Democrats won back control of the Maine House and Senate from Republicans last month in part with a message on taxes. They campaigned against the tax cuts the Republican-led legislature enacted in 2011, the largest tax cut in Maine history, arguing they were a giveaway to the wealthy.
Yet, despite Democrats’ victories, there are signs the tax cuts may well survive. That’s true even though Maine faces challenges rebalancing its current budget and balancing the new two-year budget that the Legislature will write next year.
The biggest obstacle to undoing the tax cuts is Republican Gov. Paul LePage, an anti-tax stalwart who could veto any plan. Democrats lack a veto-proof majority in either house of the Legislature. But, while Democrats are talking about pushing for repeal, it’s not clear LePage will even need his veto pen.
The cuts included reduced income tax rates, other technical changes that lowered income taxes, higher exemptions for pension income and a higher income threshold for the estate tax. All told, the cuts are expected to cost the state around $400 million in the two-year budget period that begins July 1, 2013, with the income tax cuts representing more than $300 million of that total.
To cope with deficits in the current budget, LePage has signaled that he will soon order across-the-board cuts and ask for supplemental funding for the state Health and Human Services Department. For the next budget, the state forecast in October that it expects a structural budget gap of $756 million.
“What’s interesting from sort of a fiscal policy standpoint is that these tax changes came at a time when revenues are already significantly reduced by the recession,” says Garrett Martin, executive director of the Maine Center for Economic Policy and a critic of the tax cuts. “We have effectively created half the budget problem through the income tax cuts alone.”
Yet Martin says it’s unlikely the Legislature will repeal the tax cuts or even delay them or roll them back in part. Others agree. “I honestly don’t think there will be any attempt by the Democrats to pull back on that at all,” says Republican State Rep. Gary Knight of Livermore Falls, who, as chair of the Taxation Committee in the last Legislature, was a key supporter of the tax cuts.
One reason why is that while Democrats complained about tax cuts for the wealthy on the campaign trail — the state’s top income tax rate is falling from 8.5 percent to 7.95 percent — the law also includes tax breaks for lower-income Mainers. The lowest tax bracket, 2 percent, is eliminated entirely, dropping an estimated 70,000 people off the income tax rolls. Fresh off a difficult two years out of power, Democrats may be reluctant to restore those taxes.
Likewise, the state’s budget problems may not be quite as bad as it appears at first glance, reducing some of the urgency of finding new revenue. The state’s official $756 million structural deficit figure is based on the state abiding by funding formulas for education and local aid that it has a long history of ignoring. “There are a lot of assumptions in that number of the state dramatically increasing spending,” says Mike Allen, the state’s associate commissioner of tax policy. If you assume the state will continue to fall short of the formula requirements, the deficit would look smaller.
Still, Democrats are reluctant to allow new cuts to local aid, health care and other services without any effort at new money. Martin says one alternative to repealing the tax cuts is for lawmakers to pursue a new revenue-raising plan instead, such as a millionaire’s tax or removal of some tax credits, deductions and exemptions that reduce revenue.
Any of those steps, though, will also take Republican support to become law. The vision Democrats won with in 2012 is likely to clash with the vision LePage won with in 2010, leading to a potentially difficult two years on tax and budget issues. “From a political perspective,” Martin says, “the challenge is obviously what kind of budget deal can we arrive at that either the governor will sign off on or either allow the Legislature to get the two-thirds majority to override his veto.”



eliminate the estate tax change….
Just make sure you lock down the state to keep those evil rich people from leaving…we lost about 12,000 high-income taxpayers between 1995 and 2009 as these folks relocated to more tax-friendly states…the loss to local and state gov’t in Maine is about $85 million a year…you really are pretty foolish, aren’t you?
We dont need old rich people. We need to lower business taxes so companies will move here.
why would a company move here when, if they are succesful, folks like you want to abuse them and penalize them for being “old rich people”…
Old Rich people spend money.
Thanks for agreeing with me, Cheese… . Merry Christmas.
Merry Christmas
This GRAMPY speaks for all of us who help support the local businesses and economy quite nicely. You’re welcome.
I still stand behind my statement. Maine is getting older everyday. we cant cater to retired rich people so they can stay here and pay taxes. they can leave and maybe the population of this state will become young, vibrant and start working. Lower business taxes.
The source of this inspirational comment?
“It’s time to end Maine’s income tax”, The Maine Wire, Spring 2012 (www.themainewire.com). And if you doubt those numbers on out-migration, give it some thought before you re-gurgitate leftist talking points. Why wouldn’t successful folks pack up and leave for Florida or NH or Texas for 6 months and a day? I know plenty of CPAs who advise their professional and small-biz clients nearing retirement to re-locate to a state with no income tax. Why should they stay and be plundered by the party of John Martin and Emily Cain, so they can buy the votes of Maine’s swelling dependent predatory underclass?
what regurgitate leftist talking point are you referring to
“Maine’s swelling dependent predatory underclass”thats a keeper.
Source, please, for your statistic about the number of high income taxpayers leaving Maine.
Assuming the number you provide is correct (which it likely is), it is highly unlikely we know WHY they left? Did some of them leave for warmer climates or job opportunities elsewhere, perhaps?
Also relevant would be the number of high income folks who moved INTO Maine during the same period. After all, someone must have stepped up to take all those recently vacated high income jobs.
Source below…..come on, think about it, what high-paying jobs have been vacated? The out-migrants are primarily self-employed professionals and small-biusiness owners at or near retirement. And yes, they have been replaced…..by unemployed losers migrating here to sign up for our generous welfare benefits. Drive around Bangor, in some neighborhoods that used to be very nice, and tell me Maine hasn’t been over-run by dopers and freeloaders.
Sad but true.Bangor is but a shadow of what it used to be.Some parts of this city are down right scary and I feel bad for the young folks with kids that have to put up with it.
I don’t have the numbers but I can tell you this–my son-in-law’s accountant notes that he’s “de-Mained” 87 clients over the last year, establishing residencyy in either New Hampshire (for the younger business owning set) and Florida (for retirees). Interestingly enough, a few of them were former high profile democrats who left to join brethern like Ken Curtis (former Democratic Governor) etc. who are not longer residents of Maine.
On a personal note, now that I have retired I will be establishing residencyy in Florida and have purchased a condominium on the Gulf Coast. I will be living there for 6 months and 7 days each year. The rest of the year I will be in Maine.
Get this–the money I save on taxes by leaving Maine pays for the mortagage on the condominium out of State. I made the decision to move a couple of days afer the election, mostly becasue the Democrats regained control of the legislature.
Sounds to me like more of the 1 percent gaming the system at the expense of the 99 percent. Not exactly something to be proud of.
Don’t get me wrong. I understand your decisions and might even make similar decisions in your shoes, but again — they are not something to be proud of. Accountant? Most working people can’t afford accountants to advise us on ways we can pay less in taxes and — if we could — the savings wouldn’t be enough to rent a condo in Florida, yet many of us work just as hard or harder than you. That’s why the system needs to be changed to make it more fair.
Get rid of the income tax (as you imply) and the state is left with getting the bulk of its revenues from property tax, which is, shall I remind you, a HIGHLY REGRESSIVE TAX. Case in point, my own mom, who worked hard all her life and is retired on a fixed income and owns a modest house in New Hampshire (which she can’t sell due to the real estate bust), pays 35 percent of her very limited income in property taxes. Thirty-five percent! Because of what she pays in property taxes, she can barely buy groceries and keep gas in her car. How is that in any way, shape, or form a fair way to tax people?
Maine has always been a poor state with a lot of social needs. Maine continues to be a state that provides an almost unsurpassed quality of life for those who value natural beauty, a clean environment, and a sense of authentic small town community. If you have enough money to live very comfortably and you can’t make a commitment to help support what Maine is and what it could be, well, then, we’ll get by without you. Please don’t get in the way.
So the D’s won by using class envy? Gee If they had told the complete truth they may not have won so easily
Republicans did more for the middle class in the last 2 years than the Democrats did in the prior 40……the dems know this, hence their retreat from their campaign lies and misinformation
Data please
So….democrats lie….you gonna stamp your feet and demand they be thrown out?
And Rs don’t? I present at least two Charlies …
Garret Martin? Any relation? Several quotes from him and no others?
MECEP is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Maine Democrats. Funny the BDN didn’t ask the opinion of the Maine Heritage Policy Center…
The BDN is playing its normal game. “See the shiny bobble over here?”
We already know who the MHP provides propaganda for. Why contact them any further.
“All told, the cuts are expected to cost the state around $400 million…” Rather, all told the cuts are expected save taxpayers around $400 million that they earned.
My pension paid for most of those cuts. Where is your complaint about my money being stolen? I earned that money.
It’s just the Republican way steal from the poor and those on fixed incomes to give to the rich that do nothing to help the economy.
yes, because the poor are paying soooooooo much in taxes
LOL….you people are a riot
Who do you think creates jobs?
The lower and middle class drive job growth through spending when they had maximum funds available for immediate use.
.
An independent study of 65 years of tax policy and resulting job performance proved that lowering taxes on the wealthy does nothing for job growth.
.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tax-cuts-rich-dont-spur-151649273.html
I’ve been part of the work force for 30+yrs and I have yet to work for somebody who is “poor”.
The poor in this day and age have more than those who are foolish enough to still work.
The reason the Democrats won’t fight for repeal despite their campaign pledge are twofold.
One, its popular and leaves more money in the pockets of nearly every mainer.
Two, The Democrats are hypocritical cowards.
If you earn between 30,000 and 50,000 a year, enjoy your Big Mac. That’s all LePage’s tax cuts got you. Maybe fries too if your near the upper end.
Money is always better used by the people that earned it rather than being spent by the government that didn’t.
As difficult as it seems when we are writing a check to pay taxes, we should think about what Oliver Wendall Holmes said, “Taxes are what we pay for a civilized society.” I like driving on good roads. I think it’s much easier to go about my business dealing with reasonably well-educated people. I like living in a state with relatively little crime and among a population where people are not driven to crime out of desperation. I appreciate the legal system and law enforcement we have. I like having my mail delivered to the end of my driveway, and I like libraries.
If taxes paid for the things that taxes historically have paid for I would have no problem paying it. The fact is any reasonableness about the proper role of government and how to spend tax dollars is long gone.
Now we spend tax on paying interest for normal road maintenance with bond issues…. and spend millions more a year on cab fare and travel reimbursement for drug addicts as they get their taxpayer subsidized drug fix. That’s just for starters.
The fact is there is not enough tax money to do all the things that you spendthrifts want to spend it on. If we can slow down the growth and leave a few more dollars in the hands of the people maybe we can turn this monster around.
Have we had a bond issue for normal road maintenance? When was that? Do you have specifics or are we supposed to just accept an unverified claim that we have had bond issues for normal road maintenance?
Drug addiction in our society is a fact of life. It evidently is part of the human condition and cannot be eradicated. It seems obvious that drug addiction is a threat to society. There is a human cost in terms of lives damaged and lost, but we may not care about that. If drug addicts would just crawl into a ditch and die, leaving the rest of us in peace, we might not care. They would be getting what they deserve.
But their drug addiction does cost the rest of us particularly in terms of crime and in medical costs that the rest of us will have to cover. So what do we do to cut down on the costs of drug addiction that the rest of us would unavoidably have to pay? Shooting them is probably off the table. Doing nothing would undoubtedly prove to be very expensive. Treatment might be the cheapest alternative after all. It’s more humane, too, but being humane is not a characteristic universally lauded in our society. Let’s just stick with cost effectiveness.
You just passed a bond issue doing just that. Road maintenance.
You are growing the addiction industry with my tax dollars. There is no way that 10% of the population of some Washington County towns would be addicts if folks like you didn’t make it easy. You are funding our own collective demise…
Lets stick to what people like you are doing!!!
road reconstruction is different than snow plowing, learn the difference.
There is a difference between normal road maintenance and snow plowing. Learn the difference.
As the arbitrary cuts increase the quality of our civilized society decreases.
What are you talking about. Cuts?? We haven’t had “cuts” in decades for nearly anything. We have had “cuts” in the rate of increase. But no real cuts!!!
It is a rare thing where we have budgeted $100 for something one year and $95 the next.
Obama’s definition of a cut is an increase of $8 trillion over $10 years instead of his projected $10 trillion.
Please give a reasonable example of a real cut…. not a cut in the rate of increase but a real cut!!!
Come on you are a math wiz right??
Oliver Wendall Holmes lived during a time of relatively low taxes as a percentage of peoples income.
The standard of living in Holmes time was much lower than today. I did a quick check on prices of some common items in 1903 as opposed to today. A toothbrush cost 35 cents then. Figuring inflation at 4%, that would be $25 today. A phonograph record (a huge change in technology) cost $2 then. That would be $144 today. And one of the cheapest cars cost $600. That would be about $43,200 today. Of course, cars also have undergone a huge change in technology.
Doing relatively the same type of work today yields a much higher standard of living than it did in 1903. $500 a year then would be like $36,000 today and you can buy much, much more today in today’s world. $500 would buy 1428 toothbrushes. How many toothbrushes can you buy today with $36,000? 18,000 at Walmart. People can afford to pay more in taxes and still have a much higher standard of living than they did in Holmes’ day.
Despite the economic differences, what Holmes said is just as true today.
I will take your word at your numbers if you consider for a moment mine. In 1903 government revenue as a percentage of GDP was just under 7%. Today Government revenue as a percentage of GDP is 32%. In recent times that number has been higher.
I don’t disagree with what Holmes said in the times he lived in. I don’t think that he would enjoy having …. just for averages sake… 32% of his paycheck taken as opposed to 7%.
Consider also that government spending as a percentage of GDP was about that same number, under 7% in 1903. Today we spend about 40% of GDP. Even under Clinton spending was less than 20%.
Those numbers stifle private growth and grow government and make the economy even more government dependent. That policy is unsustainable.
I checked that out. As a result of WWI, government spending rose to about 30% and dropped during the 20’s. WWII saw the percentage go up to about 53%. It reached a low of about 32% during the last years of the Clinton administration then began increasing during the Bush years to about 35%. There was another high at about 42%, probably in 2009, while we were trying to head off another Great Depression. (So far so good.)
We are in quite a different world than that of 1903. Imagine crossing the country. A car trip in those days was an adventure worthy of Jules Verne.
In 1903 we had virtually no standing military. How many months did it take us to put together a military force capable of having an effect in France? It was over a year. War was declared in April, 1917, and we finally put effective forces in the field about a year later. Today we are global policemen and seem to be fighting wars without end.
There was no social security. Everyone was pretty much on their own. Remember the Waltons? “Good night, Grandma. Good night, Grandpa. Good night, John Boy.” We aren’t much inclined now to have our parents live with us these days.
Life expectancy in 1903 was about 50. Today it is more like 78. Those additional 28 years, especially the last 13 or so cost a lot of money including tax money.
How much education did the average American have in 1903? College was rare. Even a high school diploma was probably not the norm. You might not be impressed with the quality of education of today’s youth, but we as a society are trying.
The world just isn’t the same.
Did Oliver envision a time when I should pay four times as much in taxes as you when making just twice the income? The Marxist are consumed with the very few paying little in taxes when a great number of my peers are paying closer to 50% in total taxes in one form or another.
Here is another way to look at it. In Maine the income tax on $25,000 of taxable income is about $1000. It’s about $20,000 on $250,000. That’s 10 times the income and 20 times the tax. But after tax the ratio is $230,000 to $24,000, and that is 9.6 times, not that horribly different from 10 times the income. After paying the Maine income tax, the $25,000 earner has $66 a day to pay for needs and wants. The $250,000 earner has $630 a day. That means that the $250,000 earner could pay the needs and wants of the $25,000 earner and still have $564 a day left. The $250,000 earner is still doing very well. I don’t see that much to cry about.
I’m having a little trouble with the logic here. Should we then all live on $66 per day and give the rest to the government? How would a small business person be able to save to reinvest in their business or even to pay the bills from one year to the next.
My sense is that you think that the bulk of the people making $250k per year are taking all that home. My experience says they aren’t. They are in some sort of business as an LLC or S-Corp. It is kind of hard to pocket an undepreciated commercial brick building home for example.The IRS still wants their money and they don’t take bricks.
I didn’t suggest that we all should live on $66 a day. That would be, well, stupid.
My comment was directed at wtsawyer who objects to twice the income leading to four times the tax. (That happens when the taxable income for joint filing goes from $15,700 to $31,400 with the tax going from $340 to $1360. $15,700 in additional income results in an additional $1020 in taxes, the 6.5% bracket.)
Before the LePage tax cut, $15,700 had a $454.50 tax liability and $31,400 brought $1434.50 in taxes. That is only 3.15 times as much tax. Now it’s 4 times as much tax. Governor LePage is a closet liberal!
My point is that our barely progressive income tax doesn’t really represent much of a burden to people with a high income. What we have now in Maine is getting very close to a flat tax, and high earners have plenty of after tax income.
I assume that sole proprietors pay income tax on their actual profit, revenue minus expenses which isn’t different than people whose “profits” are in the form of wages or salaries. Why would they be paying income tax on the portion of their business proceeds that are used for expenses? I’ll have to check my accounting books to see if I’ve missed something.
Actually our tax system is among the most Progressive in the world.
But a new study on inequality by researchers at the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris reveals that when
it comes to household taxes (income taxes and employee social security
contributions) the U.S. “has the most progressive tax system and
collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10% of the
population.”
I was not talking about soul proprietors. To be honest I don’t know how they work. I was speaking about LLC’s and S-corps. (The vast majority of Maine Business) Those businesses provide a form K-1 to the shareholders which reflects all sorts of business income including undepreciated assets, cash on hand over and above previous years and other taxable items.
That’s pathetic. Let’s talk about those “people” (I think you mean company’s and corporations) that derive income from …….oh, let’s say something recent, like natural gas lines? Government’s don’t have anything to do with that? Wanna talk about how much money the government pays company’s and corporations for their services? Ever heard of a Request for Proposal? How about bond money for infrastructure, who do you suppose profits from those investments? I don’t think many company’s will turn down a lucrative government contract.
I am not sure what your point is. Did you have something you are directly responding to? Can you give me a hint instead of a rant?
Conservative support for eliminating the bottom 2% tax rate doesn’t make sense. A married couple with taxable income of $10,000 would have paid $200 in 2012. Now they will pay no income tax in 2013. Conservatives complain about people who pay no income tax and turn around and support a tax plan that does exactly that. I am puzzled.
Incidentally, a married couple with a taxable income of $25,000 will save $41 (79 cents/week) under the changed rate. A taxable income of $50,000 will result in $188 ($3.62/week) in lower taxes, and a taxable income of $250,000 results in $1287 ($24.76/week) less tax.
you forgot to mention how much more in taxes the person making 250,000 pays versus the person making 50,000…
nice cherrypicked data though, classic misinformation from the left
Read. It’s LePage’s recalcitrance, veto proof.
Not at all. A cowardly unwillingness to fight for what the Democrats say they believe in coupled with the knowledge of the popularity of the tax cut.
This is just another example of the fluid thinking of the Democrats. Their thoughts aren’t fixated on things that can’t happen (i.e. make Mr. LePage see/learn how his tax break for the well-to-do has only harmed our state and his party). All they need to do is work around the mistake of LePage himself for a few years while helping as many middle and lower class working people as possible. As for the wealthy, well they’ve been doing fabulous even before the great Bush recession and have continued to do so ever since. No one need shed a tear for them or Mr. LePage and his extended family whom we are also now supporting.
If Gov. LePage were really interested in tax relief for us 98% ers he would lead a charge to repeal the excise tax on vehicles. Vehicles pay as they go through fuel taxes and license tag fees.
Better yet add an exemption based on the average sale price of a family vehicle in Maine so that it becomes more of a luxury tax on the most expensive vehicles.
Great idea. It’s just not right for someone to be able to afford a more expensive car than you !
Actually I would be one of the folks paying more.
sure you would .
Already there. Higher priced vehicles are already taxed more.
Now don’t go and spoil their fantasy with facts, daggommit.
By who? The towns collect the excise tax, not the state.
… but proportionally exactly that same rate as the least expensive possible car to get to and from work.
Excise taxes are paid to your town.
However, the excise tax is collected locally and a portion supports local budgets.
We tried that several years ago but the moon batts in this state voted against it!
Ha! “Morons.” I think we all know that it only took one of those to hide our mural and everyone knows who that one was. Sad that the GOP and people of Maine have had to suffer so badly due to the silly actions of one man. I think we do need at least a two party political system but at the moment one of them looks to be dying. Hope you too can last two more years. Oh well, that’s politics.
See what I mean. Poke!!
Not really. Let me call the Blaine House and ask for a translation.
I think the poke belongs to the one that thinks of it first. sorry
Not if the poster is responding to a poke,…..
Oh my, the huge welfare population of ME is not going to get to steal from the few wealthy folks just yet. That is like coal in the stocking.
Just out of curiosity, does MS stand for Mississippi?
Heaven forbid that the wealthy “angels” shouldn’t get any coal. Too busy keeping their halos shined (they need it).
Cheesey how could that even come close to being truthful. I in fact saw an overweight, ignorant jerk on national TV with Brian Williams confessing to removing the mural in the middle of the night like a thief.
You are still distracted aren’t you?
And you are still desperate when conversing with these two; 4mer, and SR, just by reading these post, I can see that frustration is impeding your desperation.
Obviously my smirk is not coming through. maybe I should add a *smirk* to my more sarcastic comments.
Got to love how these guys try to cover up their mistakes. Cheesy would have us believe that the insane, laughable and just plain sad things Mr. LePage says and does is all a “distraction” to throw us off what he’s really up to…which is really really something clever that we just haven’t seen yet. Tick, tick, tick Paulie’s running out of time to show us he’s really a genius in disguise. LOL!
That’s not what I said either. I think your reaction is hilarious.
So far, all I’ve heard about is what the newest majority won’t do.
When will we hear about their plans? I keep hearing that the past election was a “mandate” from Maine voters. A mandate about what? What great changes are planned that will set this State on a road to prosperity? Anybody?
No one has had a chance to do anything yet. When they reconvene they will.
Democrats should construct changes to the tax code that keep the savings in place for 98% of Mainers, but create a higher rate for the wealthiest only. Special deductions could be put in place for small businesses that have more employees than just the owner(s).
.
Also a bill that restricts the new higher threshold for 0% taxes on inheritance (the first $2 million is not not taxed under the new law – it used to be $1 million) so that only family owned businesses get the higher exemption.
.
These changes would not raise taxes above current levels on anyone, they would just change the targeting of the tax decrease that has not gone into effect. They would also be written to exempt small businesses so that they do get all of the cuts.
.
Any veto or failure to override the veto would make it abundantly clear that those opposed are willing to enrich the 2% by throwing the poorest Mainers under the bus through cuts to vital programs
“Special deductions could be put in place for small businesses that have more employees than just the owner(s).”
One the most reasonable things I have ever seen you write.
The rest not so much.
Now if you could only convince Obama do the same thing with his $250k limit.
An alliance of small business owners has debunked the silliness about keeping the pre-Bush taxes on the wealthy. It will not harm the vast, vast majority of small businesses in the least
http://mainstreetalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Straight-Talk-on-Taxes-The-Bush-Tax-Cuts-and-Small-Business-Nov-2012.pdf
“but create a higher rate for the wealthiest”
Why? You know there won’t ever be enough. And besides, everyone has a different definition of “wealthy.” Whatever yours is, some other liberal has a definition with a lower income.
Why not just confiscate the money that the rich people have? Why bother with lowering rates for some that live the way that you want them too and then stick it too those idiots that worked hard, saved their money, maintained a conservative lifestyle and now have some money saved away for people like you to take and give to the people that chose to spend their money and live like there never would be another tomorrow.
The biggest one sits in the Blaine House and probably secretly enjoys viewing it.
Democrats,…lame ,worthless,…useless.
Democrats continue to be wimps….What are they afraid of? That’s what you get from “liberals”…..Where are the radicals when we need them…
Once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But I’ve grown older and wiser
And that’s why I’m turning you in
So love me, love me, love me, I’m a liberal.
~~~~~ Phil Ochs
This is what happens, kids go to college, they are liberal, mommy and Daddy pay their way through…. Then they actually get a job and start paying taxes, then they go WTF and turn Republican..
People on welfare don’t mind tax increases, why??? Because they dont pay any…LOL
Governor LePage gave poor people a tax break. In fact he eliminated Maine income tax for couples with a taxable income of less than $10,000. Does that make Governor LePage a liberal?
I had dinner with my son-in-law tonight. He owns a pretty good sized company that employs almost 100 people. His accountant has made it very clear that he needs to do to reduce his employees to below 50. His accountant has also made it very clear that if the new Democratic Party majority messes with the tax reform enacted by the bipartisan efforts in the last legislative seesions the company is moving back over to New Hampshire, period.
You mean, the so-called “tax cuts for the rich” weren’t really the “tax cuts for the rich”? You mean the Democrats lied? You mean they’d intentionally distort and obfuscate just to get elected?
And in other breaking news…
I love how the Dems hate GW, but man they love his tax cuts………Dont hear them complaining……Wait for taxes to go up an average of 3%, then you will wish GW was back.
Lets form a commission to decide if we need a commission to decide weather or not a commission is needed.
Hey Legislature,
Since we’re facing a 750 million budget gap,
and you guys probably wont be scaling back the 400 million in tax cuts any time soon,
could we please pass a bill that will create new jobs and tax revenue?
I believe it’s time for Maine to Legalize, Regulate, and Tax Marijuana and Industrial Hemp. It’s time to start creating some jobs and bringing in new tax revenues. It’s time to start rejuvenating Maine’s manufactoring industry making green products with industrial Hemp. 25,000 products can be made from hemp covering a wide swath of niche markets.
Hundreds of jobs would be created from the growing, harvesting, processing, manufactoring, to retail. Stimulating, and circulating the local economy.
Marijuana would be regulated like alcohol, and taxed accordingly.
It could even be regulated smartly. Like mandated organic, a maximum wage, anti-monopoly, decentralized, local-small business friendly, etc.
And all the spinoff marijuana friendly restaurants, cafes, and stores would be all positive job growth and tax revenue.
When the Prohibition of Alcohol was coming to an end, the United States was coming out of the Great Depression. States were desperate to create jobs and fill state budget gaps. Alcohol was widely available, speakeasys, organized crime were the ones profiting, and corrupted politicans and law enforcement were turning a blind eye.
Ending Prohibition of Alcohol was a logical step in the process moving the country out of the Great Depression.
Ending Prohibition of Marijuana and Industrial Hemp is a logical step in the process of getting Maine out it’s Great Recession.
Now is the Time for new job growth, new tax revunue,
and living up to the name of Dirigo (I lead),
Let the People Grow Hemp!
Legalization, Regulation, Taxation!
Yes We Cannabis!