Legislature(2017 - 2018)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/25/2017 01:30 PM Senate LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB115 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 115 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE LABOR AND COMMERCE STANDING COMMITTEE
April 25, 2017
1:32 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Mia Costello, Chair
Senator Shelley Hughes, Vice Chair
Senator Kevin Meyer
Senator Gary Stevens
Senator Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Senator Cathy Giessel
Representative Dan Saddler
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 115(FIN) AM(EFD FLD)
"An Act bearing the short title of the 'Education Funding Act';
relating to the taxation of income of individuals, partners,
shareholders in S corporations, trusts, and estates; relating to
a payment against the individual income tax from the permanent
fund dividend disbursement; and repealing tax credits applied
against the tax on individuals under the Alaska Net Income Tax
Act."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 115
SHORT TITLE: INCOME TAX; PFD PAYMENT/CREDIT;
SPONSOR(s): FINANCE
02/10/17 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/10/17 (H) FIN
02/13/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/13/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/13/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/14/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/14/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/14/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/15/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/15/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/15/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/17/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/17/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/17/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/21/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/21/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/21/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
02/24/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
02/24/17 (H) Heard & Held
02/24/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/14/17 (H) FIN AT 8:30 AM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/14/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/15/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/15/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/15/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/17/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/17/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/17/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/20/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/20/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/20/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/23/17 (H) FIN AT 9:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/23/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/23/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/27/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/27/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/27/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/28/17 (H) FIN AT 9:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/28/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/28/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/28/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/28/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/28/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/29/17 (H) FIN AT 1:00 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/29/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/29/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/29/17 (H) FIN AT 5:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/29/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/29/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
03/30/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
03/30/17 (H) Heard & Held
03/30/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/03/17 (H) FIN AT 1:00 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/03/17 (H) Heard & Held
04/03/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/04/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/04/17 (H) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/07/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/07/17 (H) <Bill Hearing Canceled>
04/11/17 (H) FIN AT 1:30 PM HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/11/17 (H) Moved CSHB 115(FIN) Out of Committee
04/11/17 (H) MINUTE(FIN)
04/12/17 (H) FIN RPT CS(FIN) NT 4DP 4DNP 2NR 1AM
04/12/17 (H) DP: GUTTENBERG, GARA, SEATON, FOSTER
04/12/17 (H) DNP: TILTON, THOMPSON, PRUITT, WILSON
04/12/17 (H) NR: GRENN, ORTIZ
04/12/17 (H) AM: KAWASAKI
04/15/17 (H) BEFORE HOUSE IN SECOND READING
04/16/17 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/16/17 (H) VERSION: CSHB 115(FIN) AM(EFD FLD)
04/17/17 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/17/17 (S) L&C, FIN
04/24/17 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/24/17 (S) -- MEETING CANCELED --
04/25/17 (S) L&C AT 9:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
04/25/17 (S) Heard & Held
04/25/17 (S) L&C AT 1:30 PM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
KEN ALPER, Director
Tax Division
Department of Revenue
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Delivered a PowerPoint titled "New
Sustainable Alaska Plan Pulling Together to Build Our Future"
during the hearing on HB 115.
JERRY BURNETT, Deputy Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Revenue (DOR)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions and provided information
related to HB 115.
ACTION NARRATIVE
1:32:20 PM
CHAIR MIA COSTELLO called the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting to order at 1:32 p.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Gardner, Stevens, Hughes, and Chair
Costello. Senator Meyer arrived soon thereafter.
HB 115-INCOME TAX; PFD PAYMENT/CREDIT;
1:32:59 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO announced the consideration of HB 115. She
advised that she asked the Department of Revenue to focus their
presentation on three areas: 1) how the income tax would be
implemented, 2) the fiscal notes associated with the tax, and 3)
the revenue projections.
She welcomed Senator Giessel and Commissioner Hoffbeck.
1:34:32 PM
KEN ALPER, Director, Tax Division, Department of Revenue,
Juneau, delivered a PowerPoint titled "New Sustainable Alaska
Plan Pulling Together to Build Our Future." He advised that
earlier today the Chair asked him to start with a brief synopsis
of the origin of the language in the bill and DOR's role in
developing that language.
He explained that the income tax bills last year were tied to
federal liability, but, as other states have recognized, that
approach has structural problems. When DOR started to prepare
bills for this session, he asked the Department of Law (DOL) to
shift the basis to adjusted gross income. Because there was no
internal expertise, DOL contracted with Professor Pump, an
expert on state and local taxation from the University of
Connecticut. For a contract fee of $85,000, he delivered a draft
income tax bill based on adjusted gross income. When the
governor chose not to introduce an income bill this session, DOR
asked Representative Seaton and the House Finance Committee if
they wanted to use this technical language in their bill. They
chose to incorporate it. He described HB 115 as a hybrid that
marries the House Finance Committee's tax tables, revenue goals,
and ideas about exemptions with the technical language that
Professor Pump developed on how to tax based on adjusted gross
income.
1:37:03 PM
SENATOR MEYER joined the committee.
1:37:16 PM
MR. ALPER said the bill proposes a bracketed tax on Alaska
taxable income. Speaking to the following charts, he explained
that the numbers in the left columns represent income before
both the $4,000 individual deduction and the $1,250 baseline PFD
exemption. A filer who has an adjusted gross of $10,300 would
have zero state tax liability. A filer who has an adjusted gross
of $10,300 - $50,000 would pay 2.5 percent of the amount over
$10,300. Therefore, an individual with an adjusted gross of
$50,000 would pay 2.5 percent of $39,700 or $992.50. The tax
liability steps up for each bracket until the individual who
earns more than $250,000 pays $10,992.50 plus 7 percent of the
amount over $250,000. The brackets are doubled for joint filers,
but the tax rates remain the same.
Single Filer or Non-Resident Tax
Income
Below $10,300 $0
$10,300 - $50,000 2.5 % of amount over $10,300
$50,000 - $100,000 $992.50 + 4% of amount over
$50,000
$100,000 - $200,000 $2,992.50 + 5% of amount over
$100,000
$200,000 - $250,000 $7992.50 + 6% of amount over
$200,000
$250,000 or more $10,992.50 + 7% of amount over
$250,000
Joint Filer Income Tax
Below $20,600 $0
$20,600 - $100,000 2.5 % of amount over $20,600
$100,000 - $200,000 $1985 + 4% of amount over
$100,000
$200,000 - $400,000 $5,985 + 5% of amount over
$200,000
$400,000 - $500,000 $15,985 + 6% of amount over
$400,000
$500,000 or more $21,985 + 76% of amount over
$500,000
MR. ALPER referenced Senator Hughes' question from this morning
and described the "marriage bonus" embedded in the bill. A
single filer who marries someone without an income will pay a
lower tax as a joint filer. He described the three goals of the
marriage triangle for income taxes: 1) the tax rate rises as
income levels rise; 2) prevent a marriage penalty or bonus; and
3) the stay-at-home-spouse penalty or bonus. Mathematically it's
only possible to accomplish two of the three goals and HB 115
does so. It is a progressive tax and there is no stay-at-home-
spouse penalty.
1:40:42 PM
MR. ALPER discussed the revenue impact of HB 115 outlined on
slide 3. DOR estimates that $341 million will be collected from
withholding in the second half of FY2019. This assumes an
effective date of January 1, 2019, although the bill passed the
House with a failed effective date. Tax returns will not be
filed until April 2020.
DOR estimates, based on modeling using aggregated federal income
data for Alaska residents, that $687 million in revenue will be
collected in FY2020.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked how he came up with those estimates because
she doesn't believe it's possible to know how much will be
raised until the tax is instituted.
MR. ALPER said DOR has IRS aggregate information on Alaska
filers from 2014. DOR therefore knows how many joint filers
there were in Alaska, how many had incomes of $50,000 -
$100,000, and the total taxes they paid to the federal
government. "At that level of granularity, we could break it out
to the expectation of how people will be filing this state tax
and make certain assumptions, and get reasonably accurate
information." Adjustments have been made to the baseline data to
account for known changes such as high unemployment and layoffs
in certain sectors. Normal inflation and economic background
growth are also added to the estimate.
CHAIR COSTELLO opined that 2014 is quite a lookback considering
the significant job losses and recession the economy has
undergone in the last year. The public should know that these
are guesses as much as anything because the information isn't
current. "We're in uncharted territory," she said.
MR. ALPER argued that there is surprising stability in the
underlying income figures and that adjustments can be made for
changes in both the employment rate and wages.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked if nonresident workers are figured into the
estimate.
MR. ALPER said there is considerable data on the number of
nonresident workers and where they fit on the income scale. He
explained the basic math and advised that the most accurate
estimate in the first year is that $84 million will be
nonresident income taxes.
CHAIR COSTELLO said the sponsor's statement that it will take
Alaskans about a minute to figure out their state tax liability
is probably not the case.
1:46:41 PM
MR. ALPER said more and more taxpayers use tax software or a
professional to prepare their return. The state tax is typically
a one button add on, which takes just seconds to run the
calculation. The tables on slide 2 are similarly simple and easy
to use. It gets complicated for the multi-state filer, but those
are the more complex taxpayers that tend to already have
professional assistance with their taxes.
SENATOR HUGHES asked if the adjustments to the 2014 data account
for: 1) the 4,000 higher wage jobs lost in the oil and gas
industry, and 2) outmigration that has happened in other states
that instituted an income tax.
MR. ALPER confirmed that oil industry adjustments have been
incorporated into the baseline data, and that the bill accounts
for future population. It does so by assuming a percentage of
underlying growth and the drag factor that's created when taxes
rise.
1:49:29 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if the administration did an economic
analysis of how Professor Pomp's proposal would impact the
economy, particularly small businesses.
MR. ALPER said several different analyses of the potential
impacts on the economy have been done in the last year and the
committee will be hearing from those entities. Professor Pomp
was told that the income tax was to raise X dollars. His
specific expertise was to provide language to ensure that
everyone was accounted for and that people couldn't avoid taxes
by moving their money around and hiding it through different
shell transactions. The fact that this is a $680 million bill is
a decision that was made in the House, not by Professor Pomp and
his language.
1:51:59 PMSENATOR HUGHES
SENATOR HUGHES asked if any modeling was done to see how small
businesses would be affected by the proposed income tax. She
shared that a lot of small businesses and S Corporations have
voiced concern with the bill and she is likewise concerned.
MR. ALPER said he appreciates the concern, but the latest study
from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) shows
that middle income people pay less under this type of tax than
under a sales tax that raises the same amount of money. He
reminded members that the proposed tax is tied to adjusted gross
income in total. The things that feed into [line 37 on IRS form
1040] include wages, S Corporation distributions, partnership
income, sole proprietor income, and retirement income that is
taxable. This mix of these business and wage incomes provides an
Alaska-specific data set.
CHAIR COSTELLO welcomed Representative Dan Saddler.
She asked Mr. Alper to continue the presentation.
1:53:51 PM
MR. ALPER referenced the revenue summary on slide 3 and advised
that DOR's fiscal note shows revenue increasing to a little over
$700 million in FY2023. He said that slides 4-6 use federal data
and extrapolate it to Alaska-specific numbers. The chart on
slide 4 shows how the 230,000 returns fall into the income chart
after adjusting for the $4,000 personal deduction. Individuals
making less than $50,000 will have an average tax liability of
$407. The average taxpayer making $50,000-$100,000 will have an
average tax liability of just less than $1,800. He noted that
the $60,000-$70,000 income range is the crossover point where
the tax exceeds the PFD. By comparison, the 110 single resident
taxpayers with over $1 million in income would pay the state an
average of a little more than $152,000. After further analysis
DOR estimates that 35-40 percent of the total tax receipts will
come from households earning more than $250,000/year.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked if taxpayers would be required to indicate
in advance that they want to pay some of their tax liability
with their dividend.
MR. ALPER replied there is a calendar issue because the
dividends come out in October and taxes are due in April of the
next year. Individuals would need to pre-pledge before they
receive their dividend.
1:57:36 PM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if 230,106 is the total number of non-joint
returns.
MR. ALPER said yes.
SENATOR HUGHES said this doesn't reflect the sponsor's statement
this morning that about 500,000 Alaskans would be paying.
1:58:34 PM
MR. ALPER directed attention to slide 5 that shows that another
[128,220] returns will be filed by joint filers. The total of
single and joint returns is just less than 360,000 tax returns.
The joint returns do not reflect the second adult. That would
bring the total to about 490,000 filers and then the children
would be added. The expectation is that nearly every Alaskan
will file a tax return, although a portion will have zero tax
liability.
He said the question asked this morning is best addressed by
looking at the zero brackets in the charts on slides 4 and 5.
About 88,000 returns-or 20-22 percent of taxpayers-will have
zero tax liability. Keeping that number as low as possible was
part of the reason for basing the tax on the adjusted gross
income. He noted that the original version of this bill had a
minimum tax level where everyone would have paid at least $25.
"These are important conversations," he said, "because it's
widely understood that a broad-based tax means everyone should
participate in the cost of government."
CHAIR COSTELLO reminded Senator Hughes that the committee heard
this morning that no state in the nation calculates its income
tax as a percentage of the federal tax. It's not only
unpredictable but the federal government may stop allowing a
deduction for state tax. The point was well made, she said.
SENATOR HUGHES calculated that about 400,000 would pay.
MR. ALPER said there are about 400,000 adults in the state and
roughly 20 percent of the filers will pay zero tax.
2:02:29 PM
SENATOR MEYER recalled that he told Senator Gardner that 35-40
percent of the tax receipts would come from filers with incomes
of $200,000 and higher.
MR. ALPER clarified that he said $250,000 and higher.
SENATOR MEYER calculated that 60-65 percent of the tax receipts
would come from incomes below $250,000.
MR. ALPER agreed with the calculation. He further calculated
that 60 percent of 400,000 filers represents 240,000 households
that in aggregate would pay about $400 million. He said those
non-wealthy Alaskans would pay a substantial tax but still
smaller than the overall average. He posited that most million-
dollar income earners who pay $150,000 to the state itemize.
They are paying federal income tax at the 40 percent marginal
tax rate, so the $150,000 they're paying the state only costs
them $90,000; $60,000 will come off their federal taxes.
SENATOR MEYER asked if the implication is that people who make
$250,000 and above are wealthy and people making less than
$250,000 are not wealthy.
MR. ALPER said no; DOR was asked to do this analysis using
$250,000 as a threshold in another context in another bill. He
described Representative Clamen's tax bill that has a maximum
tax of $8,000 for filers making more than $250,000. That bill
tracked HB 115 up to the $250,000 level, but it brought in less
revenue from the higher income individuals.
SENATOR HUGHES admitted that she was stuck on the number of
payers. She reviewed her calculations and concluded that
"there's a considerable number of adults who would not be
paying."
2:06:53 PM
MR. ALPER said the graphs on slides 4 and 5 indicate that
360,000 taxpayers represent about 490,000 adults, and that 80
percent of those adults will pay something to the state. He
couldn't say how many adults pay nothing because they are below
an income threshold or some other reason.
2:07:27 PM
CHAIR COSTELLO asked him to walk through (for the individuals
listening online) the number of returns for each income level
shown on slide 5.
MR. ALPER stated that the 17,071 joint filers who make less than
$20,600 would have zero tax liability. The 62,208 households in
the $20,600-$100,000 income range have a 2.5 marginal tax rate;
the average tax liability per return is $971. The 37,127
households in the $100,000-$200,000 income range have a 4
percent marginal tax rate; the average tax liability per return
is $3,608. The 8,032 households in the $200,000-$400,000 income
range have a 5 percent marginal tax; the average tax liability
per return is $9,853. The 2,031 households in the $400,000-
$500,000 income range have a 6 percent marginal tax; the average
tax liability per return is $18,862. The 1,230 households in the
$500,000-$1,000,000 income range have a 7 percent marginal tax;
the average tax liability per return is $36,096. The 520
households in the $1,000,000 and over income range have a 7
percent marginal tax; the average tax liability per return is
$145,933.
He said it's important to note that the bracket that has the
highest number of joint filers does not generate the highest
amount of revenue. The 62,208 joint filers in the second bracket
generate just $60 million. The filers in $100,000-$200,000
bracket generate the most revenue at $134 million. The joint
filers in the $1 million plus bracket generate $76 million, or
roughly 11 percent of the total income tax. Combined with single
filers in the $1 million plus bracket brings the total revenue
to $93 million or 14 percent of the total revenue.
2:12:11 PM
SENATOR STEVENS said his concern is that there may be a tipping
point at which time people living on a fixed income may begin to
leave when they retire. That's what they did in the 1970s. He
asked Mr. Alper to reflect.
MR. ALPER opined that the higher cost of living and higher
income levels balance out, and wherever retirees move is likely
to be a higher tax jurisdiction. Washington state, for example,
doesn't have an income tax but the state sales tax is 10
percent. Another factor is that not all retirement income is
taxed. For example, a lower income senior won't see much of
their Social Security reflected in their adjusted gross income.
"Very little of the fixed income of seniors-if they truly are
lower income/fixed income-is going to actually be taxable. Quite
likely, that's where a lot of the zero filers are going to come
into this equation," he said.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked how seniors living in assisted living homes
who pay $5,000-$7,000 monthly will be affected by HB 115. "Are
you aware of that or do you think we'll hear this evening during
public testimony?"
MR. ALPER said he looks forward to hearing testimony about that,
but people who are paying those fees out of pocket aren't
exceedingly low income. Also, anyone living in subsidized
housing wouldn't pay tax on that subsidy.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked Mr. Alper to continue the presentation.
2:15:57 PM
MR. ALPER turned to slide 6 that lays out the calculation to
reach the estimated $673 million in revenue generated by the
income tax. The total joint and single return tax liability
before the PFD deduction and residency adjustments is $652
million. Subtract the $30 million PFD deduction to arrive at
$622 million. Subtract the $34 million of Alaska resident income
earned in other states and add the $84 million of nonresident
income earned in Alaska to arrive at $673 million, which is a
2017 number. The modeling adjustment brings the total to $687
for FY2020.
2:17:33 PM
MR. ALPER turned to implementation of the tax on slide 8.
CHAIR COSTELLO said she would first like him to describe the tax
division as it exists now what it will look like should HB 115
pass.
MR. ALPER explained that the tax division currently has 110
authorized positions, about 10 of which are vacant. Roughly two-
thirds of those are in the Anchorage office and the other third
are in Juneau. The division has a three-person management team:
a director, a deputy director, and an operations manager who
oversees the back-office operations. He said a large portion of
the need associated with the bill is new back-office positions
in IT and accounting. The hope is to get 80 percent of the
expected 400,000 filers to do so electronically, but that still
leaves 80,000 paper forms. This means that a substantial new
team would be required to open those envelopes and scan the
documents into the system.
He listed the 25 different tax programs the division currently
administers. Each group has its own structure, but generally
there is a supervisor as well as several auditors and
technicians. He summarized, "You have auditors and technicians
and supervisors and then the back-office folks."
MR. ALPER said the 60 people the bill anticipates needing will
include a supervisor, 20 some auditors, 10 or more technicians,
and as many as 15 back-office/data handlers. A handful of
special project specialists will also be needed to work with the
supervisor. They are higher range positions for experienced
professionals. Another IT position and an office assistant will
also likely be added.
2:22:26 PM
SENATOR STEVENS asked what the difference is that would cause
Montana to need roughly twice as many people as Alaska to
administer its income tax.
MR. ALPER explained that Alaska already has a tax division and
doesn't need to double up on many of the existing positions. If
the need for 60 additional positions is inaccurate, that will be
clear when the implementation contractor is hired. More to the
point, he said, is that the entire cost to implement is 1.5
percent of the revenue and the ongoing administration costs are
way less than 2 percent. He said he recognizes that this is a
major step that elicits strong feelings, but the implementation
and administration costs shouldn't be the deciding factor to
have an income tax.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked him to discuss the need to promulgate
regulations. She specifically asked about the potential need to
write regulations around the section of the bill that talks
about mistakes and the assumption that the department is right
and the taxpayer wrong, and the potential need to hire an
administrative law judge. She noted that Neil Slotnick with the
Department of Administration (DOA) was available to explain the
DOA fiscal note.
2:26:57 PM
MR. ALPER said that when he discussed staffing earlier in the
presentation he neglected to mention that DOR has a five-person
appeals team and they would need to add a couple of these
positions to handle potential income tax appeals. He explained
that the first step in the appeals process is before that
internal appeals team. The next step in an appeal is before an
administrative law judge in DOA's Office of Administrative
Hearings. He explained that DOR's fiscal note includes
approximately $200,000/year to pay for the services of an
administrative law judge, and DOA's fiscal note requests
interagency receipt authority to bill DOR for that service. He
opined that the technical language in the bill that assumes the
state is in the right is boilerplate income tax language.
MR. ALPER said there is no question that the bill will mandate a
large, multi-part regulatory package. However, the fact that it
has 27 pages of technical language will make that easier. It
doesn't leave a lot of judgment to the regulation writer. "This
bill provides extraordinarily precise direction as far as what
should be in those regulations and how we should be interpreting
these various provisions."
CHAIR COSTELLO said the sponsor went into that this morning.
MR. ALPER said Ms. Hansen from the sponsor's office is an
extraordinary resource and deserves a tremendous amount of
credit for the bill being where it is today.
SENATOR HUGHES referenced Senator Steven's concern and expressed
doubt that the income tax could be implemented and administered
with just 60 additional people.
MR. ALPER suggested Deputy Commissioner could provide a fresh
perspective.
2:30:50 PM
JERRY BURNETT, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Revenue (DOR), explained that some of the work
associated with the income tax will be spread to DOR's
Administrative Services Division, existing employees in the Tax
Division, and the Department of Administration. Also, the Tax
Division has become more efficient as technology has advanced.
He opined that it is not an unreasonable assumption that 60
employees will be sufficient. "We have many ways of addressing
the problem you're concerned about."
CHAIR COSTELLO asked if there were further questions about
implementation of HB 115.
SENATOR STEVENS said you very clearly heard Senator Meyer talk
about what the Senate does and does not support to address the
budget gap. He listed reducing the Permanent Fund Dividend,
establishing a percent of market value (POMV), cuts to four
major areas, the use of the Constitutional Budget Reserve (CBR),
and oil tax credits. He asked if it is his position that the
only way to balance the budget is to institute an income tax.
MR. ALPER said it doesn't matter what he thinks, but he agrees
with the Governor that we need a complete plan. It's not wise to
build in a structural deficit that's in the multiple hundreds of
millions of dollars per year, he said. The problem with basing
the solution on the permanent fund without some other feature is
that it leads to four choices: 1) you cut the budget by a
certain amount each year; 2) you're forced to try to raise a tax
quickly; 3) you spend from the Constitutional Budget Reserve; or
4) you take more out of the Permanent Fund Earnings Reserve.
Choice 4 presents the biggest danger, he said. The Permanent
Fund has very strict rules for managing it that need to be
respected. Changing them is a generationally significant
decision for Alaskans. "Building in a structural deficit might
be making a system where it's too easy to fail." That's why we
need a complete package, he said.
CHAIR COSTELLO asked if he is speaking on behalf of the governor
or himself.
MR. ALPER said he was speaking on behalf of himself. He was
paraphrasing the Governor and Commissioner to an extent, but
wouldn't say that is their policy without checking with them
first.
2:37:49 PM
SENATOR MEYER said it's hard to explain to constituents why it's
not more efficient to cut the size of the dividend. He opined
that it's inefficient to give money in the form of the dividend
and then take it back in the form of an income tax.
MR. ALPER said that's accurate for the $50,000-$60,000 middle-
income earner. They will probably pay an income tax that is
equivalent to the dividend. A lower income person will pay less
and get the same dividend and the $1 million plus income person
will pay over $100,000 in taxes and get the $1,000 dividend
back. He agreed with the sponsor's statement that there is an
inherent equity to the income tax.
SENATOR MEYER said fairness is a matter of interpretation. He
posited that middle-income people, those earning less than
$250,000, will pay the bulk of this tax.
CHAIR COSTELLO thanked the presenters and held HB 115 in
committee.
2:42:22 PM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Costello adjourned the Senate Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting at 2:42 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 115 - 2017.04.24 DOR TAX Presentation Excerpt.pdf |
SL&C 4/25/2017 1:30:00 PM |
HB 115 |