Sales tax proposal returns to radar
Lawmakers: Proceeds would pay for health coverage for all
By Peter Wong and Tracy Loew
Statesman Journal
A sales tax proposal is back at the Oregon Legislature — but even though it’s unlikely to advance this session, lawmakers say they are intrigued because its proceeds would pay for health coverage for every Oregonian.
John DiLorenzo, a Portland lawyer who lobbies on behalf of business clients, told lawmakers Tuesday that a sales tax earmarked for health care would offer savings for businesses and state government.
Employers would no longer be expected to pay health care premiums for their employees. That would boost Oregon’s economy, drawing hundreds of new employers to the state and increasing employment and income taxes, he said.
Oregon is one of the few states nationwide that could dedicate a sales tax to health care because the state currently has no sales tax, he said.
Sales tax proposals have failed nine times between 1933 and 1993, but DiLorenzo said Oregon voters rejected them because the proceeds would have gone into the state’s general fund for schools and state services.
“The current electorate, given real leadership, might view a constitutionally dedicated sales tax to finance basic health care as preferable to the prospect of the loss of their health care — given how precarious each person’s job happens to be today — and how unsustainable the current system really is,” DiLorenzo told the Senate Health Care Committee.
DiLorenzo said he was speaking only for himself. He said based on certain assumptions on benefits and deductibles, a 7 percent rate would be required, although there would be exemptions on food, housing and utilities.
The current legislative session is scheduled to end Feb. 28, and it took months for lawmakers to write two sales-tax proposals sent to voters in 1985 and 1993.
“The plan is great, but the details have to be looked at very carefully,” said Sen. Alan Bates, D-Ashland, who is a physician.
Chairwoman Laurie Monnes Anderson, D-Gresham, who is a nurse, said she would encourage informal discussions during the interim, with the aim of moving forward with a bill in 2011.
“Businesses, I think, would love this,” she said. “With proper education, I think the public would too. The problem is the word sales tax.”
tloew@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6779; pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745
No way, I would have supported a sales tax increase if it had been proposed as an alternative to raising income taxes (i.e.Measures 66 & 67) and/or as a way to reduce the income tax rates for all in Oregon, but there is no way that I would support a sales tax that was dedicated to providing health care coverage for the uninsured, a new government expenditure. I am opposed to expanding government in Oregon, and in particular feel that the issue of health care reform should be addressed with a national solution. It’s unfortunate that our President turned the issue into one of public option, class warfare and attacks against Medicare recipients and providers, otherwise we might have health care reform already enacted.
Wow, this is socialized medicine for the State of Oregon. Period. BTW, did you know that Oregon taxpayers already pay for 35% of all abortions in the State of Oregon. They also pay for assisted suicide. No copay. It’s on the house.
I paid my property Tax, new to Oregon, I was amazed at all the funds raised by Bonds. It seems if a city like Tigard / Tualatin can’t afford services, they just attach a bond to our Property tax.
They want to instill a Sales Tax, then drop the Bond Charges from my Property Tax. Finance only what you collect from Sales Tax.
Either way, Homeowners will be getting Riped Off!!!
Sounds like Obama Care on a Statewide Scale; This is a bad idea. Our current legislatures can’t balance the budget, Washington can’t balance a budget; this will be a loser like anyuthing else the Government runs.
[...] Sales Tax Proposal is back – Proceeds would pay for health coverage | Rebuild Oregon [...]
[...] DiLorenzo said he was speaking only for himself. He said based on certain assumptions on benefits and deductibles, a 7 percent rate would be required, although there would be exemptions on food, housing and utilities. Read the full story here. [...]