Lawmakers on right track with tax issue

When it comes to issues that stir passions among Pennsylvanians, we can’t think of anything that tops the question of what to do about school property taxes.

For years activists and lawmakers have been pushing a proposal that would eliminate the unpopular levy and instead fund local education through an increase in personal income and sales taxes. For years the legislation has been stymied in Harrisburg.

Now Sen. David G. Argall, a Schuylkill County Republican and a longtime proponent of the tax elimination proposal, is trying a different approach. He is the leader of the bipartisan School Property Tax Work Group, which aims to identify a tax-relief proposal with sufficient support to become law.

The group recently outlined five proposals for discussion. One would eliminate school property taxes. The others would reduce but not eliminate the school property tax burden in Pennsylvania.

Plan 1 would reduce school property taxes by $8.62 billion by raising the personal income tax from 3.07% to 4.07%; increase the sales tax to 7% from 6% to generate additional cash for homestead exclusions; require school districts to levy a minimum local earned income of 1%; expand the Property Tax and Rent Rebate Program; and expand the senior safety net through the Deferred Property Tax Program.

Plan 2 would reduce school property taxes by $6.44 billion by raising the personal income tax from 3.07% to 4.62%.

Plan 3 would cap the rebate for homestead properties at $2,340 and raise the personal income tax from 3.07% to 4.32%. It is expected more than 2 million homeowners would see their property taxes eliminated.

Plan 4 would cap the rebate for homestead properties at $5,000 and raising the personal income tax from 3.07% to 4.72%. It is expected that more than 3.1 million homeowners would see their property taxes eliminated.

Plan 5 would eliminate school property taxes by increasing the personal income tax from 3.07% to 4.82% and increasing the sales tax to 7% from 6%.

Argall deserves great credit for being willing to lead this effort, knowing full well that even considering ideas other than elimination will anger many of his constituents in a part of the state where opposition to school property taxes is particularly fierce.

Argall insists that he still favors property tax elimination but argues that it’s time to seek a solution that has a better chance to get enacted.

We agree. There is no denying that paying thousands of dollars a year in school property taxes is a tremendous burden for many Pennsylvanians. But it would be far better to search for a viable solution that at least puts a dent in the problem than to keep pushing the same problematic idea over and over again without success.

We long have had reservations about the plan to eliminate school property taxes. We have concerns about whether income and sales taxes alone will ensure a stable source of revenue for education, and how funds would be distributed among school districts if Harrisburg is collecting all the money.

Indeed, the issue of equitable school funding should be part of the discussion of all the plans on the table. People in our region know all too well that districts dealing with high rates of poverty are not receiving their fair share of state funding under the current system.

Families in Delaware County’s William Penn School District have gone to court to question the constitutionality of the state’ s school funding practices, and leaders of fiscally-strapped districts such as Pottstown and Reading are fighting for change in the system as well.

The tension between the desire to develop a fairer means of taxation and the need to ensure robust and fair funding of schools is at the heart of the matter here.

Accomplishing both won’t be easy. Approaching the subject with an open mind and a willingness to compromise is the best way forward.

We’re glad to see lawmakers trying to do just that.