Ridgewood NJ, In a new GOP web ad released today, Assemblyman Anthony M. Bucco explains how New Jersey’s progressive income tax brackets are reducing wages even when people receive cost-of-living raises.
“When income tax brackets are very close together, pay raises push taxpayers into a higher bracket even though they really aren’t wealthy,” said Bucco (R-Morris). “This can be costly for people and their families who rely on every dollar they earn.”
” Man/woman works in NYC. They move to Ridgewood for the ‘whole package’ (let’s leave the school rank out of it for a sec). They have 5 kids, all go to RPS schools K-12. Worker contributes to 401k, 403b, SEP IRA, whatever, and has a possible cash flow from these investments of 5k/month. Last kid graduates RHS and the family decides to move to Florida or another lower tax state. Are they greedy, or being financially prudent? Same goes for government employees. It’s just a desirable financial move. NJ pols (R & D alike) have screwed over the system to fix budgets, cronyism, over-spending, and going on a fiscal bender for decades. I lived here when there was no income tax (thank you Gov Byrne) and the sales tax was 3%. The pension system is broken and the culprits have since split the scene: Byrne, Kean, Florio, Whitman, DiFrancesco, Mc Greevy, Codey, Corzine, Christie. Now, we’re stuck with Murphy who believes that he can tax us out of the problems. With a democrat senate and assembly, it’s his baby now and can ram through as many tax bills as he wants. We have the prerogative to leave. “
As the wealthy leave New Jersey for states with much lower tax burdens, it will be our middle class and the working poor who will make up the difference in higher property tax bills. New Jerseyans already pay the highest property taxes in the country, not to mention we pay among the highest income and corporate taxes as well. Even millennials can’t afford to live here anymore.
I sent the following letter to the editor (The Record) this morning in response to the essay by several members of the clergy.
Re “Why we support Gov. Murphy’s millionaires tax,” (Your Turn, May 24″).
The essay by several North New Jersey clergy reveals not only their economics ignorance but also a broken moral compass – which is an unfortunate given they make weekly sermons from their respective pulpits.
Ridgewood NJ, according to the Tax Foundation the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) significantly reduced the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent, making the U.S. more competitive with other developed nations.
However, it’s important for lawmakers to remember that corporate income taxes at the state level also contribute to the overall tax burden on corporate profits.
Trenton NJ, Senate President Steve Sweeney issued the following statement in response to Governor Phil Murphy’s latest millionaire’s tax proposal:
“The unexpected surge in revenues the Governor is now claiming is the surge the Legislature expected when we imposed a 2.5 percent surcharge on the millionaire and billionaire corporations that benefited directly from the Republican Congress’ tax cut. It is the Corporation Business Tax surcharge we imposed that has been coming in far over the Administration’s revenue projections – just as the Legislature said it would.
Wayne NJ, Assemblyman Kevin J. Rooney warned the state’s economy is in danger without meaningful spending cuts after attending Gov. Phil Murphy’s invitation-only budget roundtable for Passaic County elected officials.
TRENTON NJ, In an effort to provide relief to taxpayers, Assemblyman Christopher DePhillips pushes towns to pledge against passing a rain tax.
“Over the past few days I have joined Assemblyman Ryan Peters by imploring municipalities to oppose the rain tax by taking the ‘no rain tax’ pledge and passing a ‘no rain tax resolution.’” I have reached out to mayors in my district and many of them have agreed that our residents are overtaxed and charging people for rain would only add insult to injury,” said DePhillips (R-Bergen).
Ridgewood Nj, a reader made some strong point promoting what they claimed was “protecting the environment “
“So the problem of carrying food home is a false argument: someone goes to the store and carries their own bags, which are empty, they carry the bags home, full. Whether or not they carry their own bags to the store has NO bearing on what they are carrying home! They are carrying the same weight home whether or not they carry their own bags into the store.