Colman: A NEW JOB KILLER

AB 5 is going to cost hundreds of thousands of jobs and the financial security of tens of thousands of families.  Guv. Newsom is proposing a single payer mandate on the people of California.  This will force tens of thousands of families to leave the State to save their health.  Newsom is proposing a Cuban style health care system.  Now we have the Socialists demanding a $12.5 billion a year transfer of money from the private sector to government.  More jobs will be lost.

 Here is a hypothetical example:  An owner of commercial property is paying $100,000 monthly in property taxes.  Under the Split-Roll plan, the property tax could go to $300,000 a month.

 If the tax on commercial property went up, the owner would have two fundamental choices.  He could raise the rent on tenants, or he could simply sell his property for whatever he could get.

 If the rent on a tenant went up, the tenant might be in financial jeopardy.

 If a tenant were leasing 100,000 square feet and the monthly rent were $1.00 per square foot, the rent would be $100,000 a month ($1.2 million a year).

If, under a Split-Roll plan, the rent went to $3.00 per square foot, the monthly rent would rise to $300,000 ($3.6 million a year).

 Thus, the tenant would have to come up with an extra $200,000 a month in rent.  ($300,000 minus $100,000 equals $200,000.)

Jobs will not open, people will be fired.  Wages will not increase.  The cost of goods and services will go up—making California less competitive.  A recipe for disaster—but Newsom and the unions promoting it know that.  But, they do not care.

A NEW JOB KILLER

By Richard Colman, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views,  2/26/20 

California voters may have a chance to kill jobs.

 The chance comes from a plan that could tax commercial property at a higher rate than residential property.

 The plan is likely to be on the November 2020 California ballot.

 The plan is called the Split-Roll plan.

 In general, commercial property and residential property are taxed at one percent of a property’s assessed value.  Voters, however, can elect to raise property taxes by popular vote.  Sometimes a two-thirds majority is needed to raise property taxes.  In other cases, less than a two-thirds vote is needed.

 Suppose the property tax on commercial property were $100,000 a month.  Under the Split-Roll plan, it would be easier to raise the property tax to a higher level.

 Here is a hypothetical example:  An owner of commercial property is paying $100,000 monthly in property taxes.  Under the Split-Roll plan, the property tax could go to $300,000 a month.

 If the tax on commercial property went up, the owner would have two fundamental choices.  He could raise the rent on tenants, or he could simply sell his property for whatever he could get.

 If the rent on a tenant went up, the tenant might be in financial jeopardy.

 If a tenant were leasing 100,000 square feet and the monthly rent were $1.00 per square foot, the rent would be $100,000 a month ($1.2 million a year).

If, under a Split-Roll plan, the rent went to $3.00 per square foot, the monthly rent would rise to $300,000 ($3.6 million a year).

 Thus, the tenant would have to come up with an extra $200,000 a month in rent.  ($300,000 minus $100,000 equals $200,000.)

 The tenant might not be able to come up with an extra $200,000 a month.  In such a scenario, the tenant might have to reduce or eliminate his workforce, relocate to another state or country, or go out of business.

 Voters, especially those who value their jobs, would be foolish to support a Split-Roll plan.

 Any politician who favors a Split-Roll plan should be voted out of office.

About Stephen Frank

Stephen Frank is the publisher and editor of California Political News and Views. He speaks all over California and appears as a guest on several radio shows each week. He has also served as a guest host on radio talk shows. He is a fulltime political consultant.

Comments

  1. As an owner and property manager for properties that will be badly abused by this Prop. 13 this demands an apology tour by every Democrat in the State.

    When I explain this pile of junk to the average voter they are amazed how they have been misled by the Democrats.

    This has to be defeated.

  2. It would’ve been fine without prop 13. But to just change it like that suddenly will cause economic collapse I’d imagine.

  3. Totallyfedup says

    When the hell are California voters going to wake up and see that democrats are destroying the once great state of California?
    Every damn democrat in California is trying their hardest to come up with another law and tax to hurt the people that pay the bills.
    If we don’t get these troublemaking democrats out of office, soon California will cease to exist.

Speak Your Mind

*