The ‘$100,000 dividend’
The oil boom led to the creation of the dividend and the repeal of the income tax, which meant wealthy Alaskans reaped much of the benefit.
Good morning, Alaska! (Sorry for the no-show on Monday, so this one’s going out to everyone.)
In this edition: The uneven impacts of Alaska’s boom and bust cycles, the reading list, the daily agenda and an emergency landing.
A $100,000 dividend (to the wealthiest Alaskans)
That’s been the great question underlying Alaska’s ongoing budgetary woes and inability to rally the political capital into action to find a durable solution to the annual fight. Is it the PFD? The oil industry? Is it people drawing a paycheck in Alaska? Or should it be people buying stuff in Alaska? Should it be state employees who pay with the elimination of their jobs?
So far, the state has leaned heavily on the first and last options as cuts to state services and the dividend have proved to be the path of least resistance since oil revenue fell off a cliff in the mid-2010s. But now as continues cuts to government and continued cuts to the dividend seem to no longer be the easy course of action, legislators are turning to the question of “Who pays?” There’s talk of income taxes, sales taxes, hikes to oil taxes and… um… gambling. Each one of those decisions contain different levers that will affect parts of Alaska and groups of Alaskans differently. All that is worth a deeper dive at a later date (probably later this week), but for today I wanted to highlight what former state Sen. Rick Halford told the House Judiciary Committee on Friday when going over the history of the Alaska Permanent Fund and the dividend.
“If you go back to the starting point of it all, how big was the dividend to who?” Halford asked the committee. “You look at the repeal of the state income tax and it probably represented a $100,000 a year dividend to the top 1,000 taxpayers in the state of Alaska. … You had to look at it in the context of everything that was going on. We were spending huge amounts on housing subsidies that were worth in some cases $15,000 to $20,000 a year for people who could afford to build very, very expensive houses. The income tax repeal had a huge differential effect depending on your income.”
Counting the income “saved” with the elimination of the income tax makes for an interesting way to consider how the benefits of Alaska’s oil boom were spread. Yes, the dividend and the state services that were funded with oil taxes and royalties have broadly benefitted Alaskans and are credited with some social benefits, but the repeal of the income tax has been even more significant for the wealthy and very wealthy. It also puts into finer relief just what’s at stake as the state considers that question of “who pays?” Some Republicans have continued to push plans that call for dividends in the neighborhood of $500 in order avoid any and all tax hikes while others have said the words “sales tax.” Democrats, meanwhile, have generally pushed for a more progressive approach through an income tax.
So, what should happen? Halford said it’s up to today’s legislators to decide. While looking back at the history is informative, he said, the course of the Alaska Permanent Fund has never been set in stone and has never been unanimous either. But whatever it is, it should be equitable, he said.
“It needs to be something that deals with an equitable share. Power, position, age, longevity. All these things help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer,” he said. “We tried to short-circuit that as much as possible.”
Free rides die hard
On the agenda
1:30 p.m. — The House Finance Committee will hear the 10-year fiscal outlook update from the Legislative Finance Division, Department of Revenue and the Office of Management and Budget.
3 p.m. Wednesday — The House Judiciary Committee will continue its hearing on Dunleavy’s PFD plan in Her 7 as well as two informational hearings on fiscal plans proposed by Sen. Natasha von Imhof (a constitutional approach that sets up a separate dividend account with a one-time infusion of cash and a portion of oil revenue) and Rep. Adam Wool (a proposal to tie an income tax to a slightly larger dividend).
There’s also a budget conference committee somewhere out there in the ether. There are currently no meetings scheduled for it, but it could come up quickly.
In a visit to Dillingham, Alaska U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski called for long-term protections for Bristol Bay. Groups in the area have been calling for durable protections against a mine for years and it’s something that Murkowski endorsed during her address to last year’s Alaska Federation of Natives conference. From KDLG: On Dillingham trip, Murkowski gathers ideas on permanent protections for Bristol Bay
“I would say if it’s not the nail in the coffin, it’s just waiting for the last tap of the hammer,” Tim Troll, executive director of the Bristol Bay Heritage Land Trust, said of a new agreement that would put some 44,000 acres of Pedro Bay Corp.-owned land into conservation easements thereby complicating any attempts to build the controversial Pebble Mine. From The Washington Post via ADN: Alaska Native corporation deal with conservation nonprofit complicates planning for massive Pebble mine project
In peak vaccine news, Washington is offering people who get vaccinated this week a complimentary joint. From ABC: Washington state kicks off 'Joints for Jabs' to promote COVID-19 vaccinations