Archive for May 18th, 2009

Taxes going up? Call the movers (for your goods or your money or both)

May 18, 2009

Ken’s Take: Soaking the rich to cover governmental deficits has become the cure of choice — both Federally and in in high deficit states.   And, budget projections assume that the rich folks will just bend over — stay where they are, report the same earnings and just suck it up.

The problem is “behavioral economics” — when the game changes, people adjust to rearrange the gameboard to their best advantage.  To adjust to higher marginal rates people of means often shift income to lower tax alternatives (low tax locales, tax-free investments).  So, the taxing body (states or Feds) don’t end up realizing much of the anticipated gains.

Below are highlights from an article that spells out the effect …

* * * * *
Excerpted from WSJ, “Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich”, May 18, 2009

Americans know how to use the moving van to escape high taxes.

Here’s the problem for states that want to pry more money out of the wallets of rich people. It never works because people, investment capital and businesses are mobile: They can leave tax-unfriendly states and move to tax-friendly states.

Americans are more sensitive to high taxes than ever before. The tax differential between low-tax and high-tax states is widening, meaning that a relocation from high-tax California or Ohio, to no-income tax Texas or Tennessee, is all the more financially profitable both in terms of lower tax bills and more job opportunities.

From 1998 to 2007, more than 1,100 people every day including Sundays and holidays moved from the nine highest income-tax states such as California, New Jersey, New York and Ohio and relocated mostly to the nine tax-haven states with no income tax, including Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Texas. We also found that over these same years the no-income tax states created 89% more jobs and had 32% faster personal income growth than their high-tax counterparts.

There are three unintended consequences from states raising tax rates on the rich.

First, some rich residents sell their homes and leave the state;

Second, those who stay in the state report less taxable income on their tax returns; and

Third, some rich people choose not to locate in a high-tax state.

Since many rich people also tend to be successful business owners, jobs leave with them or they never arrive in the first place.

Full article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260067214828295.html

* * * * *
Want more from the Homa Files?
     Click link =>  The Homa Files Blog

Posted in Taxes | Leave a Comment »

Gallup: Poll: Majority of Americans 'pro-life'

May 18, 2009

Ken’s Take: Skirting the philosophical issues, I find this interesting from a political perspective.  I thought it was odd that a majority of Catholics voted for Obama given the clarity of his position on abortion rights and his track record of votes on the issue.

A few weeks after the inauguration, there was some chatter from the pulpit of our church about abortion — stimulated, I think, by Obama’s early exec directives to fund overseas abortions, etc.  Iy was as is pro-life Catholics were surprised that Obama really was pro-abortion rights.

At the time. I wondered whether there would be any backlash in the polls.  None seemed to materialize until this poll.  Why?  Apparently, the media attention surrounding the Notre Dame speech caused some folks — notably Catholics — to do a gut check.

* * * * *

Reported in the Washington Times:

According to a Gallup poll released May 15 —  a majority of  Americans now say they are “pro-life” than “pro-choice”.  Specifically, A majority of respondents 51 percent are against the practice of abortion, while 42 percent classified themselves as being pro-choice.

image

“This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995”

The findings represent “a significant shift from a year ago,” when 50 percent of the respondents were pro-choice and 44 percent pro-life.

61 percent of Democrats say they are pro-choice and 33 percent are pro-life

70 percent of Republicans say they are pro-life and 26 percent are pro-choice

In 2008, half of women were pro-choice; now the number stands at 44 percent.

Among men, the findings are more pronounced: 49 percent identified themselves as pro-choice a year ago; the number fell to 39 percent this year. A clear majority of men 54 percent are now pro-life, compared with 46 percent a year ago.

It seems a change in the White House has prompted the change of heart. The president’s position has been the most radical pro-abortion of any American president.

“With the first pro-choice president in eight years already making changes to the nation’s policies on funding abortion overseas, expressing his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, and moving toward rescinding federal job protections for medical workers who refuse to participate in abortion procedures,”

Excerpted from Wash Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/16/poll-more-americans-pro-life/print/

* * * * *
Want more from the Homa Files?
     Click link =>  The Homa Files Blog

Posted in Obama - Promises Made & Kept, Obama Administration, Polls & Surveys | Leave a Comment »

Gallup: Poll: Majority of Americans ‘pro-life’

May 18, 2009

Ken’s Take: Skirting the philosophical issues, I find this interesting from a political perspective.  I thought it was odd that a majority of Catholics voted for Obama given the clarity of his position on abortion rights and his track record of votes on the issue.

A few weeks after the inauguration, there was some chatter from the pulpit of our church about abortion — stimulated, I think, by Obama’s early exec directives to fund overseas abortions, etc.  Iy was as is pro-life Catholics were surprised that Obama really was pro-abortion rights.

At the time. I wondered whether there would be any backlash in the polls.  None seemed to materialize until this poll.  Why?  Apparently, the media attention surrounding the Notre Dame speech caused some folks — notably Catholics — to do a gut check.

* * * * *

Reported in the Washington Times:

According to a Gallup poll released May 15 —  a majority of  Americans now say they are “pro-life” than “pro-choice”.  Specifically, A majority of respondents 51 percent are against the practice of abortion, while 42 percent classified themselves as being pro-choice.

image

“This is the first time a majority of U.S. adults have identified themselves as pro-life since Gallup began asking this question in 1995”

The findings represent “a significant shift from a year ago,” when 50 percent of the respondents were pro-choice and 44 percent pro-life.

61 percent of Democrats say they are pro-choice and 33 percent are pro-life

70 percent of Republicans say they are pro-life and 26 percent are pro-choice

In 2008, half of women were pro-choice; now the number stands at 44 percent.

Among men, the findings are more pronounced: 49 percent identified themselves as pro-choice a year ago; the number fell to 39 percent this year. A clear majority of men 54 percent are now pro-life, compared with 46 percent a year ago.

It seems a change in the White House has prompted the change of heart. The president’s position has been the most radical pro-abortion of any American president.

“With the first pro-choice president in eight years already making changes to the nation’s policies on funding abortion overseas, expressing his support for the Freedom of Choice Act, and moving toward rescinding federal job protections for medical workers who refuse to participate in abortion procedures,”

Excerpted from Wash Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/16/poll-more-americans-pro-life/print/

* * * * *
Want more from the Homa Files?
     Click link =>  The Homa Files Blog

Posted in Obama - Promises Made & Kept, Obama Administration, Polls & Surveys | Leave a Comment »

Maryland Throws Out Minimum Pricing

May 18, 2009

Excerpted from WSJ, “State Law Targets ‘Minimum Pricing'” By Joseph Pereira, Apr 28, 2009

* * * * *

In a move that could lead to lower prices for consumers across the country, Maryland has passed a law that prohibits manufacturers from requiring retailers to charge minimum prices for their goods.

The law, which takes effect Oct. 1, takes aim at agreements that many manufacturers have been forcing on retailers, requiring them to charge minimum prices on certain products. The practice has surged since a controversial 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that no longer makes such agreements automatically illegal under federal antitrust law.

Under the new state law, retailers doing business in Maryland — as well as state officials — can sue manufacturers that impose minimum-pricing agreements. The law also covers transactions in which consumers in Maryland buy goods on the Internet, even when the retailer is based out of state. That could potentially affect manufacturers throughout the country.

Minimum-pricing agreements keep retail profit margins higher, which in turn keeps retailers from pressuring manufacturers to lower the wholesale prices they pay for those goods. Suppliers also think that eliminating pricing competition can help retailers spend more money promoting their products to consumers. But certain retailers — particularly online ones — that attract customers because of low prices say the agreements stifle competition and gouge consumers.

Maryland’s legislation is one of a series of recent initiatives aimed at circumventing the Supreme Court decision … “Today there are an estimated 5,000 companies that have implemented minimum-pricing policies, much of it happening in the wake of the Supreme Court decision.”

One company with a minimum-pricing policy is Kolcraft Enterprises Inc., a supplier of bassinets and strollers sold by Wal-Mart Stores Inc … Kolcraft requires retailers to charge a minimum price of $159.99 for its Contours Classique 3-in-1 Bassinet. Wal-Mart’s price is $169.88. The price dictated by Kolcraft for its Options Tandem Stroller is $219.99; Wal-Mart charges $219.98.

The agreement states that the policy is intended, among other things, “to protect all Kolcraft and Kolcraft-licensed brands from diminution.”

Without such legislation, retailers had little hope of prevailing against a manufacturer who requires minimum pricing. “One must show that a manufacturer basically has greater than a 30% market share … and few manufacturers wield such market power in the U.S.

 

Edit by SAC

* * * * *

Full Article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124087840110661643.html

* * * * *

Want more from the Homa Files?
Click link => The Homa Files Blog

Posted in Mktg - Pricing | Leave a Comment »