They are coming for your business accounts
Jun 27th, 2009 by David Anderson
Our friend, Charlie Copeland alerted us to a bill HB 274. It seems to be set to sail through under suspension of the rules without a committee hearing. Which is 46 pages of fee hikes. According to the bill’s own synopsis, this is true.
This act increases certain fees charged by the Department of Health and Social Services and imposes certain new fees related to licensing, registration, and permits furnished by the Department. The fees apply to bedding manufacturers, body art and piercing parlors, manufacture of bottled water and sodas, child care licensing inspections, violations of the Clean Indoor Air Act, environmental investigations that may impact human health, inspections of cosmetology shops and similar facilities, restaurant inspections, laboratory certifications, lead based paint licensing, massage establishments, milk and dairy safety, end stage renal disease facilities, portable X-rays, public swimming pools, radiation control services, recreation camps, vital statistics, and water supply operators. This act also creates a licensure and regulatory structure for Comprehensive Outpatient Treatment Centers, End Stage Renal Disease Facilities, Standing Outpatient Healthcare Facilities, Portable X-ray Suppliers and Outpatient Physical Therapy/Speech Therapy Facilities.
It is excellent news for the taxpayer that we will now be providing less subsidy for the necessary inspection and regulation of these businesses.
The environmental violations are a no-brainer.
The increase in fees for oversight of outpatient services is long overdue. More and more advanced care is now being provided in outpatient settings other than hospitals, some in physician offices with very limited facilities and support, so improved oversight is long overdue. And, the physicians are doing this because they are making tons of money at it, so it is fitting that the fees be increased to offset the cost of oversight.
noman
” so it is fitting that the fees be increased to offset the cost of oversight.”
I’ll buy into that however, what ienhancments are we going to get re: oversight? Surely raising fees during a desperate attemp to raise state revenues doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies goverment really cares about me.
The cost is passed on to the conumer so it’s nothing more than a backdoor tax on the consumer. How about allowing me to take my payroll deductions for heathcare of the top of my income re: income taxes.
The best revenues for the state is revenues genereated through a healthy economy and every dollar taken out of business is a burden on the consumer.
What improvments with we see with our soical services re: family intervention and in the juvenile justice system? Schools have become day treatment center for dyfunctional children of dyfunctional paents aka a dumping gound or a failed family service system in Delaware.
Nothing was laid out in regards on how these fees with enhance and improve the quality of life. It’s nothing more than passing the buck to the public to bailed Delaware’s “government” out!
FYI Kilroy’s has moved to http://kilroysdelaware.wordpress.com/
please be so kind to adjust blogroll link.
thank you.
for noman, nothing government does is bad or even open to question.
A) Noman assumes that there exists a subsidy for businesses that the Government inspect.
B) Noman assumes all the bussines types listed above are inspect and not simply charged a revenue generating fee.
C) Who needs open transparent government, back room deals are cool when the dems are in charge.
Thanks, Kilroy. It’s done.
Can’t there be hearings on this? This will really affect small business. The Kidney center, the tattoo shop, child care centers, and a host of others. I don’t know who is right (it is not been held to public scrutiny or justification), but what I do know is that they can’t be too confident in their position. Why not tell us that such and such fee hasn’t been raised since 1970 or whatever if that is true? The people did not like the driver’s license and title fees going up, but they accepted it because the fees had been unchanged for decades.
Are they afraid of the truth coming out?
David, everyone of us is going to feel the pain. We will all have to get by for less, maybe permanently.
We cannot go on like this as individuals, as employees, as employers, or as a government.
This does not mean putting anyone out of business purposely, but it does mean shared sacrifice.
Let us make sure that the sharing is equitable, which means it must be progressive.
PS: As a government, DE faces an $800 million deficit, spread over 876 million residents calculates to $913 per capita! Compare this to PA, $274 per capita. (CA is $1243 per capita!)
Perry
“David, everyone of us is going to feel the pain. We will all have to get by for less, maybe permanently.”
Wow Perry I am sorry to hear your pay was cut “10%” like mine and your family is pay $10,000.00 a year between payroll deducations and deductibles before your health care plan pays a dime! So now I must share the pain with higher taxes from the state and county?
I hear the state wants to tax ammo using a three teired tax. 10% for ammo for personal protection, 20% for hunting and 100% for use in suicide.
Minner and her democrat bedfellows expanded government into the uncontrollable nightmare that it is and now we’re ask to bail 30,000 government workers out! Do we really need 220 empolyees at the Delaware deparment of education?
Thanks David for change blogroll link!
$800 million over budget…
Cut $1,200 million from the budget and then you can have $200 million for “progressive” tax cuts for the ‘poor’
“does not mean putting anyone out of business purposely, but it does mean shared sacrifice….”
We sacrificed accepting Medicaid, with only 7% above overhead, because it was the right thing to do.
We sacrificed not raising prices for 2+ years(and some even longer), because the economy is iffy, and this is our community.
We sacrificed, and still gave loyal employees bonuses, and raises when everyone else gave pep talks, and ultimatums.
We go out of business because Medicaid is now 2% above overhead, and that’s if the appointment shows. Otherwise unbilled TIME.
We go out of business because you want to increase gross receipts on mom and pops, who are already aware of their communities’ budget, and have held costs passed to them.
We go out of business, when employees are asked to work as needed, because they can’t be kept on a clock when payroll is dependent on production, and production is there, but reimbursement has been reduced, and gross receipts tax increased.
We go out of business, when employees realize they are going to do better with a guaranteed unemployment check, and full benefits while looking elsewhere pessimistically.
So again spare the sacrifice talk; been there and voluntarily. I guess I just expected my legislators to defat and trim that budget, before asking for garnishes of taxes. It makes for a much better balanced meal, I mean sacrifice, I mean budget.
Maybe one day you will be able to represent that POV in leg hall, JC.
So as not to be confused..did you mean “lamb of leg” hall?
I feel like we are all like lambs to slaughter. I have an easy solution for the budget crisis. Got money? Send it in, they will figure how to take it anyway.
Kilroy, be careful what you assume!
I’ll tell you, my yearly out-of-pocket medical payments for the two of us has been far in excess of $10K for about 10 years now. And there are plenty of younger families who have to pay ultra-high premiums for their health insurance.
Your assumption about pay cuts is also incorrect, as I got caught up in the Reagan recession and suffered a cut which is a multiple of 10%, which had a large cumulative impact by the time I retired.
And now, just as most Delawareans, I will have an increase in taxes and fees to pay for the mistakes that others have made. So yes, you and I have to share the pain, Kilroy! And so does annoni, unless he has an overseas tax shelter.
It is not easy to place yourself into the shoes of others, but making unsubstantiated assumptions is not a step in the right direction toward understanding policy impacts.
Joanne, I hear you. I am sure there is a lot more to your story than could be given here.
I would not include your situation in my sacrifice rant, as I was speaking generally.
I readily admit to not understanding very well the challenges that small businesses have had, especially in this economy.
My point is that generally, both individually and as a nation, we have been living beyond our means for decades. Then on top of that, we have had tax cut/spending increase government policies and insufficient regulatory oversight, enabling less than ethical folks to exploit us and damage our economy. We individuals have also been living too much on borrowed money.
So the responsibility is both joint and individual, so that people like you, for one, trying to run a small business get screwed.
So now we all must sacrifice more. Even cuts in spending, which of course should be done, will force sacrifice on others because jobs will be lost. There are all sorts of unintended consequences in terms of impacts on people, hopefully kept to a minimum by judicious decisions being made by our political leaders.
Collectively we have gone too far, Joanne. Now we suffer!
Thanks Perry. I wonder if virtue is it’s own reward, do they tax that too? I’m in it for double indemnity as it is. My next life I’m not keeping any rules!!!!
Perry
“It is not easy to place yourself into the shoes of others, but making unsubstantiated assumptions is not a step in the right direction toward understanding policy impacts”
So just bail the government out for being Irresponsible and just hope they learned their lesson?
“My point is that generally, both individually and as a nation, we have been living beyond our means for decades.”
“individullay” I am driving a 14 year old car so I can have the means to send my kids to college. I have basic cable to say within my means.
Don’t speack for every “individual”
So nobody wants to talk about the provisions of the bill on their merits?
You guys see fee increases and start jerking your knees like a line of Rockettes.
I for one am pleased that we will strengthen our oversight of the new mega-practices and medical facilities, and that we will not be spending from general revenue to do it.
Let’s talk about John.
John has three restaurants in New Castle County, where he employs 100 people. John is using no extra services from the county or state government. His business is down 19%. He was able to avoid layoffs for about a year, but finally gave in to the financial pressure last month and laid off five people, which was painful because employees become like family over time. John will most likely make 20-25% less this year than he did last.
Why should John have to pay $2,000 more in (gross receipts, liquor, fees, LLC and income) taxes?
This should be hand-delivered to every business owner in the Newark area.
“It’s not a matter of sacred cows,” said Kowalko, a retired machinist who is married to a teacher. “Perception cannot be a factor when you’re dealing with economics. I get a little offended that state employees are allowed to be branded as living in the lap of luxury. If the private sector is bearing an undue burden, it’s because the private sector has product lines that are failing.”
This from the guy representing the only sector of the economy that can take your money at gunpoint. Protecting copious government waste and insulting the mom-and-pop businesses all over the state at the same time? That takes talent.
John will most likely make 20-25% less this year than he did last.
Why should John have to pay $2,000 more in (gross receipts, liquor, fees, LLC and income) taxes?
I am not conceding that he has to pay $2000 more. You’ll have to lay out the numbers to convince me. If his income is down 20-25% his taxes will go down too.
And, you guys need to keep your talking points straight - Is John going to pay more in fees and taxes, or is he going to pass it on to his customers? You can’t have it both ways.
“And, you guys need to keep your talking points straight - Is John going to pay more in fees and taxes, or is he going to pass it on to his customers? You can’t have it both ways.”
Why should John’s customers pay more for the same thing? How about giving me a “why” for any of this?
Well, here’s one way to look at it… how many restaurant inspectors do you think Delaware should employ, and how often should they do inspections? Fire and electrical inspectors? And who should pay for those inspectors? Should we pay for them by cutting services or wages in other areas of government unrelated to restaurants? Or should we pay for them by taxes and fees on the owners and customers of restaurants?
Fire and electrical is up to the county. What makes you think that they are not covered anyway? Did you get that from the hearing we never had?
BTW I appreciate your comments.
Fire and electrical is up to the county.
Good point. But not one that negates my argument.
“Well, here’s one way to look at it… how many restaurant inspectors do you think Delaware should employ, and how often should they do inspections? Fire and electrical inspectors? And who should pay for those inspectors? Should we pay for them by cutting services or wages in other areas of government unrelated to restaurants? Or should we pay for them by taxes and fees on the owners and customers of restaurants?”
What is Elwood’s “John” doing more of that would require more of anything you list? No one is doing more of anything? Are you claiming that we’ll get more and/or better government with higher taxes? Please tell me that’s your claim.
What is Elwood’s “John” doing more of that would require more of anything you list?
Wrong question.
Using my example of restaurant inspectors: as gas prices for the inspector’s cars goes up, and their training costs go up, and electric and facility expense for their offices go up - who should bear the costs of those increases?
You’re right Noman..the last radiation inspector who showed up at my facility was wearing a “it’s better in the Bahamas” t-shirt, and a backwards baseball cap. I had to confirm ID. Maybe we can get him a nametag, and shirt–state issued of course, w/ those increases.
“Using my example of restaurant inspectors: as gas prices for the inspector’s cars goes up, and their training costs go up, and electric and facility expense for their offices go up - who should bear the costs of those increases?”
Lonnie George. Or, they could learn the difference between a check and a credit card. How ’bout you just get back to me when they show the slightest respect for the tax dollars they have now.
BTW, noman, you’re asking them not to pay more in taxes. You’re asking them to give the state a bigger cut. Businesses everywhere are happy to pay more in taxes if it means they’re doing more business, hiring more people and making more money.
And using your example, there would be no increase. Thanks to the economy and the realities that we face in the private sector, there are far fewer restaurants to inspect. Does that mean you’re going to sign off on there being fewer inspectors?
If you store radioactive materials you had better be checking ID of everyone no matter what they are wearing.
Maybe we can fix the budget by instituting a dress code.
Those restaurants (and medical facilities) are staffed by people trained by Lonnie George. Those kinds of businesses are the first ones to come running to government crying that they can’t find enough trained workers willing to work for crumbs.
there are far fewer restaurants to inspect. Does that mean you’re going to sign off on there being fewer inspectors?
Actually, yes. I have no interest in keeping more workers than we need. All I ask is that we do it on facts rather than ideology. So lay out the numbers and make your case.
“So lay out the numbers and make your case.”
If you had any power to change things, I would.
“Those kinds of businesses are the first ones to come running to government crying that they can’t find enough trained workers willing to work for crumbs.”
Restaurants? What planet are you from?
Oh. And keep whistling past this one, noman.
“BTW, noman, you’re asking them not to pay more in taxes. You’re asking them to give the state a bigger cut.”