question on state tax

It doesn't have to be right, it's Wikipedia. The author couldn't even spell "continental;" you're going to believe her/him on taxation?

Trying to get your hands around sales tax rates by state is an exercise in futility. Over and above the the general state sales tax rate you have local add-ons. Then you have transportation districts, museum districts, special development districts, etc. Then you have different rates for lodging, dining out, short-term car rentals, parking, new car sales, etc. Then each state or locality has tax holidays, exemptions for food or maybe just prepared foods, drugs or maybe just prescription drugs, clothes or maybe just clothes priced at under $100 per garment, doctor visits but not chiropractor visits, etc. Get the picture?

who knows what that wiki poster was cutting and pasting or trying to recall from memory. but here is a link

to an article showing Connecticut has the highest effective tax rate in 1993 (table 4). Just glancing at this article, it seems to take into account federal, state and local taxes, and of most importance the income level of the Connecticut population, since higher income people pay higher state and federal income taxes (note table 6).

or, so it seems to me.

The author of the article might not could have spelled "contentious" correctly. (grin)

ChEAr$, Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA

CT sales tax is NOT the highest sales tax in the continental United States. However, several analyses I have read do rank CT as having the highest effective tax rate in the United States when all forms of taxation are taken into consideration. Thus the sentence referred to above is a statement taken out of context and, while it may be an accurate assessment, is not a logical conclusion of the information above it.

That is a conjecture with which most of us would agree.

The ability to spell or to use a spell checker neither validates nor invalidates a statement.

I have had a personal spell checker for over thirty years. After my spell checker was adjusted to read for content first and to discuss typos and grammeric errors later, we have gotten along well.

Dick

**Off Topic**

invalidates a statement.

Carelessness in small matters is a leading indicator of carelessness in large ones.

OK, I would agree that this statement may be out of context. I am living in CT and there is no local/community tax etc, so always pays

6% flat tax unless for those tax-empty stuffs. But if taking household income into consideration, it may be among the states with highest effective rate because some towns in CT have the highest household income in the nation.

invalidates a statement. Just keep saying that over and over and over. What I say is that

And in this group, you'd better make sure you know the correct spelling of "whiskies" vs. "whiskeys" if you want to keep the moderators happy!

-Mark Bole

invalidates a statement. > Just keep saying that over and over and over. ?What I say is that

...and "de minimis," too, I would think. Maybe not.

According to the Tax Foundation, which takes into account all state and local taxes and includes taxes paid to other states as well as to the home state, Connecticut had the highest per capita tax burden of all the states in 1998. Since then it has always been second or third in ranking, behind New York (always first or second) and, usually, New Jersey. New Jersey is first in the Tax Foundation rankings in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

The Census Bureau's 2006 ranking for all state and local taxes (the most recent available) shows Connecticut 4th, behind the District of Columbia (which is not included in the Tax Foundation tables), New York, and Wyoming (!), and followed by New Jersey. By contrast, the Tax Foundation's 2006 top five are New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Maryland, and Hawaii.

The Census Bureau always shows Alaska and Wyoming among the highest, while the Tax Foundation consistently shows them as numbers 48 and

1. Obviously the two organizations are using very different methodologies, which just illustrates the complexities of the analysis, so all of these rankings should be taken with the proverbial grain of salt. Alaska and Wyoming are states that rely heavily for their revenue on severance taxes, so I would guess that the Census Bureau takes those taxes into account as if they were paid by residents of the state, whereas the Tax Foundation (more realistically, I think) treats them as paid by outsiders.

Katie in San Diego

Its validity will remain constant; its usefulness will vary with the ability of the recipient to read typos.

I represent that.

Dick

Katie wrote in news:8b51d330-3ae2-4ed7-a5a9- snipped-for-privacy@e1g2000pra.googlegroups.com:

????

Severance taxes are taxes imposed for the privilege of separating, or severing, natural resources from the land, generally measured by the market value of the resource (e.g., oil, gas, coal, timber, ore) at the time of severance.

The Census Bureau classifies state and local taxes in 6 categories: Property, General Sales, Specific Sales (e.g. alcohol, fuel, telecommunications taxes), Personal Income, Corporate Income, and Other. Most states get less than 10% of their revenue from "other" sources, which includes severance taxes. Wyoming and Alaska, by contrast, get almost 40% of their revenue in the "other" category, and most of that probably is from severance taxes -- in Alaska's case specifically the oil production tax. Wyoming, of course, has no individual or corporate income tax; Alaska imposes local but not statewide general sales taxes, and has no individual income tax.

Katie in San Diego

Katie wrote in news:ba13b2f8-e88c-48fc-bf55- snipped-for-privacy@i24g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

Thanks, Katie and Alan.