Date: 14 May 2008 14:55:33 -0700 From: "Senator Tom Harman" <senator.harman@senate.ca.gov> To: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org Subject: Harman Report: May 14, 2008 Message-ID: <130605-APP1sFU3b2ty00009eaf@smtp.cssrc.us>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
= [1]3D"Senator
=
=
Harman Report: May 14, 2008
=
=
=
= News of the Week=
[2]With Your Free Time and Extra= Money...
= [3]Vested= Interest
= [4]Paid= Sick Leave for All?
= [5]Death Tax
= [6]Waste Watchers Update: The Bucks Don't Stop at the
Education= Department
=
=
=
=
With Your Free Time
and Extra Money...
=
The National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has released its annual study about what it takes to comply with the federal tax code, and it is
not= good news for Americans. Those who use the 1040 forms spent an
average= of 24.2 hours and $207 to complete their returns this year.
That is up= from 23.3 hours and $179 just three years ago. If you are
self-employed,= you had it the worst: more than 80 hours. In all,
Americans spent 6.65= billion hours last year complying with federal
tax laws.
That= time is spent because the complexity of the tax code has
multiplied. David= Keating, the study's author, writes, "Seventy-three
years ago= the Form 1040 instructions were just two pages long. Even
when the income= tax became a mass tax during World War II, the
instructions took just four= pages. Today taxpayers must wade through
143 pages of instructions, well= over triple the number in 1975 and
nearly quadruple the number in 1985,= the year before taxes were
`simplified.' Today's short form,= at 48 lines, has double the number
of lines on the 1945 version of the= standard 1040 tax return."
The amount we spend on stuff= to help us pay our taxes is huge: $102
billion for software, postage, tax= preparers, etc. And it is likely
to get worse before (if) it gets better.= NTU warns us that the
Alternative Minimum Tax could apply to more than= 30 million taxpayers
in the next three years and its complexity will have= more of us
spending more time and more money all to make the IRS happy.
=
To see the NTU's tables and calculations, as well as read= about how
tax professionals get different bottom lines when working with= the
same set of taxpayer information, see the study here:
[7]http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=926&org_na
me=NTU
=
[8]Back to the top
=
Vested Interest
A recent Wall Street= Journal article by Stephen J. Entin, president
of the Institute of Research= on the Economics of Taxation, takes on
the current debate about extending= the Bush tax rate cuts or focusing
on tax credits for rearing children.= He observes that fewer people
are interested in tax rate reductions because= fewer people are
actually paying taxes, and that some conservatives are= pushing for
the family benefit. Entin writes, "The bottom half of= the income
distribution pays barely 3% of the income tax," and he= notes the Tax
Foundation's finding that "over 40% of the population= owes no federal
income tax, and about half who owe nothing actually get= net refunds."
Thus, "[f]or people who pay no income= tax, general government is
practically a free good." Indeed, if they= can get all the government
they need without paying and have more tax credits= that give them
even more money back, they are all for it. The problem is= the rest of
us end up paying more because the cost for general government= does
not go down. Indeed, with so many free riders, it just keeps going up. Entin says that if that happens at the expense of
"growth-oriented= tax reforms, the loss in pre-tax income may be
greater than the tax breaks."= I agree with his conclusion that "the
true pro-family solution is= less government, not more."
[9]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120770167885700061.html?mod=3
DdjemEditorialPage
=
[10]Back to the top
=
Paid Sick Leave for All?
I saw= the footage of Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (D-San Francisco)
presenting her= AB 2716 in the Assembly Labor and Employment
Committee. The bill passed= out of that committee easily on a 6-2 vote
and out of the Assembly Judiciary= Committee on a 7-3 vote. The bill
currently resides in the Assembly Appropriations= Committee. The bill
is a massive mandate that will require anybody who= employs a person
for at least seven days a year in California to provide= paid sick
leave benefits. This is a policy the city of San Francisco recently put in place.
The usual business lobbyists spoke against the= bill, talking about
how this is bad for business. The opposition did not,= however, have a
single speaker from San Francisco to testify how bad this= law has
been for businesses there. But what really bothers me is nobody= is
objecting to how huge an assault this is on our basic freedoms. This is not a creeping Leviathan; it is the genuine article. Is there any
level= of government meddling the people of California will resist?
Under= this bill, if you employ a baby sitter, gardener, tree trimmer,
whatever,= for what adds up to seven days a year, not only must you
provide paid sick= leave, you will need to keep track whether the sick
leave is taken for= that person, a relative, a friend, whomever.
Unless you do all this, you= will be a law-breaker. The best way to
not be a law-breaker, of course,= will be to not employ people at all.
I remain very disappointed= by the absence of voices defending out
basic liberties. If we do not fight= for limited government, the
American founding will have been in vain. This= philosophical issue is
far more important than whether businesses have= greater costs.
To see an edited version of the hearing on this= bill, go to:
[11]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hcz1yB8u73U
=
[12]Back to the top
=
Death Tax
Billionaire Warren Buffet= testified before Congress recently arguing
that the estate (a.k.a. "death")= tax should be maintained. He said
that the tax system should not further= reward those who already won
the "ovarian lottery," and warned= that the disparity between the rich
and poor was getting too great in the= U.S. Mr. Buffet is a very smart
man, but his reasoning on this issue is= way off. He did note that he
himself, as a billionaire, benefits greatly= from the tax system and
he mentioned that his wife's estate paid= over $110 million in taxes
upon her death. But he suggests that it should= have been more. Maybe
it is time for the flat tax at a low rate but on= all income so that
everyone, including Buffet, pays his fair share.
=
Here's the thing: if he, as a billionaire, wants to write= the federal
government a check anytime, he can. There is a special fund= set up
for the government to take gifts of any size from anyone who wants= to
pay just for the fun of it. If he wants the government to have some of his money, then he can give it. Perhaps he has done that already,
I= do not know, but I do know that not everyone shares his affinity
for government= programs and neither they, nor their heirs, should be
compelled to make= such contributions. While his wife's estate, and no
doubt his own,= will barely notice the estate tax, people of much
lesser means will struggle= over every penny. The death tax does not
just affect billionaires, but= regular families who own property or
have family businesses. Sometimes= those assets add up to the level
that triggers the tax even though the= beneficiaries of the estate
would not be considered rich by you or me.= Their inheritance might
make the difference in whether they and their children= can become
rich by developing that property or growing that business, but= many
miss out on that opportunity because the government demands its bite of the pie after the funeral. In fact, the hearing at which Mr.
Buffet= testified included people telling stories about how their
family had to= sell the inheritance just to pay the taxes. Maybe he
should have listened.
=
[13]Back to the top
=
Waste Watchers Update: The Bucks Don't Stop at the Education Department
After years of litigation -= costing millions of taxpayer dollars -
the California Department= of Education has finally settled with a
whistle-blower turned former employee.= This whistle-blower claimed
retaliation by the Department and former Superintendent= of Public
Instruction Delaine Eastin when he reported massive fraud in= the
department.
According to the Sacramento Bee ([14]April 23, 2008), the California
Department of Education= paid "$4.25 million to the former worker who
said he suffered= retaliation after he reported corruption to then
Superintendent Delaine= Eastin."
The trouble began when the California= Department of Education dished
out millions of dollars, not to California's= classrooms, but to
people seemingly just trying to make a buck off the= system. "The case
centered on corruption in a program that= handed out money to
community-based organizations between 1995 and 2000= to teach English
and citizenship to recent immigrants. Some of the schools= that got
grant money didn't even exist."
You= would expect a heap of praise for a whistle-blower doing the
right thing= in reporting the massive fraud. Instead, he was allegedly
punished for= his actions, which in the end cost taxpayers even more
money that could= have gone towards the true goals of the
Department...Education.
=
Shockingly, "A 20-year state worker, said= that when he and others
reported $11 million in misappropriations to Eastin,= she ignored
them. Then he was transferred to a job with no duties, leading= to
stress that he said triggered two heart attacks and put him in a
wheelchair."
=
The whistle-blower's "first jury trail in 2002= led to a $4.6 million
verdict. The department appealed, and the case was= sent back for
another trial. But the jury awarded...$3= million more."
Unfortunately, for taxpayers= who footed the bill, that wasn't the
only cost. "Over= seven years, it has paid another $1.2 million to law
firms for defending= the state through two jury trials and appeals."
The legal= fees went to two separate law firms - one defending the
Department= and the other representing Eastin, the former
superintendent.
Over= the last 13 years, the Department did not stem the money flowing
to attorneys= defending itself against its own employees. Nor did the
former superintendent= decry this expenditure as money that should go
toward education. Instead,= she justified the spending, and so has the
current superintendent, whose= department has not been forthcoming
about how much they spent.
This= leaves the taxpayer, who continue to send more of their
hard-earned dollars= to Sacramento hoping someone will do right by the
children...put the= buck in the classrooms.
[15]Back to the top
=
= HOME= PAGE | [16]BIOGRAPHY= | [17]CONTACT ME | [18]CSSRC
=
_________________________________________________________________
[19]CLICK= HERE TO UNSUBSCRIBE
References
1. 3D"http://cssrc.us/web/35/"
2. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#1"
3. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#2"
4. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#3"
5. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#4"
6. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#5"
7. 3D"http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=926&org_name=NTU"
8. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#0"
9. 3D"http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120770167885700061.html?mod=djemEditorialPage" 10. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#0"
11. 3D"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hcz1yB8u73U" 12. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#0"
13. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#0"
14. 3D"http://www.sacbee.com/education/story/882653.html" 15. file://localhost/tmp/3D"#0"
16. 3D"http://cssrc.us/web/35/biography.aspx"
17. 3D"http://cssrc.us/web/35/contact_us.aspx"
18. 3D"http://cssrc.us/default.aspx"
19. 3D'http://cssrc.us/web/35/subscribe.aspx?mode=u&cat=15&id=102445&code='
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?130605-APP1sFU3b2ty00009eaf>