Oregon's problem, as the very low per-capita total tax burden shows, isn't the tax burden, but rather a weaker economy and resulting low income.

But you must recall that we are 33rd (or 41st) in personal income. JW

B!X - CNN/Money rates Portland as the 6th most taxed of cities it surveyed. Here's the link http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/taxesbycity2005/index.html

Of course, this is based on a $75,000 income. The median household income in Portland is more like $41,000. I think the census bureau data you cite considers only state taxes, and not local taxes, but you might double-check that.

How does one truly quantify the lack of a Sales Tax? Do both the Money Mag. and US Census Bureau attempt to do it (I'll check out the Census's data tools)?

Its always seemed that folks with expendable income benefit more from this than people who are basically droping every dime into food, rent/mortgage, utilities, etc..

But who wants to get in another dialog about the lack of a Sales Tax? The endless Oregon debate. Heck, I bet it comes up in the Dem. Gov. primary bore fest tonight (7pm, Channel 8).

Mr. Magoo --

Portland is not Oregon.

Its really so simple.

There are indexes provided that account for the general tax hidden inside the cost of what we purchase.

Example: the cost of a 1$ candy bar.

something like 45 cents is the actual cost of producing the bar: raw cocoa, sugar, paper, wrapping, cost of equipment, etc.

Then there is the cost of handling, figure another 10 cents or so...getting the bar from production facility to marketplace.

Then there is a tax "burden" built into the cost of everything manufactured. That would be the cost of employees, insurance, equipment, taxes on computers, property, unemployment insurance for any laid off employees, healthcare, etc.

all of this adds up to a more expensive candy bar. Obviously not TOO expensive, or that candy bar wouldn't have ever ended up in your hands, but still that candy bar costs more than you might have thought it would.

Now, locally, there are taxes on computers, cash registers, property, real property, employees, signs, and weighing devices. There are extra charges to businesses for parking spaces in the form of run-off fees for rainwater.

All of those things get built into the cost of anything that folks provide here in the city.

Ever wonder why high-tech companies go out to the burbs? simple! No tax on computers in beaverton. In a 600 seat call center/internet hub, this can add up to some real $$ (I think it was 13$ a screen per year, if memory serves--but that was 10 years ago when i was an entrepeneur.)

I look at at the Fair tax proposals, and I am sorely tempted to consider them, partly due to the incredible amount of money we already pay in taxes that are hidden, built into the cost of everything we buy. Perhaps it would be better to just jump in headfirst and pay it upfront. I am torn, as it appears to be regressive.

Here are some more numbers to throw into the discussion.

Here is a link to the Small Business Survival 2005 Index

It shows Oregon to have one at 37th. (1 is best) This index includes both individual and business tax burdens into the rankings. For example ... in the report you link the full methodology and rankings on the individual criteria's. Two glaring problems are the high Capital Gains and personal tax rates.

B/X ... if you have the methodology for the Census numbers can you include it in the comments so we can compare apples to apples? I am unsure as to how they(this census chart) came up with your ranking and would love to have a factual discussion on it.

Steve - Sorry, I forgot :o)

Point is, you can't really guage the relative cost of taxation by looking at state taxes only.

<h2>Misleading ... because what really matters is the total cost of government - total public spending. Oregon makes it into the top tier by having utra-high fees. Why be misleading b!X? When writing about this subject, reveal the full picture.</h2>