Corporations v Real Citizens

I received an email today, which had a very interesting graphic:

(Please click to enlarge)

Dear MoveOn member, A few weeks ago, Senator Bernie Sanders released a list of the 10 companies worst at paying their fair share in taxes. We liked it, and our designer Gabe quickly put it into chart form and put it up on our website. What happened next was exciting: Tens of thousands of people started sharing the chart on Facebook. Blogs started posting links to it. It began to really blow up—and that gave us an idea: What if we could get this popular chart in front of millions of people today as they're finishing their taxes?

Sarah Palin is really keen on repaying the national debt and balancing the budget. She said so in Wisconsin this weekend. But her way of doing things places the burden on the "little people" by freezing salaries and cutting services. In her book, corporate "citizens" are more worthy than the little people.

Corporate "citizens" are very enthusiastic about the new status conferred on them by the Supreme Court when it comes to meddling in politics, but not so much when it comes to their civic duties, like paying their taxes.

Sarah Palin is not on the side of the people. She's on the side of her corporate paymasters and her own self, now that she has joined the economic elite...

Sarah Palin's attorney doesn't know the laws of the state

We're all very excited that the story about Sarah Palin's property taxes has reached the national media. It's great to see Jeanne Devon's efforts and dedication to the truth achieve wider exposure. Mudflats is a fantastic blog, always honest and well researched.

I selected the article from MSNBC. Let's focus on Van Flein's response:

Palin's attorney, Thomas Van Flein, said it is not the responsibility of property owners to report structures that go up on their land.

"It is the borough's job," he said in an e-mail. "The property taxes on this parcel are fully paid and have never been delinquent."

Nobody said the Palins were delinquent in paying the taxes based on the existing assessment of the value of the property. They were delinquent in not informing the borough about the building of the structures and accepted the valuation of $0.00 for years, knowing that they were worth considerably more than that.

Dave Dunivan, the assessor for the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, said owners are required by state law to report any omissions or errors in their tax assessments.

At least one of the cabins was built in 2006, very likely during the summer. Sarah Palin took her oath to serve as governor of the state of Alaska in December 2006. She represented the state and one would presume part of her job would be to ensure that state laws are upheld.

Is her attorney really twisting state law in defending his client? Van Flein said the exact opposite of what state law requirements are in this case. The least one could expect from the highest state official is that she would obey the laws of that state.

One would also expect her lawyer to inform himself a bit better about the law before making erroneous statements.

AS 29.45.180(a) requires the taxpayer who receives an assessment notice to advise the assessor of errors or omissions in the assessment of property.

As we have all realized by now, laws apply to other people, not to Sarah Palin and her family...

+++

We have just received word that this story has now reached the international media as well. It's everywhere!

.

Sarah Palin's gift to Alaska

The recent teabagging parties and the inept parallels with the original Boston Tea Party, when the slogan was "No taxation without representation", made me think of Alaska and the fact that there are no personal state taxes, a case of representation without taxation?

The state of Alaska relies almost entirely on big oil taxes and federal money. The voting public is left out of it, always with the promise of never having to pay taxes to the state.

In the thirty years I lived in the UK, I paid income tax to the central government and a local tax based on property. These taxes provided me with services and also gave me and the rest of the taxpayers a voice. We could demand services because we were paying for them. We had a louder voice when holding elected officials accountable for their decisions about how they spent our money. Their responses were not always wonderful, but at least they had to listen.

In Alaska, because the revenue is not personalized, the services provided are seen as some kind of "gift" from the state. So the voting public have difficulty in finding their voices when they demand services. The underlying message from the state goes something like this: "You should be grateful for what we provide, you don't pay for any of it!"

That's part of the fallacy of Sarah Palin's "small government". No taxes, no services, no responsibility.

Small government creates low expectations. The state provides the bare minimum and the individual is expected to take responsibility for their own health, welfare, etc.

Going back to the earlier example about having a voice as a taxpayer, it seems that the only people with a voice in Alaska are the big oil companies.

They pay big bucks and expect something in return. They get infrastructure projects and the state fighting their battles in federal courts so they can continue to destroy the environment and wildlife in order to make larger profits. They are happy to pay tax!

I know that paying taxes goes against the grain, but perhaps the voting public in Alaska should consider if they are really so lucky not to pay taxes to the state...

"He who pays the piper calls the tune."
.