Welcome to PatsFans.com

Taxachusetts to target college's for "revenue"

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Real World, May 13, 2008.

  1. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    This is excellent. I actually think that 2.5% is way too little. I pay 5+% to the state on my 5 figure pay, so why can't these billion dollar cash cows pay at least the same, or more? My favorite is the Harvard dude's response to the school paying 2.5% on the $34 BILLION they got sitting around.

    No sh!t. :rolleyes:



    Lawmakers target $1b endowments

    Exempt status of schools debated

    Email|Print|Single Page| Text size – + By Peter Schworm and Matt Viser
    Globe Staff / May 8, 2008

    Massachusetts lawmakers desperate for additional revenue are eyeing the endowments of deep-pocketed private colleges to bolster the state's coffers by more than $1 billion a year, asserting that the schools' rising fortunes undercut their nonprofit status.

    more stories like thisLegislators have asked state finance officials to study a plan that would impose a 2.5 percent annual assessment on colleges with endowments over $1 billion, an amount now exceeded by nine Massachusetts institutions. The proposal, which higher education specialists believe is the first of its kind across the country, drew surprising support at a debate on the State House budget last week and is attracting attention in higher education circles nationally.

    The idea has prompted a range of questions, including whether it is legal to infringe upon private colleges' tax-exempt status or single them out based on their wealth. It also faces significant opposition from the colleges and some skeptical lawmakers. But proponents say the colleges' vast accumulations of wealth - Harvard University has the biggest endowment at $34 billion - and their often modest contributions to their host communities justify the assessment.

    .............

    University leaders criticized the plan as a gimmick that would backfire by hurting institutions that are pivotal to the state. "You'd be taxing success here," said Kevin Casey, Harvard's associate vice president for government, community, and public affairs. "Over time, this would put us at a real competitive disadvantage, which would drastically hurt the Commonwealth."


    http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/05/08/lawmakers_target_1b_endowments/
  2. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    This stuff is funny. Here you have these "non-profit" schools, buying up, and sitting on prime real estate, paying their staff handsomely, and not paying property taxes (or very, very little if at all), whining about paying less than half of what I pay to the state. Their defense is the best. Why is taxing them bad, but taxing me, or some other corporation good? If taxing success is bad, then shouldn't that rule be applied throughout? If taxing them is bad because they help the commonwealth, then couldn't the same argument be made for business' too?
  3. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,226
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Whenever Harvard comes looking for money my wife gets really pizzed off that they would even dare to ask. Then goes into a rant about how much money they already have. Last year she wrote them a nasty (by Harvard standards) about it and told them not to bother her anymore when it comes to giving the school any money.
    Last edited: May 13, 2008
  4. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams Moderator PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,171
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +5 / 0 / -0

    I'm all for taxing private colleges at the standard rate as any other business. Harvard has more money than any of the "Corporations" that they say they hate.

    Tax them at 44%, see how they like it!
  5. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I'm a little shocked that RW would be in favor of the Mass legislature trolling for new ways to take money from more people. It's not going to change what they try to take from him, after all.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of these places paying taxes on all the money they've got sitting around, but isn't it wrong to cheer for the legislature trying to find yet more and more and more cash?
  6. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,088
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +37 / 2 / -3

    #24 Jersey

    I don't see why anyone is tax emempt. You get money you pay taxes. That applies to me. And oil companies. And churches. And colleges. Colleges especially, they're mostly liberal bastions who want everyone else to pay more taxes for the liberal causes they typically espouse. It's easy to support programs when you don't have to pay for them.
  7. Real World

    Real World Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,289
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +30 / 0 / -1

    Oh, I'd prefer that taxes be low for everyone. I also know that the state's rape of someone else's pocket, surely won't line mine. I just wanted to point out how these "non-profits" are swimming in tax free cash, while the suits in capitol hill look for new ways to squeeze water out of the rocks that are the working man & woman.

Share This Page