IRS website instructs Grades 3 – 5 public school students on why taxes are good

/in , , , /by

The IRS has produced a comprehensive website, lesson plans and instructional materials to teach public school children about taxes. The IRS website is titled, “Understanding Taxes“.

Kids.gov supports the teaching of elementary school children about taxes. Explaining Taxes to Students Lesson Plan (Grades 3 – 5):

Overview: Your students may be curious about what taxes are and why we pay them. The Internal Revenue Service has a great Understanding Taxes website. The teacher section has lesson plans, interactive activities and printable components for middle school and high school students.

Here are excerpts from the Grades 3 – 5 student lesson plan:

  1. Explain that taxes are collected to pay for things that we all share, like roads, parks, and playgrounds. We also share in the cost of services such as the public school system or the police department. Activity – Ask students to list other government services that might be funded by taxes. Here is an Online 2011 Federal Taxpayer Receipt where data can be entered to see how tax money was distributed across government programs.
  2. Tell students that there are different types and amounts of taxes based on where a person lives and his/her income. Talk to students about:
    1. Income Tax – Explain that most people in the country have money taken from each paycheck to pay income taxes so the federal government can pay for things like national defense, inspecting food, researching cures for diseases, and helping with disasters. Activity – Ask the students to create a list of goods and services they share with the family members of their household. If their parents pay them for chores, ask whether they think they should give some of this back to pay for these goods and services. Using a weekly allowance as a paycheck and setting a fixed tax rate, have students calculate their “net pay.” Have students discuss how the tax income should be divided between the goods and services they listed.
    2. Sales Tax – When a student wants to buy something with his own money, he finds out about sales tax when his purchase unexpectedly costs more than the “sticker price”. Explain that states and cities charge taxes on almost everything that is purchased so they can provide their own services, and that the sales tax rate can vary from state to state. Activity – Have students examine receipts to compare the “sticker price” of items to the final cost of the items with sales taxes included. Optional Activity – Have students calculate sales tax and the final cost of an item using the sales tax rate for your state.
    3. Property Tax – Explain how every year, some adults pay taxes to the local government based on their house’s value. Explain that properties are assessed periodically to determine their value. Even in rented property, explain that the property taxes still get paid, but they’re probably included in the monthly rent. Probe – Ask students to speculate on what happens to the amount of property tax owed when home improvements, like adding a new bathroom or finishing a basement, are made. Optional Activity – U.S. property tax rates vary from state to state, typically .2 to 4%. Have the students calculate the property tax for 3 properties at different values using the same tax rate. [My emphasis]

At the end of the lesson plan is this activity:

Discuss with students that not everyone agrees on taxes. The Boston Tea Party is a good historical example of introducing the idea of resistance to taxes. (Note the illustration about Colonialists attacking a hapless tax collector.)

Probe – Ask students to speculate on the consequences if a large number of people refused to pay taxes. [My emphasis]

Many consider this indoctrination and not education. What do you think?

Killing charitable deductions slowly – the sunset of PEP and Pease

/in , , , , , /by

Roberta Flack’s 1973 hit tune “Killing Me Softly with His Song” comes to mind when writing about how the tax codes have dramatically changed effective January 1, 2013. Two of the major changes are charitable deductions under the Personal Exemption Phase-out (PEP) and the Pease deduction cap under 26 US Code § 68.

According to the Indiana University Foundation:

As of January 1, 2013, itemized deductions will be limited in several ways:

The Pease limitations will reduce the amount of certain itemized deductions high-income taxpayers can claim: either 3% of the taxpayer’s income over the modified adjusted gross income limit, or up to 80% of certain deductions (whichever amount is less).

The taxpayer threshold for claiming medical expenses as an itemized deduction will be increased from 7.5% of AGI to 10% (though individuals age 65 and older will continue to use the 7.5% threshold from 2013 to 2016).

As was the case in 2012, the option to deduct state and local sales taxes rather than income taxes will not be available.

Kelsey Snell from Politico wrote in December, 2012, “Tax rate increases aren’t the only way in which Democrats are aiming to collect more tax dollars from the rich — they’re also looking to resurrect a dormant pair of oddly named laws that targeted the wealthy for decades.”

Snell states:

Known as PEP and Pease, they’re a little bit like the original “Buffett rule.”

The Personal Exemption Phase-out, or PEP, and the “Pease” deduction cap — named for the late Rep. Don Pease (D-Ohio) — were introduced in the 1990s to try to help balance the budget by getting the rich to chip in more. PEP reduced the value of exemptions for high-income earners by as much as 2 percent for every $2,500 earned over a set amount. Pease limited itemized deductions for the wealthy.

Read more.

According to Barbara E. Little, an associate with New Jersey based Schnader Attorneys at Law in their Tax and Wealth Management Department and the Trust and Estates, Nonprofit and Higher Education Practice Groups.:

On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the “American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012” (ATRA). In this Alert, we explore the good news and the bad news that charitably minded individuals received with the passage of ATRA.

Bad News

Let’s start by getting the bad news out of the way. ATRA revived the itemized deduction limitations, also known as the “Pease Amendment” (named after Congressman Donald Pease, the amendment’s proposer in the 1990s). Under Pease, total itemized deductions are reduced by 3 percent not to exceed 80 percent, of the amount the taxpayer’s adjusted gross income exceeds the threshold amount – $250,000 for single filers, $275,000 for heads of household and $300,000 for married filing jointly (indexed for inflation). Charitable deductions are included in the limitation equation.

Depending on the taxpayer’s income level and other deductions, this limitation could adversely affect charitable contributions. For example, consider a married couple with $60,000 of itemized deductions ($25,000 mortgage interest, $10,000 state taxes and $25,000 charitable deduction) and an adjusted gross income of $450,000. The couple’s adjusted gross income exceeds the threshold by $150,000. The couple must reduce their total itemized deductions by 3 percent of $150,000 or $4,500.

The other bad news is that two charitable deductions were not extended: 1) contributions of book inventories to public schools; and 2) corporate contributions of computer inventory.

Good News

One piece of good news is that under ATRA, once again, individuals 70½ years of age or older may make tax-free IRA distributions to charitable organizations. The maximum distribution amount is $100,000 per individual, per tax year.

Speaking with a Florida donor to local charitable organizations he bemoans the fact that under ATRA his personal exemptions are eaten up by other, primarily tax deductions, thus limiting his charitable giving. He is concerned that ATRA is written so that non-profit organizations, many of which are faith based, will be irreparably harmed. With the passage of ATRA the new charity will be government and its ability to redistribute tax revenues to those non-profits it see as fit for public donations.

The new normal is “government charity” at every level.

Listen to Roberta Flack singing Killing Me Softly:

[youtube_sc url=”http://youtu.be/4mpqXu0z3wU”]

Senators Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Rand Paul (R-KY) will respond to the State of the Union speech

/in , , , , , /by

Earlier today, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) rehearsed the Republican Address to the Nation. Senator Rubio is set to deliver a live response from the Speaker’s conference room in the U.S. Capitol, immediately following the President’s State of the Union address. He will pre-record the same speech for Spanish-language networks earlier this evening. At the same time Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) will give the TEA Party Address to the Nation from the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Viewers will be able to watch Senator Paul’s speech live on the conservative website RedState.com.

Who will be the most watched: Marco or Rand?

Frank Hagler from Policy Mic reports:

For the third year in a row, two Republicans have been selected to give the GOP response to the SOTU address. Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) will give the “official” GOP response and Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) will give the Tea Party Express response. This unusual practice started in 2011.

After the Tea Party helped usher in a Republican majority in the House of Representatives, they began exercising their power in the party. The Tea Party Express tapped Michele Bachmann to give a response that was televised to the nation. Tea Party Express Chairwoman Amy Kremer explained “The Republican Party doesn’t represent everybody in the Tea Party movement, and they certainly don’t speak for us.”

Scott Conroy from Real Clear Politics reports:

With Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul set to deliver the Tea Party’s third annual response to the State of the Union speech on Tuesday, the pressure is on for the group to prove its ongoing influence, particularly amid growing criticism from establishment Republicans who accuse it of promoting un-electable candidates at the larger GOP’s expense.

In an interview with RCP, Tea Party Express Chairwoman Amy Kremer acknowledged the moment’s significance.

“I really think it’s more important than ever for us to do it this year because there have been reports of the Tea Party’s demise, but we’re absolutely still here and focused and engaged,” Kremer said. “The Republican Party doesn’t represent everybody in the Tea Party movement, and they certainly don’t speak for us.”

The TEA Party is flexing its muscles with the creation of the TEA Party Community website. Launched on February 2, 2013 the site now has over 109,000 members.

The struggle within the Republican party pits the old guard lead by Karl Rove, against the conservative faction lead by Senator Paul, Michele Bachmann and others. It was the old guard that gave Florida the likes of former Governor Charlie Crist who won the state house as a Republican, lost the race as an Independent for the US Senate seat currently held by Rubio. It is expected that now Democrat Crist will run against incumbent Republican Governor Rick Scott in 2014.

Conroy notes, “Now, with Paul eager to rev up the Tea Party engine just as a new civil war against establishment Republicans appears on the horizon, the setting will look familiar.”

Perhaps now is the time for a civil war within the GOP?

Status of Educational Choice Programs in Florida “Unclear”

/in , , , , , /by

The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice has release the 2013 edition of “The ABCs of School Choice“. The report shows the strength and weaknesses of school choice in Florida.

According to the Foundation website , “Florida has two private school choice programs (special-needs vouchers, limited tax-credit scholarships). The state also has a charter school law and enables public virtual schooling. Limited open enrollment exists, both for intradistrict and interdistrict public school choice. ”

The Foundation notes:

“The status of school choice in Florida is unclear. Unfortunately, in an unprecedented decision, the Florida Supreme Court struck down the state’s groundbreaking Opportunity Scholarships voucher program for children in chronically failing public schools. The court declared that the program violated the state Constitution’s education article, specifically the requirement to provide a “uniform” public education. Contrary to state supreme courts in Wisconsin and Ohio, the Florida court decided that the Legislature may not provide educational options beyond those in the public schools. Still, the court limited its decision to Opportunity Scholarships only, leaving untouched Florida’s other school choice programs.

Earlier in the same case, a Florida appellate court struck down Opportunity Scholarships under the state’s Blaine Amendment. That ruling ran counter to years of Florida Supreme Court rulings on the Blaine Amendment permitting “incidental” benefits to religious organizations as the by-product of programs designed to advance the general welfare. The Florida Supreme Court did not review that issue, and the validity of the appellate court’s holding is unclear under Florida law.” [My emphasis]

A constitutional amendment was on the November 2012 ballot to eliminate the Blaine Amendment but it failed to garner the votes to pass. Unions and even some TEA Party activists were against the amendment.

Florida’s two educational choice success stories are:

Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program

Enacted 2001 • Launched 2001

Florida provides a tax credit on corporate income taxes and insurance premium taxes for donations to Scholarship Funding Organizations (SFOs), nonprofits that provide private school scholarships for low-income students and foster care children and… Read More

John M. McKay Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program

Enacted as a Pilot Program 1999 • Expanded 2000

Florida’s John M. McKay Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program allows public school students with disabilities or 504 plans to receive vouchers to attend private schools or another public school. Read More

Despite the uncertainties surrounding vouchers, tax credit programs are completely consistent with the Florida constitution, even as interpreted by Holmes, because they involve private rather than public funds. –Quote from the Institute for Justice (April 2007)

Florida Braces for 13 Tax Increases in 2013

/in , , /by

According to the Heritage Foundation, “New Year’s Day was tough for taxpayers. Thirteen tax increases kicked in. The deal that Congress and President Obama struck that finally—but only partially—avoided the fiscal cliff resulted in seven tax increases. Those hikes combined with six tax increases from Obamacare that also began on New Year’s Day.”

13 Tax Increases that Started January 1, 2013 in the fiscal cliff deal:

1. Payroll tax: increase in the Social Security portion of the payroll tax from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent for workers. This hits all Americans earning a paycheck—not just the “wealthy.” For example, The Wall Street Journal calculated that the “typical U.S. family earning $50,000 a year” will lose “an annual income boost of $1,000.”

2. Top marginal tax rate: increase from 35 percent to 39.6 percent for taxable incomes over $450,000 ($400,000 for single filers).

3. Phase out of personal exemptions for adjusted gross income (AGI) over $300,000 ($250,000 for single filers).

4. Phase down of itemized deductions for AGI over $300,000 ($250,000 for single filers).

5. Tax rates on investment: increase in the rate ondividends and capital gains from 15 percent to 20 percent for taxable incomes over $450,000 ($400,000 for single filers).

6. Death tax: increase in the rate (on estates larger than $5 million) from 35 percent to 40 percent.

7. Taxes on business investment: expiration of full expensing—the immediate deduction of capital purchases by businesses.

Obamacare tax increases that took effect:

8. Another investment tax increase: 3.8 percent surtax on investment income for taxpayers with taxable income exceeding $250,000 ($200,000 for singles).

9. Another payroll tax hike: 0.9 percent increase in theHospital Insurance portion of the payroll tax for incomes over $250,000 ($200,000 for single filers).

10. Medical device tax: 2.3 percent excise tax paid bymedical device manufacturers and importers on all their sales.

11. Reducing the income tax deduction for individuals’ medical expenses.

12. Elimination of the corporate income tax deduction for expenses related to the Medicare Part D subsidy.

13. Limitation of the corporate income tax deductionfor compensation that health insurance companies pay to their executives.

Each of these 13 tax increases will slow the economy, meaning that businesses will create fewer jobs. Fewer jobs will make it even more difficult to land a job than it already is for the more than 12 million Americans looking for work.

President Obama demanded these higher taxes. Obama’s tax increases, in Obamacare and through the fiscal cliff deal, will not curb deficits and debt, because growing spending is driving America’s budget crisis. Congress needs to immediately turn its attention to the actual cause of our deficit and debt problem: too much spending. The proper way to address this problem is through reforms to entitlement programs.

President Obama promised the American people a “balanced approach” of tax increases and spending cuts to reduce deficits and debt. He has achieved the tax increase portion of that approach. Now Congress needs to force him to follow through on the spending cuts portion.

FairTax Proponents Seeking Support from Florida Rep. Vern Buchanan (CD-16)

/in , , , , /by

In an email to supporters Mark Gupton, Managing Director for Florida FairTax Educational Assn., Inc., states, “In conjunction with the National FairTax Strategic Planning Committee, Americans for Fair Taxation and the FairTax Strategic Advisory Team, FFTEA will support their action by devoting a considerable amount of time, effort and resources towards a District Targeting Plan for Florida Congressional District 16.”

Rep. Vern Buchanan represents FL CD-16.

Rep. Buchanan is the only Florida member of Congress to serve on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, which has jurisdiction over tax policy, international trade, health care and Social Security. Florida FairTax wants Rep. Buchanan to become a co-sponsor of HR 25 – Fair Tax Act of 2009.

It is generally believed that a tax reform plan will advance out of the House Ways & Means Committee during 2013.

“Tax related issues will be in two stages: 1. Dealing with the so called fiscal cliff and debt limit problems sometime in early 2013. 2. Followed by moving a tax reform plan from the W & M Committee to the entire House of Representatives for an eventual floor vote. We have received indications through various channels that FairTax will be on the agenda as one of the choices for the W & M Committee to hear. Chairman Camp is committed, more so than any previous Chairman, to having FairTax receive a vote. This is a major step forward and one for which we have the best chance of advancing FairTax,” notes Gupton.

Florida delegation members co-sponsoring HR 25 are:  Jeff Miller (R – 01), Ander Crenshaw (R – 04), John L. Mica (R – 07), Bill Posey (R – 08), Richard Nugent (R-11), Gus M. Bilirakis (R – 12) and Dennis Ross (R – 15). Florida makes up 13% of the co-sponsors.

Mr. Jim Hoey has agreed to accept a leadership role in FL-16 by becoming the Florida FairTax Congressional District Director. In addition, Florida FairTax has established a home page just for FL CD-16 which may be viewed by clicking here.

The Income Tax: Root of All Evil

/in , , /by

Politicians and pundits alike are discussing the “fiscal cliff”. What has become a focus of the discussion by both political parties and the President are income taxes. Specifically, raising income taxes on the rich. None are addressing the root cause of the crisis the United States faces today, which is the income tax itself. The title of this column is from a book written by Frank Chodorov in 1954.

Chodorov wrote, “Income and inheritance taxes imply the denial of private property, and in that are different in principle from all other taxes.”

“The government says to the citizen: Your earnings are not exclusively your own; we have a claim on them, and our claim precedes yours; we will allow you to keep some of it, because we recognize your need, not your right; but whatever we grant you for yourself is for us to decide,” states Chodorov.

In the forward to Chodorov’s book J. Bracken Lee, the ninth Governor of Utah, wrote, “[A] weak government is the corollary of a strong people.”

Lee wrote, “The Sixteenth Amendment [which created the income tax] changed all that. In the first place, by enabling the federal government to put its hands into the pockets and pay envelopes of the people, it drew their allegiance away from their local governments. It made them citizens of the United States rather than of their respective states.”

“Theft loyalty followed theft money, which was now taken from them not by their local representatives, over whom they had some control, but by the representatives of the other forty-seven states. They became subject to the will of the central government, and their state of subjection was emphasized by every increase in the income-tax levies,” warned former Governor Lee in 1954.

Chodorov puts into historical perspective the how and why we have arrived at this point and today face yet another fiscal cliff. The United States faced this same crisis in 1873.

Chodorov stated, “But hungry people are impatient. They cannot wait for deflation to wipe out the debris of their own orgy. A much quicker cure is called for, and the medicine that promises a quick cure is money. During the [Civil] war, it was reasoned, the government printed greenbacks and there was prosperity; why not print more greenbacks and force prosperity to come back? And so, during the depression of 1873–76, and for twenty years after, there was a loud clamor for greenbacks, plus silver money to supplement the scarce gold. This was the principal recipe of the social doctors of the times, a loud-mouthed lot who acquired the generic name of Populists.” [Emphasis mine]

Chodorov noted that during the depression of 1873, “These [Populist] do- gooders were most vocal in the new West, where the ‘hard times’ hit hardest and held on for the longest time. The story of this area is the story of the railroads. In the light of later experience, we can describe the railroad expansion of the 1880’s as a make-work program, fostered by government subsidies and bounties.” Sounds eerily familiar to today’s calls to fund infrastructure improvements by the President and members of Congress.

Chodorov wrote, “[T]he income tax appealed to them [the Populists] as a means of wreaking their vengeance on those they hated—that is, those who had more than they had.”

Additionally, “Income taxation appeals to the governing class because in its everlasting urgency for power it needs money.” By 1891, the Populists, who had by that time coagulated into the People’s Party (1892-1908), included an income-tax plank in their platform. The Democratic Party later appropriated it. A typical remark in the debate on income taxation of 1894 is the following from a speech by the Populist Senator William. A. Peffer from Kansas:

“The only object we have in view in presenting this amendment [graduated income tax] is to rake in where there is something to rake in not to throw out the dragnet where there is nothing to catch. The West and the South have made you people rich.”

Chodorov notes, “The Populists, as do all reformers, assumed that social good can be achieved through political action. They ignored the age-old fact that whenever the government does “good” it acts in the interests of some at the expense of others, meanwhile acquiring power for itself. The end product of government intervention in the economy of the country is more power for government.”

“The American brand of socialism known as the New Deal was made possible by the income tax. But with the advent of income taxation, socialism was unavoidable,” wrote Chodorov.

Government never gives up power, it never voluntarily abdicates.

Chodorov offered a solution. According to Chodorov, “Compulsion means force; there must be a policeman to see that the individual does not follow his own inclinations. But policemen must live. Since they do not produce a thing by which they can live, others must support them.”

No plan can be bigger than its bureaucracy.

The only bulwark remaining against bigger federal government is the 10th Amendment – States rights and the will of the people.

Governor Lee stated, “For those of us who still believe that freedom is best, the way is clear: we must concentrate on the correction of the mistake of 1913. The Sixteenth Amendment must be repealed. Nothing less will do.”

Floridians brace for 5.21% Federal Tax Increase in 2013

/in , , , /by

The Tax Foundation released its report “How Would the Fiscal Cliff Affect Typical Families in Each State?” According to the report author Nick Kasprak, “”With the election behind it, the 112th Congress has a couple of months during the lame duck session to turn its attention to pressing fiscal issues. Large changes to both taxes and spending are scheduled to take place at the end of the year unless Congress acts. On the tax side, the biggest potential change is the expiration of all Bush-era and Obama tax cuts.”

Kasprak notes, “Additionally, the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) has yet to be patched for the current tax year, let alone next. Congress could pass a retroactive patch (which it has done in the past) that would apply to the current year as well as next year; however, if it does not, the AMT exemption level would revert to what it was twelve years ago, and certain credits (such as the Child Tax Credit) would no longer be allowed against AMT liability. If this were to happen, millions of middle-class taxpayers could see a substantial tax increase, which for some could be even larger than the change from the end of the Bush-era tax cuts.”

“Finally, the 2% temporary cut to employee-side social security payroll taxes is also scheduled to expire at the end of this year—a potential third tax increase that would affect the vast majority of taxpayers,” notes the report.

To illustrate the potential impact on typical families, we have used Census and IRS data to estimate income and deductions for the median two-child family in each of the fifty states. The Tax Foundation ran returns through its online tax calculator under two scenarios—2011 tax law (chosen because it is the latest year that an AMT patch was in effect), and 2013 law, assuming all Bush-era and Obama tax cuts expire and AMT remains un-patched. Here is how Floridians will be impacted:

Median Household Income for Four-Person Family (2011): $63,937
Total Itemized Deductions: $9,452*
AMT Disallowed Deductions: $1,770
AMT Allowed Deductions: $7,682
Tax Increase, 2011 to 2013: $3,331
From Child Tax Credit: $1,000**
From Other Bush Tax Cuts and Extenders:$1,052
From AMT: $0
From Payroll Tax: $1,279
Tax Increase as % of Income: 5.21%
Rank: 19

*Family would take the standard deduction in 2011 and also under 2013 current law

**Includes amounts from AMT changes that would prevent taking the credit against it. The amount purely from the Bush-era tax changes to the child tax credit is $1,000 for every state.

To calculate your personal tax increase please click here to use the Tax Foundations online tax calculator.

Click on map for larger view

Kasprak concludes. “While there are exceptions, the general pattern is median families in high-income and low-income states are more affected than those in middle-income states. Higher income families would be disproportionately affected by the imminent AMT changes—particularly those that owe higher than average state income tax, which is deductible under the ordinary tax system but not the AMT.”

The reports states, “At the opposite end, low-income states are disproportionately affected because three tax increases from the end of the Bush-era tax cuts—the reduction in the child tax credit, the elimination of the 10% bracket, and the reduced standard deduction for married filers—represent fixed increases that do not depend on income.”

Kasprak says, “Therefore, these increases, as a percentage of income, are largest for lower-income families.”

UPDATE: Below chart courtesy of CNN Money:

RELATED COLUMNS:

Tax Foundation Staff, The Fiscal Cliff: A Primer, TAX FOUNDATION SPECIAL REPORT NO. 204 (Nov. 8, 2012)

AP: FIGURES ON GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND DEBT – November 21, 2012

The Public Transportation Scam

/in , , , /by

Nationally transportation is the second largest household expenditure consuming 16% of family income. Americans spend on average $7,677 annually on transportation related costs (e.g. vehicle purchase/lease, gas, insurance, maintenance, repairs, etc.).

According to the most recent National Household Travel Survey 8.68% of Americans own no vehicle while 22.79% own three or more vehicles. The survey shows that since 1969, “the number of households with no vehicle had been declining while here has been growth in one, two and particularly three vehicle households.”

Americans prefer to own their means of transportation. Most travel occurs from point to point – e.g. home to work, school, grocery store or doctor. Personal transportation provides Americans with a solution that best meets their individual needs.

However, over the past decade government has become more involved in promoting public transportation.

Government collects trillions of dollars in taxes from the sale of petroleum products, cars and related services. Yet, today public transportation has been embraced more and more by governments at every level. Government is seeking to: reduce carbon emissions, save money and reduce traffic congestion. But does it meet any of these goals?

Given the fact that only 8.69% of American do not own a vehicle, the need for public transportation is insignificant.  With 91.31% of Americans owning one or more vehicles public transportation is becoming more and more costly with less impact on government’s stated goals and return on investments.

A comparison of national and Florida trends reveals that the distribution of households by number of adults is very similar. However, the distribution of vehicles differs with Florida having fewer zero-vehicle households but also fewer 3, 4, and 5+ vehicle households.

Florida has a higher share of one vehicle households compared to the nation.

Two-thirds of zero-vehicle households are single adult households nationally and in Florida. Further comparison demonstrates Florida has a higher share of households with equal or fewer cars and fewer share of households with more cars than adults.

Expenditures for vehicle travel, specifically fuel taxes and vehicle registration and license fees, are part of the revenue streams that are collected by local, state and federal governments to pay for transportation infrastructure. The fuel tax in Florida is comprised of components levied by the federal, state and local governments. Florida’s fuel taxes range from $.45 to $.53 per gallon. Florida imports nearly all of its refined petroleum products.

Florida’s public transit strategic plan promotes “transit’s role in enhancing the environment, including air quality, energy and greenhouse gas reduction.”

According to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), “The private sector makes significant investments in transportation infrastructure. This is particularly true in Florida where infrastructure investment is often a prerequisite to permission to develop. Private sector contributions are as modest as providing employee and customer parking to as significant as paying for major roadway facility improvements and/or donating right-of-way and infrastructure.” These costs are part of property ownership with development costs borne by property owners.

The transportation issue is especially important for Florida due to our high volume of tourists. Cheap and reliable energy and transportation are necessary to sustain and grow Florida’s economy.

During 2010, Florida’s transit agencies ranged in size from the three-vehicle system in Hernando County to the 1,131-vehicle system operating in Miami-Dade County. In 2010, there were 35 fixed-route public transit systems operating in Florida.

FDOT reported that public transportation costs in 2009 were: Operating Expenses of $1,015,050,830 and Operating Revenue $233,922,989. In 2010 Operating Expenses were $985,647,670 and Operating Revenue was $254,316,041. Florida taxpayers subsidized public transportation in 2009 at $781,127,841 and in 2010 at $731,331,629. In 2010 the cost to transport one public passenger was $2.33 with an average fare being $.85.

During 2009-2010 Florida lost over $1.5 billion supporting public transportation.

Does spending $1.5 billion over two years to service less than 8% of the population worth it? Given the burden is being born by those whose budgets are already being stretched to the limit, many taxpayers are saying go private and let those riding pay to ride.

Florida Property Owners Hit With Massive Tax Increase

/in , , /by

Florida property owners received their property insurance bills and found the line item “FL HURRICANE CAT FUND PREMIUM RECOUPMENT”.

When Watchdog Wire asked Citizen Insurance: Is this recoupment a tax increase on all homeowners? The reply was, “Yes, all Floridians assume the potential for assessments should Citizens run into a deficit situation.”

Unlike private carriers Citizens is not able to manage risk and reduce policy counts to manage such risk. As an insurer of last resort, created by Florida statute, Citizens must write most risks that apply for coverage.

This “recoupment” is a tax on every Florida property owner.

According to Citizens Insurance, “Citizens may levy an Emergency Assessment when Citizens incurs a deficit in any year and that deficit exceeds the amount to be collected by the Regular Assessment.” See Florida Statue 627.351(6).

That means that assessable policyholders could be assessed a maximum of 30 percent of assessable premium if there is a deficit in each of the 3 Citizens accounts. The Emergency Assessment can be spread over multiple years as was done in 2012.

The total dollar amount for the Citizen “emergency assessment” is $887,502,331 to be collected over a 10 year period. The original assessment was 1.4% but reduced to 1% by the Citizens Board of Governors. The assessment was discussed and approved by the Citizens Board of Governors at a publicly noticed meeting. The assessment was also approved by the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation.

Citizens is responsible for paying hurricane and other covered claims to its policyholders. If Citizens funds are depleted after a catastrophic event, resulting in a deficit, assessments are levied. This ability to levy assessments provides Citizens with resources to pay claims after an event.

Below is a summary of the assessments and the order in which they are levied:

Policyholder Surcharge

· Citizens policyholders are the first to be assessed if a deficit occurs.
· The policyholder surcharge is levied only on Citizens policyholders and is a one-time surcharge.
· This assessment can be up to 15 percent of premium for each of Citizens’ 3 accounts. The assessment is levied for any account that has a deficit. That means that Citizens policyholders could be assessed a maximum of 45 percent of the policyholder’s premium if there is a deficit in all 3 of Citizens accounts.
· If the Citizens Policyholder Surcharge does not cure a deficit, additional assessments will be levied based on the account type:

o Coastal Account – Regular Assessment
o Commercial Lines Account (CLA) or Personal Lines Account (PLA) – Emergency Assessment

Regular Assessment

· A broad base of licensed Florida property and casualty insurance companies, including property and automobile insurers are assessed if a deficit remains.
· Companies must remit their portion of the Regular Assessment to Citizens within 30 days of a levy. They may recoup the assessment amount by passing it on to their policyholders.
· Insureds who purchase coverage from surplus lines insurers are also subject to the regular assessment.
· If there is a deficit in the Coastal Account, an assessment of up to 2 percent of premium or 2 percent of the deficit in the Coastal Account can be levied against assessable insurers and their policyholders.
· This assessment is a one-time assessment.
· Citizens policyholders are not charged this assessment.
· If the Citizens Policyholder Surcharge and the Regular Assessment do not cure the deficit in the Coastal Account, an Emergency Assessment will be levied.

Emergency Assessment

· A broad range of property and casualty policyholders, including Citizens policyholders, are assessed directly by their insurance companies. Insurers collect from their policyholders and forward to Citizens.
· For each of the 3 Citizens accounts, this assessment may not be more than 10 percent of the policy premium or 10 percent of the remaining deficit, whichever is greater.

According to the September 2012 Citizens Property Insurance Corporation rate hearing, “Citizens lost nearly $1 billion on sinkhole losses occurring in 2007-2011 with a loss ratio for sinkhole business for 2011 of 877%. This created net loss for the PLA for year ended 12/31/11 and resulted in less financial resources to pay for future hurricanes.”

Florida property owners gird your loins – another emergency assessment is on its way and it looks like a huge Sinkhole!

RELATED COLUMNS:

Fired investigators uncovered evidence of misconduct at Citizens’ top levels

Florida Insurance regulators remove 210,000 policies from Citizens, the state’s largest insurer

Citizens’ Insurance Looking To “De-Populate” Roles

WARNING: Taxmageddon Coming to Florida on 1/1/2013

/in , , /by

According to the Heritage Foundation, “On January 1st, 2013, there will be a $494 billion tax increase on you. This is the highest single-year tax hike in U.S. history. We call it taxmageddon.”

“Taxmageddon is coming from a variety of income tax rates increases, a higher death tax, new taxes from Obamacare, and many more. These tax hikes will primarily hit the middle class, with the dreaded Alternative Minimum Tax being the worst offender. You need to see the details to grasp just how bad it is,” states the Heritage Foundation.

The Heritage Foundation has broken out these federal tax hikes by state, so Floridians may see how bad taxmageddon is for them. According to the analysis Florida will see a total federal tax increase of $34.37 billion. With an average income per tax return of $65,085 that results in an average federal tax increase of $3,669 per tax return.

To view the impact of Taxmageddon on you and your state please click here.

Throwing Money At Education Isn’t Working

/in , , , /by

A new study titled Throwing Money At Education Isn’t Working by State Budget Solutions found that, “Higher levels of funding do not ensure higher graduation rates, nor does it directly correlate to higher test scores on the ACT.” Florida’s numbers show that spending more on education has not moved the needle on student ACT scores or reduced the state’s drop out rate.

State Budget Solutions examined national trends in education from 2009-2011, including a state-by-state analysis of education spending as a percentage of total state spending, and a comparison of average graduation rates and average ACT scores per state. The study shows that states that spend the most do not have the highest average ACT test scores, nor do they have the highest average graduation rates.

Florida is no exception to this rule. State Budget Solutions reports, “None of the states spending the least on education (as a percentage) had the lowest average graduation rates. The same is true for ACT scores. An outlier to this general trend was Florida. In 2009, Florida spent less on education than 46 other states. In fact, Florida spent five percentage points less than the national average on education. Florida also underperformed in ACT scores, ranking third for the states with the lowest average ACT scores, but did not similarly underperform based on average graduation rates.”

Here are the Florida specific numbers provided in the study:

Percent of Florida’s Total Spending on Education:

2009 – 25%
2010 – 24.8% (NOTE: In 2010 Florida received an additional $700 million in federal RTTT funding)
2011 – 25.2%
2012 – 25.6%

Average ACT Composite Score for Florida:

2008-09 – 19.5
2009-10 – 19.5
2010-11 – 19.6

Florida Education Spending & Student Performance Data:

2009-10 Per Pupil Funding $400
2009 Drop Out Rate/NCES Drop Out Rate 76.3%/63.6%
2010 Drop Out Rate/NCES Drop Out Rate 79.0%/65.0%
2011 Drop Out Rate/NCES Drop Out Rate 80.1%/66.9%

NCES: National Center for Education Statistics

According to the study, “Each year, the United State spends billions of dollars on education. In 2010, total annual spending on education exceeded $809 billion dollars. Although it is unclear whether that figure is adjusted for inflation, that amount is higher than any other industrialized nation, and more than the spending of France, Germany, Japan, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia combined. From 1970 to 2012, total average per pupil expenditures in the U.S. has more than doubled.”

“Despite higher levels of funding, student test scores are substantially lower in the United States than in many other nations. American students scored an average of 474 on a 600-point scale, performing only slightly better in science, with an average score of 489. By comparison, Canadian students scored an average of 527 and 534 on the same tests, and Finnish students scored 548 and 563, respectively,” notes the State Budget Committee study.

A conclusion of the study is, “As a result of centralization, states have less authority to develop state-specific metrics to accurately measure education initiatives. Localized control results in more narrowly tailored metrics and a better understanding of failure and success based on those metrics. Oversight at a local level is more practical and more effective than federal oversight.”

RELATED VIDEO: Teachers union speaks out against new film ‘Won’t Back Down‘

Former Mayor Responds to Sarasota County School Board Raising Taxes

/in , , /by

David Merrill, businessman and the former Mayor of the City of Sarasota, Florida, sent the below email to all Sarasota County School Board members.

School Board Members,

I urge you to reject the proposed increase in property taxes for schools. You can eliminate the need for the extra taxes by cutting wasteful policies and programs, and you have failed to make the case that the money will actually improve the education of our children.

Instead of looking to more taxes, you can find more than enough savings to eliminate the need for the taxes by replacing your credential-based compensation system for teachers.  Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education, and Bill Gates have said we need to find the money to improve our schools by eliminating the waste and inefficiency from the type of compensation system that you use. Yet, other than perhaps for some new-hires, Sarasota’s teachers’ salaries are set from a salary table with two variables: advanced degrees and years of teaching.

In 2010 Arne Duncan said, ”There is little evidence teachers with masters degrees improve student achievement more than other teachers.” Despite this information, Sarasota pays for more advanced and special degrees than any other district in Florida. A full 67% of Sarasota’s teachers have a degree above a bachelor’s degree.  While some advanced degrees may be appropriate, does giving two-thirds of the teachers at Phillipi Shores Elementary School higher salaries because they have advanced degrees really do anything to help our children learn the alphabet and the multiplication tables?

When it comes to teacher longevity, Sarasota’s teachers have the 7th highest average longevity out of the state’s 67 school districts. However Harvard Professor Paul E Peterson’s study titled “It’s Easier to Pick a Good Teacher than to Train One: Familiar and New Results on the Correlates on Teacher Effectiveness” reports that there is little increase in a teacher’s effectiveness after the first three years of teaching.  But you continue to increase teachers’ salaries based solely upon the number of years that they’ve been teaching, when, instead, we should pay them based on a performance evaluation like other professionals.

Some of you may say that you know these arguments, but politically you can’t cut teachers’ pay.  Therefore, in the absence of courage to confront the teachers union, your argument is that you have no choice but to increase taxes.  But, based on FCAT and EOC Assessment scores, you can’t show that you have been good stewards of the half-billion dollars you have collected from the referendum-initiated school tax since 2002.

Looking at our FCAT history, Sarasota’s ranking among Florida’s school districts on the high-school Reading FCAT and Math FCAT are lower today than they were a dozen years ago.  For the first three years of the high-school Math FCAT back in 2000, 2001, and 2002, Sarasota’s score was either the second or the third highest in the state. Likewise, for the first two years of the high school Reading FCAT in 2000 and 2001, Sarasota’s scores were either second or third in the state.  When the school-tax referendum passed in 2002, everyone looked forward to new and innovative educational strategies to build on our excellent school district, but, instead, the school district immediately went into an inexplicable funk, from which you’ve not yet recovered.

(I use the FCAT scores from the highest grade in high school that the test is given because they include the cumulative learning from lower grades, and they are the closest measure of the performance of your finished product, the high school graduate.)

Sarasota’s Ranking on High School FCAT among 67 Districts

2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Math
3
2
3
10
11
12
9
10
11
12
6
6
Reading
2
3
6
16
12
16
9
13
12
12
6
9
Science
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
11
8
11
12
10
11
9

 

Fortunately, we’ve begun to regain some of our former glory.  On the recent Algebra EOC Assessment, Sarasota had the second highest score, which may be the beginning of getting back to where we were 11 years ago.

Unfortunately, despite the hundreds of millions of dollars of supplemental taxes that taxpayers have given you since 2002, Sarasota’s high school student’s FCAT scores are still determined more by Sarasota’s favorable demographics than the school district’s extra efforts.  As you know, demographic factors such as adult personal income, percentage of free and reduced lunch, adult educational levels, and student racial composition are good predictors of a district’s FCAT scores when considered together.  In fact, there is a good argument that our county and city commissioners are more responsible for Sarasota’s FCAT scores than the school board since the commissioners’ policies have had the most influence on our demographics.

If you were to chart these demographic factors for Florida’s school districts, most school districts’ FCAT scores would fall within a narrow band of where one would expect to find them based on their demographics.  However, when districts deviate from their demographic prediction, it’s possible that their school district is doing something different from the other districts.

Accordingly, there are three districts on the high school FCATs who have challenged Sarasota’s scores, but who shouldn’t be able to based on their demographics alone. These districts, Sumter, Gilchrist, and Wakulla, all have less attractive demographics for adult income and educational levels compared to Sarasota, and their free and reduced lunch percentages are either similar to or higher than Sarasota’s.  Even with these unfavorable demographic characteristics, and along with having less money per student, fewer teachers with advanced degrees, less teacher experience, and lower teacher pay than Sarasota, these lower-income districts have achieved some impressive FCAT scores. They are obviously doing something right given what they have to work with.

District
County Adult Data
2011 11th Grade Science FCAT Students
Teacher Data
2011 High School FCAT Scores
Personal Income
% College
% High School
% Free-Lunch
% White
Advanced Degrees
Median Salary
Science
Math
Reading
GILCHRIST
$29,682
15%
72%
48%
92%
33%
$42,829
322
339
324
SARASOTA
$52,331
34%
87%
38%
72%
67%
$55,264
317
339
322
WAKULLA
$28,711
22%
78%
35%
82%
37%
$37,042
317
338
322
SUMTER
$24,836
17%
77%
45%
71%
33%
$42,365
320
334
317
FLORIDA
$38,210
23%
76%
45%
47%
41%
$45,723
307
329
309

 

If you could show a similar pattern of consistently having higher test scores than our demographics alone would predict, you could make an argument that you are efficiently and effectively using your resources, and that giving you more resources could lead to even higher test scores. However, you can’t make the argument because our high school students don’t consistently outscore the districts with similar or more favorable demographics.

On the 2011 FCAT tests, there were six districts that outscored Sarasota’s combined test scores and who also have demographics at least as favorable as Sarasota’s.  (I’ve excluded Gilchrist, which is shown above.) The districts are St. Johns, Okaloosa, Brevard, Seminole, Martin, and Santa Rosa. Each district has its favorable and unfavorable demographic factors, but they would all be considered similar.

Some key characteristics for these districts are shown on the table below.

District
County Adult Data
2011 11th Grade Science FCAT Students
District Data
2011 High School FCAT Scores
Personal Income
% College & Prof. Degree
% Free-Lunch
% White
Teacher Advanced Degrees
Teacher Median Salary
All Gov. Revenue Per Student
Science
Math
Reading
ST. JOHNS
$ 48,640
40%
13%
84%
41%
$44,370
$        9,360
324
344
332
OKALOOSA
$ 41,024
33%
23%
74%
42%
$48,779
$        9,245
328
342
330
BREVARD
$ 37,284
33%
25%
67%
43%
$42,421
$        9,226
326
341
326
SEMINOLE
$ 40,133
40%
31%
60%
48%
$43,301
$        8,910
318
343
327
MARTIN
$ 51,723
33%
25%
71%
41%
$43,677
$      10,739
321
340
326
SANTA ROSA
$ 34,838
32%
28%
80%
37%
$42,729
$        8,791
317
338
331
SARASOTA
$ 52,331
34%
38%
72%
67%
$55,264
$      11,961
317
339
322

 

Although the demographics are similar, as the chart shows, the Sarasota’s median teacher pay is 25% higher than the average of the other districts, and Sarasota takes in 28% more tax revenue per student than the other districts on average, or about $2,500 per student.  And, yet, with more lower-paid teachers and far fewer financial resources, these other districts have typically outscored us.

To put a better perspective on the magnitude of this disparity in revenues between districts, Sarasota has about 40,000 students, so a difference of $2,500 per student amounts to $100,000,000.  That’s how much Sarasota could save each and every year if we matched the average budget of the other six districts above.  Or, said another way, that’s how much money we could save if our school district were as efficient and effective in delivering high-scoring high-school graduates as other top districts – like we used to be a decade ago.

The table below summarizes the calculation for the extra tax burden that Sarasota taxpayers must fund annually above what the other top districts on average must pay.

Calculation of Sarasota’s Extra Tax Burden Relative to Top-Scoring Districts
Sarasota’s Per-Student Tax Revenues
Avg. Tax Revenue of 6 Higher-Scoring Districts
Higher Tax Burden for Sarasota Per Student
Sarasota’s Student Enrollment
Sarasota’s Total Extra Tax Burden
$11,961
$9,379
$2,583
41,076
$106,078,770

 

So, the questions before us are whether or not Sarasota has the potential to be the top school district in Florida, and whether we need to collect an extra $100,000,000 in taxes to do it.  And I’ll answer the first question with an unequivocal “Yes!”  And I’ll answer the second question with a “Hopefully not”.

The first question is easy to answer because we right there at the cusp a decade ago.  Back then, before the extra taxes started gushing in, our high school kids were just shy of having the highest scores on the FCAT.  In fact, it was the promise of being the top school district that got the voters to rally behind the property-tax increase in 2002 after having voted down a similar referendum in 2000.  Our recent 2nd-place score on the Algebra EOCA shows that we still have the potential, and it’s not unusual in the lower grades for us to have top FCAT scores.  By effectively using the financial resources that the public has given you, you can overcome any demographic advantages that even a district like St. Johns enjoys, and our high school students can be the very best in the state.

However, the reason I don’t support a continuation of the extra $100,000,000 in taxes is because the need for it is purely remedial. There are only two reasons that the extra taxes are needed.  One possibility is that you have failed to develop a school district that is as efficient and effective the school districts that are currently at the top of the FCAT rankings.  The other possibility is that our city and county commissioners have failed to create an economy that provides enough jobs for high income, college educated workers.  After all, it’s their children who get the top scores.

But continuing the extra $100,000,000 in taxes drains our economy of productive resources and makes our community-development plans more difficult. Other districts that don’t have to pay it are gaining a competitive advantage over Sarasota.  Over a decade, the cumulative impact of draining this much money from our economy is huge.

In less than two years you will have another vote to extend the property tax for schools.  (It only provides about half of the extra $100,000,000 in taxes that you collect.)  I predict that you will fail unless you do two things.  First, you must develop a compensation system that rewards our many excellent teachers and eliminates the bad ones.  (Ever read RateMyTeachers.com?  We still have bad teachers.  My 7th grade son just got one of the worst ones at his school.  Why is Ms. Friedland still allowed to teach?)  Secondly, you must restore Sarasota’s high-school test scores to their rightful place at the top of all districts.  Unlike a decade ago when we were Number 2, with all your extra resources, we need to be Number 1.

Finally, with $100,000,000 more than the average of the other top districts, you don’t need more money.  You need a better plan.  Arne Duncan has said that schools need to do more with less.  I suggest you show your understanding of the new reality by voting down your proposed tax increase.

Best regards,

David Merrill
Arox Land Development, Inc
700 Bell Road
Sarasota, Fl  34240

Florida Makes High Gas Taxes Top 10 List

/in , /by

The American Petroleum Institute (API) collects motor fuel tax information for all 50 states and compiles a report and chart detailing changes and calculating a nationwide average. Florida is listed as number ten on the list of gasoline taxes at 53.4 cents per gallon (cpg). Florida ranks 16th for diesel motor fuel taxes at 54.9 cpg. To view the July 2012 API report click here.

The nationwide average tax on gasoline of 48.9 is down .6 cpg from the April 2012 API study. The federal tax on gasoline is 18.4 cpg. The average state gasoline excise tax is 21.0, up .1 cpg from April 2012. Other taxes (such as applicable sales taxes, gross receipts taxes, oil inspection fees, county and local taxes, underground storage tank fees and other miscellaneous environmental fees) were 9.5 cpg, down .7 cpg from April. Adding these taxes and fees to the state excise taxes results in a volume-weighted average state and local tax of 31.1 cpg.

The difference is Florida has higher “other taxes” on gasoline and diesel motor fuels.

According to its website API, “Supports the implementation of sensible taxing policy that considers broad based approaches over industry specific proposals, supports efficient approaches to tax collection and weighs the impact of taxes on the ability of U.S. based business to compete in the world market place. ” Specific tax proposals to provide cheap and reliable power and meet the energy needs of the United States are provided here. The API makes specific recommendations on the: Repeal Sec. 199 for Oil and Natural Gas Companies; Repeal Expensing of Intangible Drilling Costs; International Reform/Dual Capacity; Increase Geological and Geophysical Amortization Period; Raising the Oil Spill Tax; Reinstate Superfund Taxes; and Repeal EOR Credit and Marginal Well Credit. To read the detailed recommendations on these taxes click here.

The API website states, “It will take all forms of energy to promote our economy. That’s why API and our members support the development of renewable and alternative sources of energy. However, we it must be done as part of a comprehensive energy policy that encourages the development of all forms of domestic energy.”

The below map depicts January 2012 gasoline tax rates by state and was prepared by API:

Toll is a Four Letter Word for Tax

/in , , , /by

Central Florida currently has eight toll roads and one Interstate (I-4). The Interstate is currently the only freeway highway in Central Florida. The tolls were supposed to be a “temporary tax” to cover “the initial construction costs”. However in Central Florida, the Florida Turnpike is now 55 years old, the BeeLine Expressway is 45 years old and the East/West Expressway is 39 years old and the toll taxes are higher today than ever before. Additionally, in South Florida I-75 turns into a toll road, known as Alligator Alley, at Naples and goes to Ft. Lauderdale.

Sally Baptiste from AmericanStatesman.org notes, “Bottom line – toll roads have become a cash cow for the state of Florida and other states. In the case of the BeeLine Expressway, the initial construction 45 years ago was only 6 million dollars. Through my research I also learned that the Florida gas tax money is used to pay for ‘general state expenses’ and not the roads.”

“The politicians will never admit that highways are the LEAST expensive form of transportation and the number one choice of Americans. The politicians are perfectly content to ignore citizens in support their special interest groups. The politicians are perfectly content to ignore the transportation facts and waste our tax dollars in the interest of their personal agendas,” states Baptiste.

Baptiste provides the following points about toll roads in Florida and across America:

  • Toll taxes go AGAINST the public interest. They do not “promote the general welfare” of the people.
  • There are better ways to increase funds for roads with no tax increase or a very very minimal tax increase. However, this requires those in public office to work in the best interest of the people – not their special interests and in some cases their own financial interests (i.e. OOCEA Scott Batterson is one example).
  • Toll taxes are nothing more than a tax against the people.
  • Toll taxes have nothing to do with improving transportation. “Tolls create gridlock”.
  • Toll taxes are a cash cow for the State of Florida and the local municipalities.
  • Toll taxes are regressive. Lower income individuals are harmed the most and toll taxes represent a major expense to small businesses.
  • The “User Fee” explanation is inaccurate, but is easy way to lure taxpayers. It ignores all the taxes we already pay for use of the roads and everyone pays for “Toll Abuse”. Everyone’s cost of living goes up and disposable income is reduced which takes money out of the local economy. These are a few of the costs associated with “Toll Abuse”.
  • The Interstate Highway system was seen as one of the best economic investments made. It supports the economy, national security, law enforcement, emergency services and improved the quality of life for all Americans.
  • The privatization of public assets and infrastructure is part of Agenda 21. The goal is to limit mobility of the American people and make money for government in the process. This does not “promote the general welfare” – toll taxes go against the public interest.

Baptiste asks the typical Florida motorist: Would you rather pay $1200 a year in toll taxes PLUS $300 gas taxes or $400 in gas taxes with access to all roads?

To learn more visit StolenLanes.org.