Las Vegas Review-Journal (Sunday)
Oregon campaign cash cow: a sales tax proposal
SALEM, Ore. — A campaign in Oregon is being bitterly fought, with vast sums spent by both sides on TV and other ads, even more money than for the governor’s race.
The titanic tussle is over a proposed tax that is aimed at the companies making the most sales in the state, but opponents — including major corporations — say every Oregonian will be affected.
Both sides have arrayed armies of experts who say that the tax on companies’ sales of more than $25 million will trigger a rise in prices, or that such a scenario is bogus.
While it might be impossible to predict whether companies will raise prices if the measure passes, this much is certain: Oregonians abhor sales taxes. Oregon is one of only five states in America that don’t have them. Oregonians have rejected sales tax proposals nine times in nearly 90 years.
“Backers claim the $6 billion from Measure 97 will all come from big, out-of-state corporations. Don’t let them fool you. Measure 97 is a hidden sales tax,” winery owners Rob and Jolee Wallace wrote in opposition. They stressed that their company doesn’t have even close to $25 million in sales, but they asserted that the tax “impacts all small businesses and takes more money out of the pockets of every Oregon family.”
Consumers would not be directly taxed by the measure, which is expected to increase state revenue by $3 billion per year, not $6 billion. Many businesses that have narrow profit margins feel threatened because sales would be taxed, not profits. The minimum tax for companies with more than $25 million in sales in Oregon would be 2.5 percent of the excess over $25 million, plus $30,001.
The Legislative Revenue Office says the tax would wind up costing each Oregonian at least $600 a year.
Gov. Kate Brown, a Democrat, said she supports the measure because the state budget is facing a $1.3 billion deficit, and the money is needed to help fund education, health care and senior services.
Republican challenger Bud Pierce said that the measure would increase the cost of living for every Oregonian and that instead state government should learn to live within its means.
Even Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders weighed in on it, saying in a statement Wednesday that “at a time of massive income and wealth inequality, it is time for large profitable corporations to start paying their fair share of taxes. That is why I am supporting Oregon 97.”
Otto Schell, legislative director for the Oregon PTA and spokesman for the Yes On 97 campaign, on Thursday cited a state Department of Education report that said Oregon’s class sizes are among the largest in the nation. “Without revenue to hire more teachers, we will continue to slip lower in nearly every marker for our kids and schools,” he said.
However, the money might not necessarily go solely for education, health and senior services because it would land in the general fund, which the Legislature can spend as it sees fit.
The amount spent on local TV ads both for and against Measure 97 dwarfs the gubernatorial race ads, surpassing $7.6 million, according to The Center for Public Integrity. In contrast, roughly $1.9 million has been spent on local TV ads in the gubernatorial race. The Center for Public Integrity analyzed data about political advertising on broadcast television from Kantar Media/ CMAG, a tracking firm that monitors 211 media markets around the country.
The campaign for Measure 97 has received $10.8 million in contributions, while opponents have contributed $18.3 million, according to Secretary of State Jeanne P. Atkins’ office.