The first thought I had about this endorsement, 'Duh'.

(Btw, Sole propriorships already pay business taxes & fees) It would be nice if you'd check your use of the word 'only' at the door. 'Only' is an obscene word when it comes to referring to what others would pay. "Don't worry about me-worry about thee".

How many new business will open with an increase in taxes?

The Selling of Bonds that were placed in the PERS account lost 885 million. The new tax proposes a revenue increase of 773 million. Guess why they need a tax.

PERS is now 53% of payroll and will be 63% of payroll in 2013 - 2015. Tax PERS and their millionaire pensions or shut PERS down and these irrepsonsible people will have to manage their own money. Why work if all you do is pay taxes? Everyone is going slow down. Tax Revenue will decline further. This blatantly obvious. Don't be an idiot.

"Partnerships, LLCs, LLPs, and S-corps - the corporate forms of most small businesses - will only pay a flat $150 corporate minimum, regardless of income or profit."

And if I do a little part time business on the side, say $1500 / yr you want me to pay a tax of 10% of my income BEFORE EXPENSES!!!. On top of all the licenses etc.

Even if have no-profit, or am just starting up.

YOUR greed knows no end. YOUR lack of caring about the small guy is showing again.

Wow, a truly amazing endorsement. Whod'a thunk it?

The fact is most small businesses will attempt to minimize net income. That's just good planning. You strike a balance between the earnings you think you should retain to cover slow times and the amount you want to show as net upon which to be taxed.

Here's the newss for all you good progressives. The excess profits that a business does not want to be taxed are typically issued out as bonuses to the owners and employees, which are then taxed as income. And in the past, the tax rate on personal income that we've paid out as bonuses is HIGHER than the corporate tax rate.

Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

"The fact is most small businesses will attempt to minimize net income"

This tax is on GROSS income. That is sales before expenses.

If you sell lots and loose money, you still have to pay this tax.

Again, the progressives don't care about people.

I understand the gross receipts component, but it doesn't kick in below a half million. I am talking about the fact that the state is most likely getting more revenue now from businesses doing less than a half million than they would if 67 is enacted. Or is it 66?

During the 1970's corporation taxes made up about 16% percent of the state general fund, now is at 6.6%.

Let's take a look at that statement. Do you know why corporate taxes as a percent of GDP are down? Do you? Could it be that the number of individual taxpayers has increased significantly in the last 20 years while the number of C-corps has GONE DOWN.

Since 1990, personal filers have gone up 31% while C-corp filers have gone down 7%.

Did you know that a sizable chunk of taxes collected on the individual side are directly attributable to business activity. Roughly 9% of taxes collected on the individual side are from sole proprietors, s-corps, partnerships and real estate activities.

Since '90, the number of s-corps has gone UP 200%. S-corps pay their taxes as individual filers.

Very interesting.

Memo to non-profits that don't think dollars are the end-all be-all of why they exist: Fuck you!

$200 total economic activity? $150. None. $150.

So is it complete indifference, or outright maliciousness, that the "flat" $150 couldn't have been subject to at least the requirement that you even HAVE $150 in economic activity?

I can list you 10 non-profits that run as such, and most will go under if this passes. Still, no $$ activity, what do they matter? No, REAL non-profits take a big chunk of donation money for full-time staff positions!

It was really an interesting article,I love reading such articles. Thank you.

In 2006, two-thirds of C-corporations operating in Oregon paid only the $10 minimum. Some paid only the minimum because they had no profits that year. Of the rest in 2006, 5,156 corporations had profits but were able to use tax credits, losses carried forward from prior years or both to reduce their tax liability to zero or less than the minimum tax. That year, 31 corporations had Oregon taxable income in excess of $1 million but were able to use these special tax provisions to reduce their tax liability to the $10 minimum. (Source, Oregon Center for Public Policy)

Agree with Ralph. Double duh, though. Agreed on verbiage. Add "should" and "ought", unless you care to discuss epistemology.

Posted by: aion kina | Dec 16, 2009 12:27:41 AM It was really an interesting article,I love reading such articles. Thank you.

Guess the spam only got taken out yesterday. Which was pretty funny that after all those ads showed up and got deleted, I went to a topic, and voila! At the top of the article was a Google ad. for the exact same thing (website even) that they had deleted! Now, THAT'S Dems in action!

Harsh comments folks.

This is pretty straightforward to me. The smoke has been cleared off and the facts are plainly visible.

Measures 66/67 have a minimal impact on Oregon businesses. Most every effort by government would benefit from its passage.

It's got my vote.

I should have mentioned that most of the ones that I mentioned are taking the hemlock and will vote for it.

That'll teach them to be idealistic!

Also makes the biggies whining all the more pitiful.