Add Row

Add Element

update

Kozi Checks & Balances
Media Site Home

update

Add Element

Categories

Add Row

Add Element

update

Kozi Checks & Balances TaxTactics News

update

March 24.2025

2 Minutes Read

Examining North Carolina's Tax Proposal: Will It Truly Help Workers?

North Carolina Capitol building at night with statue, related to tax proposal.

North Carolina's Bold Tax Proposal: A Closer Look

As North Carolina’s House Bill 11 gains momentum, it sparks discussions around tax fairness and equity. The bill, which aims to exempt income taxes on tips, overtime, and certain bonuses, mirrors strategies previously championed by former President Trump. Proponents argue that this will provide much-needed relief for workers in the service industry, but the implications of such a move raise important questions.

Understanding the Impact on Workers

House Bill 11 targets tipped workers like waitstaff and hairstylists, claiming to assist those struggling with their finances. However, only about 125,000 out of 4.9 million workers in the state are in jobs where tipping is customary. This narrow focus overlooks a substantial segment of low-income earners who may not benefit from this tax exemption. For instance, many hardworking North Carolinians who earn a fixed salary or work set hours could end up facing increased tax burdens, creating a situation of unfairness without justification.

Economic Consequences of Favoritism in Tax Policies

A key issue arises when comparing the financial scenarios of two individuals: Tracy, a secretary earning her income solely from wages, and Bob, a waiter who earns a combination of wages and tips. If HB 11 passes, while Tracy’s tax burden remains unchanged, Bob could see a significant reduction in his tax liability, making his situation much more financially favorable. Such preferential treatment not only creates disparities among workers but also disrupts the tax balance necessary for a fair economy.

Looking Ahead: The Risks and Rewards

While the intention behind HB 11 might be to support struggling workers, it risks becoming a flawed policy that rewards certain income types over others arbitrarily. The potential consequences could include a less equitable tax system that inadvertently harms those it aims to help. As this bill progresses, North Carolinians must consider the broader implications of such tax changes, balancing immediate aid with long-term economic health.

Payroll Taxes

Write A Comment

Related Posts All Posts

11.25.2025

Swiss Voters Urged to Think Twice About the 50% Inheritance Tax Proposal

Update Understanding Switzerland's Proposed Inheritance Tax On November 30th, Swiss voters are set to make a pivotal decision regarding a new proposal that aims to impose a staggering 50 percent inheritance tax on estates valued over CHF 50 million. If approved, this measure would launch Switzerland to the forefront of global inheritance tax systems, aligning it with some of the highest rates seen across Europe. However, this proposal doesn't come without significant debate and concern. Why Swiss Voters Should Be Skeptical The plan, initially proposed by the Young Socialists group, is drawing skepticism as many believe it could lead to adverse economic effects and hinder the financial autonomy that Swiss cantons currently enjoy. Unlike in most European countries, Switzerland operates a cantonal tax system that allows for moderate inheritance taxes, providing benefits to close heirs while fostering tax competition among regions. Moving towards a federal taxation system threatens this competitive landscape. The Risks of High-Pressure Taxation One of the core criticisms of the 50 percent tax rate is its potential to force families to sell valuable assets just to meet tax liabilities, which undermines the continuity of family businesses and could lead to financial instability for many households. Economic history tells us that heavy taxation on inheritance can prompt wealthier individuals to relocate, with potentially detrimental impacts on the Swiss economy, including capital flight. Lessons from Other Nations Countries such as Spain have attempted to centralize inheritance taxes, only to face backlash and subsequent reductions of these rates to avoid economic dislocation. This move by Switzerland raises alarms, emulating strategies that have proven unpopular and economically harmful elsewhere. Instead of creating more revenue for social programs, high rates often end in taxpayers shunning their inheritances and minimizing their contributions to the economy. Final Thoughts Switzerland is currently navigating a challenging crossroads. The proposed inheritance tax not only threatens to undermine the cherished principles of local governance and fiscal autonomy but could also be economically counterproductive. As voters prepare to cast their ballots, it’s imperative that they consider the broader implications of such a tax.

11.20.2025

Delaware's Proposal to Decouple from OBBBA: What It Means for Innovation

Update What Delaware's Decoupling Proposal Means for Local Businesses As Delaware Governor Matt Meyer calls for a special session to consider decoupling from provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), local businesses are left wondering how this will impact their growth and competitiveness. The proposed move to eliminate immediate expensing of research and development costs could place additional strain on companies trying to innovate in a tough economic climate. Unpacking the Full Expensing Debate The concept of full expensing and immediate deduction of R&D costs has been a cornerstone of the federal tax code since 1954. This change allows businesses to quickly reinvest in new technologies and equipment, boosting productivity and supporting job creation. Without these provisions, Delaware risks becoming less appealing to businesses focused on cutting-edge innovations. Governor Meyer cites a projected revenue shortfall as justification for the proposal, but it may indeed dissuade businesses from investing in the state. The Long-Term Costs of Short-Term Gains While Meyer argues for immediate fiscal responsibility, the broader implications of this decoupling could be detrimental. Immediate expensing supports a dynamic economy, encourages R&D investments, and ultimately leads to higher revenues through economic activity. A temporary focus on budget shortfalls might blind Delaware’s leaders to the substantial long-term economic benefits that accompany a stable and innovation-friendly tax environment. Historical Context: Delaware's Tax Competitiveness Delaware’s ranking in the Tax Foundation's State Tax Competitiveness Index has dropped recently, raising concerns about its attractiveness to businesses. Currently sitting at 24th, the state has the opportunity to reverse this trend by remaining aligned with federal provisions that support business development. By decoupling, Delaware risks losing its edge over neighboring states that offer more favorable tax conditions. Encouraging Innovation in the Face of Adversity Innovation is the backbone of economic growth. Eliminating immediate expensing for R&D could significantly hamper the capabilities of local firms, especially smaller entities that rely on quick returns to fund their projects. As competition intensifies for a limited pool of researchers and funding, Delaware’s economic fabric could fray if policymakers don’t carefully reconsider this proposal. What's Next? A Call to Action for Stakeholders As discussions unfold in Delaware, it’s crucial for business owners, entrepreneurs, and locals to voice their concerns over the implications of this potential decoupling. Engaging with policymakers and advocating for a tax regime that supports innovation could foster a more sustainable economic environment. The discourse on taxes and their impact on businesses should not only focus on immediate financial implications but also incorporate the long-term growth potential of a vibrant, innovation-driven economy.

11.19.2025

Debunking the Promise of Tariff Dividends: Costs Outweigh Revenues

Update Understanding the Impact of Proposed Tariff Dividends on Our Economy The notion of providing $2,000 'tariff dividends' to low- and middle-income Americans, as proposed by President Trump, raises important questions about the sustainability and impacts of these payments. While President Trump envisions using the revenues generated from increased tariffs to fund these dividends, the reality is much more complex and financially burdensome. The Cost of Tariff Dividends: A Closer Look Recent models project that these dividend payments could cost between $279.8 billion to a staggering $606.8 billion, significantly overshadowing the anticipated revenue from the tariffs, which is estimated to be only $158.4 billion in 2025. Essentially, every proposed design for the dividend would absorb all available tariff revenues, indicating a concerning imbalance. The Realities Behind Tariff revenues It is crucial to understand that the revenue generated by tariffs is not as straightforward as it seems. As outlined in various economic analyses, while $117 billion has been collected from tariffs so far, the effective revenue for the government is reduced due to the income and payroll tax offset. This offset occurs because tariff collections effectively shrink the overall tax base by taking money out of the economy before it reaches households. Potential Long-Term Financial Consequences Should these $2,000 dividends be paid out annually, the long-term implications could be dire. The estimated budgetary cost for a scheme that issued such payments annually could climb to nearly $6 trillion over ten years, which threatens to exacerbate the already precarious national debt situation. In contrast, eliminating tariffs altogether might offer a more sustainable solution for economic relief. Looking Forward: What Should Policymakers Consider? As negotiations around taxation and spending continue, it becomes evident that careful consideration must guide any decisions regarding tariff dividends. With the national debt approaches its maximum threshold, the focus should ideally shift towards measures that responsibly reduce deficits rather than initiate potentially reckless financial moves. In summary, while the idea of providing monetary relief through tariff dividends may resonate with many, it is crucial for policymakers to consider the broader economic ramifications and the need for responsible fiscal planning.

Examining North Carolina's Tax Proposal: Will It Truly Help Workers?

North Carolina's Bold Tax Proposal: A Closer Look

Understanding the Impact on Workers

Economic Consequences of Favoritism in Tax Policies

Looking Ahead: The Risks and Rewards

Terms of Service

Privacy Policy

Core Modal Title