes forget to change stations. Not everybody wants to pay for satellite radio. This will be a huge disappointment to my 9 year old. And to me - there's so many songs on the radio that I don't want her listening to.