Connecticut: Proudly more backward than Alabama


Well, maybe that's a tad unfair, at least for the moment. Still, this ( More of State's Poorest are Feeling Tax Burden , from today's Courant) is alarming:

When Connecticut's state income tax was implemented in 1991, the threshold at which a family of four started paying the tax was $24,100 or 73 percent above the federal poverty line at that time. It was the highest threshold in the nation for a state income tax.

Today, that threshold stands just 17 percent above the poverty line, a drop of 56 percentage points and the largest percentage decline in the nation, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities based in Washington, D.C.

Although most of the 42 states with income taxes have adjusted for inflation and increased their tax thresholds relative to the poverty level, only Connecticut and Alabama have not increased their thresholds since 1991, the report said. Alabama recently passed legislation that will begin to raise its threshold later this year.

There's no excuse for this, nor is there an excuse for this, which is even worse:

Under Connecticut's current tax system, wealthy residents pay a far smaller share of their income in state and local taxes (4.4%) than do lower-income residents (10%) and middle-income residents (9.5%), according to Connecticut Voices for Children, a nonprofit family advocacy group in New Haven.

This argues for a more progressive income tax, balanced by a reduction in the sales tax, the tax that hits the poor the hardest. Time to make use of that veto proof majority, Dems (not that they will). If that 4.4% figure is correct, it puts the lie to the notion that the rich will leave in droves if we raise their taxes a bit. They've got a way to go before their tax burden reaches that of the poor. Of course, even if their tax burden were equal, their tax pain would be miniscule next to that of people below the poverty line.
Posted: Saturday - March 31, 2007 at 06:27 PM          

©