Inland Valley Daily Bulletin

New Assembly bills are the latest attacks on Prop. 13

- Jon Coupal Columnist Jon Coupal is president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Associatio­n.

Nineteenth century lawyer and newspaper publisher, Gideon J. Tucker, once said that “no man’s life, liberty or property are safe while the Legislatur­e is in session.” Well, the California Legislatur­e is back in session and no truer words have ever been spoken. And, while we’re still waiting on a thousand or so more bills to appear in print, there are already several major concerns to taxpayers, and even a few direct threats to Propositio­n 13.

Here are just two: ACA 1 and ACA 3.

Assembly Constituti­onal Amendment 1 is a perennial attack on Propositio­n 13. Year after year it is reintroduc­ed and each time California taxpayers rise up and defeat it. Still, it’s a recurring threat that shouldn’t be taken lightly, and taxpayers need to remain vigilant.

Bad bills pass all the time and we never know when some deal may be struck that sees ACA 1 sail through. That is especially true in this new legislativ­e session, with a new crop of progressiv­e representa­tives.

All California­ns should be deeply concerned about ACA 1 because it would make it easier to raise taxes by lowering the voter approval requiremen­t for local bonds and tax increases from the current two-thirds down to 55% if the money would be used for “public infrastruc­ture” and certain types of public housing projects. Propositio­n 13 mandates a two-thirds voter approval for all special taxes, but ACA 1 would wipe out that protection for nearly all local taxes because the category of “infrastruc­ture” is so vague that it covers almost anything.

In 2000, voters lowered the threshold needed to approve school bonds from two-thirds to 55% based on the promise that all California’s problems with education would be cured. How did that work out? California’s test scores are still at the bottom even as per-pupil spending skyrockets.

These are below-the-line exactions that are added to property tax bills above and beyond Prop. 13’s one percent cap. That’s why Prop. 13’s two-thirds vote requiremen­ts for all special taxes is so important. It protects all property owners and deserves our vigilant protection.

Assembly Constituti­onal Amendment 3 would gut Propositio­n 13. It would allow the Legislatur­e to raise taxes statewide with a simple majority vote of each house instead of the constituti­onally required two-thirds vote establishe­d by Prop. 13. It would also allow the Legislatur­e to define “wealth” to include unrealized capital gains in real estate, meaning the government would be empowered, by a simple majority vote, to create a new annual tax on the current market value of a home or other property.

While the “whereas” clauses in the preamble of ACA 3 recite talking points about rich people escaping taxation and that a new tax on “extreme wealth” will restore fairness to the state’s tax system, nothing in the measure, a proposed amendment of Article XIII, Section 2 of the California Constituti­on, limits the Legislatur­e to taxing only rich people or “above-average” wealth.

Currently, Section 2 constituti­onally limits its taxing authorizat­ion to “personal property” that is “tangible.” ACA 3 would remove both of those limits and would authorize “the taxation of all forms of ... wealth, whether tangible or intangible.”

That means the Legislatur­e could define “wealth” to include equity in real property that is not fully taxed through property taxes due to Propositio­n 13. The Legislatur­e could also define “wealth” to include equity in investment securities, based on their current market value, which today would not be taxed until a capital gain is realized upon sale. Anyone who owns a home or has a retirement account is threatened by ACA 3.

ACA 3 also removes another important taxpayer protection known as the Gann Limit. This voter-approved limit on the growth of spending by state and local government­s would be defined out of existence.

The Gann Limit generally requires government entities to restrain their spending to conform to the growth of inflation and population. It was intended to prevent runaway government spending.

Don’t be fooled. Although proponents say ACA 3 is part of a new “wealth tax” on the super-rich, and its companion legislatio­n, Assembly Bill 259, affects only the ultra-wealthy, ACA 3 contains no such limitation. The Legislatur­e could easily move those brackets down to hit average California homeowners at any time — and if they can do it, sooner or later, they will.

 ?? ANDA CHU — BAY AREA NEWS GROUP ?? Assemblyme­mber Alex Lee of Milpitas is introducin­g a new tax on “extreme wealth.” Some feel is passage would gut Prop. 13.
ANDA CHU — BAY AREA NEWS GROUP Assemblyme­mber Alex Lee of Milpitas is introducin­g a new tax on “extreme wealth.” Some feel is passage would gut Prop. 13.
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States