Legislature(2011 - 2012)BUTROVICH 205
03/06/2012 09:00 AM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| SCR22 | |
| SB198 | |
| SB222 | |
| SB29 | |
| SB208 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| = | SCR 22 | ||
| = | SB 198 | ||
| *+ | SB 222 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 29 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 208 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 29-TAX EXPENDITURE REPORT
9:38:02 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI announced the consideration of SB 29, a bill
which seeks to focus greater public and legislative attention on
"independent state expenditures," which the bill defines as tax
credits, deferrals, waivers, exclusions, and deductions. These
forms of indirect spending constitute a high percent of state
spending, yet they receive relatively little attention in the
annual state budgeting process and are rarely evaluated to
determine whether they are meeting the goals for which they were
initially enacted. The public also knows little about these
expenditures, despite the fact that the state actually writes
checks to reimburse companies for some types of tax credits.
SENATOR PASKVAN moved to adopt the CS for SB 29, labeled 27-
LS0305\I, as the working document before the committee.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI objected for discussion purposes.
SAM GOTTSTEIN, staff to Senator Bill Wielechowski, sponsor of SB
29, introduced the bill. He said that SB 29 deals with tax
expenditures which are defined on page 4, lines 13 and 17. He
termed tax expenditures "tax credits." The intent of the bill is
to have information provided to the legislature and public in
order to have a better understanding of where the state's money
goes and whether money given for tax credits achieves its
legislative purpose. According to the Center for American
Progress, tax expenditures make up about 25 percent of federal
government spending. In Alaska, according to the Department of
Revenue (DOR), there were $863 million in tax credits in 2011
for the oil and gas industry. Alaska spends more on tax credits
annually than the budget of DOR, DNR, DEC, LAW, Court System,
and the Legislature combined. That amount is about 15 percent of
Alaska's annual expenditures.
He reported that only 9 states do not publish this type of
disclosure information and Alaska is one of them. The majority
of Alaska's tax credits have no disclosure. Oil and gas credits
do not disclose the value of each credit, where it was applied,
how many jobs it creates, or how much goes to wages. On the
other hand, the Alaska Film Office has tax credit information on
line.
He concluded that the intent of the legislation is to get
information about all tax credits out to the public. He said the
sponsor's intent is to find the right balance between getting
information and creating too much of a burden on DOR to find out
the information.
MR. GOTTSTEIN addressed the changes in the bill by section:
Section 1 makes the short title of SB 29 the "Alaska
Tax Break Transparency Act."
Section 2 requires legislative intent language for any
future tax expenditures in order to make it easier for
DOR to figure out if a particular tax credit is
achieving its legislative intent.
Sections 3-5 are changed to more clearly refer to the
Fall Revenue Sourcebook.
Section 6 is the "meat and potatoes" of the bill. The
first subsection deals with what would be published
annually for each tax credit. It would have statutory
authority and deal with the annual sum, how many
taxpayers there were, what the estimate of tax credits
for the following year would be, and the estimate of
the public cost. In subsection (c) in Section 6, the
goal is to have a one-time analysis of each tax credit
over $1 million to determine whether the statute
authorizing the tax expenditure has achieved its
purpose. Page 4, lines 3-9, describes how that
happens. If it is a new tax expenditure, the analysis
will be done either seven years after implementation,
or one year before the sunset of the tax expenditure.
If it is an existing tax expenditure, there is a five-
year window after the effective date to complete the
analysis. Also in Section 6 is a requirement for an
electronic copy of the report.
Section 7 is the effective date of July 1, 2015. This
date was chosen because DOR is working on creating an
automated system, which was paid for from a $34.7
million appropriation from the legislature last year.
9:45:09 AM
MATTHEW GARDNER, Executive Director, Institute on Taxation and
Economic Policy (ITEP), Washington, D.C., testified in support
of SB 29. He related that ITEP is a non-profit organization that
focuses on federal and state tax policy issues with an emphasis
on the goals of sustainability, transparency, and fairness in
tax laws. He said that SB 29 would take an important first step
toward achieving those goals by requiring regular scrutiny of
Alaska tax expenditures that currently reduce Alaska tax
revenue.
He explained that the basic insight behind tax expenditures is
that a law that cuts taxes for a specific individual or business
is no different, for budget purposes, from a law that directly
spends money on that business or person. The problem is that,
while the legislative budget process imposes regular and strict
scrutiny of spending that is done directly by government, in the
absence of a tax expenditure report, little or no scrutiny is
given to spending that is done through a tax cut. He emphasized
that tax breaks are government spending and should be
scrutinized the same way as appropriations.
He noted that 45 states now require a tax expenditure report.
Five states have enacted new legislation similar to SB 29. SB 29
goes the extra mile to evaluate tax breaks because it requires
information on the equity and efficiency effects of the tax
expenditure. Requiring an evaluation of the effectiveness of tax
breaks requires a lot of work. Some states, such as Washington
and Oregon, are doing very well with the reporting process,
because they dedicate resources up front. Other states, such as
New Jersey, have taken the first step of legally requiring an
evaluation of the effectiveness of tax breaks, but have not
followed through by funding them. SB 29 would make
implementation easier than some states because it requires the
evaluations to be staggered, which reduces costs and provides
adequate time to complete each evaluation.
MR. GARDNER suggested that SB 29 could go further in one area.
It could decouple from federal tax breaks. Oregon is an example
of a state that provides that tax expenditure reports not be
limited to tax breaks created by state law. It also includes
federally created tax breaks. SB 29 should require that new
legislation creating or expanding a tax break must include a
statement identifying the rationale behind the tax break.
9:50:56 AM
MATT WALLACE, Executive Director, Alaska Public Interest
Research Group (APIRG), testified in support of SB 29 because it
would achieve transparency, accountability, and effectiveness in
Alaska's budget and policy making. He related two reasons why
this legislation is important. First, it promotes better policy
making and provides information about whether it is worth it to
provide or increase tax credits. Secondly, it makes sure the
information about tax credits is available and transparent.
JOHANNA BALES, Deputy Directory, Tax Division, Department of
Revenue (DOR), answered questions related to SB 29. She agreed
with the intent of the legislation to provide transparency and
information about tax expenditures, but noted the large expense
to do so. She referred to Mr. Gardner's comment about getting
information from the Film Credit Program on-line, but pointed
out that it would not provide the type of information this bill
is looking for. She said she was aware that LB&A was doing a
performance audit of the Film Credit Program and had assigned
seven auditors to the project, which is expected to take
approximately six months and use a significant amount of
resources to obtain the information. She concluded that the
legislation would be a highly expensive endeavor for the state.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted that DOR was requesting 16 new full-
time positions, including 8 full-time tax technicians to
manually compile the aggregate tax expenditures, as well as 4
full-time auditors. He recalled several years ago when he filed
a bill for an on-line checkbook, which was done for no cost. He
pointed out that 45 other states are doing performance audits.
He opined that the legislation was a good investment, but he
hoped it could be done for less than has been proposed.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if Ms. Bales agreed with the coordination
with the tax management system that the legislature put in the
budget a year ago.
MS. BALES said yes. Once that system is up and running, the
ability to compile the information would simply be a report. At
that point in time, tax technicians would no longer be needed to
compile data. With the implementation date of July 1, 2015, the
implementation would not be fully realized until after a
contractor has been identified, or around 2017. In order to meet
the requirements of SB 29, manual compilation of data would have
to be done.
SENATOR PASKVAN referred to oil production tax credits of $1
billion per year, and asked what would be a reasonable cost in
order to get a better understanding of where that money is
going.
MS. BALES did not have an opinion, but said it was something to
think about when undertaking a performance audit. She reiterated
that it would be expensive.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if the DOR fiscal note was less than 1
percent of the oil tax credits.
MS. BALES said yes.
9:59:36 AM
SENATOR GIESSEL asked if Ms. Bales believed the bill would
clarify where the Film Tax Credits would go. She said she
thought that the film industry did not pay taxes and their tax
credits were bartered to other companies.
MS. BALES requested more information.
SENATOR GIESSEL explained that the state gives the film industry
a credit and those credits are sold to other companies. She
asked how a performance audit would show that.
MS. BALES explained that the report would show the number of
taxpayers that are claiming the film credit. A performance audit
would show the benefit to Alaska from a credit to the film
industry. She noted that there are 16 Alaska-specific credits,
12 of which meet the $1 million threshold, so there would need
to be 12 performance audits.
SENATOR GIESSEL restated her concern. She described a scenario
where the film industry credit was sold to another company and
asked how that credit would show up in a performance audit.
MS. BALES thought it would be shown in two ways in the audit. It
would show up as a credit given to the company that purchased it
and how it affected the film industry.
SENATOR GIESSEL referred to charts on page 106 of the Fall 2011
Revenue Source Book and asked if they summarize the credits for
that tax year.
MS. BALES said that was correct.
10:04:08 AM
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI noted the original fiscal note for SB 29 was
for $1.7 million and asked for 16 new full time positions. In
the past few days, substantial changes were made to the bill in
an attempt to keep expenses down, and the effective date was set
at July 1, 2015, to give the Tax Division time to get their new
automated tax system operational. That is the system the
legislature appropriated $34.7 million for last year. The intent
of that was to avoid most manual compilation and to rely on a
much less expensive and much more efficient automated system.
He explained that the revenue period for tax expenditures was
changed from annually to 7 years following enactment for new
expenditures, and within 5 years from 2015 for existing tax
expenditures. The definition of tax expenditures was refined in
order to exempt those that add up to less than $1 million
annually and any federal tax expenditures Alaska has
incorporated into its tax code. He concluded that the fiscal
note is now more modest and reasonable. He requested Ms. Bales'
estimation of costs for version I of the bill.
MS. BALES predicted there would be a reduction in the amount for
compilation; however, the performance audits costs may have been
underestimated. Even though federal deductions are not included,
she predicted performance audits would be more expensive because
of the need to include lease expenditures and capital costs in
the oil tax credit program. She pointed out that there are 22
tax programs with their own exemptions, deferrals, and
deductions that go beyond federal corporate income tax
deductions that the department "piggybacks on." Doing
performance audits on those tax programs, within a five-year
timeframe, would be expense. Also, she noted there was little
guidance regarding standards for performance audits in the bill.
She used the film production tax credit as an example and
questioned what standards would be used to audit it. Even with
the changes to the bill, significant resources would be needed.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI said he would continue to work with DOR on
the fiscal note.
10:08:46 AM
SENATOR PASKVAN discussed costs that apply to an audit. He
understood that DOR already has an internal duty to conduct
audits and he hoped that DOR was not including those costs in
the fiscal note.
MS. BALES explained that DOR does financial tax audits. The bill
would also require performance audits, which DOR does not do.
Performance audits require a more subjective process and DOR
would need more direction as to how to proceed.
SENATOR PASKVAN inquired about the automated system that is
going out to bid. He opined that the internal audit aspect of
the tax credit systems would be more easily understood.
MS. BALES said that was the expectation.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if determining whether a credit is meeting
the intent was a legitimate function of government.
MS. BALES said yes, but the legislation is outside the scope of
DOR's mission, which is to collect taxes. Currently, performance
audits are done by LB&A and have specific guidelines and
standards.
SENATOR PASKVAN requested clarification on whether the Tax
Division has the authority to conduct performance audits, or
whether another department should take on this work.
MS. BALES said she has spoken with Chair Wielechowski about that
issue. She said she was not saying performance audits should not
be done by DOR. She voiced concern that the guidelines for
performance audits are not included in the bill. Performance
audits are done by LB&A and contain performance standards.
SENATOR PASKVAN asked if Ms. Bales would be willing to transfer
data to LB&A.
MS. BALES said that is already done.
SENATOR MEYER suggested this legislation could be considered for
LB&A.
CHAIR WIELECHOWSKI agreed to work further on this issue. He set
SB 29 aside.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SCR 22.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SCR 22 |
| SCR22 ANWTF Report.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SCR 22 |
| SCR 22 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SCR 22 |
| SCR22 2-22-12.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SCR 22 |
| SCR22 2-22-12.xls |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SCR 22 |
| SB198 Ver.M.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SCR 22 - Big 4 letter..PDF |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SCR 22 |
| SB198 Justices Allow Ban on Polygraph Use.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB198 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB198List of States that Allow for Suspension of Police Officer Certificates.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB198States with Polygraph Protection for Police Officers.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB 198 Letters of Support.PDF |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB 198 Lettter of Support.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB198-DOA-LR-2-24-12.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB198-DPS-APSC-02-28-12.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB 29 Approved Film Production Tax Credits by Year.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Redeemed Film Production Tax Credits by Year.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Tax Expenditures 101.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29, version A.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 DOR 1-27-12 Presentation on Oil Production Tax Credits.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 DOR 2010 Fall Revenue Sourcebook Overview.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| Draft CS for SB 29 version B.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Explanation of Changes in S STA CS, Version A, to Version I.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 DOR 2011 Fall Revenue Sourcebook Appendix on Total Tax Expenditures.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 29 Alaska public disclosures of tax expenditures.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB029-DOR-TAX-02-28-12.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 29 |
| SB 208_Version M.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| CSSB 208_Version B.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 208_Sectional Summary.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 208_Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| CSSB 208-B_Sectional Summary.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 208_Support Letter_Alaska Municipal League.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB208-DMVA-MVA-DHSEM-3-5-12.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM SSTA 3/13/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 222.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 222 |
| SB222 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 222 |
| SB222 Other States Efforts to Fight Base & Budget Cuts.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 222 |
| SB222 Air Force Structure Changes (Feb 12) (1).pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 222 |
| SB222 Articles on DoD Cuts & AK Responses.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 222 |
| Support for SB 198.PDF |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 198 |
| SB 208_Support Letter_Alaska State Fair.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 208_Support Letter_Food Bank of Alaska.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 208_Support Letter_AK Commission on Aging.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |
| SB 208_Support Letter_Alaska Fire Chief's Association.pdf |
SSTA 3/6/2012 9:00:00 AM |
SB 208 |