








To put this into a broader context, a Wall Street Journal editorial published this past Saturday was solely devoted to Connecticut's tax burden. The editorial indicated that Connecticut collects $7,007 in state and local taxes per "man, woman and child resident." According to the Tax Foundation, this is more per capita than every state but New York and New Jersey. This has contributed to Connecticut businesses having hired zero net new workers since 1992 while the U.S. has added 22 million new jobs. "As the tax burden has surged the state has lost population to other states in every year in the last decade except one." The editorial focuses on Connecticut's income tax. However, the city of Stamford is a key contributor to this rising tax burden of Stamford residents.
What are we receiving for these high taxes? In Stamford, we are facing many issues, including a need to improve the city schools, roads that are in need of repair, a Police Department that needs to be overhauled, etc.
The motto is Stamford is the "City that Works." It works for the municipal workers who have been getting nice wage and pension increases, and many of them aren't Stamford taxpayers. It has not been working for many overburdened Stamford property-tax payers.
As this election approaches, we need to understand the mayoral candidates' positions on these fiscal issues. How can they provide needed services without continuing to overburden property-tax payers? So far, candidate Michael Pavia has indicated he will hold the line on several municipal worker contracts that are currently up for renewal, which is a good first step. Candidate Martin indicated he is studying the contract renewal situation. We need to know much more about how they and the candidates for the Board of Representatives will handle these fiscal issues including taxes. These issues have to be addressed now. We don't want Stamford facing a budget crisis in its future, further overburdening its property-tax payers.


President Barack Obama wants to boost income taxes for the wealthy to pay for tax cuts for everybody else. He wants to limit the deductions that high-income families take for mortgage interest and charity contributions to help pay for providing more people with health insurance.
House Democrats are planning to hit the wealthy with even higher income taxes to pay for their version of a health care overhaul.
Between the plans, a family of four with an income of $5 million a year would see its annual income taxes skyrocket by more than $440,000. A similar family making $800,000 a year would get a tax increase of $30,000, according to an analysis by the financial services firm Deloitte Tax.
"I still think being wealthy is better than being poor," Clint Stretch, who heads tax policy at Deloitte Tax, said with a touch of understatement. "But this is a pretty high proposed tax burden."
Taxing the rich to pay for health insurance would represent a significant departure from the way Americans have financed safety net programs in the past.
Both Social Security and Medicare are supported by broad based payroll taxes. Although the rich pay more—they have bigger incomes—the burden is shared by the middle class and even the working poor.
By contrast, the health care plan working its way through the
House would impose $544 billion in new taxes over the next decade on
just 1.2 percent of households—joint filers making more than $350,000 a
year.