Quinn Has Her Own Income Tax Plan

Christine C. Quinn

City Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn plans to propose on Thursday that Albany raise the income tax on people making more than $300,000 a year as a way to generate $1 billion. And if that happens, she wants $72 million of the new revenue to pay for her proposal to eliminate personal income taxes for low-income families in New York City who owe no state or federal income taxes.

The proposals are wholly dependent, of course, on what Albany does. But they also suggest that there could be tough negotiations with Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg over how to plug a $4 billion budget deficit.

In his budget proposal last month, Mr. Bloomberg urged that Albany raise the city’s sales tax by 0.25 percentage points, to 8.625 percent, among other ideas. But in excerpts from her remarks to be delivered in her annual State of the City address Thursday, Ms. Quinn says that the city’s income tax structure is outdated, and that the working poor have been bearing too much of the burden. So she has come up with a plan, together with City Councilman David Yassky of Brooklyn and the Drum Major Institute for Public Policy.

“We’re not afraid to ask those who’ve gotten the most from New York City, to give a little back when times get tough,” according to excerpts from her planned speech. “And for New Yorkers on the other end of the spectrum, we need to offer some relief.”

Under the income tax plan, the pretax rate on household incomes from $297,000 to $532,000 would jump to 4.25 percent from 3.683 percent, or an annual increase of $374. For households earning $532,000 to $1.2 million, the extra annual tax would be $5,571, and for those over $1.2 million, $19,066.

Over all, the bill applies to 4 percent of taxpayers.

“It’s shameful,” according to an excerpt from her speech. “Bernie Madoff pays the exact same tax rate as a public school principal. That’s not sharing the burden. It’s a slap in the face.”

Meanwhile, the tax break for low-income families would cover roughly 224,200 households with taxable incomes under $45,000, a level that is too low to owe federal or state income taxes, but still have to pay the city income taxes.

But under Ms. Quinn’s proposal, households receiving the proposed credit would save an average of $321.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

Perfect! It’s about time for fairness and not equality.

She is a complete idiot. First of all, the same tax rate on the principal and Madoff would yield different taxes- a percentage of a lower income vs a percentage of a higher income. Secondly, her comments about people who earn more should start giving back- they already have, in the form of paying much more in taxes than anyone else. That is how she and her council members make their salaries.

anyone making more than 500k should pay 40% back in taxes.

NO ONE needs that amount of ‘wealth’

But don’t the people earning under $45,000 rely the most on City services?<>

I’m thinking schools (and related things like meals), public parks and recreational facilities etc

If you remove the concept of taxpayer for the lower income – you effectively put them on welfare.

Ask the working class if they want to be on welfare – I think you’ll find the answer is a resounding “NO!”.

Once again, the misguided old 20 Century “white guilt” liberalism rears it’s ugly head in NYC. I am so glad I moved my legal residence out of this town 25 years ago!

First, whatever happened to the investigations about Ms. Quinn’s curious and peculiar allocation of funds. It’s been months since we’ve heard anything new, and it sure looks like she’s skating.

And second, the NYC proposal for an increase in sales tax isn’t 0.25 percent. That’s a public relations phrase used to sell it as being minimal.

The right way to describe the increase is as a percentage of the current number. Since NYC’s current rate is 4 percent (the rest is 4 percent to NYS and an additional 0.375 percent “allocated” to transit), that small sounding 0.25 percent is actually… a 6.25 percent increase in NYC’s rate.

I am also glad I left NYC. Everyone should pay tax toward the city. 5% of a million and 5% of 10,000 mean entirely different things. The city is on a one way trip back to the 70s as they tax everyone out at the same time jobs leave. Good luck to all of you unlucky enough to still reside in NY state. BTW, why do city councilor make almost 120K plus bonus for committee appointments for a part time job? Quinn should start by not taking a salary for her “work”.

Basing tax arguments on fairness is nonsense.

I come from Finland, and according to statistics, a person has 300% more chance to raise a social class in Finland then in the US. Our tax goes till 70% for the rich, and we have great (admittedly clumsy) social programs, like free hospitals, dental services, unemployment funds, student allowances, student loans etc.
The original logic behind our system is that in a capitalistic society capital rules, and you can’t stop the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. Most of the people are short on capital, so their destiny (as a % of society) is clear. Instead of state propaganda in the line of “land of opportunities” we opted for outlawing elite collages and universities, and providing security (food, clothes, and shelter). This has led to us having the worlds most effective school system, and a slower raise in income gap, and few dangerous neighborhoods.
The pity in relation to the US is that if someone wants to feed the poor, people go crazy, but if someone makes tax cuts for the rich, or gives a trillion to banks, or looses a few trillion in the pentagon (Rumsfeldt), nobody is as worried.

Google “decline in private profit” to get an idea where this ‘fairness’ is leading the world.

It’s about time that the wealthy shoulder their fair share.

Sales taxes and MTA fare increases disproportionally affect moderate income and poor New Yorkers. And many hard working New Yorkers do not bring in salaries of over even $100,000, let alone the $300,000 mentioned above, even with more than one job.

Quit whining, rich guys, and pull your own share – working New Yorkers are sick of carrying you.

In response to the other Mike… who are we to decide who “needs” a certain amount of money?

Part of the wealth envy in this country comes from a fatalism that opposes the American concept of opportunity that brings people here from all over the world. Just because you don’t have the skills, education, determination, ambition, and desire for risk that it takes to be an executive doesn’t mean that you have the right to limit those who do.

When a baseball player gets $10 million a year, it’s because he’s got the talent to improve the chances that the team will do well and people will want to buy tickets, licensed merchandise, and the products that advertisers sell on broadcast games. When an executive gets $10 million a year, it should be for the same criteria – they’re adding to the company’s ability to make revenue.

When the company loses money overall, how many of those high-paid people actually added to the bottom line, preventing it from being worse? That’s the question to be asked when recalculating compensation, not whether anyone “needs” that much money, or whether it’s “fair.”

Despite being a small-government conservative, I agree with the idea of shifting the tax burden away from people whose incomes are so low that they don’t pay federal or state income tax. The administrative expense of handling those returns isn’t much smaller than for people who pay in thousands of dollars, so this would reduce that cost as well. It might also encourage lower-income workers to live in the city as opposed to the suburbs, which, in the case of New York City, could be in another state.

At least Quinn isn’t following the state legislature in branding high-income people as “rich.” $300,000 in household income in Manhattan isn’t rich, it’s upper-middle-class.

ClarksonForPresident February 12, 2009 · 9:11 am

If Finland’s so great, why are you here?

A person living in new york city that makes 90,000 pays an effective tax rate of 39%……


So enact a 10% supertax on the earnings of politicians and parasite government “workers”.

plays a tax guy on local cable access February 12, 2009 · 10:49 am

“Meanwhile, the tax break for low-income families would cover roughly 224,200 households with taxable incomes under $45,000 _ a level that is too low to owe Federal or State income taxes, but still have to pay the city income taxes.”

Better check your facts again. $45K taxable income — or even $1K, for that matter — hardly escapes Fed. or state income taxes. Hint: that’s why it’s called “taxable income”…

Even if you meant to write “adjusted gross income”, still no free pass, in general… unless your household happens to claim a crazy number of exemptions or unusually high itemized deductions or other credits.

High personal income taxes don’t redistribute income, they redistribute people. I lived in the NY metropolitan area in the 1970’s and cleary recall the results of the line of thinking being touted by Quinn and the rest of her ilk in Albany. The primary contributing factor to the current situation was the reliance on tax collections from high income earners in the financial sector which are now gone and unlikely to return. Tax policy based on envy is a dangerous and ruinous path and will leave everyone less well off.

To George, commenter #4, while people making less require more in city services, people making more require…the labor of those making less! In lieu of providing a higher income to employees we, as a society, ask that people who are better off pay a greater share of their income so we can provide the services that the employers neglect to provide. Without this system in place, the economy breaksdown.

As for paying a flat tax rate regardless of income, it is better not to think of the amount you are giving but rather what you are left with – essentially, what is your buying power. For someone making $50,000, having 10% taken out leaves you with $45,000 of buying power, while somone making $1M paying that rate has $900K of buying power left. At the bottom level, there is a fixed cost of living, a point beyond which someone simply cannot live in this City. The person making $1M never reaches this bottom limit so their tax rate is hardly a burden, but for that person who now only has $45K left, it hurts a lot more. So even if the richer person pays a 50% tax, they are still left with $500K, and a considerably more buying power. It would be unfair to tax the rich person to make his/her buying equal to that of the poorer person, but imminentaly fair to take a chunk in taxes while maintaining strong buying power. Plus, that richer person could not make that level of money without the labor of someone making less. But to allow the person making less to even be able to live close enough to their job (e.g. in NYC), certain social and physical infrastructure pieces need to exist, like mass transit and public education, and that needs to be subsidized by those making mire.

I guess Quinn doesn’t need Bloomie anymore. Who needs big pro-development money when the tide of public opinion has shifted. Maybe they’ll just ignore her poor record and flip-flopping if she caters enough to populism.

Hope everyone enjoyed NYC in the 70’s and 80’s, because that’s where we’ll be when the financial industry and its associated tax revenue has been driven to New Jersey and Connecticut once and for all. But in the meantime, by all means let’s wave our fists in the air and shout “off with their heads”. It feels so good to have people to blame.

I’m sure Ms. Quinn et al welcome the opportunity to deflect attention away from themselves for their short-sighted reliance on inflated Wall Street wages as budget-filler for the past decade. It’s like a drunk driver blaming InBev for making him go to the bar – a pretty neat trick if it works. Bravo, Ms. Quinn, bravo.

Perley J. Thibodeau February 12, 2009 · 2:12 pm

Ya gotta admit that Christine Quinn is real good at creative book keeping!

Perley J. Thibodeau February 12, 2009 · 3:30 pm

Tune in tomorrow to the Chef’s Network for the Christine Quinn Show.
Ms. Quinn will be showing her viewers how to cook books!

Someone said that her wording is a public relations scheme. I don’t agree with this ideal. The definition of public relations is as follows: The managment function which evaluates public attitudes, identifies policies and procedures of an individual or organization, with the public interest, and plans, executes, and evaluates a program of action to earn public understanding and acceptance. What she is doing is trying to scam using pretty words. This may be benefiting the lower income group, but is doing nothing to help the higher income group. Anyone here who is agreeing that the rich should pay would be saying something entirely different if you were in the position of having that money- you’d view it as an injustice and against the ideals we’ve set up as Americans. I’m not making anywhere near 300K, but I don’t think they need to pay more because they’re ‘higer up’ in work class. Nobody should be penalized for working hard. This isn’t a socialist country.

Memo to Mzzzzz. Quinn: Socialism doesn’t work. Never has. Never will. You’re running out of worker bees(those that are productive). You can’t keep dividing those bees into the money you whizz off. Everything will grind to a halt eventually. I’m sure you thought of that already. Keep up the good work comrad

I have been on an executive board of a corporation for a couple of years, and I don’t see that ‘hard work’ people rant about. Long hours? sure, but hard work? We operate with capital and power. Before the corporation I was in Europe’s biggest IT market research company, we sold data to big companies that could be used to crush their weaker competitors. This is a capitalistic society and a lazy idiot with a billion will outrun a wizz kid with 10$ any day (even in a country like Finland with high taxes).
It’s a strange world where the poor argue for their right to get poorer, the issue of how much money the government uses is secondary to who it uses the money on, and how. I guess many Americans prefer the government paying food and housing to prisoners, rather then support ghettos with necessities for development.
Just remember that statisticians can predict success and failure rates in society, and they are not based on hours of work or study.

Are we, the taxpaying public still paying Ms.Quinn’s gas bill for her SUV including her weekend trips to the Hamptons?

Are New York government pensions still exempt from state and city income tax? If so, it’s time for the retired bureaucrats to pay their fair share. How many more corporate headquarters would the city and state like to lose? How many more financial types would they like to chase out to Connecticut?