Sponsored by Oregon Business

Taxes won't keep businesses from coming to Oregon

| Print |  Email
High Five
Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Lane Metro Partnership head Jack Roberts, who is responsible for bringing businesses into Lane County, says out-of-state companies looking to move to Oregon don't seem worried about the implications of Measures 66 and 67.

Yet opponents say the measures' higher corporate and personal income taxes will hurt Oregon's business climate.

Roberts said Oregon is attractive — and would continue to be regardless of the election outcome on measures 66 and 67 — for reasons that go beyond the overall tax burden. He said the particulars of Oregon’s business tax system include property tax waivers within “enterprise zones” and a tax formula that favors companies whose goods are sold outside the state. That makes Oregon an ideal home for the most sought-after employers: those who bring dollars into the state’s economy from markets beyond its borders, he said.
Roberts said he dislikes the permanence of some of the taxes in the two measures and philosophically disagrees with tax increases that hit the business sector and high earners instead of distributing the burden more broadly. But he is supporting the two measures because he sees no substantial economic harm to outweigh the benefits of protecting education and basic services that are funded with state tax dollars.

Read the full story at The Register-Guard.

{biztweet}Oregon Measures 66 67 out-of-state{/biztweet}



Dennis F
0 #1 Jack Roberts is WAY out of touch...Dennis F 2010-01-19 15:41:32
If you don't think this will hurt the business climate in Oregon you must be on crack and you certianly don't own your own company. Measure 67 is a backdoor Sales Tax and nothing else. It does not help this state one bit when the voters have voted against a sales tax over and over. So our liberal leaders decide to add a "corporate" tax on the gross sales of any company which is another way of installing a "sales" tax on sales. And this bologna about it only going from $10 to $150 is misleading at best. That only applies to "hobby-level" business doing less than $500K which is not the majority of Oregon small business. So most businesses will be faced with ten or hundreds of thousands in "tax" increases from this new measure. It's a crime and you know it. And to sideswipe all the companies in this recession/depre ssionary Oregon market with what is effectively a Back-Tax for 2009 sales should be a crime. Especially since over a third of what the state expects to collect in these measures is going to be doled out to state employees in pay raises and benefits when the rest of the people of this state are losing jobs, cutting their hours and wages just to survive. What the hell are you clowns thinking...it is obviously not a state govenment that works for the people. I can tell you that our company is looking forward to moving to a more friendly state and I would encourage other business to leave as well.
Quote | Report to administrator
Brett Moser
0 #2 Oops... Get your facts straight DennisBrett Moser 2010-01-20 12:23:51
If Measure 67 passes, 88% of business in Oregon won't see their taxes increased by more than $140. ONLY C-Corporations (they generally have 75 shareholders or more) will see their taxes raised more than $140.
Quote | Report to administrator
0 #3 Too bad more info wasn't available sooner, the facts helped me decidelamac 2010-01-20 13:53:15
Many people I talk to don't know what these two measures are all about. After reading the explanations that came in the mail today, I realized #66 is a no-brainer. I'm not one of the lucky ones who make over $250,000/year. I think people who make that amount of $ can afford to pay a little more. What I learned is that the amount under $250,000 isn't taxed more; its only the amount over $250,000 that is affected by #66. So, all of you Oregonians out there making under this amount, need to allow those more fortunate to help turn our economy around. It's important not to listen to other people's opinions without doing your own research -- and getting to the underlying facts. Like myself, most people don't know the facts about this measure, and are only listening to the opinions of other uninformed folks. There are a lot of scare tactics floating around out there, I think to confuse us. My rule of thumb is find out who is funding the ads. If they're big corporations, I think they're about "the money" and not about "the little guy" (i.e. you and me). I don't think big corporations need any more breaks, but I do know those of us making less than $250,00/year are in deep doodoo right now. We need the help that rich folks can give. I was surprised, after reading the literature that came in the mail today, that the amount of taxes #66 would impose was very minimal -- teeny. If I made this amount of money (over $250,000), I'd gladly pay a little more in taxes to make my community and my state, which I am proud of, a better place to live for me, my family and my neighbors. That's what has helped make Oregon a great place to live. We're a community who cares about the quality of life in our state. My point: don't be fooled, don't vote against your own best interests. Get the facts. Make your own decision as to whether to allow people who make over $250,000 (people who can afford it) help our state out of a deep hole. Thanks for listening!
Quote | Report to administrator
0 #4 Mr. Dennis F. above, you are uninformedlamac 2010-01-20 14:22:40
I'm so sorry Mr. Dennis isn't versed in the facts, and is using such inflamatory language. It makes it hard to have a conversation with you, when you spout such negative talk, including name-calling. This isn't productive. It doesn't make you sound like you're a good neighbor looking to help the people of Oregon. As the facts would have it, Oregon currently has the lowest corporate taxation on the West Coast. And, even with measure 67's passage, we still will have one of the lowest corporate tax levels in the nation. Your statement that you would go to a more friendly state to do business is --> just silly. Oregon is one of the most business-friend ly states in the nation, And still will be after measure 67 is passed. You'll have a hard time finding a better place to do business, anywhere. I do have a small business in Oregon, and I have paid the $10 minimum tax for years. I don't think $150, in the big scheme of things, will bankrupt any of us. Yes, it's a big jump from $10 to $150, but the $10 fee hasn't kept up with the times. I understand that the 1931 fee of $10 equates to about $300 today, so $150 is only half of what the fee could be if we compared dollars to dollars. When put in this context it is high time we brought the tax code up to date, and at the same time helped our economy. I don't agree this is a partisan issue. I think it is "a have pride in your state", "save the economy", "everyone pay their fair share" kind of issue. I'm sorry to say, it sounds like Mr. Dennnis is more focused on his own piece of the pie and not "his fellow man" or the beautiful state of Oregon.
Quote | Report to administrator
0 #5 Hmmm...Interested 2010-01-21 08:53:04
It is interesting that the debate is centered on who can afford to pay and who cannot afford to pay. The people not being asked to pay are sure that the other people can afford to pay. As a CPA I know that the groups being asked to pay will pass this additional cost on to the group that is voting for them to pay.

At some point, if our state is so great, shouldn't we request some accountability out of government? What are they doing with the billions of dollars they currently get annually to allocate and spend? If the people have as a priority education, safety and health why are these the areas of the budget that are first to be cut. Why are the office specialists 1 and 2 or the file clerks or the mid-level management not the first ones to be laid-off?
Quote | Report to administrator
Oregon Business magazinetitle-sponsored-links-02