Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
60 user(s) are online (34 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 59

ecoindie, more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




« 1 (2) 3 »


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#47
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
Yes and the subject is that JC is likely to lose suburban tax school funding, and rather than raise it's low tax rate to do so it wants to have it funded by others-again.

The state has already determined that JC underpays its 'local fair share' by 200 million dollars a year, but Fulop and Hudson County legislators (and now Sweeney, too) are doing everything they can to avoid JC paying its fair share.

Posted on: 6/4 11:57
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#46
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/18 21:18
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1565
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
The thread is about JC looking for more ways to avoid self funding it own school children's education.


Holy shit. Here is the title of the thread:

"Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools"

It's literally (the most overused word of the decade, but made for this particular sentence) about the president of the senate suggesting a payroll tax.

Subject: Sweeney
Verb: proposes
Object: tax

There is a thread just a few down from this one:

"Will Jersey City and Hoboken ever lose Abbott District Status?" for your school funding circle jerk.

Posted on: 6/4 11:42
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
The thread is about JC looking for more ways to avoid self funding it own school children's education.

Posted on: 6/4 11:22
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/18 21:18
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1565
Offline
That may be what you are choosing to talk about. Bodhipooh was responding to Brewster's comment about non-resident employees working in Jersey City - which, in fact, is what the thread is about.

You are free to try to hijack every thread to fit your agenda, as you often do. We don't have to play along.

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Untrue. People working here but living outside JC could choose to work elsewhere. Or they could move to JC. They do have choices. They may not like them, but they have them.

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote: I dont think the sales tax analogy is an apt one: you can *choose* not to shop in NYC and instead take your money elsewhere. And, that's exactly the point: non JC residents lack that choice when it comes to their money and its "transfer" to the city's coffers.


To the school funding issue we're talking about, non-residents don't have a choice over the redistribution of tax money for schools. Trenton takes into account what it feels is the ability of each town to self fund their own schools, and gives much less back to affluent towns, more to others, and an obscene amount to Abbott districts. I guess someone from, say, Mendham could 'choose' to move to East Orange, but that's not really a choice, is it?

Posted on: 6/4 11:06
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
Quote:

T-Bird wrote:
Untrue. People working here but living outside JC could choose to work elsewhere. Or they could move to JC. They do have choices. They may not like them, but they have them.

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote: I dont think the sales tax analogy is an apt one: you can *choose* not to shop in NYC and instead take your money elsewhere. And, that's exactly the point: non JC residents lack that choice when it comes to their money and its "transfer" to the city's coffers.


To the school funding issue we're talking about, non-residents don't have a choice over the redistribution of tax money for schools. Trenton takes into account what it feels is the ability of each town to self fund their own schools, and gives much less back to affluent towns, more to others, and an obscene amount to Abbott districts. I guess someone from, say, Mendham could 'choose' to move to East Orange, but that's not really a choice, is it?

Posted on: 6/4 10:58
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/10/18 21:18
From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1565
Offline
Untrue. People working here but living outside JC could choose to work elsewhere. Or they could move to JC. They do have choices. They may not like them, but they have them.

Quote:

bodhipooh wrote: I dont think the sales tax analogy is an apt one: you can *choose* not to shop in NYC and instead take your money elsewhere. And, that's exactly the point: non JC residents lack that choice when it comes to their money and its "transfer" to the city's coffers.

Posted on: 6/4 10:51
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/7/9 7:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 2275
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:

It sort of proves the point that once the government gets to enjoy the proceeds of a tax, it will find ways to spend it and be in need of more.


NJ imposed an income tax in 1976 to offset property taxes. Today we both have high income taxes and property taxes

Posted on: 6/4 9:07
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3556
Offline
Quote:

Ain't that something? ;)

It sort of proves the point that once the government gets to enjoy the proceeds of a tax, it will find ways to spend it and be in need of more.

Posted on: 6/4 8:18
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3556
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Doesn't it smack you of "taxation without representation?"

No more so than if I went into NY and had to pay higher sales tax. I don't get a say. There's a pretty good argument for this merely from a macro POV, these employees drive JC roads and benefit from JC 1st responder services, etc without paying anything to this city. I've heard this argument defending NYC's tax. It makes a lot of sense for a city with a big non-resident commuter population, unlike many sprawling smaller cities in this country that include much of the nearby suburbs in their borders.

Sure you can argue their employers pay property tax or PILOTS, and they spend money here, but that's not nearly as much as if they lived here.

That said, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the city exempts nonresident city employees.


I dont think the sales tax analogy is an apt one: you can *choose* not to shop in NYC and instead take your money elsewhere. And, that's exactly the point: non JC residents lack that choice when it comes to their money and its "transfer" to the city's coffers.

The situation about over-aid of the local BOE is a tricky one, and I don't pretend for a second to have a solution. But, I do know this situation is untenable for much longer. In the eyes of other municipalities, we are getting a sweet deal by assuming a tiny portion of our local BOE, assessing a paltry 0.4% for our schools, and yet refusing to find ways to streamline operations, or cut back, but smugly accepting their money to enable the situation while claiming poverty. Clearly, this is now a hot button issue, and I very much doubt it will go away. The reval simply exposed what many had suspected, and now a day of reckoning may be upon us.

Posted on: 6/4 8:16
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline

Posted on: 6/4 8:06
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3556
Offline
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Refresh my memory... wasn't there supposed to be a hotel room tax that was supposed to allocated to schools? They want to be revenue creative, the city should be going after AirBnBs. I see more people @ Grove or Exchange with large suitcases and they do not appear to be looking for hotels.


In general, I dislike the idea of enacting new taxes that enable government to avoid having to deal with problems, but this is not a bad idea. A tax on AirBnB, or other short-term rentals, could be a more palatable solution that does not screw with residents, or the business base that has undoubtedly contributed to JC's resurgence. The city should get creative about solutions that can generate revenue without shafting the residents, but they should also really go after fiscal improvements. It is simply too easy to say "well, it is hard to find ways to save money." Do we really want to empower the local government to keep dreaming up new taxes without some accountability about its spending?

Posted on: 6/4 8:01
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2009/5/12 18:51
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1476
Offline
Refresh my memory... wasn't there supposed to be a hotel room tax that was supposed to allocated to schools? They want to be revenue creative, the city should be going after AirBnBs. I see more people @ Grove or Exchange with large suitcases and they do not appear to be looking for hotels.

Posted on: 6/4 5:52
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
Brewster, 80,000 people commute to work in JC every day? Care to cite something to show this?? In any case, I'm ok with a payroll tax as long as all workers in JC, not just those who aren't JC residents, are subject to it. Fair is fair.

Posted on: 6/3 23:58
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Brewster, I'm ok with the tax-but disturbed that JC would find a way to exempt JC residents from the tax.


Why? Something well north of 80k people commute to JC, that's what it was a decade ago, best data I could find. They spend at least 40 hrs a week here, why is it outrageous to suggest they contribute more than maybe buying lunch?

As for school aid, bullshit. You've made clear for years that you want state support to JC ended, not just cut back to SFRA levels. Your stuff is nothing more than classic right wing social darwinism orthodoxy: everyone look out for themselves, and justify failure with your armchair sociology.


Nonsense. I believe that inner cities should get support from more affluent areas. That said, the big beef amongst NJ legislators is that JC gets preferential treatment over other low/middle class districts like Bayonne, or Dover, etc who really are getting screwed. And JC mayors gave out PILOTS like crack dealers giving a free sample, ensuring that tax money goes to the general fund (so the mayors can spend it as they want) instead of the BOE getting some of the cash. It's a scam, and now even other NJ Democrats are fed up.

Posted on: 6/3 23:54
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2017/9/20 21:56
From Chilltown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 159
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Brewster, I'm ok with the tax-but disturbed that JC would find a way to exempt JC residents from the tax.


Why? Something well north of 80k people commute to JC, that's what it was a decade ago, best data I could find. They spend at least 40 hrs a week here, why is it outrageous to suggest they contribute more than maybe buying lunch?

As for school aid, bullshit. You've made clear for years that you want state support to JC ended, not just cut back to SFRA levels. Your stuff is nothing more than classic right wing social darwinism orthodoxy: everyone look out for themselves, and justify failure with your armchair sociology.


State aid should be completely cut off in a city where 1/3 of the buildings contribute ZERO to schools because of abatements, while at the same time spending like crazy. . Period. End of story. Until the property tax rate in JC approaches average, you should not complain whatsoever if our benefactors (homeowners in the rest of state) resent JC for this.

Posted on: 6/3 23:47
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5324
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Brewster, I'm ok with the tax-but disturbed that JC would find a way to exempt JC residents from the tax.


Why? Something well north of 80k people commute to JC, that's what it was a decade ago, best data I could find. They spend at least 40 hrs a week here, why is it outrageous to suggest they contribute more than maybe buying lunch?

As for school aid, bullshit. You've made clear for years that you want state support to JC ended, not just cut back to SFRA levels. Your stuff is nothing more than classic right wing social darwinism orthodoxy: everyone look out for themselves, and justify failure with your armchair sociology.

Posted on: 6/3 23:33
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2017/9/20 21:56
From Chilltown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 159
Offline
No, Monroe. Don't you know it's racist these days to even suggest personal responsibility as a course of action?? Tsk, tsk, this board is going to eat you alive for that one LMAO.

Jokes aside, Monroe nailed it with the point that no one is saying prevent JC from using the payroll tax. But again, with very little skin in the game, behavior won't change. The reval is the greatest thing to happen to JC for all the reasons Monroe listed. Will steve be able to fund his pet projects to keep the locals asleep, and still keep taxes flat now?

We all can't wait to see!

Posted on: 6/3 22:41
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
Brewster, I'm ok with the tax-but disturbed that JC would find a way to exempt JC residents from the tax. That's patently unfair. Even Newark doesn't do that. Until JC has skin in the game there isn't any chance of cost containment.

Look how after the reval the DTJC people are now starting to question spending, since they're now finally paying their fair share as an example.

As far as inner city schools, more money isn't the answer. Look at how much Asbury Park spends-over $33K/year/student, and local taxpayers pay under 9% of the costs. And performance is pathetic. It's involved parents (like in Union City) that drive better schools, not total spending, in the inner cities. Uninvolved parents are the curse, not state funding.

Posted on: 6/3 22:10
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5324
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
When suburban taxpayers pump 1.2 billion dollars into JC schools every three years-which spend 25% more per student than the state average, and have putrid graduation rates (minus McNair), you're damn right other state taxpayers get a say. And they do, finally, through the state legislators who see how unfair it is to their own cities and schools.


It's a big jump to get from saying the state should not transfer your money to JC to saying JC can't be allowed to raise tax money how it wishes, with in-state precedent no less.

And I'm so tired of your citing poor performance as justification for defunding these schools, like that would help. You honestly couldn't give a crap how they perform, as long as you didn't have to pay for them. Poorly performing inner city schools are a universal problem in this country, JC is not an outlier. Most of your rhetoric shows you don't believe in the basic idea of Abbott/SFRA, that poor districts should not be abandoned to their own resources while wealthy ones like Short Hills can give a cadillac education to their kids.

Posted on: 6/3 22:06
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
JP, the suburban towns fund their school systems to a great extent (you mentioned the Short Hills Mall-Millburn/Short Hills pays almost 90% of its own school costs). Money that towns like that send to Trenton gets sent for Abbott districts like Newark and JC-which total almost $1.5 billion each year between them.


Posted on: 6/3 22:06
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2017/9/20 21:56
From Chilltown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 159
Offline
Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
I'm not sure why people keep saying that state funds are somehow the suburbs money going to the city. The urban areas are where the jobs are located, and where business that generates sales tax is located. Sure there are some exceptions like the Short Hills Mall, and some income is generated from investments and the like, rather than jobs. But many of those suburbanites demanding their "fair share" commute into NYC, and pay their income tax to NY, not NJ. (The same is true, of course, for Jersey City residents that hop the PATH train in).

Whatever the issues with "fair share" of property taxes going to schools, Jersey City and other urban areas provide the lion's share of funding to the state.


Source for this completely made up tidbit?

I'm sure JC produces more revenue than most cities in NJ. It's highly unlikely they provide more revenue than the rest of the state. But nice try. Party's over, pal.

Posted on: 6/3 22:01
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2005/6/7 23:24
From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1332
Offline
I'm not sure why people keep saying that state funds are somehow the suburbs money going to the city. The urban areas are where the jobs are located, and where business that generates sales tax is located. Sure there are some exceptions like the Short Hills Mall, and some income is generated from investments and the like, rather than jobs. But many of those suburbanites demanding their "fair share" commute into NYC, and pay their income tax to NY, not NJ. (The same is true, of course, for Jersey City residents that hop the PATH train in).

Whatever the issues with "fair share" of property taxes going to schools, Jersey City and other urban areas provide the lion's share of funding to the state.

Posted on: 6/3 21:10
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2017/9/20 21:56
From Chilltown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 159
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Monroe, and non JC residents like him, quite frankly, have just as much skin in the game with JC as residents do.


No, they don't. Same as we don't let foreigners, even ones who live here, vote in our US elections. If a JC public employee chooses not to live in the city that employs them, they give up the right to vote in that city. They can choose to work elsewhere, same as all the people who complain about street noise and parking are told to move if they don't like it.

I hate the fact that we have Monmouth County resident cops who, when told of a crime, think and even occasionally say, "what do you expect, living in this shithole?" I had a friend who taught in the system say the other night that one of her colleagues was an deep racist who hated all the kids in the school. When your city employees are only interested in what they can extract from a city they don't live in, you don't give them a say in the budget.


Doesn't it smack you of "taxation without representation?" While I agree that non-residents can't (or, shouldn't) directly affect local politics, I do find it more than a little ironic to feign some indignation at non-residents for wanting to more say (or, visibility) into local spending when the city (and, its residents) are more than willing and happy to take the money of non-residents to help pay for local matters.

It reminds me of the proverbial free loader whose family will help finance his expenses, but who gets upset when someone questions his lifestyle and choices. Talk about chutzpah, really.


It's not proverbial; JC is one of the worst freeloader around. Period. Want outsiders to butt out? No problem, just relinquish the state of the almost $500mm they give a year for these failing schools, and you won't hear a peep from the outsiders. Until then, JC is the equivalent of living in moms basement.

Posted on: 6/3 20:57
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
When suburban taxpayers pump 1.2 billion dollars into JC schools every three years-which spend 25% more per student than the state average, and have putrid graduation rates (minus McNair), you're damn right other state taxpayers get a say. And they do, finally, through the state legislators who see how unfair it is to their own cities and schools.

Posted on: 6/3 20:56
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5324
Offline
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Doesn't it smack you of "taxation without representation?"

No more so than if I went into NY and had to pay higher sales tax. I don't get a say. There's a pretty good argument for this merely from a macro POV, these employees drive JC roads and benefit from JC 1st responder services, etc without paying anything to this city. I've heard this argument defending NYC's tax. It makes a lot of sense for a city with a big non-resident commuter population, unlike many sprawling smaller cities in this country that include much of the nearby suburbs in their borders.

Sure you can argue their employers pay property tax or PILOTS, and they spend money here, but that's not nearly as much as if they lived here.

That said, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the city exempts nonresident city employees.

Posted on: 6/3 20:54
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/8/12 14:31
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3556
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Monroe, and non JC residents like him, quite frankly, have just as much skin in the game with JC as residents do.


No, they don't. Same as we don't let foreigners, even ones who live here, vote in our US elections. If a JC public employee chooses not to live in the city that employs them, they give up the right to vote in that city. They can choose to work elsewhere, same as all the people who complain about street noise and parking are told to move if they don't like it.

I hate the fact that we have Monmouth County resident cops who, when told of a crime, think and even occasionally say, "what do you expect, living in this shithole?" I had a friend who taught in the system say the other night that one of her colleagues was an deep racist who hated all the kids in the school. When your city employees are only interested in what they can extract from a city they don't live in, you don't give them a say in the budget.


Doesn't it smack you of "taxation without representation?" While I agree that non-residents can't (or, shouldn't) directly affect local politics, I do find it more than a little ironic to feign some indignation at non-residents for wanting to more say (or, visibility) into local spending when the city (and, its residents) are more than willing and happy to take the money of non-residents to help pay for local matters.

It reminds me of the proverbial free loader whose family will help finance his expenses, but who gets upset when someone questions his lifestyle and choices. Talk about chutzpah, really.

Posted on: 6/3 20:33
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/2/9 15:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 322
Offline
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Is this a 1% tax on JC business employees, or a 1% tax on payroll paid by the companies?


The tax is on the business, not the worker.

The first version of it says it "shall not apply to the remuneration paid by employers to employees who are residents of the municipality." Newark has allowed for exemptions for businesses that employ 50% Newark residents.

I spoke with Sweeney's office on Friday and they indicated it's not finalized who if anyone would be exempt from the JC tax.

Posted on: 6/3 19:45
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 16:13
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5324
Offline
Quote:

HeightsNative wrote:
Monroe, and non JC residents like him, quite frankly, have just as much skin in the game with JC as residents do.


No, they don't. Same as we don't let foreigners, even ones who live here, vote in our US elections. If a JC public employee chooses not to live in the city that employs them, they give up the right to vote in that city. They can choose to work elsewhere, same as all the people who complain about street noise and parking are told to move if they don't like it.

I hate the fact that we have Monmouth County resident cops who, when told of a crime, think and even occasionally say, "what do you expect, living in this shithole?" I had a friend who taught in the system say the other night that one of her colleagues was an deep racist who hated all the kids in the school. When your city employees are only interested in what they can extract from a city they don't live in, you don't give them a say in the budget.

Posted on: 6/3 19:37
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
But the Star Ledger says the tax will be a tax on businesses.

"Sweeney's plan — which assumes the start of a new tax on Jersey City businesses expected to bring in $70 million at least in new revenue — inched closer to reality on Thursday when he said he is willing to risk another state government shutdown if lawmakers do not tackle school funding. A budget spat in 2016 led the government to shut down for three days."

Posted on: 6/3 19:16
Print Top


Re: Sweeney proposes slapping payroll tax on Jersey City businesses to fund schools
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/5/15 10:11
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 4326
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Does this mean that if you're a resident of JC you would be untaxed on the 1%, while JC workers from other towns have to pay it?


Sounds like yes, unless JC decides to tax it's residents too. So...NYC does it, Newark does it, will the world end if we do it too rather than raise the rate 25%? Obviously this is a component of how NYC keeps it's residential property taxes so low.

I'd rather see school cost reformed, but that ain't going to happen, we're talking seriously entrenched interests. And BTW, a lot of those so interested city employees don't even live here, same as you don't.


NYC residents who work in NYC aren't exempt from NYC payroll taxes. And the low taxes in NYC come about from the giant $ generated by Wall Street.

Newark residents and non-residents who work in Newark both pay the 1%.

http://www.tax-rates.org/new_jersey/newark-income-tax

Posted on: 6/3 18:44
Print Top




« 1 (2) 3 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017