Posted on 03/27/2007 8:34:42 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Report: N.J., 18 Other States Tax Poverty-Stricken
(CBS/AP) TRENTON New Jersey is among 19 states that tax families living in poverty, according to a new report released Tuesday.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found two-parent families of four who earn less than the federal poverty line -- $20,615 per year -- must pay income taxes in 19 of the 42 states that levy that tax.
"Families with very limited means are still taxed too much by states," said Jason Levitis, the report's author.
New Jersey doesn't require residents who earn less than $20,000 per year to pay income taxes, but the center found poor families in New Jersey who make between $20,000 and $20,615 owed $219.
"In a high-cost state like New Jersey, even people making well above $20,000 still can't afford basic necessities," said Jon Shure, president of New Jersey Policy Perspective, which has advocated for tax reforms to help poor families. "So taxing anyone who is below the poverty line is especially burdensome. It blocks their climb up the economic ladder."
Gov. Jon S. Corzine last year proposed increasing New Jersey's income tax threshold to $25,000, but withdrew the plan amid state budget woes. This year he has proposed extending the state's Earned Income Tax Credit to apply to families who earn up to $38,000, but the Legislature must approve the proposal.
(Excerpt) Read more at wcbstv.com ...
Any state with legalized gambling (casinos, lotteries, etc.) taxes the poor.
FWIW, I suspect this was one of the underlying reasons why New Jersey's tax system has become increasingly regressive in recent years. There's a serious concern here over the number of high-income taxpayers that have been fleeing to other states.
Every state with a sales tax is taxing people in poverty. Any time a poor person buys something, they are paying sales tax. there's no sales tax exemption based on income.
If you make an income, then it should be taxed, just like everyone else.
I would bet that Alabama's tax revenues would take a big hit if this tax was deleted on at or below poverty level folks. Even if they dropped it, I suspect it would be added in sales taxes.
I think someone did a study on how much benefits one gets for each dollar they paid in taxes. The bottom 20 percent of income earners get about $ 6.50 in benefits from the federal government for each dollar they pay in taxes, while the upper 20 percent gets only $ .40 in benefits from the federal government for each dollar they pay in taxes.
In what Bizarro World variation of America is it fair to have a tax specifically aimed at one socio-economic group? The rich should be soaked to subsidize the rest of the population?
In a high-cost state like New Jersey ...
Wonder why?
Absolutely. Untaxing the poor is a bad idea. It creates a group of voters that are guaranteed to vote for more entitlements, because they know they won't pay for them.
The fact that government spending is too high for an equal levy per person is completely hidden by a progressive tax system.
"Poverty stricken" seems to indicate that it was an unavioidable condition, like an illness. In fact, we know that poverty (outside of a few cases of very bad luck) is caused by behavior.
If those in that position take advantage of all the assistance available to them, they're coming out way ahead of the pittance in taxes they pay.
That would be a good thing if it were true, since nobody should be excluded from having to pay for government.
Unfortunately, it isn't true. Most state sales taxes do not tax used goods, groceries, medical supplies, rent, utilities, or most services. In other words, most of what the truly poor spend money on is not subject to sales taxes. They don't spend very much of their income on clothing, or new goods. Cars and even TV's and appliances are often purchased used.
That sounds about right. $6.50 per dollar paid is unbelievable!
Rush reporting on this situation right now.
Needs list of other states. CBS/AP only talk about East Coast states.
Wonderful NJ!
No, state-sponsored gambling is a tax on the stupid.
Stupid and poor are not necessarily the same - I was poor when I was working my way through college, but still not stupid enough to buy lottery tickets.
That very neatly summarizes the Dimocrat Party position, yes.
My own theory is that we could eliminate poverty by taxing it out of existence - make it economically undesirable to be poor with an inverted income tax structure.
Whaddaya think?
First rule of economics: If you want more of something, then subsidize it; if you want less of something, tax it. I think that principle applies here!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.