NJ governor: cut state income tax rate on income over $500,000

[lostinblue 1,989]

http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2010/02/nj_loses_70b_in_wealth_over_fo.html

N.J. loses $70B in wealth during five years as residents depart

Published: Thursday, February 04, 2010, 5:15 AM Updated: Thursday, February 04, 2010, 5:24 PM

Leslie Kwoh/The Star-Ledger

More than $70 billion in wealth left New Jersey between 2004 and 2008 as affluent residents moved elsewhere, according to a report released Wednesday that marks a swift reversal of fortune for a state once considered the nations wealthiest.

Conducted by the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy at Boston College, the report found wealthy households in New Jersey were leaving for other states mainly Florida, Pennsylvania and New York at a faster rate than they were being replaced.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rutgers University economists say it could take seven years to recover from recession

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The wealth is not being replaced, said John Havens, who directed the study. Its above and beyond the general trend that is affecting the rest of the northeast.

This was not always the case. The study the first on interstate wealth migration in the country noted the state actually saw an influx of $98 billion in the five years preceding 2004. The exodus of wealth, then, local experts and economists concluded, was a reaction to a series of changes in the states tax structure including increases in the income, sales, property and millionaire taxes.

This study makes it crystal clear that New Jerseys tax policies are resulting in a significant decline in the states wealth, said Dennis Bone, chairman of the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce and president of Verizon New Jersey.

The report was commissioned by the state Chamber of Commerce and the Community Foundation of New Jersey to study the effects of wealth migration on charitable giving after executives noticed more affluent philanthropists were moving away. Wealth includes assets such as real estate, stocks, bonds, 401ks, mutual funds and vehicles.

But economists say there are many other implications for the states financial health.

Wealthy residents are a key driver for everything from job creation and consumer spending to the real estate market and the state budget, said Jim Hughes, dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University. In New Jersey, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay more than 40 percent of the states income tax, he said.

Thats probably why we have these massive income shortfalls in the state budget, especially this year, he said.

Until the tax structure is improved, he said, well probably see a continuation of the trend, until there are no more high-wealth individuals left.

He added the report reinforces findings from a similar study he conducted in 2007 with fellow Rutgers professor Joseph Seneca, which found a sharp acceleration in residents leaving the state. That report, which focused on income rather than wealth, found the state lost nearly $8 billion in gross income in 2005.

Findings from the Boston College report show that about 302,780 households left New Jersey between 2004 and 2008, only slightly lower than the 323,350 households that moved into the state. However, the average net worth of the departing households was about 70 percent higher, at $618,330.

Those who left were also more likely to be older and more educated, with jobs as entrepreneurs or in the finance and professional industries, the study found. Those replacing them tended to hold management or support jobs in the manufacturing industry. The study analyzed data from three main sources: The Federal Reserves Survey on Consumer Finances, the Census Bureau and the Internal Revenue Service.

Experts pointed to an abundance of anecdotal evidence to support the numbers. Ken Hydock, a certified public accountant with Sobel and Company in Livingston, said in this 30-year-career hes never seen so many of his wealthy clients leave for "purely tax reasons" for states like Florida, where property taxes are lower and there is no personal income or estate tax. In New Jersey, residents pay an estate tax if their assets amount to more than $675,000. Thats compared to a $3.5 million federal exemption for 2009.

Several years ago, he recalled, one of his clients stood to make $60 million from stock options in a company that was being acquired by another. Before he cashed out, however, the client put his home up for sale, moved to Las Vegas, and never stepped foot back in New Jersey again, Hydock said.

He avoided paying about $6 million in taxes, he said. He passed away two years later and also saved a huge estate tax, so he probably saved $7 million.

Meanwhile, Gov. Chris Christies administration said the report is just another reminder of the difficult tasks ahead.

Its the consequence that weve been talking about for so long, of the spending and taxing habits that weve all experienced, said Mike Drewniak, a spokesman for Christie. Its the sort of thing that we feel the need to stop so we can get New Jersey back on a prosperous path.

-Staff reporter Lisa Fleisher contributed to this report

Edited October 2, 2010 by lostinblue

[mawilson 2,133]

Legacy member,

We are discussing state income taxes, not federal.

Do you have a graph that shows the top marginal rate in the state of New Jersey for 1910-2010?

[lostinblue 1,989]

He may sound sincere and actually believe what he is saying, but that doesn't make his point of view more valid. So on one hand, he's telling the teachers to tighten their belts because of the state's fiscal crisis and on the other hand he's wanting to give those whose income is a half a million or more, a huge tax break. This is typical Republican policy meandering - tell Middle America to suck it up while favoring the rich.

Wealthy residents are a key driver for everything from job creation and consumer spending to the real estate market and the state budget, said Jim Hughes, dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University. In New Jersey, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay more than 40 percent of the state’s income tax, he said

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Wealthy residents are a key driver for everything from job creation and consumer spending to the real estate market and the state budget, said Jim Hughes, dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University. In New Jersey, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay more than 40 percent of the state's income tax, he said

That's a Right Wing myth. You have no factual data to back that up. The wealthy in this country pay less in taxes now than they have over the last century. In the meantime, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to grow to pre-Depression numbers. Americans won't stand by and let the wealthy turn us into a Third World economy where a small few possess most of the wealth. The Right fights against all the factors that helped build the greatest Middle Class this country has ever had after WWII - progressive tax policies, unions, and fair labor laws like the minimum wage. The Right may fool some voters into thinking they stand for the little guy, but eventually most voters will realize just who is looking out for whom.

Edited October 2, 2010 by El Buscador

[웃 910]

That's a Right Wing myth. You have no factual data to back that up. The wealthy in this country pay less in taxes now than they have over the last century. In the meantime, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to grow to pre-Depression numbers. Americans won't stand by and let the wealthy turn us into a Third World economy where a small few possess most of the wealth. The Right fights against all the factors that helped build the greatest Middle Class this country has ever had after WWII - progressive tax policies, unions, and fair labor laws like the minimum wage. The Right may fool some voters into thinking they stand for the little guy, but eventually most voters will realize just who is looking out for whom.

You have been fooled as well. Nothing has improved with the Democrats running the country. They've been in power for 4 years and most people are not better off now than they were 4 years ago!!!

Total debt outstanding on 1/1/2006: $8,170,424,541,313.62

Total debt outstanding on 10/1/2010: $13,561,623,030,891.79

Increase in 4 years 10 months: $5.4 trillion

Unemployment rate January 2006: 4.7%

Unemployment rate August 2010: 9.6%

The good old days:

February 3, 2006: 12:43 PM EST

Unemployment rate lowest since 2001

Employers add 193,000 jobs in January as unemployment dips unexpectedly, wages up more than forecasts.

By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney.com senior writer

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -

The drop in unemployment was the latest sign of a tightening labor market, which could put upward pressure on wages and prices in the months ahead.

On Wall Street, stocks fell as investors worried that the report makes further interest rate hikes by the Federal Reserve more likely.

Treasury bond prices fell right after the report was released but later recovered.

The department said average hourly wage rose 7 cents to $16.41, a 0.4 percent increase that was slightly more than the 0.3 percent gain forecast by economists.

Over the last 12 months, average wages are up 3.3 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis, the biggest 12-month change in nearly three years.

In the part of the report that normally gets the most attention, U.S. employers added 193,000 jobs to payrolls in January, up from a revised 140,000 gain in December. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a gain of 250,000 for January.

But the unemployment rate and wage increase seemed to be getting most of investors' attention on Wall Street.

Anthony Chan, chief economist for JPMorgan Private Client Services, said he thinks the market might be overreacting a bit to the unemployment rate, which is based on a survey of households and is generally seen as less accurate than the survey of employers for the payroll numbers.

"I didn't see the average length of the work week picking up. I didn't see an increase in the labor market participation rate," he said. "That all makes me concerned that some of the tightening talk is a bit overstated."

Jeoff Hall, the chief U.S. economist for Thomson Financial, agreed that the unemployment rate could bounce back up in coming months as those now not counted as in the labor force start to look for or find jobs.

But he also said that the department's Bureau of Labor Statistics annual revision to last year's payroll numbers showed that the job reports from the last half of 2005 understated the strength of the labor market.

"It turns out the labor market is a lot tighter than we first thought," said Hall. "If you look at the last five months alone, we had 151,000 more jobs added than the BLS had first estimated."

Edited October 2, 2010 by Lord Infamous

[Pooky 3,825]

The wealthy in this country pay less in taxes now than they have over the last century.

The wealthy are paying less in taxes to New Jersey because they are all leaving. The state is haemorrhaging sources of tax income because of the imbalance between New Jersey and other states. Why pay the extra, when, for example, you can cut your tax bill by two-thirds by relocating to Pennsylvania?

Most high earners didn't get that way by being stupid and if they find a way to keep more of what they earn, they will take that road. If knocking the State tax rate down from 9% to 6% stems the exodus from the State, Christie will look prudent. If he attracts high earners back to the State, he will look downright smart.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The wealthy are paying less in taxes to New Jersey because they are all leaving.

By that logic, the wealthy would be buying up the cheapest homes because, why spend a million plus for a home when you can spend a fraction of that for a little shack? While it may be true that the wealthy will try to avoid paying taxes, they also tend to want to live in areas with prime real estate. If you and your spouse are making over half a million annually and currently live in New Jersey, I'd like to know where you're thinking of moving just to shave off 4% of your adjusted earnings. And I doubt either you or your spouse are driving around in cars that are less than 20g's. People's living standards are shaped more by what they value when their income level allows them to, rather than how they are going to save a nickel here or dime there, and state tax rates are no different.

[^_^ 5,021]

By that logic, the wealthy would be buying up the cheapest homes because, why spend a million plus for a home when you can spend a fraction of that for a little shack? While it may be true that the wealthy will try to avoid paying taxes, they also tend to want to live in areas with prime real estate. If you and your spouse are making over half a million annually and currently live in New Jersey, I'd like to know where you're thinking of moving just to shave off 4% of your adjusted earnings. And I doubt either you or your spouse are driving around in cars that are less than 20g's. People's living standards are shaped more by what they value when their income level allows them to, rather than how they are going to save a nickel here or dime there, and state tax rates are no different.

Yeah, 1M+ households aren't the ones relocating to the Lehigh Valley. The NJ families doing that (and there are many) are middle class, 150K-300K households.

[Pooky 3,825]

By that logic, the wealthy would be buying up the cheapest homes because, why spend a million plus for a home when you can spend a fraction of that for a little shack? While it may be true that the wealthy will try to avoid paying taxes, they also tend to want to live in areas with prime real estate. If you and your spouse are making over half a million annually and currently live in New Jersey, I'd like to know where you're thinking of moving just to shave off 4% of your adjusted earnings. And I doubt either you or your spouse are driving around in cars that are less than 20g's. People's living standards are shaped more by what they value when their income level allows them to, rather than how they are going to save a nickel here or dime there, and state tax rates are no different.

Stick to facts, Steve, because your guesswork sux

[lostinblue 1,989]

By that logic, the wealthy would be buying up the cheapest homes because, why spend a million plus for a home when you can spend a fraction of that for a little shack? While it may be true that the wealthy will try to avoid paying taxes, they also tend to want to live in areas with prime real estate. If you and your spouse are making over half a million annually and currently live in New Jersey, I'd like to know where you're thinking of moving just to shave off 4% of your adjusted earnings. And I doubt either you or your spouse are driving around in cars that are less than 20g's. People's living standards are shaped more by what they value when their income level allows them to, rather than how they are going to save a nickel here or dime there, and state tax rates are no different.

Not NJ but NY all the same.......

http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/golisano5.26.09.html

WHY I'M LEAVING NEW YORK

Guest View by Tom Golisano

I love New York. But how much should it cost to call New York home? Decades of out-of-control budgets, spending increases and relentless borrowing have made New York simply too expensive.

Politicians like to talk about incentives -- incentives for businesses to relocate, incentives to buy local and incentives to make smart decisions. After reviewing the 2009 budget, I have identified the most compelling incentive of all: a major tax break immediately available to all New Yorkers. To be eligible, you need only do one thing: move out of New York state.

Last week I spent 90 minutes doing a couple simple things: registering to vote, changing my driver's license, filling out a domicile certificate and signing a homestead certificate -- in Florida. Combined with spending 184 days a year outside New York, these simple procedures will save me over $5 million in New York taxes annually.

That savings doesn't include that Florida has a 6 percent sales tax, compared to New York's 8 percent or more. Florida has lower utility taxes and lower gasoline taxes. The Florida homestead certificate guarantees my property taxes will not grow more than 3 percent.

By moving to Florida, I can spend that money on worthy causes, like better hospitals and improving education, and on worthy projects like the Clinton Global Initiative. Or maybe I will continue to invest that money in fighting the status quo in Albany. One thing is certain: That money will not continue to fund Albany's bloated bureaucracy, corrupt politicians or regular handouts to the special interests.

How did we get here in the first place? It all starts with spending, spending and more spending.

BUDGET SPENDING

New York's budget was $72.7 billion in 1999. Ten years later, it has ballooned to $131.8 billion. That growth is astounding, but it continues to get worse. Each year, New York's budget has had 6 percent compounded growth, double the average rate of inflation (2.8 percent). Florida's budget, on the other hand, went down 8 percent this year. HEALTH CARE SPENDING New York spends $2,283 per person on Medicaid. That's the highest per capita spending in the nation and twice the national average. In the last decade, the Medicaid budget has grown by 50 percent ($30 billion in 1999 and $45 billion in 2009). In almost every sector (hospitals, nursing homes, medicine, clinics, and home and community care), spending per recipient regularly exceeds the national average.

Faced with escalating costs and diminishing returns, Albany and their allies, the health care unions (SEIU has over 300,000 politically active members), had only one answer: Increase taxes.

EDUCATION SPENDING

New York spends the most per pupil in America on education, spending 63 percent above the national average. Costs went up about 60 percent in the last decade ($12.7 billion in 1999 and $20.7 billion in 2009). Like health care, education is something worth spending on and worth investing in, but we're spending more and getting less. New York City schools graduated 54 percent of high school students in 2007, Buffalo 47 percent and Rochester 45 percent.

Why? Perhaps it's because the New York state teachers union, with its $114 million budget, is always trying to convince Albany to spend more. Maybe it's because it's mandatory that all teachers pay union dues. Whatever the cause, when faced with potential cuts, the union and their allies have one response: Increase taxes.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SPENDING

It's not just the state. It's the range and breadth of New York layers of governments and special taxing districts. In New York, the average state and local tax burden is $5,260 for every man, woman and child. That's by far the highest in the country. Like Albany, when faced with a difficult problem, these municipalities have one answer: Increase taxes.

Upstate New York has been particularly hard hit. Add unreasonable real estate taxes to the uncontrolled state spending, and you have whole communities decimated. The assessment process is unfair, unworkable and unreasonable, and the result is that 15 of the 20 highest taxed counties in America are right here in Upstate New York. While homeowners in other areas build equity, we just pay more taxes.

NO ONE'S HOME

This problem did not begin with the current recession. New York faced a $6 billion shortfall before the economic downturn. However, in the face of economic turmoil Gov. Paterson, Speaker Silver and Majority Leader Smith looked to the unions and special interests, who answered with one voice: Raise taxes.

Among other taxes and fees, they raised the marginal tax rate on the most successful (and most mobile) New Yorkers to 8.97 percent, the second highest rate in the nation.

It was irresponsible and it may just prove to be counterproductive, since the top 1 percent of earners account for about 50 percent of state revenue. We're the ones who can -- and will -- leave.

It's not an easy decision, but I'm being forced away from my family and friends, a pain shared by too many parents and grandparents in this state.

I'm leaving. And by domiciling in Florida, I will personally save $13,800 every single day. That's a pretty strong incentive.

Like I said, I love New York, but I'm not going to pay New York more for the waste, corruption and inefficiency that is New York state government.

Tom Golisano is the Chairman of the Board of Paychex, Inc. and the founder of the B. Thomas Golisano Foundation. He created Responsible New York so the voices of ordinary New Yorkers can be heard over the special interests, to hold elected officials accountable and to advocate for government reform.

Niagara Falls Reporter www.niagarafallsreporter.com

[luckytxn 2,265]

Not NJ but NY all the same.......

http://www.niagarafa...ano5.26.09.html

WHY I'M LEAVING NEW YORK

Guest View by Tom Golisano

I love New York. But how much should it cost to call New York home? Decades of out-of-control budgets, spending increases and relentless borrowing have made New York simply too expensive.

Politicians like to talk about incentives -- incentives for businesses to relocate, incentives to buy local and incentives to make smart decisions. After reviewing the 2009 budget, I have identified the most compelling incentive of all: a major tax break immediately available to all New Yorkers. To be eligible, you need only do one thing: move out of New York state.

Last week I spent 90 minutes doing a couple simple things: registering to vote, changing my driver's license, filling out a domicile certificate and signing a homestead certificate -- in Florida. Combined with spending 184 days a year outside New York, these simple procedures will save me over $5 million in New York taxes annually.

That savings doesn't include that Florida has a 6 percent sales tax, compared to New York's 8 percent or more. Florida has lower utility taxes and lower gasoline taxes. The Florida homestead certificate guarantees my property taxes will not grow more than 3 percent.

By moving to Florida, I can spend that money on worthy causes, like better hospitals and improving education, and on worthy projects like the Clinton Global Initiative. Or maybe I will continue to invest that money in fighting the status quo in Albany. One thing is certain: That money will not continue to fund Albany's bloated bureaucracy, corrupt politicians or regular handouts to the special interests.

How did we get here in the first place? It all starts with spending, spending and more spending.

BUDGET SPENDING

New York's budget was $72.7 billion in 1999. Ten years later, it has ballooned to $131.8 billion. That growth is astounding, but it continues to get worse. Each year, New York's budget has had 6 percent compounded growth, double the average rate of inflation (2.8 percent). Florida's budget, on the other hand, went down 8 percent this year. HEALTH CARE SPENDING New York spends $2,283 per person on Medicaid. That's the highest per capita spending in the nation and twice the national average. In the last decade, the Medicaid budget has grown by 50 percent ($30 billion in 1999 and $45 billion in 2009). In almost every sector (hospitals, nursing homes, medicine, clinics, and home and community care), spending per recipient regularly exceeds the national average.

Faced with escalating costs and diminishing returns, Albany and their allies, the health care unions (SEIU has over 300,000 politically active members), had only one answer: Increase taxes.

EDUCATION SPENDING

New York spends the most per pupil in America on education, spending 63 percent above the national average. Costs went up about 60 percent in the last decade ($12.7 billion in 1999 and $20.7 billion in 2009). Like health care, education is something worth spending on and worth investing in, but we're spending more and getting less. New York City schools graduated 54 percent of high school students in 2007, Buffalo 47 percent and Rochester 45 percent.

Why? Perhaps it's because the New York state teachers union, with its $114 million budget, is always trying to convince Albany to spend more. Maybe it's because it's mandatory that all teachers pay union dues. Whatever the cause, when faced with potential cuts, the union and their allies have one response: Increase taxes.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT SPENDING

It's not just the state. It's the range and breadth of New York layers of governments and special taxing districts. In New York, the average state and local tax burden is $5,260 for every man, woman and child. That's by far the highest in the country. Like Albany, when faced with a difficult problem, these municipalities have one answer: Increase taxes.

Upstate New York has been particularly hard hit. Add unreasonable real estate taxes to the uncontrolled state spending, and you have whole communities decimated. The assessment process is unfair, unworkable and unreasonable, and the result is that 15 of the 20 highest taxed counties in America are right here in Upstate New York. While homeowners in other areas build equity, we just pay more taxes.

NO ONE'S HOME

This problem did not begin with the current recession. New York faced a $6 billion shortfall before the economic downturn. However, in the face of economic turmoil Gov. Paterson, Speaker Silver and Majority Leader Smith looked to the unions and special interests, who answered with one voice: Raise taxes.

Among other taxes and fees, they raised the marginal tax rate on the most successful (and most mobile) New Yorkers to 8.97 percent, the second highest rate in the nation.

It was irresponsible and it may just prove to be counterproductive, since the top 1 percent of earners account for about 50 percent of state revenue. We're the ones who can -- and will -- leave.

It's not an easy decision, but I'm being forced away from my family and friends, a pain shared by too many parents and grandparents in this state.

I'm leaving. And by domiciling in Florida, I will personally save $13,800 every single day. That's a pretty strong incentive.

Like I said, I love New York, but I'm not going to pay New York more for the waste, corruption and inefficiency that is New York state government.

Tom Golisano is the Chairman of the Board of Paychex, Inc. and the founder of the B. Thomas Golisano Foundation. He created Responsible New York so the voices of ordinary New Yorkers can be heard over the special interests, to hold elected officials accountable and to advocate for government reform.

Niagara Falls Reporter www.niagarafallsreporter.com

Strange to read about this guy moving since just last night I was talking to someone that wanted to move from New York southwards. He is interested in Texas for now and asked for suggestions. I gave him a few nice areas to check out. He loved an area I mentioned and the land prices and taxes made him take my number so he can get more info.

Go ahead and tax the rich heavily as we can always use successful people down our way.

[lostinblue 1,989]

This problem did not begin with the current recession. New York faced a $6 billion shortfall before the economic downturn. However, in the face of economic turmoil Gov. Paterson, Speaker Silver and Majority Leader Smith looked to the unions and special interests, who answered with one voice: Raise taxes.

Among other taxes and fees, they raised the marginal tax rate on the most successful (and most mobile) New Yorkers to 8.97 percent, the second highest rate in the nation.

It was irresponsible and it may just prove to be counterproductive, since the top 1 percent of earners account for about 50 percent of state revenue. We're the ones who can -- and will -- leave.

[luckytxn 2,265]

This problem did not begin with the current recession. New York faced a $6 billion shortfall before the economic downturn. However, in the face of economic turmoil Gov. Paterson, Speaker Silver and Majority Leader Smith looked to the unions and special interests, who answered with one voice: Raise taxes.

Among other taxes and fees, they raised the marginal tax rate on the most successful (and most mobile) New Yorkers to 8.97 percent, the second highest rate in the nation.

It was irresponsible and it may just prove to be counterproductive, since the top 1 percent of earners account for about 50 percent of state revenue. We're the ones who can -- and will -- leave.

Send down our way. We can never have enough successful people.

[mawilson 2,133]

Wealthy residents are a key driver for everything from job creation and consumer spending to the real estate market and the state budget, said Jim Hughes, dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University. In New Jersey, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay more than 40 percent of the state’s income tax, he said

That's a Right Wing myth. You have no factual data to back that up.

What's a Right Wing myth? That it is the wealthy who create jobs is this world?

Find me a job created by a poor person. Seriously man, you need to have your head examined.

[TBoneTX 45,849]

Find me a job created by a poor person.

I was going to post the same, but in different words: Please name one poor man who ever gave another man a job, si man.