Skip to main content

By Michael Wood, Third and State

The latest proposal to eliminate property taxes in Pennsylvania would leave school districts with $2.6 billion less in overall funding within five years, according to an analysis from the Pennsylvania Independent Fiscal Office. Matthew Knittel of the IFO presented the findings during a Pennsylvania Senate Finance Committee hearing Tuesday.

The plan — proposed in both HB 76 and SB 76 — would swap school property taxes for higher state income and sales taxes, largely on individuals. The IFO, which did not take a position on the bill, compared what could be expected from the new mix of state funding to projected property tax revenue over time and tallied the fiscal impact on school districts and state government.

Much like with previous versions of this property tax plan, the numbers don't add up. The IFO projects school districts would receive $112 million less in funding than they would have received from property taxes in 2014-15, which grows to $2.6 billion by 2018-19

The reason is fairly simple. The bills place an artificial limit (the lower of sales tax growth or rate of inflation) on how much in new income and sales tax dollars go to school districts to replace lost property taxes in future years. This is true even if those state tax collections exceed the caps, as they likely would in most years. The bill does not address how schools are to pay for increasing pension obligations, let alone costs for health care, supplies, or utilities that may increase in price faster than inflation.

Like all tax swaps, this one picks winners and losers — with Pennsylvania's school students and the state's future among the biggest losers.

Corporations, which pay about 30% of all property taxes and are among the largest taxpayers in many districts, would come out as big winners. Their school property taxes would be eliminated, but unlike individuals or small businesses, corporations would pay no more in state taxes. Instead, their share of school funding would be shifted to individuals and small business owners who pay income taxes and consumers who pay sales tax. (Many goods and services purchased by businesses would remain exempt from the state sales tax under this plan).

Renters, including many seniors, would see higher sales tax and income tax bills, but little "relief" in the form of lower rent payments. For low-income families, this plan is Robin Hood in reverse, with poor renters paying higher taxes to subsidize tax cuts for wealthy property owners.

For non-elderly homeowners, it's a mixed bag. Homeowners would see their local property taxes decline, but their state income taxes would rise. Many homeowners would also see their federal taxes increase, as they would lose a deduction for paying property taxes.

Many school districts have already adopted earned income taxes to reduce dependence on property taxes. Taxpayers in those districts would pay increased state taxes to subsidize property tax cuts in other parts of the state.

The change could make houses in Pennsylvania less affordable in the future. When California adopted property tax limits, it saw housing prices skyrocket. 

Many seniors and people with medical conditions would have to pay sales tax on an array of health care goods and services.

Finally, schools would receive much less than they need to help students succeed. Good schools are the lifeblood of a community and its economy. If we shortchange our schools, how will Pennsylvania ever prepare better workers for tomorrow's economy or attract and retain businesses that need skilled workers?

Paying property taxes are a real problem for some homeowners and in some specific areas of the state. We should address those concerns with targeted reforms rather than a one-size-fits-all approach that has been adopted nowhere else in the nation. Some of the reform efforts, like Act 1 of 2006, have helped moderate property tax growth — and the IFO report reflects that. Many districts have adopted earned income taxes to lessen reliance on property taxes.

The most effective way to ease Pennsylvania's over-reliance on local sources for school funding is to increase the state's support of education. Pennsylvania trails most states in state funding for schools, creating tremendous inequities across districts. A good education should not depend on where a child lives. The state needs to make — and keep — a commitment to provide a larger share of school funding. That is the key to a healthier economy and a better Pennsylvania.

Originally posted to ThirdandState on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 12:51 PM PDT.

Also republished by Pittsburgh Area Kossacks, Philly Kos, and DKos Pennsylvania.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  A big issue in Ohio too (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BachFan

    The 1997 DeRolph decision, which came out of a rural school district in Appalachian southeastern Ohio, found Ohio's over-reliance on local property taxes was unconstitutional, but provided no sanctions for not doing anything. And that's exactly what our legislature has done for six years — nothing —  despite two additional decisions against local property tax over-reliance.

    We were promised decades ago that the lottery would provide a who new gusher of education money. Instead, they have subtracted a dollar of general fund money for each dollar raised by the lottery. So it's nothing but a wash.

    Now the state is chopped its contributions, creating a massive wave of school levies. My city has its second in two years which, if passed, will result in the taxes on my modest condo having gone up more than $400 in two years. That's without the increased the county is asking for health & human services due to state cute, and the Metroparks increase. Total increase will be over $500. It's no longer a question of whether I will lose my home to tax foreclosure but when (It's close to fully paid off but that market is such that it would be difficult to sell for even half its assessed value)

    Absolutely, the state should take responsibility. But our governor, Taxin' John Kasich, has cut state income taxes in a way that almost entirely benefits those with six-figure or higher incoems (if you make $50,000 or less, your cut will not buy you a pizza), while raising sales taxes and causing new levies to be placed on the ballots.

    So we get more and more taxes and less and less for education.

    Thanks for this diary. This insanity has to stop if we're serious about quality education for all kids and remaining competitive with other countries. But we clearly aren't.

    Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

    by anastasia p on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 03:57:52 PM PDT

  •  I didn't think school funding in PA (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BachFan

    could get any worse.  Apparently it can.  We live in MD and are hoping to retire to Pittsburgh to be near our kids.  It's stuff like this that gives me second thoughts.

    “It is the job of the artist to think outside the boundaries of permissible thought and dare say things that no one else will say."—Howard Zinn

    by musiclady on Thu Oct 17, 2013 at 04:29:58 PM PDT

Click here for the mobile view of the site