Democrats to Connecticut: If it moves … tax it!

Here we go … notice the new mantra of the Democrats … “Fairness“.

Wealthy executives, small businesses, middle-class homeowners and college students buying textbooks would all pay higher taxes under a budget proposal by the legislature’s Democratic majority that would increase taxes by more than $3 billion over the next two years.

The state’s richest residents — those earning more than $1 million annually — would see their income tax rates increase by nearly 60 percent under the plan, which was sharply criticized Thursday by Republicans as confiscatory and praised by Democrats as a step toward tax fairness.

Toward tax fairness? In the words of Karen Carpenter, “We’ve only just begun.”

Here’s a partial list of some of the things the Democrats will tax:

  • Couples making more than $250,000 6 percent. 7 percent on incomes over $500,000; rise to 7.5 percent on incomes exceeding $750,000; and top out at 7.95 percent on incomes over a million dollars.
  • Corporate surcharge increase of 30 percent.
  • Applying the sales tax to a variety of items previously exempt including tax preparation services, bicycle helmets and child car seats.

Oh and … another increase in the smoker tax. The cigarette tax would rise by 50 cents a pack on July 1, up to $2.50 a pack (on top of the $1.01 tax the Democrats in DC just whacked you with).

Oh and lest I forget, that property tax credit? From the Courant:

Currently, the maximum $500 credit is available to couples earning $100,000 or less annually. Under the new proposal, only couples earning about $25,000 or less would be eligible for the full credit in the second year of the two-year budget.

Spending. Don Williams told Ray Dunaway this morning that social programs remain intact, including “health care for recent immigrants.” Hmmm. And they are currently negotiating with labor for concessions but the biggest concession is “we won’t be filling vacant state jobs.” I am guessing folks at Bank Of America, The Hartford, et al would welcome that.

I do not want to see anyone lose their jobs so if saving jobs means a pay cut, so be it. If it means just reducing the pay increase while others in the private sector lose pay and jobs, now that’s fairness. Can’t wait to see the rest of the details. It’s a new world order of fairness baby!

Update (Steve): Don’t forget to check out the post from March 31 – When increased taxes are bad – increase government fees – I guess the state is going all in with tax increases and fees.

5 replies
  1. Bill
    Bill says:

    It's NOT a 1% and 2% rise in tax rates, it's 20% and 40%!  6 is 120% of 5 and 7 is 140% of five.

    Do the math.  These new rates represent a 20% rate rise at $250,000 and 40% rate rise at $500,000 per year!  Are these people crazy?  Do they think that people with that kind of income can't leave the state?

  2. Wayne SW
    Wayne SW says:

    The flatulence tax is next.  Leave it some green beanie to develop a personal flatulence device that everyone will be required to affix to their person.  This device will send signals to the "MotherTaxUsShip" and levy the appropriate exhaust tax.  There could be a scale of fees tied to a coefficient of sulphurous content and a surcharge for excessive sound….i.e.  Silent but Deadly could be more costly for the stealth, than the loud and announced, fair warning deduct factor.  Loud and no sulphur would have………

    This is somehting that Lawlor and McDonald could handle, right up therr alley.  Both uniquely qualified, yup.

  3. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    So let me get this straight: according to some of our "learned" congresscritters, we have to adjust pay out of a Constitutional duty to equal protection, but we can arbitrarily single out certain groups of people for different (read it: increased) taxation?

    Where is the equal protection in that?  If anything, the equal protection clause should protect people from unjust and unequal (read it: progressive) taxation.

    Good for the goose, good for the gander.

    P.S. Wayne, I think piping the methane directly to the engine as a "green" biofuel might offset the need for a tax!   I love the point about getting sulfur out of the flatulence!  LOL!

Comments are closed.