The State of the State Address by Gov. Phil Murphy this week was serving two masters—his national ambitions and his rosy view of the Garden State.
The speech before the Assembly members and State Senators was short on new policy initiatives—save looking to reform the liquor license—and long on platitudes of what the two term governor considers his accomplishments over the last five years.
At its heart, the address was Murphy’s belief that New Jersey is on strong economic footing.
But what will not be forgotten is his statement at the end of the week that he is going to offer a tax break to New Jerseyans is his budget he will introduced in February.
“You’re going to see significant tax cuts,” Murphy said in the interview, on Bloomberg’s Balance of Power. “But absolutely no new taxes.”
And he said he would let the Corporate Business Tax sunset this year. “A deal is a deal. We committed that that would lapse and go away, and that’s where I am as we speak,” he said.
We would suggest two items, including one that has been pushed by State Sen. Anthony Bucco.
First, make the tax cut an across-the-board one. We do not deny the easing of fees last year on such things as parks and at the motor vehicle commission helped, but what people want is their money staying in their pocket. Every resident of New Jersey should receive a break.
As for the GOP idea, it is time to index New Jersey’s gross income tax brackets annually for inflation. As Bucco has pointed out, the federal government has utilized this practice for more than 40 years.
We believe the ANCHOR program was a good start. But a second extension needed for filing shows that the burden for any reform should be placed on the state government, not the residents of New Jersey.
Murphy’s statement on taxes was of much more significance than anything he said earlier in the week during the state of the state. Now is not the time for tax credits or targeted cuts—to make New Jersey more affordable, real tax relief must be accomplished for everyone.
Income-indexed property tax structures are what is needed next to make NJ affordable for all. Rich people should pay more per unit of assessed value, and income-poor people should pay less per unit of assessed value. There is no reason to force long-time residents or young people who inherit property to sell and move just to fill the property tax coffers. The well-off should pay their fair share and let middle class and poor residents keep their homes without having to go bankrupt in order to pay huge property tax bills. Funding for schools should also be shifted more towards income-based rather than property-tax based funding.
Why aren’t legislators listening to an idea whose time has come?
This is all very nice, but then…why did the tolls go up on NJ toll roads, is this a tax or, this is how they say it, A user fee?
The only way to cut taxes (without shifting them to others, increasing the debt, or gimmicks) is to cut spending. Let’s see if there are any specific spending cuts in the proposed budget.
One again frederics above shows his fascist side by calling for forcibly confiscating the wealth of better off people and giving it to others he deems more worthy. Why? Cause he thinks so! What a monster. Wealthy people earned their money just like everyone else and just like everyone else should KEEP every penny.
Taxes are theft and stealing from richer folks is STEALING and class warfare.
Typical liberal ignorance
If he, and the legislature, don’t come up with a 40% decrease in property taxes, then it doesn’t matter what he or any future governor does. It’s not a “party” thing, it’s a state thing. Other states don’t have the property tax NJ has, yet they manage to fund their budgets.
A 40% decrease would decimate schools and other services. We need a sensible shift in how tax rates are determined, preferably linking property tax rates to income tax brackets.
Please Governor No More Tax breaks ( or PILOT-deals) for the corporations and rich beyond any economy. Those developers who use affordable housing minimums to impose their market will bare living spaces, not affordable as the need, are not doing the community any real favors. We have exceeded sustainable scale in our State.As citizens we are denied even basic passive rights of said citizenship: 1. Health Care including Dental w/taxes paid already 2. Affordable Housing according to a set amount according to income 3. Meaningful work of actual need subsidized by government tax..
Instead we are subjected to private interest and making the advantaged class already beyond any economy even richer and more corrupted. The cult of the individual has subverted the collective sense of a Nation. Does it makes sense to be taxed in ones wages, and not have medicinal benefits, like an elected official would, and for life?
How does depending on having a job and relying on an employer to pay for a basic human right, Health Care, makes sense? How does market will bare rents for living space makes sense? God/Nature created the land, not the real estate moguls who leach life from us with unjust rents and fees..Rent should never exceed a certain amount of ones income.
I am not saying a 40% decrease in revenue. A 40% decrease in property taxes. The revenue can easily be made up elsewhere. The number one saver is to have 20 county governments, school districts, and police depts., not 500.
In today’s digital economy, keep raising taxes on the “rich” and they will leave…and take 100% of their income and property taxes with them. Which would make NJ’s financial woes even worse.
NJTP pulls in fortune of out of state revenue. Give resident commuters a discounted EZPass device.
Look at DE, ten miles of I-95 and the toll is more than a $1 a mile. That is out of state people paying into DE coffers.
They aren’t going anywhere. They are too tied to NYC, the economic capital of the world. An economy based on “buying things”…guess where all the “buyers” live…the Northeast. people are in the Northeast because that’s where the money is. You make your money here and then move out a nd open up a slot for somebody else to take your place.
I agree we have too many small governments, but what would the reality of reducing the number of these look like. It seems too many have family members in local governments. There would be a lot of resistance to eliminating jobs. It wouldn’t be insurmountable but a definite challenge.
Don’t let the door hit them on the way out…
The reality would be the elimination of top heavy positions. Instead of 500 police chiefs we would have 20. Instead of 500 school board superintendents we would have 20. Right on down the line. They can work out a deal and let the existing hang on, but after “X” years, or retirement, those positions end.
@Crown, while I’m ambivalent (while being cognizant of the cost benefits) about the advisability of consolidating town services/officials, those who oppose consolidation have legitimate concerns about ending local control of such services. Obviously not all towns share the same interests when it comes to the various issues that might arise within each service category, so there could be a sense of disempowerment that results from such an undertaking. NJ has a lot of small towns, for better or worse, and residents would certainly tend to feel that their local small town flavor would be diminished by consolidation. Exactly how to address that concern is worth exploring if we are to pursue further consolidation.