NE4: March-June Northeast Budget FY2014 (Law)

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

For reference, this is sirnick's last budget (sans a change in the dates.) I just wanted to get it in the queue so we could get some discussion going on this.

The budget procedure's a bit new to me, but sirnick and Cincinnatus have given me a lot of help. We estimated that after the additional expenditures (stimulus and what not) we had an additional ~2.2 billion left over. I'll have to contact Adam about estimates for revenue this trimester.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

For reference, this is sirnick's last budget (sans a change in the dates.) I just wanted to get it in the queue so we could get some discussion going on this.

The budget procedure's a bit new to me, but sirnick and Cincinnatus have given me a lot of help. We estimated that after the additional expenditures (stimulus and what not) we had an additional ~2.2 billion left over. I'll have to contact Adam about estimates for revenue this trimester.

Adam is the best bet for the new projected revenues, until then I'm not sure if debating too much of the budget will be worthwhile other than Deus' more technical questions.

Also, I don't know where the agricultural subsidies even were in the budget. Perhaps tax expenditures, well have to ask Griffin.

Noted. Should this be tabled until I correspond with the GM, or just fall to the bottom of the page and be bumped?

I don't have much to say about the budget, but does anyone else think the northeast has too many budgets? Most other regions and the federal government have them every year or six months. For one thing 4 months is not long enough for a budget to go into effect, and often it just leads to the same budget being passed over and over again without much debate.

It used to be yearly, but I believe this changed that.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I don't mean to overburden the Governor, but we should also try to determine how much is currently in the Disaster Relief Fund.

Also, I have a few more questions:

What does "tax expenditures" refer to?

What specifically is entailed in "direct aid and incentives to municipalities?"

Cincinnatus did some examination of the old budgets and estimated that there could be about $13 billion in the Disaster Relief Fund. There was one year where we appropriated 50% to the Disaster Relief Fund since the Capital Relocation Act failed, but some of that was probably depleted by Hurricane Sandy.

Most of the expenditures are (I believe) codified into law.

I believe Napoleon or Scott would be better equipped to answer the question wrt "direct aid and incentives to municipalities" as this was passed during my retirement.

I think we're bound by the current law to appropriate 20% of the surplus to the Disaster Relief Fund, though given the amount of money we have there we could amend the Budget Procedure to allow for flexibility in future sessions.

Also, given our past surplus (as well as any leftovers that sirnick alluded to) I think we have room for some tax relief, though I'd like to leave some of this surplus for my police camera program.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Thank you Mr. Gm! And, whoa, surplus!

OK.

I plan to try and get rid of a few line items when Governor Dallasfan's budget procedure amendment is being debated, but for now I will withdraw my previous amendment and offer this one instead:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think there is some merit to what Deus is saying about energy spending, but I don't think the Assembly would reach a consensus on eliminating these entirely - not to mention that we've already got a pretty big surplus.

What if we were to eliminate funding on refitting government buildings, and reduce the amount of funding we have for alternative energy?

Also, I think given the current surplus we have, we should explore reducing tax rates (or eliminating them outright for the  $25,000 - $49,999 bracket). Tax cuts aren't a big priority of mine, but with the surpluses we've been having (and the amount of money we have in the Disaster Relief Fund) we'd be effectively hoarding money.

That being said I will need some of the surplus left over once I introduce legislation wrt police cameras (these can be pricey.)

How does the Assembly feel about his?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

So Deus' proposed amendment isn't friendly?

Unfriendly for now. Though I do agree that we should pear these down a bit.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Mm, that seems like a good point.

Amendment is friendly.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

So, is everyone fine with the current expenditures? I might have an amendment regarding tax expenditures later but I'd like to start discussing revenues if the Representatives are content with that.

Not a Representative, but that sounds good to me.

As mentioned before, I'd like to look into lowering or eliminating taxes for some brackets, given the surpluses we've had. I don't think it'd break the bank.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I am happy with the current budget or with lowering some tax. The surplus isn't excessive.

The surplus in itself may not be excessive, but when you consider the amount that we have in the Rainy Day fund (>13 billion) it is.

How do you feel about eliminating the $25,000 - $49,999 bracket entirely? This would affect the surplus the least and would also allow working families to keep more of their income.

Cincinnatus may not be in the Assembly anymore, but he's certainly not forgotten about us. He was kind enough to PM me, as to what this would look like:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I support Governor Dallasfan's proposal.

I am also introducing an amendment to eliminate the tanning tax

Here is my reasoning:

The tanning tax is a tax upon the use of tanning beds. Not only is this blatant discrimination against tanning establishments, but it is an insult to those citizens of the Northeast who wish to improve their tan. Who are we to try and tax them out of existence because they want to tan their skin? In addition, this tax risks causing the MTV show Jersey Shore, a valuable commercial asset, to depart our region and set up shop in a region that doesn't want to tax tanners out of existence. Besides, the tax hardly generates any revenue anyway, and it seems doubtful that it actually deter tanners, but rather would only serve to make their habit more expensive, and thus more harmful to themselves.

Despite my preference for fair complexions, I would support such a measure.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

For the record, Deus' amendment is friendly.

I don't want to tarry too much longer on this - are there any other revisions that the Assembly would like to make?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Deus never introduced the amendment regarding the tanning tax.

When I said, "I am also introducing an amendment..." I mean that i was introducing it right then, not that I was planning to introduce it in the future.

You didn't give me the language, which I need to put the final bill together.

Am I allowed to just strike out the tax?

Also, since this is the "March-June" budget would the regional government shut down if we didn't pass the budget by the end of March?

I don't know if there's a precedent for that. In real life, most likely.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Awesome, sirnick .

I don't have any further suggestions at this juncture, though later on I will want to appropriate some of the surplus (will be filed under public safety.)

I think it'd be advisable that we pass this with haste, as to avoid any potential shutdowns/damages to our credit rating.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I'd argue the point that despite no specific mention, the Another Budget Amendment doesn't apply, since I've yet to sign it.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

I'd argue the point that despite no specific mention, the Another Budget Amendment doesn't apply, since I've yet to sign it.

That makes sense. In that case, the final figures for the budget look like this:
Total expenditures - $231.428 billion
Total revenues - $251.425 billion
Total surplus (after 20% allocation to Disaster Relief Fund) - $15.997 billion
Disaster Relief Fund (I used Cinci's estimate of $13 billion) - $16.999 billion

These figures can just be incorporated into the budget, right?

Sirnick's numbers weren't definitive, so I don't see why not. However, since we're abolishing an income bracket I don't know that the surplus would be that high.