Pittsburgh wants new $52 tax paid now all in January

[RamboLiberal]

I hope there is one huge stink about this. This is really shitty for people who are not big wage earners and live paycheck to paycheck. I hope the airwaves and the newspaper editorial pages are burning up tomorrow.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05006/437912.stm

Pittsburgh's new $52 occupation tax was billed as a dollar-a-week tax, but workers in the city are really getting hit with the full tax bite this month.

<snip>

Workers in the biggest city with the new tax, Pittsburgh, will be seeing smaller paychecks this month than they may have anticipated. Instead of taxing the $52 out in small batches -- a quarterly $13 deduction through the year, for example -- the city has told employers to deduct it all in January. Employers can take it from their workers in bites this month -- say, $26 in two biweekly payrolls -- but the whole $52 has to be collected during January.

Pittsburgh officials said they originally proposed that the tax be collected quarterly, but that language did not survive into the final version of Pittsburgh bailout bill, Act 222 of 2004. That meant the payment rules reverted to requirements in the state's Local Tax Enabling Act, which mandated that occupation taxes to be remitted in one lump sum.

Pittsburgh officials told employers in a tax bulletin issued last week to collect all $52 from their employees this month and remit it to the city, which is how Pittsburgh collected the former occupation tax.

<snip>

In another confusing twist, workers making less than $12,000 who are supposed to be exempt from the full $52 tax -- and pay only the existing $10 occupation tax -- will have the full $52 deducted from their January paychecks too. They will have to apply for a $42 refund at the end of year, using their W-2 forms and federal tax returns to prove they did not make more than $12,000.

[bleedingheart]

1. personally I am torn on this one..

on one hand the tax has been $10 for so long that realistically it should have probably been raised incrementally over the past years..

However I agree that now that they raise it by $42 it will now hurt the low wage earners the most...$12K a year is not a high enough minimum...it should be set around $20K...

[windlight]

2. I don't understand

about this tax at all... I grew up in PA and left and have now returned but I haven't understood the logic about this Tax in the first place... what is the point..you are taxing me so i don't sit at home?... I know all payroll taxes are that way but a flat dollar amount ALWAYS hurts people that can least afford it in the first place. so what would be so bad in eliminating it completely and replace it with .001% increase in normal state payroll taxes and pass that money back to the communities that use it?...

[bleedingheart]

3. there is no guarantee that a state tax increase would help

Pittsburgh.

PA GOPers cut education funding so much that the local taxes have gone up all over the state to try and get money to pay for education.....and the money that was cut from education was diverted not to the taxpayers..but to corporations.

Now Rendell wants gambling to help education and to give taxpayers a break...but now the GOP is fighting it because they don't want a fix for the problem under a Rendell term if at all...because the GOP in PA cares only about the corporations.

As for this tax for Pittsburgh...sadly the city needs money. Funny how we build the steelers and pirates stadiums...but we aren't seeing any great increase in revenue as a result that would help the city.

[RamboLiberal]

4. Yes the city needs the money and $52 is not much to ask

I'm just objecting to taking it all in one chunk. That really affects the minimum wage folks. They needed to spread this out over the year. And better they should've made this a graduated tax.

Plus the city of Pittsburgh needs to get some of the so-called "non-profits" who are making a buck to be a taxpaying entity again.

[windlight]

5. I agree

But with us in the state we pay and pay on all sorts of levels...(Fed, State, and local) my point is to spread out the $52 instead of hurting the poorest. Where I work an hour east of Pittsburgh also increased to the $52 and my local property taxes increased 50% (from 16 mils to 24). But I understand what that is buying me in property taxes. What I don't understand is the $52. Couldn't that be spread over a really small increase and still get the desired results?

[bleedingheart]

6. I am not sure what they can do to help the low wage earners

the sad fact is that the high wage earners in general have moved away from the area which has in a way "blighted" the farm land around Pittsburgh by creating more overdeveloped suburbs...which leaves the majority of the city limits populated by low-middle income people...yes there are some areas like Squirrel Hill and Shadyside that are more "high-end"...but the majority of residents don't have the money to fully fund the city.

What Pittsburgh needs is a short term tax incentive and education plan that will lure residents back into the city to help fix this problem.....I drive by a section of the city each day (Rt65..) full of beautiful old buildings and houses that are decaying...why not create an incentive plan for urban renewal and to help build back the tax base...

I live in the eastern suburbs but I truly appreciate and love the city...I really would rather live in the city than in the burbs..and plan to move back when my kiddies are out of school...in fact we are hoping to buy some property in the next few years with the hope to renovate it as our "retirement" property...

[durablend]

8. Even worse here, sadly...

Conewago Township/Dauphin County...they whack us with a $250 occupation tax if you make more than $4000 a year. Only exemptions are if you're a student, over 70, or moved out of state/area. This is on top of the 1% the municipality/school district splits. Why they can't abolish this regressive thing and just roll it into the 1% (adding another 1% would mean you'd have to make $25K+ to pay the $250) is beyond me.

[4MoreYearsOfHell]

7. There will be a lot of angry people

when they get their paychecks in January. I remember that there was some talk earlier in this debate about taking $60 by way of $5 per month...

But I guess that made too much sense...

[RPM]

9. feh - the city is as bad off as the low-income wage earners.

perhaps even close to Bankruptcy.

Hasn't been raised since 1960, i don't think anyone should put up a stink. Time to pay the piper.

[Dropkick]

10. It's funny...

...the people I heard at work today (paid monthly, today was payday) complaining about this the most were ones who do not live within the city limits. I didn't hear much of anything from the people who actually live, as well as work, here in the city. Doesn't bug me at all (and I am by no means highly paid).

[Dr Batsen D Belfry]

11. As I recall

the occupational tax has always been paid in January lump sum. I could be wrong on this though.

I have had this debate with suburbanites over the Pittsburgh occupational tax plenty of times, and every time I have won.

Each time I get the complaints, I ask them when the last time anyone came to the region to visit their little hamlet. And the last time their little hamlet offered things like the symphony, or a museum, or something else where the property is off the tax rolls because they are non-profit.

People don't realize that these organizations that provide services to the entire region are consuming resources that city residents pay for through their taxes without anything in return. This is why the commuter tax is necessary, not the roads etc.

DBDB