Wal-Mart Fights Paying Fair Share of Property Taxes

by James Parks
on AFL-CIO Blog:

A new report shows Wal-Mart—the world’s largest retailer, which made nearly $12 billion in profits last year—is squeezing money out of local communities by trying to reduce its property taxes, the main source of revenue for schools, roads, police and fire protection.

The giant retailer has sought to reduce the property taxes it pays on 35 percent of its stores and 40 percent of its distribution centers, according to a report by the nonprofit research group Good Jobs First. In fact, Rolling Back Property Tax Payments, estimates the company has filed more than 2,100 property tax challenges nationwide. Click here for the full text of the report. More...

VT Tax Study Info Debunks "Tax Burden" Myths

Vermont's Joint Fiscal Office published Vol. 2 of the Tax Study last week. It contains important information that helps debunk the mantra about VT having the highest "tax burden" in the country. By calculating tax liability for 24 different hypothetical filers in 12 states, they show clearly that VT's progressive income tax (and various sales tax exemptions) helps moderate the cost of taxes for most Vermonters. In the end, VT looks pretty good.

The media has done many stories about the so-called "tax burden" and routinely quotes those who refer to it as evidence of Vermont's anti-business attitude or to hype the Governor's "affordability agenda". Unlike the flawed per capita approach, the JFO study gets to the heart of the matter.

Doug Hoffer

Backdoor Electric Deregulation by “Political Suck-up Board”

Reprinting a comment by Traven at the Prog Blog:

CVPS wants what GMP has - “Alternative Regulation” - which may not use the deregulation word, but produces similar results. Effective earlier this year, GMP was granted permission to pass along the volatile wholesale cost of power to electric users. Under the alternative regulation scheme, GMP customers may see their electric bills change four to six times a year. No wonder CVPS wants deregulation, oops alternative regulation, too.

According to political appointee Riley Allen, director of planning for the Department of Public Service, whose mandate is to protect the interest of ratepayers, “The reality today is that wholesale (electric) markets are extremely volatile.” Certainly true, and reason enough as Californian’s found out years ago not to go there. In effect, under the new regulatory scheme, GMP will always know the wholesale prices it pays for electricity, but is protected from most of the price volatility. Electric users on the other hand will get a bill totally after the fact, when it is too late to reduce electric usage. It might not be so bad if electric users had real time price information and the ability to cut usage immediately. But we don’t. And so, those price spikes in natural gas prices and hot or cold weather will really hurt.

“Alternative Regulation” leaves GMP’s customers exposed to volatile prices. And its not just electricity use in Vermont that will drive the price GMP charges, but usage across all of New England. This is because electricity is priced and sold regionally. Think CT and Boston.

In its order allowing the alternative path to deregulation, the Public Service Board, or as renamed in Jeff Danziger’s cartoon, the “Political Suck-up Board”, stated that GMP’s new way to charge its customers for electricity would not set a precedent. Anybody want to make a bet?