Hagan under fire on temporary taxes

Submitted by ryanteaguebeckwith on September 17, 2008 - 12:44pm.
Tags: | | | | | | | | |

Kay Hagan is under fire for the temporary taxes.

Two new ads by the National Republican Senatorial Committee and Americans for Prosperity attack the Democratic Senate candidate for her vote for the 2001 budget.

That year, the state faced a revenue shortfall because of the poor economy. To make up the losses, Gov. Mike Easley proposed two temporary tax hikes that August.

Under the final plan approved by the legislature, the sales tax rose by a half cent and the income tax on the wealthy — single taxpayers making more than $120,000 or married couples making more than $200,000 — went up a half of a percent.

The taxes were supposed to sunset in 2003 and 2005, but lawmakers extended them, eventually phasing out all but a quarter-cent in sales tax increases in 2007.

Hagan served as a budget writer from 2003 to 2007.

You must be logged in to post a comment on this blog. If you already have an N&O online user account, click here to log in. Otherwise, click here to register (it's free!).

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Hagan under fire on temporary taxes

Submitted by ryanteaguebeckwith on September 17, 2008 - 4:31pm.

You raise an interesting question on terminology. I borrowed the language for this from a previous post, but I'll look into it more as I continue checking this ad.

— RTB 

» login to post comments

Re: Hagan under fire on temporary taxes

Submitted by piperscot on September 17, 2008 - 4:25pm.

RTB,

Glad to see that you're the arbiter of who is wealthy by assigning that description to someone making $120,000. I notice that you didn't point out that the sales tax hit the poor, the middle, the top. All regardless of income. Wealth and income are two distinct subjects. I can be the wealthiest person in Chapel Hill with very little income and therefore the income tax increase doesn't touch me. Conversely, I can have a negative net worth, live in a modest home, drive a nice car, paying off my college loans and not save a dime on $120K income a year. Have you seen the income tax rates on single filers? You should have defined the income tax increase as affecting higher income earners.

» login to post comments