-
Subscribe Today!
Jan
22
Query: If the Lake County Council is able to figure out a way to pass a county option income tax and also convince the Commissioners to go along, can we trust that the new tax won’t rise from 1 percent to 4.5 percent (or more) at some point in the future?
Steve Dalton replied to an earlier post about the efforts in the General Assembly to get a brand new tax for Lake County:
Ok, I’ll take the bait. I for one think that Lake County should move to an income tax, and use the proceeds as a way to cut property taxes.
In addition I think that all Lake County government offices should have to cut 15% from their spending in 2008, so don’t think that I’ve lost my conservative way.
I’ve been arguing with Buzzcut that a consumption or income tax is always fairer than an asset tax anyway.
I personally don’t trust the local government to cut back and fully expect that as soon as new tax money rolls in, it will immediately be allocated and more “needs” — some legitimate and some not so much — will be found requiring another tax increase.
I could be wrong, however.
Any thoughts?
- State Rep. Chet Dobis says trust us, we're from the state government in an effort to sway Lake County Council...
- State Representative Dan Lehe, (R-Brookston), wants to cap any Lake County income tax at 1 percent, reports the Northwest Indiana...
- I was running a little late to the Lake County Government Center, so I missed the "non-vote" that killed the...
- The one percent Lake County income tax is just a start on the road to more and more tax increases....
- Bob Mattson at the South Shore Progressive writes that the Lake County Council has betrayed voters' trust by failing to...
Comments
4 Responses to “If Income Tax Is Approved, Can We Trust It Will Stay At 1%?”
Leave a Reply
First off, thanks for the mention.
I share your mistrust of government, I know many governent leaders and they are always convincing themselves that they could fix society’s ills if they only had more money.
I would suggest that Lake County implement the income tax, only on binding agreement to cut government by the same amount. This is what Mitch Daniels has called for, and I have to agree with him. Local government and libraries and storm water boards and schools are getting pretty carried away increasing their incoming dollars by 7-10% per year.
The problem with the COIT in Indiana is that is isn’t capped. The county can jack it up to whatever they want to, going up in steps of 1% per year max.
The property tax is capped. They can’t get any more than 2% of your assessed value.
Being that income taxes and assessed values are so highly correlated (you need a higher income to afford a more expensive house), I really don’t think that Steve’s argument against taxing assets makes a difference in practice.
Hi Steve,
I was listening to Glenn Beck talking to Ron Paul this morning and they mentioned that the key to solving some of the problems taxpayers are facing is to cut back spending.
Every year, governments at all levels have pushed for budget increases and growth. George Bush has seen record increases in government spending while on his watch.
We’d have plenty of money without always having to increase taxes and borrow money from the Saudis and Chinese if we’d cut back a little bit. Pretty soon, we’re going to hit our credit limit and it won’t be pretty.
Hi Buzz,
I’m thinking the way you think. Government units have been growing and spending more year after year. Keeping budgets the same as a previous year’s budget is seen as a cut, so they’ve been pushing to spend more and more to justify increasing their subsequent years’ budgets.
If we get a 1% income tax, it is likely that it will keep increasing, especially if part of the money is going to end up in Hammond, East Chicago, and Gary.
There are too many interests that want to get a slice of the pie and will push for tax increases so they can spread the money around to friends and family.