Government officials don’t have the ability to identify the highest uses of these funds because those officials are too far removed from the signals that the market provides. And, even if they could identify them, they are too bogged down in bureaucracy to respond quickly.

On the surface, providing loans to small businesses seems like a good thing, but when you look closer, this policy is yet another example of the government picking winners and losers in the marketplace. The governor can implement other strategies that would grow the economy better, such as reducing excessive occupational licensing requirements in Missouri, lowering the overall tax burden, and eliminating the bureaucratic barriers to starting a business.

Additionally, supporters of programs like this one tend to argue that, because federal dollars fund the program, taxpayers in Missouri needn’t worry about the cost. This money doesn’t come out of thin air. There is no such thing as a free government program. Like all other forms of government spending, federal dollars come from the pockets of taxpayers, who can’t spend it themselves in the private sector. Furthermore, as a commenter on the article points out, programs that are funded by the federal government often come with strings attached, and therefore reduce the state’s sovereignty.

The post $27 Million in Loans, but Who Pays for It? appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

Acknowledging the will of the state legislature, a vote by the people, and his fiduciary duty, Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster inched closer to challenging the constitutionality of the federal health care law.

“We haven’t finally formulated what the plans are,” said Koster, following a question by Missouri Watchdog about his plans regarding the health care law during a press conference Tuesday in St. Louis.

Twenty-six states have already joined. Why hasn’t Missouri yet? What’s the delay?

The post Missouri’s Attorney General Is Still Not Yet On Board Florida Lawsuit appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

In an article on the Missouri Watchdog, Brian Hook links to a new study from Tax Foundation. It concludes that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would negatively affect revenues for states that allow residents to deduct the amount that they pay in federal income taxes — which includes Missouri. This is because if the tax cuts expire, a high-earning individual living in Missouri would pay more in federal taxes. He or she could therefore deduct more from state income taxes, and Missouri would receive less revenue.

I want to highlight my statements in the article regarding the marginal effects of this policy in Missouri, because it’s a concept fit for Show-Me Daily. From the article:

If the tax cuts are allowed to expire, taxpayers in Missouri will experience higher tax rates, said Christine Harbin, an analyst with the Show-Me Institute, a free market think tank. The top marginal effective tax rates on income would increase to 46.69 percent under the Democrat’s plan, or 41.13 percent under the Republican’s plan.

“Because they will experience reductions in their take-home income, it’s likely that fewer individuals and businesses will decide to come to Missouri to conduct business,” Harbin told Missouri Watchdog.

“People tend to think on the margin, and a marginal number of individuals and businesses will elect to go to other states where the cost of doing business is lower. For those individuals and businesses that do remain in Missouri, this reduction in net income will mean that they will have less money to save or spend.”

The tax policy will also likely have negative consequences for the state budget as well, Harbin said.

“A reduction in general revenue collections will mean that the state will have to raise tax rates further, cut expenditures or borrow more to cover the shortfall,” she said, adding changes in tax policy could further discourage individuals and companies from remaining in Missouri or relocating to the state.

It’s additionally notable that the expiration would negatively affect all taxpayers, not just those in the highest marginal income bracket, because the Bush tax cuts reduced marginal income tax rates for all earners. The Bush tax cuts introduced a new 10-percent bracket; previous to this, the lowest rate was 15 percent. If the Bush tax cuts expire, low- and middle-income earners would also experience a tax increase.

I hope that this reduction in state tax revenues doesn’t lead to the unfortunate consequence of eliminating federal deductibility in Missouri. Contributors to Show-Me Daily have discussed the negative consequences of income taxation before.

If the tax cuts were extended, individuals living in Missouri would be better off because they could keep a greater share of their income, and the state government in Missouri wouldn’t experience a consequent reduction of revenue.

The post Letting the Federal Bush Tax Cuts Expire May Have Negative Revenue Consequences in Missouri appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

While many restaurants don’t offer health coverage, McDonald’s provides mini-med plans for workers at 10,500 U.S. locations, most of them franchised. A single worker can pay $14 a week for a plan that caps annual benefits at $2,000, or about $32 a week to get coverage up to $10,000 a year.

Last week, a senior McDonald’s official informed the Department of Health and Human Services that the restaurant chain’s insurer won’t meet a 2011 requirement to spend at least 80% to 85% of its premium revenue on medical care.

McDonald’s and trade groups say the percentage, called a medical loss ratio, is unrealistic for mini-med plans because of high administrative costs owing to frequent worker turnover, combined with relatively low spending on claims.

Brian Hook of Missouri Watchdog points out that McDonald’s is among the top 20 employers in the Saint Louis metro area, with between 5,000 and 9,999 employees. Furthermore, this problem is hardly limited to McDonald’s employees:

Insurers say dozens of other employers could find themselves in the same situation as McDonald’s. Aetna Inc., one of the largest sellers of mini-med plans, provides the plans to Home Depot Inc., Disney Worldwide Services, CVS Caremark Corp., Staples Inc. and Blockbuster Inc., among others, according to an Aetna client list obtained by the Journal. Aetna also covers AmeriCorps teaching-program sponsors, who are required by law to make health coverage available.

Aetna declined to comment; it has previously indicated that the requirement could hurt its limited benefit plans.

Granted, these plans are far from perfect, but for many of the people who use them, it is likely the best they can afford. If the plans are outlawed, these people will either seek taxpayer-subsidized coverage or opt for no coverage at all. Mini-med plans are evidence that the market can insure the overwhelming majority of people, but not when it is so frequently hobbled by government restrictions.

The post Law to Expand Health Coverage Limits Health Coverage appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

The Tax Credit Review Commission held its regional meeting in a veritable monument to the tax credit programs they review: the Old Post Office building in downtown Saint Louis. It’s borderline poetic. From an article by Brian Hook in the Missouri Watchdog:

The DESCO Group and DFC Group developed a plan, using tax credits, to restore the [Old Post Office] building in 2000. The Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, moved into the building in 2006.

Steve Stogel, co-chair of the Tax Credit Review Commission, is president of DFC Group in St. Louis.

Additionally, some individuals cited in their testimonies a recent study from Saint Louis University that evaluates the historic preservation tax credit program. After I delivered my testimony, co-chair Chuck Gross even handed me a paper copy.

The SLU study has a peculiar list of financial supporters:

DFC Group
Downtown Council of Kansas City
Kansas City Port Authority
Missouri Growth Association
Missouri Municipal League
Partnership for Downtown St. Louis
Urban District Alliance of Springfield

Listed first is DFC Group, which is co-chair Stogel’s company. The other organizations are groups that receive direct, concentrated benefits from tax credit programs. The Missouri Growth Association, for instance, is a trade association of commercial property owners, managers and developers. Also well represented in this list are city bureaucrats, a group with incentives to grow the size of government.

Isn’t this the very definition of a conflict of interest? How can the Tax Credit Commission evaluate the effectiveness of these programs objectively and fairly if its leadership uses tax credits to earn a living? How can the commission have sound judgment if it bases its decisions on studies for which the leadership paid?

The post The Definition of a Conflict of Interest appeared first on Show-Me Institute.

With seven of the 25 commissioners present, nine residents testified in favor of different tax credits. Due to low numbers, the commission was in recess for a majority of the time between 3 p.m. and 9 p.m.

But each participant told commissioners about how tax credits help his or her project or program.

These tax credit programs affect a greater number of Missourians with their diffused costs than with their concentrated benefits, but the negatively affected group unfortunately has less of an incentive to testify at these meetings because their individual losses are comparatively small.

Quite unfortunately, the rent-seeking occurs on both sides of the table. The members of the Tax Credit Review Commission include businessmen whose companies have directly benefited from tax credits. Many other members of the committee represent the real estate industry, and would certainly benefit from an increase in construction activity.

Did anybody else notice that there are are no economists on the committee, despite the fact that its focus is economic development? This is unfortunate, yet unsurprising.

The Tax Credit Review Commission is holding regional meetings throughout Missouri this week. The schedule is available online. I encourage Missouri taxpayers who are concerned with the costs and negative consequences of tax credit programs in Missouri to attend. I plan to attend and deliver testimony at the regional meeting in Saint Louis on Sept. 21.

(I adapted the title of this blog entry from a recent — and related! — article in Reason: “Let’s Cut Spending! (Just Not Any of the Spending That Benefits Me.)

The post Let’s Cut Tax Credit Programs! (Just Not Any of the Tax Credits That Benefit Me) appeared first on Show-Me Institute.