I don't understand why transportation fees are being rolled into our water/sewer bill.

What's the rationale for this? Because it can be done?

If we need a city wide charge, then levy it where it's supposed to be levied, in the property tax, not in water/sewer where it can be conveniently hidden from sight.

"If they do, venture capital firms will no longer pay a combined 3.65 percent tax on the gains made by investing in small companies..."

"..if they're not going to pay taxes, then why the heck do we want them in town?"

Because they invest in small business that hire little folks that work for a living.

i am all for expanding bicycle routes and bike safety.

less traffic, less pollution, less cars.

Because they invest in small business that hire little folks that work for a living.

I'm still waiting for the trickle-down from Reagan.

"...if they're not going to pay taxes, then why the heck do we want them in town?"

We want venture capitalists in town for the same reasons we want any business in town. Portland is the only city in Oregon with an open-ended business income tax. The city and county should end this anti-business tax for all firms, not just VCs.

And, we shouldn't let our "leaders" tie this tax decrease to a transportation tax increase. Any new transportation tax should rise or fall (hopefully fall) on its own and not be tied to any other tax reduction.

They're not tying it -- I am. Cut taxes on investment gains; add taxes on gasoline, or just living here. Some "progressives."

JK: They already have the money. They gave it away to campaign constituting developers in the Pearl, SoWhat and other URs. Last year alone they collected $51 million, of which the city should have gotten $21 million. That would have covered the whole problem with some left over for police and fire. See last page of pdc.us/pdf/ura/urban-renewal-report-06-07.pdf (The TSCC report puts the real number at around $75 million)

If you look at a list of road projects, it is a challange to find any that actually are for cars. They are mostly transit, bike and ped “improvements”. They waste what they have on speed bumps, bubble curbs, putting bus stops in the middle of the travel lane and those concrete bus pads you see at some bus stops.

If they get more, they will just muck up traffic even more.

Not one cent until they get their priorities right.

Better yet, lets make those millionaires in the tax abated condos and those towers actually pay tax that goes to the city, above any that they pay to the UR district for THEIR OWN roads.

My proposal for a new tax: Residents of UR districts must make up, directly to the city, the amount of money diverted by the PDC to improve their own neighborhood.

Thanks
JK

Well said:
The more something is taxed, less of it is produced. The capital gains tax punishes the very thing that encourages growth in the economy. Consequently, less wealth is created to invest in worthy enterprises that benefit workers, business owners and investors alike.

The capital gains tax is detrimental to Oregon’s economy for a variety of reasons, the most basic being that the more something is taxed, less of it is produced. The capital gains tax punishes the very thing that encourages growth in the economy. Consequently, less wealth is created to invest in worthy enterprises that benefit workers, business owners and investors alike.

“A tax on capital gains provides a disincentive for investors to channel their assets into capital-creating enterprises that foster economic growth.”
Capital gain is the difference between the selling price and the purchase price of an asset. An increase in value is penalized by the capital gains tax, yet because of the voluntary nature of this tax—it is only realized when the asset owner decides to sell—capital gains tax rates can have a profound impact on the movement of investment capital within the economy. The investment of capital in projects that would create value involves risk, and it takes ingenuity to recognize these opportunities. The reward of a greater return, or capital gain, provides the needed incentive for investors to take risks. A tax on capital gains provides a disincentive for investors to channel their assets into capital-creating enterprises that foster economic growth.

Although the principal harm effected by the capital gains tax is the inhibition of capital formation, other inequities are perpetuated by this tax. The fact that capital gains are not indexed for inflation unfairly harms investors. Not only must they pay tax on real value gains, but they are also taxed on illusory gains from inflation. This is one of the various facets of the capital gains tax that works to create a bias against risk takers—the individuals who drive the economy forward with their genius and innovation.

“A repeal of the capital gains tax also would improve the economic environment for Oregon. … In the effort to keep firms from fleeing the state and to attract new businesses to Oregon, every effort must be made to make the state as appealing as possible.”
Repealing the capital gains tax would permit wise investments to be rewarded, yet it is not only the wealthy who would benefit. The Cato Institute report, “The ABCs of the Capital Gains Tax,” states: “Roughly 95 percent of the fluctuation in wages over the past 40 years is explained by the capital-to-labor ratio. When the ratio rises, wages rise; when the ratio flattens, wages stagnate.” Laborers would benefit if capital gains were permitted to grow unimpeded, driving the elevation of both wages and the standard of living.

A repeal of the capital gains tax also would improve the economic environment for Oregon. Oregon’s capital gains tax rate is 9%, the third highest in the nation, making Oregon far less competitive than more business-friendly states. In the effort to keep firms from fleeing the state and to attract new businesses to Oregon, every effort must be made to make the state as appealing as possible. For investors determining the most fiscally attractive location, a high capital gains rate can be the negative factor. For a competitive edge in an increasingly globalized world our legislators should repeal the capital gains tax, allowing the economy to grow and prosper, something that ultimately will benefit everyone.

The capital gains tax is unjust and destructive to the goal of developing a vibrant economy full of great opportunities. As investors are allowed to receive their due reward for making wise financial decisions, consumers and workers are the ultimate beneficiaries. The politically and economically sound decision is to repeal the capital gains tax.

http://www.cascadepolicy.org/2007/10/09/end-oregons-capital-gains-tax/

Thank you, Grover Norquist.

Yes, people who live off their parents' money shouldn't pay any taxes. Only those who work should pay taxes.

I'm all for making it safer to bike in this city, but not at the expense of the flow of car and truck traffic which transports the majority of freight and business travel in this city. 120 miles of separated bike boulevards sounds like a recipe for hell on wheels to me. And a watse of money.

(c) either a county vehicle registration fee

How about a "bicycle registration fee"?

And no property tax abatements.

Jack,

Currently, the CoP is not getting any Business Income Tax from the VCs. They all left town. 3.65% of $0 is still $0. So the change won't cost the CoP a dime.

As for trickle down, who knows, the VCs might even hire a few more people in Portland rather than Kruse Way.

Please Jack, give me a break. You know that trustafarians are a VERY minor percentage of capital gains tax payers. The capital gains tax is the reason Oregon's tax collections are so volitile, get rid of it and no more boom and bust in Salem.

All of us know people that hold a property of business too long to "avoid paying the taxes". This inserts a lot of inefficiency into the economy and Portland's tax just adds to the problem. Get rid of the CG taxes and there will be more people who work and pay the taxes and they will earn more.

Get rid of the CG taxes and there
will be more people who work and pay the taxes and they will earn more.

Yes, it's working so well at the federal level -- this country's become a real paradise for working people. Let's replicate that system at every level of government.

Sorry, but income from property is just like any other income, and ought to be taxed accordingly.

Jack - The County's top transportation priority is fixing or replacing the Sellwood Bridge. As Chair, I am responsible for finding a funding solution to make that happen. It has been made clear to me by our Congressional delegation that if we want to secure significant federal dollars to fix or replace the bridge during the next Congressional transportation reauthorization process in 2009, we need to come to the table with a local match in hand. If we do not secure local matching dollars, we are either 1) on hook to pay for the whole thing locally without the benefit of federal assistance, or 2) we must go without any funding for another 6 years until the next Congressional reauthorization in 2015. The County is also looking at other transportation needs (other Willamette River Bridges, for example). NOTHING has been decided besides my clear interest in finding the dollars for the Sellwood Bridge. Regards, Ted Wheeler.

Ted:

I understand. But throwing in with Sam the Tram and Streetcar Smith isn't going to help your case.

Like it or not, you and they are competing for the money that's in my wallet right now. I'll give you some for the Sellwood. But I'm inclined to tell the two of them to go stick it.

Plus, we're all so sick of the photos of the kids every time you want more money. Give it a rest.

I saw the flyer before it went out, but to be honest I didn't even notice the emphasis on kids - I see the point you are making and we do have to avoid the appearance of hyperbole. For the record, my ideal flyer would show an untouched photo of the west abutment to the Sellwood Bridge - Illustrate the problem and state the facts - but then again, some might object to that as being fearmongering...Ted

It is pretty scary.

If you've got those photos, send some of them to me. I'll gladly run a few.

I think most people will back you in fixing the bridges we have. But if they get a sense that their taxes are going to go for more streetcar and tram malarkey, you're going to have a hard sell.

Ted Wheeler: Having Sam as a compatriot could be harmful to some of your goals.

Have you ever asked Sam why he didn't lobby the legislature for $10M from the lottery funds where he managed to get $200M for the Milwaukie Light Rail? Why couldn't he have asked for $20M of the amount to go to the Sellwood bridge?

Did you ever ask him why ODOT's STIP dollars (gas tax money) that were alloted for just CoP which amounted to $136.5 MILLION couldn't have been at least partially applied to the Sellwood Bridge (40 projects that just benefited bikes, pedestrians, sidewalks, bubbles, trolleys, light rail, buses, trails, travel smart program, programs to encourage alternative modes to not drive alone, metro van pool, etc.)?

Did you ever ask him why he helped take $45 MILLION from CoP's general fund and bail out SoWhat in the Amendment 8 of the Agreement, and not apply some of it to bridges, roads?

Did you ever ask him why he took $3.5 MILLION from CoP's general fund to pay for the cost overruns on the trolley extension into SoWhat?

Ted, much of the "transportation crisis" that Sam has concocted can be solved with proper priorities, and over time. Where has Sam been the past 15 years as he has sat in City Hall?

When resistance wears down Sam can get back to capping I-405.

C'mon guys, show some creativity. I mean look at all the things we done and think we can do without new taxes:
- PGE Park
- Floating sidewalk
- Streetcars, trams, light rail
- Armory theater
- Burnside bridgehead
- Oregon Convention Center and hotel
- Pearl District improvements by taking SDC funds from poorer parts of town
- Doulas, ballet troup tours
- Pedstrian bridge across Willamette
- FPDR
- VoE and Chris Smith's wet dreams

If we can just start putting some of that money into schools, police, Sellwood Bridge, road repairs, I might believe you actually care about Portland outside of downtown.

Ted Wheeler,
Please stop this:
"Jack - The County's top transportation priority is fixing or replacing the Sellwood Bridge. As Chair, I am responsible for finding a funding solution to make that happen."

The evidence contradicting this notion is staggering, making your claim very insulting.
Where was such a "priority" when Sam and company were pursuading the legislature to hand over $250 million in lottery backed bonds for the TRUE priority Milwaukie Light rail- and it's new bridge just slightly down river from the Sellwood bridge?
Not only has more light rail been the priority but it's advocates are busy scheming to keep the Sellwood bridge replacement in limbo forever. Even adding bus service to the new light rail bridge to lessen the need to fix the Sellwood bridge now closed to buses.
There isn't a road or bridge improvement in the county that isn't far down the list of priorities and this new tax revenue will be sucked up by all those other streetcar, light rail, and green street landscapes ahead of any real road and traffic improvements.
With Sam and company having maxed out much of their funny money, [borrowed] Urban Renewal municipal credsit card he's into what any Tanya Harding would do. Go get another card.
For an application and approval for that new card [taxes] he uses the public agencies to conduct a broad campaign to deceive the voters.

Please don't help him. If you genuinely and rightly so beleive the Sellwood Bridge and other road needs are a higher priority get to work and get them funded first and well ahead of the Milwaukie light rail. Go get that $250 million.

Holey Moley. We just got the mailer here at our office. In Tigard. In Washington County.

That's a good use of tax dollars, dontcha' think?

"Yes, it's working so well at the federal level -- this country's become a real paradise for working people. Let's replicate that system at every level of government.

Sorry, but income from property is just like any other income, and ought to be taxed accordingly."

Employment is up, we are just adding to the labor supply too quickly for wages to go up very fast.

So, if I buy property for $100,000 and inflation is 4% and I sell it a year later at $103,500 I pay tax on that $3,500 but did I really have income?

Cmmr. Wheeler,

My question is why this is being funded via the water/sewer bill?

Along with Prof. Jack, I would willingly pay add'l gas taxes to help repair and renovate our transportation infrastructure.

But I don't think this should be part of my water and sewer charge. That bill should pay for water / sewer use and infrastructure and nothing else.

I saw the flyer before it went out, but to be honest I didn't even notice the emphasis on kids...

Therein lies the problem, Teddy.

If that statement is true - not good.

If it's not - worse.

So, if I buy property for $100,000 and inflation is 4% and I sell it a year later at $103,500 I pay tax on that $3,500 but did I really have income?

Maybe not, but if you sell it for $110,000 you did.

Besides, you get to pay your tax in inflated dollars!

8c)

Paul - thanks for the feedback - the County is only considering options that the County has the statuatory ability to use - we don't issue water or sewer bills so that's off the table for us. Our options are far more limited than the City - what we could consider would include vehicle registration fees, gas taxes or potentially general obligation bonds. I'm open to ideas, and this is the right time to consider them. Bill - the Sellwood Bridge is, and has been, the publicly stated first transportation priority for the County as far as I am concerned. I think you are asking why it isn't the region's first priority - if you ask me, it should be. Regards, Ted.

Ted,

Thanks for posting here. I think the options you propose are much fairer, in my opinion.

I know sometime a heat shield is required when elected officials post on blogs, but many of us appreciate it.

Jack, the concern relative to the "VC tax" is that Multnomah County and the City of Portland appeared to take the position that the tax should be imposed on capital gains recognized by the venture capital funds themselves, which are partnerships. As you know, partnerships are pass-through entities for federal and state income tax purposes. As such, they do not pay federal or state income taxes; their partners pay such taxes on each partner's share of the partnership's income. Treating the funds as taxpayers for purposes of the city and county tax would mean that 4 percent would come off the top before the funds made distributions to their partners. While it was not clear to me that the city and county were correct in their interpretation of the tax as requiring this result, this appreared to be their position. As a result, when I set up my fund for example (Mount Hood Equity Partners), I was unwilling to subject my investors to the risk that the partnership would be subject to this tax. To be safe, I set up my fund in Clackamas County. Portland and Multnomah County will not get any tax on capital gains at the fund level. They also will not receive any tax on the management fees my management company receives, since it is now also in Clackamas County. Making it clear that the tax will not be imposed at the partnership level will certainly increase the tax revenue Portland and Multnomah County will receive, because the fund managers will more likely be willing to locate back in Portland, subjecting their management fees to the tax but not risking the result of subjecting fund capital gains to the tax (other than to the extent such gains are allocated to the fund managers as a carried interest). Maybe that is not as interesting as saying that Wheeler and the others are selling out, but those are the facts. Hope this helps.

Bob Wiggins
Mount Hood Equity Partners

Bob:

Thanks for that information. All I knew is what I read in the papers, which wasn't very informative.

A regressive tax is a tax imposed so that the effective tax rate decreases as the amount to which the rate is applied increases. The term "regressive tax" describes a distribution effect, which can be applied to any type of tax system (income or consumption) that meets the definition. It is frequently applied in reference to fixed taxes, where every person has to pay the same amount of money, such as a poll tax. The term regressive refers to the way the rate progresses from high to low. The opposite of a regressive tax is a progressive tax, where the tax rate increases as the amount to which the rate is applied increases. In between is a proportional tax, where the tax rate is fixed as the amount to which the rate is applied increases. Regressive taxes reduce the tax incidence of people with higher incomes, as they shift the incidence disproportionately to those with smaller incomes.

The regressivity of a particular tax often depends on the propensity of the tax payers to engage in the taxed activity relative to their income. In other words, if the activity being taxed is more likely to be carried out by the poor and less likely to be carried out by the rich, then the tax is regressive. To determine whether a tax is regressive, the income-elasticity of the good being taxed as well as the income-substitution effect must be considered. A simplified illustration of a regressive tax on income (proportional on consumption) is as follows: If Jane has $10 and John has $5, a tax of $1 on a purchase would result in an effective tax rate on the total of 20% for John and 10% for Jane. Thus, a tax that is fixed to the value of the good/service (without exemptions or rebates) would likely, in effect, result in a higher rate of taxation to people with less money (depending on consumption level and timeline examined - year or lifetime). A regressive tax system does not mean and likely would not result in low income earners paying more taxes than the wealthy, only that the effective tax rate relative to income or consumption would be a larger tax burden to low income earners.

so suck my cock!