HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #13701  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 3:00 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,362
Maybe Kenney is reinstating the wage tax deduction?

Quote:
Currently Philadelphia residents incur a 3.9004 percent wage tax and 3.4741 percent for non-residents. The new budget drops those to 3.8907 percent and 3.4654 percent.
Read more here:
http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelp...-licenses.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13702  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 3:06 PM
Justin7 Justin7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
Pepsi to lay off 80 to 100, blames soda tax

Time to get rid of the tax? No sense in losing hundreds of jobs over this.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/po...-soda-tax.html
Can a moderator please move this to the propaganda thread?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13703  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 3:52 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by br323206 View Post
On another taxation note, from PBJ:

"Currently Philadelphia residents incur a 3.9004 percent wage tax and 3.4741 percent for non-residents. The new budget drops those to 3.8907 percent and 3.4654 percent."

http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelp...-licenses.html
Glory! For a Philadelphia resident with an annual income of $200,000, this amounts to annual savings of roughly $19. Pointless. What is the shortfall to the government? With such minimal impact, I see no reason to implement this. The government should wait until it can make a meaningful chance. If the amendment on property tax goes through or something else happens that allows anything but the most insignificant, silly de minimis decrease.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13704  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 4:53 PM
1487 1487 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
Maybe Kenney is reinstating the wage tax deduction?



Read more here:
http://www.bizjournals.com/philadelp...-licenses.html
this is basically the same rate of reduction that has been in place for most of the last 20 years or so.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13705  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 5:00 PM
br323206 br323206 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
Glory! For a Philadelphia resident with an annual income of $200,000, this amounts to annual savings of roughly $19. Pointless. What is the shortfall to the government? With such minimal impact, I see no reason to implement this. The government should wait until it can make a meaningful chance. If the amendment on property tax goes through or something else happens that allows anything but the most insignificant, silly de minimis decrease.
Everything in government happens incrementally. If they continue to decrease it by a hundredth of a percentage point every year it'll add up to a meaningful decrease.

On another note, I still don't understand why we charge nonresidents less. Why incentivize moving out of the city? It should be reversed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13706  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 5:18 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1487 View Post
this is basically the same rate of reduction that has been in place for most of the last 20 years or so.
The reduction in rate has been frozen since at least 2008. I think they're just re-implementing the reduction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13707  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 5:19 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
Glory! For a Philadelphia resident with an annual income of $200,000, this amounts to annual savings of roughly $19. Pointless. What is the shortfall to the government? With such minimal impact, I see no reason to implement this. The government should wait until it can make a meaningful chance. If the amendment on property tax goes through or something else happens that allows anything but the most insignificant, silly de minimis decrease.
It's better than nothing honestly. I would rather them start to slowly decrease it, then cut it to 2% when Harrisburg allows Philadelphia to alter the tax structure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13708  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 5:20 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,105
While I'd like to see a more meaningful incremental reduction, the whole point was for the decrease to be subtle and "automatic" so that the politicians would just have to adjust to the new reality, rather than have to actually do anything affirmative. Whatever works. Most suburbs at at 1%. That should be their target, but I think they'd be competitive at 2%. Wage tax doesn't apply to me, so they'd still have to get rid or simplify all of the other taxes/regs to encourage a sole-proprietor like me move back into town. I miss it, but not enough to complicate my life to be there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13709  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 6:07 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 View Post
It's better than nothing honestly. I would rather them start to slowly decrease it, then cut it to 2% when Harrisburg allows Philadelphia to alter the tax structure.
Mmm...this de minimis reduction is putting $20 back in the pockets of affluent people and less back in the pockets of less affluent people. Won't be felt. But it's still however many millions of dollars that the city loses that could be put towards something like the the cap over I-95 just proposed between Walnut and Chestnut. The total reduction is .0097% of income. That's insanely small. If it's the same the next couple years, there is still going to be a significant cut if and when an alteration to the tax structure allows for it. These kind of cuts are too small to help anyone and are also too small to avoid sticker shock if there is a real future cut. So the only thing I see it doing is cutting into city funds marginally.

Anything less than an .1% reduction (i.e. 3.9004% to 3.8004%) really just fails to serve any identifiable purpose. And that's being generous
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13710  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 6:22 PM
br323206 br323206 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
Mmm...this de minimis reduction is putting $20 back in the pockets of affluent people and less back in the pockets of less affluent people. Won't be felt. But it's still however many millions of dollars that the city loses that could be put towards something like the the cap over I-95 just proposed between Walnut and Chestnut. The total reduction is .0097% of income. That's insanely small. If it's the same the next couple years, there is still going to be a significant cut if and when an alteration to the tax structure allows for it. These kind of cuts are too small to help anyone and are also too small to avoid sticker shock if there is a real future cut. So the only thing I see it doing is cutting into city funds marginally.

Anything less than an .1% reduction (i.e. 3.9004% to 3.8004%) really just fails to serve any identifiable purpose. And that's being generous
You send a signal that down is the direction you intend for it to go. Then maybe next year, fingers crossed, we see a little larger reduction.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13711  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 6:41 PM
1487 1487 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
Mmm...this de minimis reduction is putting $20 back in the pockets of affluent people and less back in the pockets of less affluent people. Won't be felt. But it's still however many millions of dollars that the city loses that could be put towards something like the the cap over I-95 just proposed between Walnut and Chestnut. The total reduction is .0097% of income. That's insanely small. If it's the same the next couple years, there is still going to be a significant cut if and when an alteration to the tax structure allows for it. These kind of cuts are too small to help anyone and are also too small to avoid sticker shock if there is a real future cut. So the only thing I see it doing is cutting into city funds marginally.

Anything less than an .1% reduction (i.e. 3.9004% to 3.8004%) really just fails to serve any identifiable purpose. And that's being generous
its about the long term trend, not cash in your pocket from year to year. Over a decade or so these reductions mean something. They aren't going to be noticeable year to year. I think the wage tax was almost a % point higher when the reductions started under Rendell. The rates were last this low in the 70s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13712  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 6:41 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,105
^exactly
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13713  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 7:15 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1487 View Post
its about the long term trend, not cash in your pocket from year to year. Over a decade or so these reductions mean something. They aren't going to be noticeable year to year. I think the wage tax was almost a % point higher when the reductions started under Rendell. The rates were last this low in the 70s.
I agree with the longterm trend, but I think a reduction of a greater amount every few years would be better received. I also tried to find a listing of each decrease but could not find one. I would hazard a guess that this is one of the lowest decreases ever and the typical decrease is greater.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13714  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 7:16 PM
jsbrook jsbrook is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by br323206 View Post
You send a signal that down is the direction you intend for it to go. Then maybe next year, fingers crossed, we see a little larger reduction.
Perhaps. It's ultimately not a big deal in the scheme of things. But I think most people could do without the symbolic gesture.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13715  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 7:24 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,105
BREAKING NEWS ON I-95 CAP:

PennDOT just allocated $100 Million. That leaves $35 million to go!

https://billypenn.com/2017/03/02/pen...rk+cap+project

Unless Federal highway funds are included in the PennDOT piece, surely we can get a fair piece of that from DC. There might also be funds available from the President's infrastructure spending goal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13716  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 7:41 PM
Urbanthusiat's Avatar
Urbanthusiat Urbanthusiat is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: University City, Philadelphia
Posts: 557
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13717  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 8:13 PM
Knight Hospitaller's Avatar
Knight Hospitaller Knight Hospitaller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Greater Philadelphia
Posts: 2,105
^ I thought we'd at least get something (since my Scottish group was advised that our monument would have to be moved for replacing the existing cap), but it looks like we'll get it all!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13718  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 8:31 PM
1487 1487 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,400
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsbrook View Post
I agree with the longterm trend, but I think a reduction of a greater amount every few years would be better received. I also tried to find a listing of each decrease but could not find one. I would hazard a guess that this is one of the lowest decreases ever and the typical decrease is greater.
when the concept started under Rendell the reductions were standard and predictable. I think this is simply picking up where they left off. The reductions were always small. Only major change will come with the pending PA state bill.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13719  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 8:38 PM
br323206 br323206 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1487 View Post
when the concept started under Rendell the reductions were standard and predictable. I think this is simply picking up where they left off. The reductions were always small. Only major change will come with the pending PA state bill.
I found an Inquirer article (paywalled in the Archives) from 1996. That year the wage tax reduction saved the average family $5.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13720  
Old Posted Mar 2, 2017, 8:38 PM
summersm343's Avatar
summersm343 summersm343 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller View Post
BREAKING NEWS ON I-95 CAP:

PennDOT just allocated $100 Million. That leaves $35 million to go!

https://billypenn.com/2017/03/02/pen...rk+cap+project

Unless Federal highway funds are included in the PennDOT piece, surely we can get a fair piece of that from DC. There might also be funds available from the President's infrastructure spending goal.
Whoa! It's actually happening. I'm sure we can get most of the $35 million from the Feds. The rest could probably be raised via donations, etc.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:05 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.