Too Small to Keep
-
Upload
heath-w-fahle -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Too Small to Keep
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
1/12
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
2/12
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
3/12
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
4/12
(July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012). These items are actually 371 revenue accounts into
which the state deposits the myriad taxes and fees it collects. The number of taxes
and fees the state actually collects is much more difficult to ascertain, since many of
the revenue accounts hold money from a number of sources, and those accounts and
sources frequently change.
The vast majority of Connecticuts taxes and fees produce a very small amount of the
state governments overall revenue. For fiscal year 2012, the bottom 200 taxes and
fees generated just $22 million. Put another way, fifty-three percent of revenue sources
produce one-tenth of one percent of the states revenue.
This poses a practical question: Is it cost-effective to administer 200 taxes and fees that
raise so little revenue?
Much attention is paid to the cost of the tax system on taxpayers, who spend 6.1 billion
hours or approximately $168 billion each year complying with the federal tax code
according to the IRS (IRS, 2012, pp. 5-6). Less attention is paid to the tax collectors
cost, the administrative costs associated with generating revenue for the government.
In this Yankee Institute study, we examine the administrative costs of tax collection
to identify whether it is cost-effective to collect taxes and fees that produce very little
revenue. We review efforts that other states have taken to quantify administrative costs,
estimate the costs of collection for Connecticuts taxes and fees by state agency, and
offer recommendations for improving the tax system.
We find it difficult to calculate collection costs because most state agencies do not
collect data on the subject. We did estimate collection costs for five agencies, finding
a range between 24 cents and $20 per $100 collected. We also recognize generally
the challenges associated with identifying such costs. We recommend that state
agencies begin to evaluate administrative costs for each fee they collect as part of the
results-based accountability report cards they generate for the Connecticut General
Assembly. We recommend reform of Connecticuts occupational licensure laws to
eliminate fees and reduce the cost of entering the workforce. Finally, we recommend
the state legislature include an expiration date on all taxes and fees to force a regular
review process.
4
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
5/12
Other States Study Administrative CostsOther states have made an effort to study the administrative costs of taxes and fees.
In 2002, the Washington State Department of Revenue released a draft study on the
administrative costs of the major taxes and fees collected by the state (WashingtonState Department of Revenue, 2002). They found administrative costs on a per $100
collected basis ranged between 3 cents to $61.22, with an average state tax collection
cost of 63 cents.
Washington State also determined the compliance costs for businesses for major taxes.
Those were estimated to be anywhere from 31 cents per $100 remitted up to $6.47 per
$100 remitted.
Colorado releases a yearly estimate of administrative costs in its Department of Revenue
Services annual report (Colorado Department of Revenue, 2012). For 2012 they estimated
administrative costs were $1.17 for every $100 collected. Other states that publishadministrative cost data include Michigan, California and Idaho. These states found
administrative costs as low as 10 cents for the Colorado cigarette and tobacco tax and
as high as $5.88 for Colorados alcoholic beverage tax (Mikesell, 2011).
There is a significant difference between the two measures of administrative costs in the
above studies. The Washington State study, for example, measured the collection cost
for each revenue source while the Colorado annual report identifies the cost of collection
incurred by state agency. This difference changes the measurement from a measure
of cost effectiveness - the cost of a specific tax or fee to a measure of administrative
efficiency, the cost of collecting fees for a specific state agency.
Our Eorts to Study Administrative CostsThe Yankee Institute requested cost of collection data from sixteen state agencies. None
of the twelve agencies that responded had ever heard of previous studies on the topic
nor were most agencies able to provide data sufficient to estimate these costs in terms of
effectiveness.
Subsequent efforts to estimate these costs by agency were also stymied by a lack of
publicly available data. We requested detailed budgets and organizational charts as part
of our request. We received these for some agencies, but others said either that they did
not have detailed organizational charts or did not respond to the request.
Using the information available, we estimated administrative costs for five of the 43
agencies that collect taxes and fees: the Department of Revenue Services, Insurance,
Consumer Protection, Transportation, and the Office of the Secretary of the State.
Combined, these agencies collected $15.8 billion in fiscal year 2012.
5
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
6/12
The Department of
Revenue Services,
the states primary
revenue collectionagency, generated
$16.5 billion of the
$21 billion the state
received in fiscal year
2012. Dividing that
amount by the agencys annual operating budget of almost $65 million, we estimate
administrative costs of 41 cents for every $100 collected.
The Department of Insurance supplied a rough estimate of its own administrative
costs. The department took in revenue of $81.5 million in 2012. Peter Zelez, the fiscal
administrative manager for the department, estimated that the work of collection was
done by one full time employee and took some of the time of several other employees,
or about the equivalent of two full time employees at a cost of $193,800 a year. Based
on this estimate, we calculate the Insurance Department spends about 24 cents for
every $100 collected.
The Department of Consumer Protection, which collects $47.5 million, did not
estimate its own administrative costs. In response to our Freedom of Information request
for data, Claudette Carveth, DCPs director of communications, replied:
We do not have documentation pertaining to taxes and fees that our agency
administers, in part or in whole, that discuss cost-benefit analysis, agency overhead or
the number of FTE associated with the agencys collection costs specific to each tax
and/or fee. This includes reports, datasets, memos or emails, for FY 2012 or any fiscal
year.
Using the detailed organizational charts supplied by the agency, we identified employees
who appear to be involved in revenue collection, including those related to occupational
licensure. Using the salaries of those 54 employees for 2012 found on the state comp-
trollers website, plus their fringe benefits, we estimate a collection cost of $4.84 million,
or $10.20 for every $100 collected.
The Department of Transportation asked the state legislature in 2013 to increase
the fees for outdoor advertising permits, typically meaning billboards. In its request to the
legislature, the agency said that the administrative cost of monitoring the billboards is
$400,000 a year.
Agency
Estimated Cost
of Collection per
$100 collected
Department of Revenue Services $0.41Department of Insurance $0.24
Department of Consumer Protection $10.20
Department of Transportation -
Secretary of the State $20.00
6
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
7/12
In the DOTs legislative proposal for the 2013 session, the department said: The existing
permit fee revenue falls far short of the Departments costs associated with regulating
the outdoor advertising industry. The current permit fees range from $20-$60, and the
department was asking for those to increase to $40-$120.
We asked DOT for the calculation used to determine the administrative costs for
billboards. Wally Lugli, chief of financial management and support for DOT, said:
I was told it was just an estimate, no official study was done (Lugli, 2013).
According to the Secretary of the State, the commercial recording division is
responsible for the agencys collection of taxes and fees. The Secretary of States
Office collected $31.6 million in revenue for 2012. According to the Comptrollers
annual report, the commercial recording division cost $6.3 million to run in 2012 (CT
State Comptroller). Using these figures, the fees collected by the Secretary of State cost
$20 for every $100 collected.
RecommendationsWe find it difficult to calculate collection costs because most state agencies do not
calculate the cost of collecting the taxes and fees they administer nor does it appear
they have much data on the subject. Evaluating specific revenue sources for cost-
effectiveness is impossible in this context.
We recognize the challenges associated with identifying such costs. For example,
are the capital costs associated with the Connecticut Business Response Center/
Licensing Information Center, the states online occupational licensing resource center,
able to be divided among each licensing fee collected on a pro rata basis? Does anemployee whose job description does not include fee-processing count as an
administrative cost if he or she occasionally plays a role in the task anyway? These
are important questions that should be addressed by agency leadership in collaboration
with state employees and legislators.
We recommend state agencies begin to evaluate administrative costs for each fee
collected as part of the results-based accountability report cards they already generate
for the Connecticut General Assembly. State officials should establish and apply
guidelines for calculating administrative costs to all relevant agencies.
We recommend the elimination of certain licensure fees as part of a broader reform of
occupational licensure in Connecticut as described in the recent Yankee paper on the
subject (Murphy).
7
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
8/12
State government already requires licenses for 241 occupations the 15th most in the
nation according to the Institute for Justice. Connecticut is one of just seven states to
license tree trimmers and upholsterers, one of three that license home entertainment
center installers, and the only state that licenses conveyor operators and forest workers.
The Institute also found that nationally, licensing costs entrepreneurs an average of $209
in fees and requires at least one exam and about nine months of training and education
(Carpenter II, Knepper, Erickson, & Ross, 2012).
Many professions currently subject to licensure need not be licensed. In 2012, the state
collected $219,655 in licensing fees from fire sprinkler installers, another $143,990 from
TV repairmen, and $52,839 from interior designers. These licenses often unnecessarily
regulate and intrude on local enterprise and create a barrier to entry for individuals
attempting to enter the workforce.
While necessary in certain circumstances, fees for continuing education courses andexams should be considered for repeal. Exams cost businesses millions of dollars every
year, which are ultimately passed on to consumers as higher prices. Currently these
fees are listed under Other Fees/App/Exam in state documents. The state collected
$9,044,950 in 2012 in these fees from local businesses.
These regulations make it more difficult to live and work in Connecticut. The US Chamber
of Commerce estimated in 2011 that burdensome regulations cost Connecticut more
than 12,000 jobs (US Chamber of Commerce, 2011). Higher taxes and fewer job
opportunities lead many people to look elsewhere for work. Chief Executive magazine
reported that more than 16,000 net residents moved out of state last year, one of the
highest rates in the nation on a per capita basis (Chief Executive Magazine, 2013).
We also recommend that the state legislature include an expiration date on all taxes and
fees to force a regular review process. Requiring that all taxes and fees sunset after a
five or ten year period will force legislators to review each revenue source for cost-
effectiveness and applicability given rapidly changing economic conditions and advent
of new technologies. This heightened scrutiny is warranted and necessary to ensure
Connecticuts financial competitiveness with other states and to promote efficiency.
ConclusionRichie Maderia and thousands of Connecticut residents like him ultimately suffer from
the same challenge: The freedoms and opportunities that were once open to them in
Connecticut are slowly but surely disappearing. A state government that cannot attest
to the cost effectiveness of its own actions is at least part of the problem.
8
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
9/12
The State of Connecticut does not currently know how much it spent to collect $21.4
billion in revenue in fiscal year 2012. We estimate the costs to be between 24 cents
and $20 per $100 collected by agency, offering a rough sketch at best about the
administrative efficiency of each state agency. We were unable to project these costs
on a per revenue source basis to establish cost effectiveness due to a lack of data
collected by the state.
We recommend the establishment of guidelines for calculating administrative costs in
collaboration with state employees; requiring these calculations be included on
results-based accountability report cards; adopting occupational licensure reform to
eliminate certain taxes and fees; and including an expiration date on all legislation
creating a new tax or fee to create a regular process of legislative review in the future.
When adopted, these recommendations will improve lives by expanding personal
freedom and creating new opportunities for growth in Connecticut.
Appendix 1The Yankee Institute requested information on the cost of tax and fee collection from
sixteen state agencies, including:
Department of Insurance
Department of Consumer Protection
Department of Energy and Environmental Protection
Department of Public Health
Department of Administrative Services
Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection Department of Motor Vehicles
Department of Agriculture
Department of Labor
Department of Revenue Services
Connecticut Judicial Branch
Secretary of the State
Office of Chief Medical Examiner
Department of Corrections
Department of Education
Department of Transportation
9
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
10/12
Works CitedCarpenter II, D. M., Knepper, L., Erickson, A. C., & Ross, J. K. (2012). License to Work:
A National Study of Burdens from Occupational Licensing. Washington, DC: Institute for
Justice.
Chief Executive Magazine. (2013, 5 6). The Best and Worst States for Business 2013.
Retrieved 5 15, 2013, from http://chiefexecutive.net/connecticut-is-the-45th-best-state-
for-business-2013
Colorado Department of Revenue. (2012).Annual Reports. Retrieved May 21, 2013,
from Colorado State Government: http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/Revenue-Main/
XRM/1213867975035
CT State Comptroller. (n.d.). Fiscal Year 2012 Annual Report. Retrieved 5 30, 2013, from
CT Office of State Comptroller: http://www.osc.ct.gov/2012annual/pdf/LegalReport2.pdf
IRS. (2012). National Taxpayer Advocate Annual Report to Congress. Taxpayer Advocate.
Washington DC: Internal Revenue Service.
Lugli, W. (2013, February 8). Chief of Financial Management and Support, Connecticut
Department of Transportation. (S. Bates, Interviewer)
Mikesell, J. (2011). Fiscal Administration: Analysis and Applications for the Public Sector
(8th Edition ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Murphy, R. You Didn't Build That. http://www.yankeeinstitute.org/YouDidntBuildThat.pdf.
Yankee Institute .
Revenue, Washington State Department of. (n.d.). Washington State Tax Structure Study.
Retrieved May 21, 2013, from http://dor.wa.gov/content/aboutus/statisticsandreports/
wataxstudy/Simplicity-Findings.pdf
US Chamber of Commerce. (2011, 3 2). U.S Chamber Study Shows States Could
Create Nearly 750,000 Jobs and 50,000 New Businesses by Streamlining Employment
Regulations. Retrieved 5 15, 2013, from http://www.uschamber.com/press/releas-
es/2011/march/us-chamber-study-shows-states-could-create-nearly-750000-jobs-
and-50000-ne
Visit us on Facebook www.facebook.com/yankeeinstitute
10
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
11/12
About the Authors
Heath W. Fahleis the Deputy Director of the Yankee Institute
for Public Policy, where he directs the Institutesoperations, digital outreach, government
transparency efforts, and policy research.
His previous works include two studies on
Connecticuts government-funded campaigns
system: Slanting the Playing Field in October
2009; and Governments Thumb on the Election
Scales in October 2011. He also manages
Yankees government transparency efforts
including the CT Sunlight Project
(www.ctsunlight.org), an online database of
state and local government spending.
His opinion pieces have been featured in
the Hartford Courant, New Haven Register,
Waterbury Republican-American, and the
Torrington Register-Citizen. He is a contributing
columnist at CT News Junkie
(www.ctnewsjunkie.com).
Prior to joining Yankee, Heath was the Executive
Director of the Connecticut Republican Party
and on the staff of Congressman Rob Simmons
(CT-2).
He earned his bachelors degree in Political
Science from the University of Connecticut,
and is working toward his masters in public
administration from the University of Connecticut.
Suzanne Bateshas worked as a journalist and researcher for
more than 10 years, including work for the
Associated Press, the New Hampshire Union
Leader, Good Morning America Weekend and
New Hampshire Public Radio.
Personal highlights from her career include
covering presidential candidates in the 2008 New
Hampshire primary, interviewing diplomats on the
United Nations Security Council, and covering
the Wyoming State Legislature.
As a researcher, she has studied state education
policies, the security implications of skewed
gender ratios in Asia, and congressional
fundraising.
Suzanne has a graduate degree in journalism
from Columbia University and a bachelors
degree in political science from Brigham Young
University. She lives with her family in South
Windsor, Connecticut.
About the Yankee InstituteThe Yankee Institute is a think tank that develops
and advocates free-market and private sector
solutions to public policy issues. Foundedin 1984, Yankee has offices in East Hartford,
Connecticut.The Yankee Institute is nonpartisanresearch and educational organization and is
classified by the IRS as a 501 (c) (3) non-profit.
11
-
7/27/2019 Too Small to Keep
12/12