November 2012 Election, California, Proposition 39
Vote Recommendation: Yes
Although I don't think the state really needs more money, I think that it is clear that the current tax treatment favors out-of-state businesses, and is thus bad for California. Even if they immediately planned to spend the money investing in Cathode Ray Tube futures, it would still appear to be a good idea for California. (It would probably be a bad idea if they were planning on using the money to invest in baby seal pelts, but they are not.) However, the planned revenue usage appears sensible as well so it seems like an all-around good thing.
See: November 2012 Election, California
Details
Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding.
Initiative Statute
- Summary
Requires multistate businesses to pay income taxes based on percentage of their sales in California. Dedicates revenues for five years to clean/efficient energy projects. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues of $1 billion annually, with half of the revenues over the next five years spent on energy efficiency projects. Of the remaining revenues, a significant portion likely would be spent on schools.
External Resources
- Voter Information Guide - Secretary of State
- Official Title and Summary - Secretary of State
- Analysis - Secretary of State
- Arguments and Rebuttals - Secretary of State
- Text of Proposed Law - Secretary of State
- California Proposition 39 - Ballotpedia