Regarding “Texas doles out $31 billion in property tax breaks for business as Chapter 313 expires,” (Jan. 23): The Texas Miracle is sort of a three-legged stool. It requires no state revenue tax, a light-weight regulatory contact and efficient financial improvement incentives. One of the legs, the financial improvement incentive program, Chapter 313, has been reduce off for big capital investments and have to be changed with a contemporary, extra clear program.
Giving restricted tax abatements in the quick time period – in alternate for long-term tax income – is smart. Look at the many employers which have used this incentive. Their initiatives not solely create high-wage jobs however they’re in the end money cows for the state, native taxpayers and faculty districts.
Take Tesla for instance. The firm moved its headquarters and built a manufacturing facility here in Texas. Without the tax abatement, it’s extremely unlikely the plant, which created 1000’s of jobs and is creating billions in financial output, would have been constructed right here.
The whole everlasting tax income of no funding is zero. No property taxes. No gross sales taxes. No new jobs. Without a substitute for Chapter 313, we’ll lose.
It’s notably pressing given a few of the federal incentives which are spurring huge new investments in semiconductors and power initiatives. Texas leads the nation in exports in each areas and total. Let’s maintain it that approach.
And to those that say there’s no proof that Texas would lose offers with out an incentive to appeal to giant capital initiatives, keep in mind we began the program as a result of that was precisely the case. Don’t repeat historical past. Replace Chapter 313 with a contemporary and clear incentive program.
Glenn Hamer, president and CEO, Texas Association of Business
Regarding “Tomlinson: Texas Republicans introduce tax hikes, burdensome regulations in assault on clean energy,” (Jan. 25): Once once more, Chris Tomlinson appears to be enjoying free with the information. He states: “SB 505 would add $400 to the cost of new electric-only cars and small trucks,” which, technically talking, is right, however fails to point out a key element, which the next line of the bill clearly states: “or $200, for the registration or renewal…” Few individuals studying the article will notice that new car registrations are good for 2 years, thus the precise annual value of the new registration payment is simply $200, however Tomlinson chooses to spotlight the larger $400 quantity in an try to make the payment appear extra onerous than it truly is.
The present fuel tax is a good tax because it relates to put on and tear on our roads. Heavier autos trigger extra put on and tear they usually additionally get much less miles per gallon and thus they pay extra fuel taxes through consumption of extra gas. Currently, all-electric autos, that are a lot heavier than their gasoline counterparts, pay zero {dollars} in fuel taxes. There are two methods to repair this. One is to do as Sen. Robert Nichols is proposing and add a set payment to auto registrations. An different can be to assess that payment primarily based on the weight of the car and the miles pushed for the 12 months. Such a payment might be assessed at the annual inspection after which collected upon registration renewal. The latter is clearly the fairest, however slightly onerous. A set registration payment can be less complicated to handle and will range primarily based on the weight class of the automotive and be primarily based on the common miles per gallon of a equally styled gasoline equal.
Tomlinson ought to have as a substitute argued that the payment is required, however was slightly on the excessive aspect. A car that drives 15,000 miles a 12 months and solely will get 15 MPG would pay $200 in fuel taxes. Clearly, most autos get higher fuel mileage than that — and even in the enormity that’s Texas, 15,000 miles is on the excessive aspect of common.
An award-winning reporter must be higher at espousing information and fewer about pushing an agenda.
Tim Graney, Katy
Oil and fuel earnings
Regarding “Texas made record-shattering $24.7B off oil and gas last year,” (Jan. 24): Revenues jumped 54 % in contrast to the final report in 2019 from the oil business which had received huge tax breaks pushed through by Republicans. Recently Exxon posted a virtually $20 billion revenue in the third quarter. Other oil firms additionally posted big earnings.
On the identical web page as these Business headlines: “Boycotts of ESG cost states.” Here the oil firms are crying that it hurts the oil business. Is it chopping into the billions they’re getting by preserving fuel costs excessive? Or the tens of millions they ship to Republicans’ campaigns to maintain the huge tax breaks they’re having fun with? This final election confirmed me how effectively the oil business donates to the Republicans. When I’d see large 10×5 posters selling Republicans all up and down the streets.
As my tax invoice will increase and Exxon’s tax invoice turns into non-existent, I believe it’s time for the oil business to pay their justifiable share of taxes and never line the pockets of politicians. I name on Texas Republicans to assist the individuals they symbolize and never be influenced by the huge cash they get from the fuel business.
Phil Lynch, Houston
story by Source link