Last spring, Gov. Mike Leavitt took on the biggest political challenge of his young administration when he told legislators he would cut more than $4.5 million from existing sales-tax exemptions in 1994 and spend the money on building schools.
A few cynics scoffed. Legislators promised to help.But so far they haven't helped much. In fact, even though Leavitt only wanted $4.5 million from a possible $50 million in 11 exemptions earmarked for study this year, a legislative committee last week recommended that only $730,000 be gleaned from the exemptions - that's 1.5 percent of the $50 million possible, one-sixth of what Leavitt needs.
In his budget address to lawmakers last week, Leavitt again pledged to find the $4.5 million in the exemptions, saying "outdated or ineffective" exemptions don't stack up when compared with the needs of Utah's schoolchildren.
But two GOP legislators involved in the nine-month search for the cash say Leavitt likely won't succeed. The reasons are multifold - there are sound economic development reasons for most of the exemptions, it's difficult or impossible to collect some of the sales tax even if you wanted to and some of the exemptions go to high-profile businesses that have lobby and campaign-contribution clout with lawmakers.
But a big reason Leavitt will probably fail, Reps. John Valentine and Byron Harward believe, is that the state will have more than $200 million in new revenue next year; with all that cash around, it just won't be politically possible to cut back popular tax breaks for businesses.
And politics clearly plays a dominant role in this debate, as can be seen in discussion and voting on the two committees that searched for the money this year. Leavitt asked two groups to study the 11 exemptions, first the citizen/lawmaker Tax Review Commission, later the Revenue and Taxation Interim Study Committee, made up only of House and Senate members.
The commission hired a BYU economics professor to study the exemptions, using various criteria, and report on impacts and money that could be gleaned. Professor Lawrence C. Walters recommended repeal or tightening of exemptions that could have raised the money Leavitt asked for. But the commission itself, after much bickering,came up with only $3.4 million - short of what Leavitt wanted. However, in a split vote, the Tax Review Commission did take one tough stand - repeal Geneva Steel's exclusive exemption, which costs taxpayers $1.5 million a year, in 1994.
The Revenue and Taxation Committee didn't even come close to Leavitt's or the commission's numbers. After much speechmaking about how valuable the exemptions were to business - with some members actually saying some exemptions should be expanded instead of repealed - the committee only voted to take away exemptions on commercial videotape ($22,000) and taxi fares ($382,000) and to change the formula for taxing vending machine sales (about $325,000).
Commercial videotape, mostly used by TV stations, isn't used that much anymore and, besides, TV news reporters aren't exactly popular with lawmakers these days - especially after two stations dogged legislators to out-of-state conferences the past two years, getting long-range pictures of them golfing.
Taxi fares often are paid by out-of-state travelers who don't vote in Utah. And evidence provided committee members shows that the current vending tax formula probably doesn't come up to the general sales-tax rate of 6.25 percent, and thus some adjustment upward spoke to equal treatment under the law.
Voting to take away Geneva's sales tax exemption, by comparison, proved much more difficult. Geneva executives did make a good case on why the exemption is saving the firm in a difficult, worldwide steel market. But Geneva also has some of the most effective lobbyists on Capitol Hill and over the past six years has been one of the biggest contributors to legislative campaigns of any group or business. Geneva, based in Orem, employs more than 2,000 people, helping with the Utah County legislators' vote, and is a union shop with support from organized labor. That helps bring some Democratic lawmakers into the fold, as well.
Both committees voted to allow some current exemptions to end naturally when their expiration dates come up or to tighten, rather than repeal, some exemptions down the road. But those actions, even if they really do happen, don't affect next year's budget, where Leavitt needs the money during the January-February general session.
Valentine, budget chairman for the House, and Harward defend the work of the Tax Review Commission and Revenue and Taxation Committee, saying there's sound reasons to keep most of the exemptions.
Says Revenue and Taxation Committee co-chairman Harward: "Most people say there are two alternatives: repeal the exemptions and get the money, or keep the exemptions, help businesses who justifiably need state help, and lose the tax dollars. I say there is a third alternative that really could happen - repeal the exemptions but still lose the money because those specific businesses either go out of business, move out of state, or you find it costs more to collect the tax than you'd get in tax, so you don't come out ahead."
A final note: Don't assume lawmakers will only be considering taking away some sales-tax exemptions. Already, two lawmakers have pre-filed bills that give more sales tax breaks. Rep. Gerry Adair, R-Roy, wants to exempt sales tax paid on medical equipment used in the home; and Rep. Tom Matthews, D-Helper, wants to exempt sales tax on gun safes.