CLT
UPDATE
Friday, May 26, 2006
A
"temporary" tax finally rescinded -- 108 years later
"Today is a good day for American taxpayers; it marks
the beginning of the end of an outdated, antiquated tax that has
survived a century beyond its original purpose, and by now should have
been ancient history...."
U.S. Treasury News Release
May 25, 2006
Treasury Announces End to Long-Distance Telephone Excise Tax
Maybe it’s something in the spring air, but suddenly everyone
on Beacon Hill loves a tax cut....
Now comes the state Senate, which on Wednesday approved a series of tax cuts in
its budget plan, including an income tax cut tied to an increase in local aid.
Senate leaders say they’re serious about cutting the income tax to 5 percent, as
the voters demanded back in 2000, and we’d love to believe them. . . .
A Boston Herald editorial
Friday, May 26, 2006
Everyone’s invited to tax cut party
After going on record earlier this year in favor of rolling
back the 5.3 percent income tax rate to the former, longstanding 5 percent
level, the state Senate this week approved a measure that appears to make good
on its pledge. However, the budget provision is loaded with so many conditions
that it may not have any effect at all....
This week, instead of simply completing the rollback, the Senate opted to drag
out the process for at least three years.
By this fall’s legislative elections, taxpayers should have a pretty good sense
of whether the measure is a rollback or a ruse.
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
Friday, May 26, 2006
Rollback or ruse?
Senate tax vote has strings attached
While U.S. senators celebrated a packaged of moderate
immigration reforms yesterday, Bay State lawmakers advanced a series of
hard-edge proposals to crack down on illegal immigrants whose impact is being
felt in communities statewide.
"Clearly, there is a public outcry over this," said state Sen. Steven Baddour
(D-Methuen). "The public is really paying attention to this issue, and so are
the legislators."
Yesterday’s action by the Democrat-dominated state Senate, which passed a
measure to prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining public housing, stood in
stark contrast to the compromise plan pushed forward by the Republican-dominated
U.S. Senate.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
Mass. pols take hard line:
Push for tough stance on immigration reform
Illegal immigrants would be barred from taxpayer-funded
housing under a proposal passed by the state Senate yesterday, the last of three
immigration measures to receive unanimous support from lawmakers.
The passage of the housing proposal, which still needs approval from
House-Senate negotiators, came amid high emotions over an issue that has drummed
up significant debate in local communities.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
Senate OKs crackdown on housing for illegals
Boston’s talk radio yakkers have had a heavy hand in
getting lawmakers to take notice and toughen up illegal immigrant
measures, lawmakers and talk hosts agree, urging fired-up listeners all
week to call state senators and demand change.
"I have no doubt about it that the listeners of 96.9 Talk have had an
impact. They were already there, ready to go," said
Michael Graham, WTKK-FM’s afternoon drive host. "The citizens are
angry, they want to do something, they’re so frustrated."
"I’m not making a wave. I’m riding one," Graham added....
"We’ve worked hard on this issue. People are crazy about this issue.
It’s really a hot button issue," said WRKO radio host and Herald
columnist Howie Carr.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
Talk DJs urged fans to call for crack down
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
After 108 years, the "temporary" tax for the
Spanish-American War has finally been rolled back! How many
even owned telephones back
in 1898?
And we think our 17-year old "temporary" income tax hike is a problem?
Never trust a politician's promise. Never, ever.
They lie: it is their nature.
The species homo politico is bred to lie, has evolved
to say what needs to be said to gain in order to survive and rule.
Homo sapiens like us have evolved to be naturally honest by nature and
are often gullible, expecting others to be like us -- why we're not
driven toward elective elitism. We're easy victims of homo
politico, and must therefore be always on our guard.
Isn't it weird . . . very strange, that there is not
a single word or mention of the state Senate's unanimous votes yesterday
on illegal aliens in the entire edition of today's Boston Globe, nothing
about all the three Senate bills unanimously adopted. As an
advocate of free and open borders, it's not in the Globe's interest, nor
that of its parent-company, the New York Times, apparently. Save
this reference today for the next time you hear that there's no "liberal
bias in the media" -- that the mainstream media "doesn't have an
agenda." You've now got the evidence.
 |
|
Chip Ford |
U.S. Treasury
News Release
May 25, 2006
Treasury Announces End to Long-Distance Telephone Excise Tax
WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Treasury Department today announced it is
conceding the legal dispute over the federal excise tax on long-distance
telephone service. The Department of Justice will no longer pursue
litigation and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will issue refunds of
tax on long-distance service for the past three years. Taxpayers will be
able to apply for refunds on their 2006 tax forms, to be filed in 2007.
Treasury Secretary John Snow states, "Today is a good day for American
taxpayers; it marks the beginning of the end of an outdated, antiquated
tax that has survived a century beyond its original purpose, and by now
should have been ancient history.
"The Federal Appeals courts have spoken across the board. It's time to
'disconnect' this tax and put it on the permanent 'do not call' list.
"In addition to ending the litigation, I would like to call on Congress
to terminate the remainder of this antique tax by repealing the excise
tax on local service as well."
Key Facts Regarding Tax Refunds:
No immediate action is required by taxpayers.
Refunds will be a part of 2006 tax returns filed in 2007.
Refund claims will cover all excise tax paid on
long-distance service over the last three years (time allowed given
statute of limitations). Interest will be paid on refunds.
The IRS is working on a simplified method for individuals to use to
claim a refund on their 2006 tax returns.
Refunds will not include tax paid on local telephone service, which was
not involved in the litigation.
Originally established in 1898 as a "luxury" tax on wealthy Americans
who owned telephones, the federal excise tax on telephone calls is not
compatible with today's modern information-age society.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
A Boston Herald editorial
Everyone’s invited to tax cut party
Maybe it’s something in the spring air, but suddenly everyone on Beacon
Hill loves a tax cut.
There’s Attorney General Tom Reilly, who had an election-year epiphany
on the income tax rollback. Another gubernatorial wannabe, Chris
Gabrieli, has softened somewhat on the issue. We all know Lt. Gov. Kerry
Healey wants to be the tax-cutter-in-chief.
Now comes the state Senate, which on Wednesday approved a series of tax
cuts in its budget plan, including an income tax cut tied to an increase
in local aid.
Senate leaders say they’re serious about cutting the income tax to 5
percent, as the voters demanded back in 2000, and we’d love to believe
them.
Under the Senate plan, the tax rate would drop beginning with the 2007
tax year, provided the state restores local aid accounts to pre-2002
levels. It would drop to 5 percent by 2009.
Of course, we’d much prefer to see the will of the voters honored with
an outright rollback. But tying it to local aid growth, well, might give
it a *remote* chance of happening, since lawmakers tend to fall over
themselves to bring home the bacon in the form of local aid.
It’s curious that the Senate budget spells out the income tax relief
plan, yet doesn’t spend quite enough on local aid next year to guarantee
the cut. There would still be time for it to take effect for 2007. But
if senators are indeed serious about cutting the income tax, shouldn’t
their budget plan reflect it?
And the House, which would have to go along with the plan, has in recent
years taken an all-too-leisurely approach to cutting the income tax.
Let’s just say it’s no slam-dunk.
But hey, when it comes to a ride aboard the tax relief bandwagon, we’re
happy to make room for everyone.
Return to top
The Telegram & Gazette
Friday, May 26, 2006
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
Rollback or ruse?
Senate tax vote has strings attached
After going on record earlier this year in favor of rolling back the 5.3
percent income tax rate to the former, longstanding 5 percent level, the
state Senate this week approved a measure that appears to make good on
its pledge. However, the budget provision is loaded with so many
conditions that it may not have any effect at all.
The income tax rate was raised from 5 percent to 5.85 percent in 1989 as
an emergency measure after the "Massachusetts miracle" went bust. After
voters demanded a rollback in a 2000 referendum, a stepped reduction was
initiated, only to be put on hold after the dot.com bubble burst.
This week, instead of simply completing the rollback, the Senate opted
to drag out the process for at least three years. The rate could drop to
5.2 percent in the coming budget year, 5.1 percent in fiscal 2008 and,
finally, 5 percent in fiscal 2009 — two full decades after the
"temporary" rate hike.
And that’s the best-case scenario. If state aid to schools and
communities fails to meet the 2002 level, inflation-adjusted, all bets
are off. And, of course, the level of local aid is set by the
Legislature.
Lawmakers are contemplating an increase in local aid in 2007. However,
the modest
concession to cash-strapped municipalities and school districts bespeaks
a frugality not evident in last fall’s $1 billion spending spree with
“surplus” tax collections.
By this fall’s legislative elections, taxpayers should have a pretty
good sense of whether the measure is a rollback or a ruse.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
Mass. pols take hard line:
Push for tough stance on immigration reform
By Casey Ross
While U.S. senators celebrated a packaged of moderate immigration
reforms yesterday, Bay State lawmakers advanced a series of hard-edge
proposals to crack down on illegal immigrants whose impact is being felt
in communities statewide.
"Clearly, there is a public outcry over this," said state Sen. Steven
Baddour (D-Methuen). "The public is really paying attention to this
issue, and so are the legislators."
Yesterday’s action by the Democrat-dominated state Senate, which passed
a measure to prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining public housing,
stood in stark contrast to the compromise plan pushed forward by the
Republican-dominated U.S. Senate.
The federal plan includes provisions to tighten borders by adding patrol
agents and building electronic fences, but it also includes forgiving
provisions to create a pathway to citizenship for illegals and start a
new guest worker program.
The plan still must be reconciled with an enforcement-only bill passed
by U.S. House lawmakers, who are pushing tougher penalties against
illegal immgrants. One such provision would make being in the country
illegally a felony, while another aims to hike fines against employers
who hire illegals.
The penal tone of those measures more closely resembles that of
proposals now floating around Beacon Hill, where lawmakers say they are
hearing more and more from residents and officials concerned about
problems created by years of federal inaction.
"The federal government has done an absolutely terrible job enforcing
the borders," said state Sen. Richard R. Tisei (R-Wakefield). "This has
gone on for so long that most people have just had it."
The measures now to be considered in a state House-Senate conference
committee would create a hotline to report employers who hire illegals
to the attorney general, force courts to consider immigration status at
arraignments and empower local housing authorities to verify legal
immigration status of applicants for public housing.
Immigrant advocates scoff at the proposals, saying they are borne out of
political expediency. "The (senate) Republicans . . . have hit a perfect
storm of fear amid the national debate on immigration," said Ali Noorani
of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Coalition. "They have been
able to tap into anti-immigrant sentiment in communities throughout the
state."
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
Senate OKs crackdown on housing for illegals
By Casey Ross
Illegal immigrants would be barred from taxpayer-funded housing under a
proposal passed by the state Senate yesterday, the last of three
immigration measures to receive unanimous support from lawmakers.
The passage of the housing proposal, which still needs approval from
House-Senate negotiators, came amid high emotions over an issue that has
drummed up significant debate in local communities.
"It’s unconscionable to be giving taxpayer benefits and public money to
illegal aliens," said Framingham Housing Authority Executive Director
William Casamento, who wrote a letter supporting the Senate measure.
"There is no more public housing built. It is a very finite resource."
Immigrant advocates argue, however, that state attempts to crack down on
illegals, whether it be on taxpayer benefits or employment by Bay State
companies, will only drive them further underground and divide
communities.
"(Illegal immigrants) are not seeking to get ahead in any line
anywhere," said Thomas Keown of the Irish Immigration Center. "Turning
all manner of state agencies into customs and immigration enforcers is
not the way to go."
In addition to empowering housing authorities to check applicants'
immigration status, the Senate’s measures would create a state hotline
to report employers who hire illegal immigrants and force courts to
confirm defendants’ immigration status at arraignments or risk losing
funding.
State Sen. Robert Hedlund (R-Weymouth), who proposed two of the three
measures, said he was continually hearing from local housing officials
who complained they had no means of ensuring that taxpayer benefits were
not going to illegal immigrants.
"It’s insane," he said. "They broke the laws of our country to get here
and they’re getting subsidized taxpayer housing at the expense of needy
American citizens." Immigrant advocates have argued there is no data
showing illegal immigrants are seeking or receiving public housing
benefits.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 26, 2006
Talk DJs urged fans to call for crack down
By Jessica Heslam
Boston’s talk radio yakkers have had a heavy hand in getting lawmakers
to take notice and toughen up illegal immigrant measures, lawmakers and
talk hosts agree, urging fired-up listeners all week to call state
senators and demand change.
"I have no doubt about it that the listeners of 96.9 Talk have had an
impact. They were already there, ready to go," said
Michael Graham, WTKK-FM’s afternoon drive host. "The citizens are
angry, they want to do something, they’re so frustrated."
"I’m not making a wave. I’m riding one," Graham added.
Graham and other talk jocks have launched their own grass-roots effort,
telling listeners all week to urge lawmakers to pass proposals to crack
down on illegal immigrants.
"The effect that people calling up here had - the effect of having the
legistlators actually take a look at - I think that was because of the
effect talk radio and the media had," said state Sen. Robert Hedlund
(R-Weymouth).
Hedlund’s staff was fielding constant calls for a solid three hours and
the phone lines were jammed one day earlier this week as the issue was
debated on talk radio. Hedlund went on several shows in support of the
amendments. All of the calls to his office were in favor of the
proposals.
The senator’s chief of staff, Ted Langill, said they hadn’t seen calls
like this since the early days of the gay marriage debate.
"We’ve worked hard on this issue. People are crazy about this issue.
It’s really a hot button issue," said WRKO radio host and Herald
columnist Howie Carr.
Return to top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|