New Jersey storm-hit areas may see property tax hikes: Christie

Wed Nov 14, 2012 9:42am EST

Related Topics

Photo

Obama at the bar

Obama shares drinks and shoots pool during a stopover in Denver.  Slideshow 

(Reuters) - New Jersey's towns badly hit by superstorm Sandy may raise property taxes to finance their rebuilding efforts, Governor Chris Christie said on Wednesday.

A 2 percent state cap on annual increases can be ignored by local governments if there is a natural disaster, he said in an interview with CBS radio.

If towns "need to spend some money to get themselves going," a property tax is possible, Christie said.

Christie has campaigned for months on a "Jersey Comeback," a plan that includes tax cuts to boost the state's shaky economy. Earlier this week, he said he would wait to see what Sandy's impact on local finances would be before deciding whether to press ahead with more tax cut requests, local media reported.

Areas badly ravaged by the storm, which tore through the U.S. Northeast at the end of October, will need repairs in housing, businesses and critical infrastructure systems like transportation.

The federal government and insurers are expected to pay for many recovery costs, but the reimbursement process can be long.

Local governments, whose funds are stressed by immediate damage repair costs, are also losing sales taxes and other revenues.

New Jersey, the seventh-largest state economy, has not yet provided estimates on economic damage by the storm, but Christie said he hoped to have a figure by the end of the week.

Neighboring New York State plans to ask the federal government for $30 billion in disaster aid to help with the recovery for New York City, Long Island and other devastated areas.

In February, Christie proposed a 10 percent across-the-board income-tax cut. The Democrat-led Legislature cut a deal with Christie for a plan to provide property-tax credits on residents' income tax returns for those earning less than $400,000 a year.

But state lawmakers, concerned about lagging revenues, didn't include the proposed cuts in the $31.7 billion budget for fiscal year 2013, which the governor signed in July.

(Reporting by Hilary Russ; Editing by Bernadette Baum)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (2)
gregbrew56 wrote:
Kick ‘em while they’re down…

Nov 14, 2012 2:53pm EST  --  Report as abuse
morbas wrote:
Transaction tax code imposes disproportionate encumbrance on sustenance income. At the municipality and city levels, taxation is restricted to property and transactions which burdens the lower quintile at sustenance levels, lesser burdening incomes substantially above poverty. Perhaps it is time to impress on Obama that the upper quintile needs much much higher rates, perhaps approaching the 1960′s 91.5%. This disaster effects the solvancy of the municipality-city levels of governments, which across the nation are some are in default.
A surtax on incomes in the $200K and upwards of say 80%, added to th e 2012 tax rates, would provide the revenue for Federal-State and Municipality, eliminating all other forms of taxation. Business would no longer be burdened with any taxation and would be impowered to expand. A nationaized income tax system margined at 20K, 20K to 200K at 25%, and 200K upwards at 80% would revenue $6.6 trillion and reduse taxation below $250K, just what Obama wants. We need to mandate this scheme to all our representatives, they exist to represent the people.

Nov 14, 2012 3:29pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.