Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
heads up to business owners SQ766
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HMFIC" data-source="post: 1947053" data-attributes="member: 7539"><p>It has to do with companies that are "centrally assessed" by the State Board of Equalization. It has to do with the type of company such as a public service company and not just their size...</p><p></p><p>The bottom line is that the majority of locally assessed small businesses in Oklahoma are going to get a tax increase if this bill is not approved. The legislature HAS to go back and deal with this instead of throwing it out the window and refusing to deal with such an important issue.</p><p></p><p>Heres a much better detail of it than I can provide:</p><p></p><p><a href="http://okpolicy.org/blog/taxes/property-tax-cuts-create-winners-and-losers/" target="_blank">http://okpolicy.org/blog/taxes/property-tax-cuts-create-winners-and-losers/</a></p><p></p><p><em>Under SQ 766, the big winner is large railroad and utility companies like Southwestern Bell and AEP-PSO. Oklahoma has historically taxed the intangible property of these entities that “centrally assessed” by the State Board of Equalization, but not taxed intangible property of other businesses that are locally assessed by counties. A 2009 Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling opened the door to locally assessed entities being subject to this tax. However, rather than develop a Constitutional Amendment that would have restored the status quo, the Legislature put forward in SQ 766 a proposal to end all taxation of intangibles. The result would be a revenue loss to schools and local governments of about $65 million that would have to be made up for by a combination of budget cuts and hikes in the tax rate on the property that remains taxable.</em></p><p><em></em></p><p><em>As we explained in an earlier blog post, there are much better way to achieve property tax relief than creating more arbitrary caps and exemptions. During the income tax debate, we heard a lot about lawmakers’ desire to “expand the base and lower the rate.” State Questions 758 and 766 would do the opposite.</em></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HMFIC, post: 1947053, member: 7539"] It has to do with companies that are "centrally assessed" by the State Board of Equalization. It has to do with the type of company such as a public service company and not just their size... The bottom line is that the majority of locally assessed small businesses in Oklahoma are going to get a tax increase if this bill is not approved. The legislature HAS to go back and deal with this instead of throwing it out the window and refusing to deal with such an important issue. Heres a much better detail of it than I can provide: [url]http://okpolicy.org/blog/taxes/property-tax-cuts-create-winners-and-losers/[/url] [I]Under SQ 766, the big winner is large railroad and utility companies like Southwestern Bell and AEP-PSO. Oklahoma has historically taxed the intangible property of these entities that “centrally assessed” by the State Board of Equalization, but not taxed intangible property of other businesses that are locally assessed by counties. A 2009 Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling opened the door to locally assessed entities being subject to this tax. However, rather than develop a Constitutional Amendment that would have restored the status quo, the Legislature put forward in SQ 766 a proposal to end all taxation of intangibles. The result would be a revenue loss to schools and local governments of about $65 million that would have to be made up for by a combination of budget cuts and hikes in the tax rate on the property that remains taxable. As we explained in an earlier blog post, there are much better way to achieve property tax relief than creating more arbitrary caps and exemptions. During the income tax debate, we heard a lot about lawmakers’ desire to “expand the base and lower the rate.” State Questions 758 and 766 would do the opposite.[/I] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
heads up to business owners SQ766
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
