Surrounded by jewelers and their lobbyist, Senate President Pro Tempore Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, patiently listened to complaints about a proposed new luxury tax. He nodded sympathetically. Then he shook his head.
No, Williams said, he is not interested in revising the tax package that was approved last week by the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and is speeding to a vote by the full Senate no later than Tuesday.
"We have an agreement with the governor," Williams said. End of story.
Variations of that scene played out Wednesday all over the State Capitol. Jewelers, car dealers and others affected by the tax package buttonholed lawmakers in the Capitol's halls, pleading their case. Some came with lobbyists, others without.
Scenes like those are why Williams committed to a quick vote on the budget deal. Once reported out of committee, tax and spending plans get picked apart, drawing opposition the way a dead carp draws flies.
Williams said the leaders of the legislature's Democratic majority promised Gov. Dannel P. Malloy earlier Wednesday that they would schedule votes on the budget no later than Tuesday.
Nothing that occurred Wednesday night in House and Senate Democratic caucuses on the budget seemed to upset that timetable.
"It could be Friday, but most like Monday or Tuesday of next week," Williams said.
Williams was confronted by the jewelers as he made the short walk from his third-floor corner office to the Senate, passing dozens of lobbyists standing on the other side of a velvet rope that gives lawmakers a clear path.
Joe Hebert, the owner of Hebert Jewelers of Milford, said after Williams left that a 7 percent tax on jewelry costing more than $5,000 would drive more of his business to the internet, especially diamond engagement rings.
"I'm scared," said Hebert, who runs his shop with his wife and daughter. "It's another nail in the coffin."
One floor below, lobbyist Bill Malitsky approached Rep. Patricia M. Widlitz, D-Guilford, the unflappable co-chair of the Finance committee, arguing against a tax on cosmetic surgery.
Malitsky says some cosmetic procedures are a treatment for serious medical ailments, such as lesions caused by AIDS. They should not be taxable, nor should tax officials have access to medical records necessary to collect the tax, he says.
Standing near an elevator outside the House, Widlitz seemed to listen sympathetically and patiently. But she gave the same answer as Williams: There is no desire to open up the tax package, inviting a barrage of requests for similar consideration.
"There is something in this budget for everyone not to like," Widlitz said. "The longer it hangs out there, the more things people find to object."
Wednesday was the first session day since Finance and Appropriations voted their pieces of the budget to the House and Senate floors. Having had time to analyze the revised budget, lobbyists, clients and legislators took the opportunity to raise objections, Widlitz said.
"This is piñata day. Everyone is taking their shot," said Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk. "You basically had every special interest descending on the Capitol."
Duff didn't have to make the long drive to Hartford to get lobbied. He didn't even have to leave his bed. An employee of New Country Porsche of Greenwich, where a 2011 Cayenne Turbo is available for $99,995, called him early at his home to express displeasure over the 7 percent luxury tax on automobiles costing more than $50,000.
"It was 5:53 a.m. to be exact. The gentleman told me his name and started going right into it," Duff said. When Duff noted the hour and that he still was in bed, the caller apologized. He called later to say he thought he had called a business number.
Duff, whose district includes economically diverse Norwalk and some of Connecticut's richest citizens in neighboring Darien, said he wasn't angry.
"It's everybody's right to lobby and talk about issues that affect them personally," Duff said. "I understand their argument. I completely understand their argument."
The luxury tax was inserted into the budget to accommodate Democrats who complained that too much of a $1.5 billion tax increase, now trimmed to $1.4 billion, proposed by Malloy fell on the middle class.
Duff dug in earlier on other proposed taxes, such as a tax on airplanes and applying the sales tax to boats and marine services. He called those taxes job killers. They eventually were removed from the revised budget, but the luxury tax remains.
"The car dealers also got a plum in the budget by removing the tax on the trade-ins," Duff said. "Nobody can get 100 percent here."
Ken Crowley, a prominent central Connecticut car dealer, loitered outside the Senate, looking for legislators to lobby. He appreciates that Malloy and the legislators relented on the plan to assess a sales tax on the value of trade-ins.
But he said that $50,000 is too low a threshold for a so-called luxury tax, and many buyers of high-end cars have homes out of state, where they might buy and register their cars.
Next to the Capitol, in the cafeteria of the Legislative Office Building, a dozen owners of online businesses met to discuss how to fight the so-called "Amazon tax," a requirement that online merchants collect the sales tax.
The budget would require such collections if the company has a physical presence in Connecticut, or if it does business through an affiliate located in the state.
Vin Villano, the owner of Clarus Marketing of Middletown, said owners of online businesses in Connecticut do not object to the concept of Internet transactions being subjected to the sale tax. Their concern is that Amazon and other big players do.
To avoid having to collect the tax, the big boys are threatening to terminate partnerships with Connecticut companies like Clarus. It is how they responded in other states with Amazon taxes.
"We believe 25 percent to 30 percent of our revenues disappear overnight," said Villano, whose company expanded last year from 20 to 25 employees. "We're collateral damage."
Widlitz and Rep. Toni E. Walker, D-New Haven, the co-chair of the Appropriations Committee, said any changes in the spending or tax packages will come only if agreed to by the governor and legislative leaders.
"Those decisions are at a higher level than the committee chairs," Widlitz said.
It's a tax that any wealthy individual can subvert anyhow.
You don't think they will buy their jewelery out of state.
Please just raise the tax on their capital gains and dividends.
People that punch a time clock pay more in their income tax then these rich folks do sitting home and watching their capital gains and dividends grow.
Just a bunch of you know what.
"Joe Hebert, the owner of Hebert Jewelers of Milford, said after Williams left that a 7 percent tax on jewelry costing more than $5,000 would drive more of his business to the internet, especially diamond engagement rings." --- Good luck to anyone stupid enough to buy a diamond ring on the internet. What a stupid statement.
I'll leave to others to judge the wisdom of buying diamonds on the net, but it is a growing business. One of the bigger companies, Blue Nile, just reported a 13 percent quarterly growth in net income over the previous year, from $5.44 million to $6.18 million.
We have a much bigger problem then the ones mentioned here. Malloy keeps mentioning increased taxes of $1.5 billion. I have heard from a very,very reputable source that the total tax increas is approximately $2.5 billion. I have tried to obtain an answer for over two weeks from the so called impartial Office of Fiscal Analysis without luck.If I am right and it is really $2.5 billion then the state workers do not have to give up one cent for the budget to balance. Why hasen't anyone challenged the $1.5 billion.
My figures are as follows.
Income tax
Read MoreI have to laugh at this let's tax the rich some more as the solution to all our problems. I understand that the top 1% already pay some 47% of the taxes in CT. As we continue to raise taxes and drive money and jobs out of the state who do you think is hurt? The rich, who when they get sick enough of the foolishness, up and leave taking jobs with them - remember many are small business owners, or the working class who lose jobs. Think I'm kidding - take a look at the record.
Read MoreDave548 Please spare me the rich pay more.
If your argument is that they pay more because they make more,
my reply to any millionaire or billionaire as a middle class individual,
"You can pay what I pay in taxes but you have to make what I make in income". "I will gladly swap places with you any day and gladly pay your taxes and more".
belltro is dead on
Krugman highlights this with a graph showing that taxes is well aligned with income: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/22/zombie-tax-lies/
Perhaps Dave believes that the poor are "luckie duckies" because they don't pay taxes...
More taxes to chase out rich are not what is needed.
NC loses Amazon-Amazon all but told South Carolina goodbye Wednesday after the online retailer lost a legislative showdown on a sales tax collection exemption it wants to open a distribution center that would bring 1,249 jobs to the Midlands.
Company officials immediately halted plans to equip and staff the one million-square-foot building under construction at I-77 and 12th Street near Cayce.
“As a result of today’s unfortunate House vote, we’ve canceled $52 million in procurement contracts and removed all South Carolina fulfillment center job postings from our (Web) site,”
Read MoreA difference of $1 in the price of a $50,000 car can lead to paying about $325 more in taxes (the entire price at 7% instead of 6.35% if I am understanding the proposal correctly). The Governor's original approach on the luxury tax was better.
There is a big difference between raising the capital gains and dividends tax at the federal level than at the state level. Raising it at the state level, where it is currently taxed in a similar way as wages, will make the state less competitive.
You are correct. The original proposal was a surcharge only on the incremental costs above $50,000 for a car. This luxury tax applies to the first dollar, so the difference of a dollar in price could trigger a higher tax on the entire amount.
belltro and Sammy, check your chart, the top 20% already pay more than their share of earnings so that the bottom 60% don't have to; but you seem to have missed the point:
It's the working class that are the most dependant on jobs in the state to make a living. If your rich enough your investments are spread around the nation and even the world. This tax, tax, tax mentality - along with regulate, regulate, regulate - here in Connecticut has already cost us over 40% of our manufacturing jobs in the last 20 years. Now
Read MoreGas taxes- http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2011/04/27/gasoline-taxes-vs-exxon-p...
"The map above from API shows gasoline taxes by state (combined local, state and federal), which range from a low of 26.4 cents per gallon in Alaska to a high of of 66.1 cents per gallon in California, averaging 48.1 cents per gallon across all states. How does that compare to oil company industry profits per gallon?"
According to this post on Exxon Mobil's Perspective Blog , "For every gallon of gasoline, diesel or finished products we manufactured and sold in the United States in the last three months of 2010, we earned a little more than
How is it that plain old cops make 0$200,000/yr? OT? That's fine..but here's the catch..pensions should NOT take OT into consideration when calculated. Yet the unions negotiate this deal all the time..We cannot afford it, nor should we.
These tax increases effect mostly the middle class..home prices, which is the the largest investment the middle class makes are going to suffer continued housing price decreases with these tax increases. With this now being the worst state to live as far a s property and state taxes..u have to keep reducing the sales price..
It's now the worst state to do
Read MoreDave 548 you miss the entire point of Krugmans graph which is that the rich do not pay more than everyone else.
Look at the graph for all the other income levels.
It shows that when income is compared to taxes paid it is in almost equal
ratios for all incomes.