West Virginia lawmakers are clamping down on corporations trying boost environmentally and socially responsible investing. A new report by EcoConsult Solutions finds their actions will likely cost taxpayers at least $9-million, and perhaps as much as $29-million dollars annually. Senate Bill 262, passed last year, restricts the state from investing in companies deemed to be energy boycotters. Among those boycotted include BlackRock, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo.
Jim Kotcon, chair of the West Virginia Sierra Club, said restricting long-term financial investments in the form of bonds could end up costing residents and taxpayers by reducing the amount of money the state has for public services and programs.
"This appears to be an effort by the state government to help bail out the coal industry and to deny the real cost of climate change on West Virginia citizens," Kotcon said.
More than two dozen states are suing the federal government over a U.S. Department of Labor rule change on environmental, social and governance, or ESG, in workplace retirement accounts. The rule allows 401(k) providers to consider climate change and other issues when making investments.
Kotcon said environmental groups believe state investment funds should take into consideration environmental and social factors, especially since West Virginia communities are struggling to cope with increased flooding and extreme weather events driven by climate change.
"It has become sort of an extremist initiative," he said, "trying to penalize financial institutions that are attempting to do the right thing."
More than a dozen states so far have passed or have pending bills that would pull state funds from investments deemed to be adverse to the oil and gas industry, according to the report.
get more stories like this via email
As Nebraska state lawmakers convene for a special session on property tax reform called by Gov. Jim Pillen, groups are weighing in on the details Pillen has released so far.
The governor's goal is to cut property taxes by 40% to 50%, which includes the state taking over funding of K-through-12 schools. A majority of the additional revenue needed would come from higher sales taxes and/or eliminating sales-tax exemptions for around 100 goods and services.
Nebraska Farmers Union President John Hansen said the governor's plan is missing one leg of the "three-legged tax reform stool" - income taxes - which he said puts legislators in a difficult position.
"By taking income taxes off the table," he said, "the governor has already limited the Legislature's ability to come up with a solution to the property tax problem that leaves our state with a more fair and balanced tax system, that is also more widely supported by citizens."
Hansen said he fears the governor's approach will cause state sales taxes to be "out of balance" and regressive - with lower-income earners paying a larger portion of their income in sales taxes than those will higher incomes. Property tax reform has been a priority of the Nebraska Farmers Union for more than three decades.
Hansen said Pillen pushed for income tax cuts for individuals and corporations in the last legislative session, despite there being no "outcry" for income tax relief.
"If you add up the first three years of those combined income tax cuts," he said, "it more than equals the amount of additional revenue that the governor needs to fund the property tax reductions that he wants."
In addition to placing a higher burden on low-income Nebraskans, Hansen argued the governor's plan would give a huge benefit to some of the state's wealthiest residents.
"For the folks who own large amounts of property and also make large amounts of income, the governor's giving them a double tax-cut benefit," he said. "He substanstially lowers both their property taxes and their income taxes, and these are the folks who already have most of the wealth."
According to the Lincoln Journal-Star, Pillen's property tax plan would save him nearly $1 million a year in property taxes.
get more stories like this via email
The Keystone State continues offering a favorable landscape for Pennsylvanians seeking employment opportunities.
Claire Kovach, senior research analyst at the Keystone Research Center, said the steady trend has been ongoing for months, with the rate hovering below the national average of 4.1% during the past year.
"Pennsylvania is on a roll," Kovach asserted. "We added, I think, 15,600 jobs in June, and that's 11 months straight now that Pennsylvania has added jobs. The data we got showed that Pennsylvania's unemployment rate is still quite low through 3.4%, and it's been at that or around that for over a year now."
Kovach pointed out inflation is falling as nominal wages are growing steadily and the persistence of the combined effects is helping the labor market recover. She noted the number of nonfarm jobs rose to a record high of more than six million.
Kovach emphasized the largest increase in jobs in June was in education and health services.
"There's just some of the jobs that are most in demand," Kovach observed. "Jobs, especially like in health services, are consistently projected to be some of the most in-demand jobs over the next years and decades, especially in Pennsylvania. I believe leisure and hospitality also reached a record high in June."
Kovach added as the economy improves and nears full employment, the jobless rate will not continue to drop forever. It is expected to gradually stabilize at a low level, with the lowest so far at 3.2%.
Disclosure: The Keystone Research Center contributes to our fund for reporting on Budget Policy and Priorities, and Livable Wages/Working Families. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
A coalition of South Dakota groups is voicing its opposition to a ballot measure intended to end a state sales tax on consumables.
If passed this November, Initiated Measure 28 would repeal the state's 4.2% sales tax on "anything sold for human consumption," including food and other products from toothpaste to tobacco, CBD and vaping products.
Sandra Waltman, director of public affairs for the South Dakota Education Association, said the teachers union opposes the repeal because it does not include a plan to replace the money the current tax contributes to education.
"Our main reason for opposing this is the lack of a plan for replacing the $176 million and what that will do, not only for K-12 students but for higher education," Waltman explained. "Districts would probably be looking at a very bare-bones budget."
Currently, Waltman said about 60% of public school funding comes from state coffers, and the other 40% from local property taxes. She called the potential effect on education "drastic," saying they could lead to fewer teachers, larger class sizes and cuts to newer resources like mental health support and programs for career and technical education.
Proponents of the measure said repealing the tax could help the nearly 9% of South Dakotans who are food insecure but Waltman countered the same people would likely feel the effects of underfunded school systems.
"To repeal one tax without a more broad conversation about how you replace that revenue is shortsighted, and we think you shouldn't just be repealing a tax without a plan."
Other groups opposing the measure include the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association, Chamber of Commerce and Industry, South Dakotans Against a State Income Tax and the South Dakota Farm Bureau.
Disclosure: The South Dakota Education Association contributes to our fund for reporting on Education. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email