Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

It would be interesting to know if similar proposals have recently appeared in any other Texas newspapers.
1 posted on 06/04/2002 11:27:01 AM PDT by Pining_4_TX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Pining_4_TX
And don't even think that an income tax will replace the property tax, or even reduce it.
2 posted on 06/04/2002 11:32:47 AM PDT by grobdriver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX; Bigun
I have read the article, and have also noticed that there has been much talk about "Robin Hood", property tax, sales tax, and state income tax on local talk shows. I have also noticed that similar arguments are being made in Tennessee.

That being said, I have only lived in Texas for less than three years. I have been advised by more experienced Texas Freeper natives that there has always been talk about a state income tax behind the scenes; the truth is that there will NEVER be a state income tax in Texas for various state constitutional and political reasons.

When I lived in Illinois, they raised state income taxes in the late 80's (temporarily, btw). They used the same excuses as Tennessee. The citizens of Illinois are still waiting for those tax surcharges to be repealed. Need I say more.

Still keep an eye out for this. You never know what the liberals are up to.

3 posted on 06/04/2002 11:36:33 AM PDT by PetroniDE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
First TN, now TX. They are destroying all refuges. Are the liberals trying to make the entire country a tax hell at the state level too? In Florida, I think we need to form a militia that will tar and feather anybody who utters the words "income tax".
6 posted on 06/04/2002 11:44:56 AM PDT by StockAyatollah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
The Houston Chronicle has been pushing a state income tax for years. I almost posted the editorial it ran today, because it had so many goofy reasons for supporting it, such as the suggestion that the "wealthy" who will pay more taxes under this deal will enjoy a bigger federal tax deduction!

But I didn't. Republicans are going to get a commanding advantage in the state legislature this year, and I doubt any such bill is allowed for discussion on the floor.

7 posted on 06/04/2002 11:45:17 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Liberals just looooove an income tax, because it's so easy for them to create loopholes and exemptions to it to reward their followers and penalize their opponents, i.e., those who work for a living.

They just love to bandy about terms like "fairness" and "greed", as in discussing the "fairness" of their proposals, and the "greed" of anyone opposing them.

Just ask the Tennesseans, where investment income is called "unearned" income!

9 posted on 06/04/2002 11:53:15 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
NONONONONONONONONOOOOO

I am fixin to move my happy a$$ to Texas here in a year or so, getting the heck out of VA to which I've been paying state taxes to fund new office suite carpeting for the wine-and-white-linen set for the past ??? years... I was kinda looking forward to leaving all that crap behind, y'all! Thought you Texicans had more sense...

11 posted on 06/04/2002 11:56:43 AM PDT by maxwell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Organize your anti tax people now. Get yourself some good talk radio guys to lead the fight such as we have in TN, and be ready to show up at the capital each and every time they even think they want to talk about an income tax.... and most of ALL...be READY for the fight of your life!
13 posted on 06/04/2002 12:00:31 PM PDT by D. Miles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
From what I heard, this was originally proposed as a voluntary income tax. If you didn't want to pay a high property or sales tax, you could voluntarily pay an income tax.

Well, many know how "voluntary" the Federal income tax is. It is the first step and they will try to sneak an income tax into Texas by saying it is voluntary.

Don't be fooled by the word "voluntary".

16 posted on 06/04/2002 12:19:51 PM PDT by SpottedBeaver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
While I don't want to see state income taxes in any way, shape or form, something needs to be done about the ever upward spiraling property taxes, they are beating me to death.
17 posted on 06/04/2002 12:22:45 PM PDT by ScreamingFist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX; Dog Gone
I hope we remain alert, because this is the first shot across the bow

This is not the first shot and has been going on for twenty years. The problem now is that we have lots of new people in the state, taxes are far too high, and old line Rats are regaining control of the party behind the scenes. (read Sharp, Barnes etc.)

They will try to push this on us every two years until they win.

19 posted on 06/04/2002 12:29:14 PM PDT by HoustonCurmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Here are some starting points google turned up:

http://advocate4texas.4mg.com/newpage5.htm

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/

http://www.governor.state.tx.us/

http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/

http://www.window.state.tx.us/txgovinf/tbs.html

http://204.65.49.78:81/

http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/pubs/books/budget.html

http://www.protex.org/

22 posted on 06/04/2002 12:40:37 PM PDT by GailA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Well to do so will require the changes as outlined in the Texas State Constitution......

The Texas Constitution

Article 8 - TAXATION AND REVENUE

Section 24 - PERSONAL INCOME TAX; DEDICATION OF PROCEEDS

(a) A general law enacted by the legislature that imposes a tax on the net incomes of natural persons, including a person's share of partnership and unincorporated association income, must provide that the portion of the law imposing the tax not take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting in a statewide referendum held on the question of imposing the tax. The referendum must specify the rate of the tax that will apply to taxable income as defined by law.
(b) A general law enacted by the legislature that increases the rate of the tax, or changes the tax, in a manner that results in an increase in the combined income tax liability of all persons subject to the tax may not take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting in a statewide referendum held on the question of increasing the income tax. A determination of whether a bill proposing a change in the tax would increase the combined income tax liability of all persons subject to the tax must be made by comparing the provisions of the proposed change in law with the provisions of the law for the most recent year in which actual tax collections have been made. A referendum held under this subsection must specify the manner in which the proposed law would increase the combined income tax liability of all persons subject to the tax.
(c) Except as provided by Subsection (b) of this section, the legislature may amend or repeal a tax approved by the voters under this section without submitting the amendment or the repeal to the voters as provided by Subsection (a) of this section.
(d) If the legislature repeals a tax approved by the voters under this section, the legislature may reenact the tax without submitting the reenactment to the voters as provided by Subsection (a) of this section only if the effective date of the reenactment of the tax is before the first anniversary of the effective date of the repeal.
(e) The legislature may provide for the taxation of income in a manner which is consistent with federal law.
(f) In the first year in which a tax described by Subsection (a) is imposed and during the first year of any increase in the tax that is subject to Subsection (b) of this section, not less than two-thirds of all net revenues remaining after payment of all refunds allowed by law and expenses of collection from the tax shall be used to reduce the rate of ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes levied for the support of primary and secondary public education. In subsequent years, not less than two-thirds of all net revenues from the tax shall be used to continue such ad valorem tax relief.
(g) The net revenues remaining after the dedication of money from the tax under Subsection (f) of this section shall be used for support of education, subject to legislative appropriation, allocation, and direction.
(h) The maximum rate at which a school district may impose ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes is reduced by an amount equal to one cent per $100 valuation for each one cent per $100 valuation that the school district's ad valorem maintenance and operation tax is reduced by the minimum amount of money dedicated under Subsection (f) of this section, provided that a school district may subsequently increase the maximum ad valorem maintenance and operation tax rate if the increased maximum rate is approved by a majority of the voters of the school district voting at an election called and held for that purpose. The legislature by general law shall provide for the tax relief that is required by Subsection (f) and this subsection.
(i) Subsections (f) and (h) of this section apply to ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes levied by a school district on or after the first January 1 after the date on which a tax on the net incomes of natural persons, including a person's share of partnership and unincorporated association income, begins to apply to that income, except that if the income tax begins to apply on a January 1, Subsections (f) and (h) of this section apply to ad valorem maintenance and operation taxes levied on or after that date.
(j) A provision of this section prevails over a conflicting provision of Article VII, Section 3, of this Constitution to the extent of the conflict. (Added Nov. 2, 1993.)

37 posted on 06/04/2002 1:42:48 PM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!!!!

wish we could secede ala walter williams suggestion ;)

41 posted on 06/04/2002 1:48:45 PM PDT by christine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
At this point, I would hope people are aware, if the state says it's proposing an income tax to relieve the burden of another tax, the people will most certainly have both.
45 posted on 06/04/2002 1:51:35 PM PDT by mconder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Better hold on to your hat's down there, feel's like a storm brewing! Start your fight now. Blackbird.
62 posted on 06/04/2002 3:59:41 PM PDT by BlackbirdSST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Didn't they try this state income tax thing years ago when I was a kid, it has to be voted on, I think, and it was soundly defeated. I don't know, now that we have so may outsiders in Texas, what will happen.

One thing you can count on is vote fraud so that will have to be watched very, very closely. Texas has a 7.8% sales tax, I consider that a fair and evenly distributed tax. Austin is just going to have to get by with that.

68 posted on 06/05/2002 6:04:58 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
A fallout from this is that the Union might get an extra 4 states as Texans get pissed off at Austin and exercise their Treaty rights.
72 posted on 06/05/2002 6:30:19 AM PDT by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
Bump and bookmarked.
82 posted on 06/05/2002 12:57:31 PM PDT by Liberal Classic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson