Laclede County Proposes Its Own Tax Cut

Patrick Ishmael and I have been writing and talking a lot about the proposal on the ballot in Clay County to reduce its very high commercial property surtax. Voters in Clay County will decide whether to reduce the surtax rate slightly to equal Jackson County’s tax rate. We think that even though the change is modest, it would be a beneficial move for economic growth in Clay County.

Not to be outdone, Laclede County officials have also decided to put a surtax reduction before voters. While the Laclede County rate is not as high as the Clay County rate, it is nonetheless very high and by far the highest among neighboring counties. Laclede County’s rate cut is also larger than Clay County’s. Laclede County officials are proposing to reduce the surtax from $1.03 per $100 of assessed valuation to $0.51. The key thing to remember is that the surtax does not roll back as assessed valuations increase, so over time as the local economy grows—and this tax cut should help it grow more—the rate remains the same and the tax revenue generated by it will increase. For the record, the $0.51 rate is right on average for Missouri counties. (Some are saying that the average rate is $1.02, but whoever calculated that clearly used a weighted average. The largest counties of St. Louis, Jackson, and Clay with their very high rates significantly alter the calculation. I think the unweighted average (mean: $0.53; median: $0.41) is preferable for comparing individual counties to each other, especially counties such as Laclede, which is economically competing more with Camden and Dallas counties than with St. Louis and Kansas City.)

The Lebanon R-3 school district is crying some wolf about the size of this rate cut. School officials claim the district will lose $275,000 per year from this; however, Lebanon R-3 is a large school district, and that figure is less than one percent of its total revenues. This is a district that received $4 million in federal stimulus funds alone last year and which is poised, like every Missouri taxing district, to soon see a significant increase in personal property tax revenues this year from the dramatic increase in used car values. The personal property tax windfall alone should make up for the potential loss of revenue from the surtax reduction, should the voters pass it.

This commercial property surtax cut should be a real benefit to economic growth and job growth in Laclede County, and it will be interesting to see what the voters decide.

 

Robertson Fire District Changes Move Forward

A judge has thrown out a lawsuit that sought to block a recall vote for Robertson Fire District in northwest St. Louis County. So the recall vote of the full board will move forward, although the politics of that recall are not what this post is about. As I have written about before, this dispute is a complicated but ultimately vital issue that perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with so many of our very small tax entities in Missouri that get little attention from the public or media.

To summarize, about 20 years ago Hazelwood annexed a part of unincorporated St. Louis County that had been served by Robertson Fire District. Because of an obscure and misguided law (RSMO 72.418), Hazelwood was not allowed to use its own fire department provide fire protection services to the newly annexed area. Instead, Hazelwood was required to keep paying Robertson Fire District the amount it was due from property taxes within the part of its district now within Hazelwood. (It’s more complicated than that, but those are the basics of the arrangement.)

That part is troubling enough, but what happened over the ensuing years is that the fire district was able to convince voters in that area to increase their property taxes dramatically, because the residents did not owe the increased taxes like they normally would. In this case, the entire city of Hazelwood had to pay the higher taxes that benefitted (perhaps) a small number of residents. These elections were likely held on little-attended election dates where small groups of residents were able to wield outsized influence. The fire department union probably comes into play here, as a very politically active union can more easily dominate a fire district than a city fire department, although it can certainly do so with the latter, too.

Over the years, it has gotten to the point where Hazelwood is considering bankruptcy to pay the insane taxes it owes a fire district for services Hazelwood could and should be providing itself to these residents. This situation reflects everything that can go wrong with local government in Missouri—high taxes, inefficient government, and the imposition of taxes on taxpayers who have no say in the matter to benefit special interests. I wrote about this issue in my paper on Special Laws in Missouri. RSMO 72.418 needs to be changed so that cities that annex or incorporate have the option of providing fire services to the new parts of a city if that is what the new residents want. It is reasonable to require some type of payment to the fire district in these instances, but the current law allows the rampant abuse we are seeing in St. Louis County by the Robertson Fire District and needs to be substantially changed.

WATCH: Taxes Have Consequences with Arthur B. Laffer, Jeanne Sinquefield and Brian Domitrovic

On September 20, 2022, Show-Me Institute and Show-Me Opportunity hosted a discussion with Arthur B. Laffer, Jeanne Sinquefield and Brian Domitrovic about their upcoming book Taxes Have Consequences: An Income Tax History of the United States.

 

About The Book

Taxes Have Consequences: Dr. Arthur B. Laffer and Dr. Jeanne Sinquefield imageAuthors: Arthur B. Laffer, Brian Domitrovic and Jeanne Cairns Sinquefield

The definitive history of the effect of the income tax on the economy.

Ever since 1913, when the United States first imposed the income tax via constitutional amendment, the top rate of that tax has determined the fate of the American economy. When the top rate has been high, as in the late 1910s, the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, and 1970s, the response of those with money and capital has been to curtail real economic activity in favor of protecting assets and income streams. Huge declines have come to the economy in these circumstances.

The most brutal example was the Great Depression itself. When the top tax rate has been cut and held at reduced levels—as in the 1920s, the 1960s, in the long boom of the 1980s and 1990s, and briefly in the late 2010s—astonishing reversals have occurred. The rich have brought their money out of hiding and put it to work in the economy. The huge swings in the American economy since 1913 have had an inverse relationship to income tax rates.

About the Speakers

Arthur B. Laffer is the legendary founder of supply-side economics and economic advisor to President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Donald Trump in 2019.

Jeanne Cairns Sinquefield helped pioneer index-fund investing as executive vice president and head of trading at Dimensional Fund Advisors.

Brian Domitrovic is the author of five books, including the landmark history of supply-side economics Econoclasts.

Pay Differentiation Can Heal Missouri’s “Teaching Shortage”

Amidst a “teaching shortage” that is driving almost 25% of Missouri school districts into four-day school weeks, Missouri schools and officials are searching for relief and solutions.

The Missouri Blue Ribbon Commission has been tasked with finding solutions for this “crisis.” The commission proposed additional funding for the Career Ladder Program (opportunities for professional development and extra pay), Grow Your Own Program (local teacher recruitment), and raising the base salary for teachers to $38,000.

Two key questions arise from this proposal:

  1. What is the nature of this teacher shortage? Is it truly a crisis?
  2. How will handing out more money solve the issue?

To answer the first question, it is important to note that the total number of public school teachers in Missouri (71,055) in 2020–2021 is the highest it has been in the past five years. One might think this is a normal occurrence because the population of the United States is increasing.

However, public school enrollment in Missouri has been steadily decreasing, from over 915,000 students in 2016 to under 860,000 in 2021. Additionally, enrollment is projected to dip below 800,000 by 2030—a 10 percent drop in less than fifteen years.

So, what gives? Why are schools feeling the burdens of shortages and claiming that there is a crisis if they have an increasing number of teachers for a decreasing number of students?

It is not because of a shortage of total teachers, but a deficiency of specific teachers. Teachers for special education, mathematics, physics, and biology are in low supply.

One of the reasons for these specific vacancies is the lack of pay differentiation for teachers. In Missouri, public school teachers are expected to be paid equally across the board, whether they are special educators, calculus teachers, or elementary music teachers. This isn’t to say that any of these jobs are easy—there are difficulties in each of these different sectors—but objectively, a special educator and calculus teacher require higher credentials than an elementary music teacher.

Lack of additional pay likely means many future teachers are not pursuing credentials that cost additional time and additional money because it doesn’t pay off. This contributes to a lower proportion of teachers entering these fields.

This brings us to my second question: How will raising pay across the board solve this issue? It won’t. If the ratio of special educators to elementary music teachers is 1:1, an additional uniform $6,000 raise likely won’t change the ratio. The problem of specific teacher vacancies would remain. While the commission’s idea of increasing salary and recruitment is the right one, the funding needs to be allocated more carefully.

If the commission wants to solve this “teacher crisis,” pay differentiation, or at least extra compensation in these low-supply fields, needs to be implemented. The extra time and money required to become proficient in high-demand fields should be balanced with a pay increase, and teaching roles could then be more evenly filled in Missouri.

The Legendary Loop Trolley Saga Continues

A familiar sentence for St. Louis residents: The Loop Trolley is back in the news! Show-Me Institute analysts have been covering this issue for a long time, and lucky for you all, a new chapter is now unfolding.

In addition to the $51 million that has already been spent on the Loop Trolley project, the East-West Gateway Council of Governments has recently decided to approve an additional $1.2 million of spending from federal grant funds and an additional $540,000 local match.

While St. Louis residents may want government officials to abandon this project that has been characterized by incompetence and countless setbacks, the cheapest solution for taxpayers is actually for the trolley to run. The federal government has threatened to demand repayment of $37 million in grants given to St. Louis if the trolley stops running. Abandoning this project does not mean that taxpayers would abandon paying for it. Because of this potential clawback, city officials argue this additional funding is necessary for sustaining the trolley and avoiding a bigger financial blow.

Despite concerns about self-sustainability, trolley tickets have been free to riders since its re-opening on August 4th. Although I understand that making tickets free could boost popularity by attracting people to try the trolley, there needs to be a long-term economic plan if it will truly be self-sustaining.

Trolley officials should seek to maximize profit with methods such as ticket prices, advertisements, renting to private parties (Nashville does this often), and possibly even filming for commercials and movies/TV shows. The goal should be to reduce the burden on taxpayers—who have already paid entirely too much for this project—as much as possible.

Like it or not, the Loop Trolley is most likely a long-term part of St. Louis’s future. However, it does not need to be a long-term drain on taxpayer funds. A plan for self-sustainability through trolley revenue is a necessary next step.

This Is What Number Four Looks Like?

By now, we have all seen that wonderful photo of the young child sitting in the backseat of her parents’ car. You know, the one where the adorable blonde with buck teeth gives her mother the side eye. The meme has been shared countless times via social media. It also happens to exemplify the exact feeling I had upon reviewing the Heritage Foundation’s recently released Education Freedom Report Card.

The report ranked Missouri 17th overall in terms of education freedom. This ranking includes measures on “transparency,” “regulatory freedom,” and “spending.” But it was the ranking on “school choice” that stood out the most. The Heritage Foundation ranked Missouri 4th in the country in terms of having the best school choice environment. This ranking included considerations for private school choice, private school choice program design, charter schools, homeschooling, and public school choice.

The reason I was so shocked by this ranking should be obvious to anyone living in the Show-Me State—school choice options are almost nonexistent for anyone living outside of St. Louis or Kansas City.

This is what school choice looks like in Missouri.

Charter Schools

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reported that in Missouri there were 71 total charter schools in 2019—20 (Missouri ranks 27th in the number of charter schools). This accounts for 2.9 percent of total public schools (34th overall). In total, these charter schools served fewer than 25,000 students (28th overall), or 2.7% of all public school students (34th overall).

What the NCES rankings don’t reveal is that all these schools and all these students are in either St. Louis City or Kansas City. Missouri has had charter schools for more than 20 years. The first one ever to open outside of the major cities just opened this year; the Leadership School opened with 94 students in the Normandy School District, and it faced considerable opposition. As the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports:

Normandy schools have not been fully accredited for the last decade and are under the control of the Missouri Board of Elementary and Secondary Education. In 2021, Normandy students scored lower than any district in the state in English with 14% proficiency and second lowest in math with 5% proficiency.

This is what number four looks like?

Private School Choice

The Missouri Legislature created the Missouri Empowerment Scholarship Accounts Program in 2021. Students are using the program for the first time this year. EdChoice reports that 51% of families in “applicable Missouri cities and counties” are eligible for the program. While that sounds impressive, it is not. The program is limited to counties eligible for charter schools or cities with more than 30,000 residents. Just as charter schools are out of reach for many in our state, these program restrictions put school choice out of reach for many Missourians. Furthermore, that 51% number includes everyone eligible based on income restrictions without taking into account other factors (200% of the federal free-and-reduced price lunch income level).

Even if you do live in Clay, Jackson, Jefferson, St. Charles, or St. Louis County (the eligible counties), or Columbia, St. Joseph, Joplin, Jefferson City, Cape Girardeau, and the City of St. Louis (the eligible cities) and you meet the income requirements, you still have other hurdles. Your child must meet one of the following criteria to be eligible: have an Individualized Education Program, be entering kindergarten or first grade, or have attended public school the previous year.

At most, based on the number of tax credits available for the program, the scholarship program could serve 3,900 Missouri students.

This is what number four looks like?

We are certainly glad to see the small gains Missouri has made toward greater educational freedom, but the work is not done despite this curious number four ranking.

Would an Income-tax Cut Benefit Missouri?

Missouri’s economic growth has consistently lagged that of much of the country—so badly, in fact, that our state’s gross domestic product growth ranked 40th among the states between 2010 and 2020. That’s the grim reality of Missouri’s position relative to the rest of the country while states like Florida, Tennessee, and Texas leave us in the dust. How can policymakers help create an environment that strengthens economic growth to benefit more Missourians?

Tax relief and reform alone won’t solve all of Missouri’s problems or immediately launch Missouri to the front of the pack in attracting talent and capital from around the country. We need better schools with more educational opportunities We need to reduce crime, especially with three of our major cities—St Louis, Kansas City, and Springfield—ranking distressingly high on national crime indices. But solving either, let alone both, of these problems is very complex and likely to require a multi-pronged approach as policymakers work to build consensus and tackle each element of the problem.

There are some things Missouri can never have—like Florida’s coastline (although the Lake of the Ozarks is plenty to brag about)—but implementing good tax policy is well within our grasp. Some would seek quick, superficial, and ultimately harmful “fixes,” like using subsidies or tax credits (subsidies by a different name) as handouts to lure large, well-connected companies to expand in Missouri, with no guarantee that any jobs they create would outlast the flow of taxpayer money. But history and research have undermined the claim that we can subsidize our way to prosperity or successfully pick winners and losers. One thing policymakers absolutely can do is create a better, more level playing field for families and small businesses with an income-tax cut that returns money to their pockets and reduces the penalty on hard work and investment.

Thankfully, Governor Parson and the General Assembly appear poised to pursue exactly that—rate reductions to Missouri’s income tax—in the upcoming special session of the legislature. Doing so would not only be welcome relief to Missourians suffering under decades-high inflation, but it would also be a great way to kickstart a bold tax-reform agenda to improve the economic prospects of every Missourian. Economic research has demonstrated that lower income-tax burdens encourage work, improve productivity, increase entrepreneurship, promote innovation, and attract people and firms from places with more punitive taxes. When we enable people to earn higher returns on their labor and investments, it should come as no surprise that we get more of both.

This isn’t theory or idle speculation. One only needs to look as far as neighboring Tennessee to see a state much like our own that has grown dramatically faster than Missouri in recent decades. One major reason for that growth is that Tennessee is one of nine states with no income tax, and its major cities do not have local income taxes. Greater economic growth is more than just a statistic. It’s more jobs and new businesses at places ranging from local mom-and-pop shops to modern tech start-ups—all driving up wages and creating ladders of opportunity. Growth benefits Missourians of all backgrounds, which is why we must seize on the opportunity to return power and money to the people through the kind of income-tax-rate reductions now being discussed.

Those who oppose these cuts look past the obvious success of Tennessee and Florida and instead bring up the specter of Kansas, which faced negative consequences in the years following its own major tax cuts. But not every tax cut is created alike, and prudent budgeting always demands running the math both on the revenues and spending sides, which is exactly what Missouri policymakers are doing carefully and seriously as they deliberate. By contrast, when Kansas cut taxes, it created a special zero percent rate for only certain forms of income (namely, LLCs, S-Corps, and other pass-through entities) and did not undertake other subsidy and spending reforms to ensure that the numbers would add up. Favoritism and bad arithmetic are bound to create problems. Not surprisingly, many businesses changed their structure to these newly tax-free entities, and Kansas state revenues fell. Kansas reduced the tax rate on pass-through income to zero, far below that of regular income. Not only did this change have little justification economically but it also greatly encouraged tax avoidance behavior through income reclassification

That is not the proposal under consideration in Missouri. Governor Parson and the legislative leadership are considering accelerating already-planned rate reductions by cutting the Missouri income tax rate from 5.3 percent to 4.8 percent—a move well justified by the enormous surge in revenues the state continues to experience. It would be even better for our state if Missouri were to push even further past 4.8 percent. The prudent course of action in that case would be to also pursue subsidy reductions and other tax and spending reforms to ensure the stability of Missouri finances for vital public services. State leadership is also considering increasing the standard deduction on state taxes, which would deliver further relief to working- and middle-class Missourians, removing some from the tax rolls entirely.

At a time of high inflation and labor shortages, putting Missouri on a faster growth track through pro-growth, pro-work, pro-investment income tax reductions could not be more appropriate. In the short term, having more money in their pockets will provide much-needed relief to struggling families and empower Missourians to achieve their dreams, whether this means saving for a house, starting a business, or donating to their communities. In the long run, taking an important step toward major tax reform signals that Missouri is open for business and no longer willing to cede ground to states like Tennessee, Florida, or Texas. If those states can attract investment and talent by rewarding hard work and entrepreneurship, then we can too.

However you measure it, Missouri has not been growing compared to other states. If the Governor and legislature succeed in passing some combination of tax rate reductions and other adjustments to our income-tax system, they will increase opportunities for all Missourians. That would be a legislative special session we could be proud of.

Perry County Should Reduce Its Commercial Property Tax Surcharge

In 1985, Missouri changed the way that local governments tax commercial and industrial property. Voters approved eliminating the personal property tax on business merchandise and inventory and replacing it with a surcharge on the value of commercial real estate. That year, each Missouri county calculated its new surcharge at a revenue-neutral level of replacement for the discontinued business property taxes. Among the reasons for the change was a desire to base the tax on the value of real estate, which is more consistent than ever-fluctuating inventories. The change was enacted through an amendment to the Missouri Constitution, and that amendment stated explicitly that the replacement levy calculated by the counties could not be raised. However, the change also mandated that only voters—not local elected officials—could reduce the tax. Similarly, the commercial surcharge is at odds with the mechanics of other property taxes in Missouri, which have tax rates that fall as assessed valuations rise. The surcharge tax rate (also called the surtax) remains at the same level, even as assessments increase.

The timing of this change is important. In 1985, Perry County set its rate at $1.06 per $100 of assessed commercial valuation. This is a much higher rate than other counties in the region. Perry County has long had a strong manufacturing base, and it is likely that those industrial companies generated substantial inventory taxes that necessitated—at the time—a high surcharge replacement tax rate. By comparison, Bollinger County’s rate is much lower, at $0.13, St. Francois’ rate is a mere $0.20, St. Genevieve is just above that at $0.21, Madison’s rate is $0.25, and Cape Girardeau tops out the rest of the area at $0.37. Perry County is almost triple the surcharge tax rate for its region.

Assessed valuations have grown enormously since the tax was introduced. For example, in 1986 (the first year after the current assessment system was implemented) the total assessed valuation of Perry County was $84 million and $11 million of that was commercial property. As of the most recent reassessment in 2021, the total assessed valuation of Perry County is $404 million, with $74 million being commercial (an increase in commercial valuation of more than 500 percent). The surcharge rate has never been reduced to offset that significant rise in commercial assessed valuation, as happens with other property taxes. The combination of a high tax rate and the difficulty involved with reducing it puts Perry County at a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the region in 2022.

This is a problem, but a problem without blame. These differences were probably not a big deal in 1985, when the tax alteration described earlier had a neutral effect for Missouri businesses. But it is a major problem now. Reducing rates as commercial assessments rise is simply an issue of fairness. It would not lead to a tax revenue decrease but would simply mean treating the commercial surcharge like other property taxes in Missouri.

Another issue with reducing the tax might be more complicated. Lowering the commercial surcharge rate could both spur economic activity and reduce the perceived need for tax incentives. Frankly, from a government revenue perspective, many of the dollars lost to the surcharge reduction could be replaced by a reduction in the tax incentives that have been given to select businesses. Perry County and Perryville have each engaged in harmful tax subsidies like tax-increment financing. Reducing the surcharge rate for all businesses while eliminating the use of tax subsidies for a few, select businesses would be a public policy win–win for Perry County.

The elected officials in Perry County should place surcharge tax reduction proposals on the ballot so that voters can have a say in making their region more economically competitive. The state legislature should then authorize a vote on changing the Missouri Constitution to allow the commercial surcharge to be reduced as assessments increase, like other property taxes. These two changes would help grow the economies of both Perry County and Missouri, and everyone benefits from that.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging