Proposition 39 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Proposition 39 - Essay Example The organizations against this proposition are the California Manufacturers & Technology Association and Friends for Saving California Jobs. As a supporter of Proposition Number 39, the â€Å"Tax Treatment for Multistate Businesses. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funding. Initiative Statute,† this proposition is good for the State of California because it will result to significant tax revenues that will fund a sustainable approach to development, a development that will provide additional employment and extra funds for education. Numerous firms, organizations, business people, and individuals are in support of Proposition 39 because they know that its contribution to the increase in tax revenues is fair and will benefit the state in general. At present, California requires additional funds to finance its increasing public costs. Lawrence reports that California’s tax revenues primarily go to the â€Å"Big Three,† specifically education, human rights, and cor rections (235). With a high number of school-age population, California needs more funds, without necessarily burdening ordinary taxpayers. This proposition taxes the rich, where the money will benefit the entire state, including the taxed large businesses. State law presently allows the majority of multistate businesses to choose one of two methods to determine the amount of their income associated with California and taxable by the state: â€Å"1) Three-Factor Method and 2) Single-Sales Method† (â€Å"Analysis by the Legislative Analyst† 68-69). Multistate businesses are normally allowed to select the method that is most beneficial to them for tax purposes. Proposition 39 decrees that multistate businesses would no longer choose the method for determining their state taxable income that is most beneficial for them (â€Å"Analysis† 69). Instead, many multistate businesses would have to establish their California taxable income using the single sales factor meth od. Businesses that operate only in California would not be affected (â€Å"Analysis† 69). According to â€Å"Analysis by the Legislative Analyst,† this policy measure would raise $1 billion of additional tax revenues from 2013 (70). Around fifty percent of the revenues would then fund clean and energy efficiency programs: â€Å"For a five-year period (2013–14 through 2017–18), about half of the additional revenues—$500 million to $550 million annually—would be transferred to the Clean Energy Job Creation Fund to support energy efficiency and alternative energy projects† (â€Å"Analysis† 71). With significant funds for clean and green energy, the state will experience a cleaner atmosphere and more efficient public facilities. Aside from funding clean and green projects, the tax revenues will go to education budget increases. As the analyst of the proposition said: â€Å"For 2018–19 and beyond, the guarantee likely would be higher by at least $500 million†¦The exact portion of the revenue raised that would go to schools in any particular year would depend upon various factors† (â€Å"Analysis† 71). Lawrence reminds Californians that the state needs to build more schools and hire more teachers, while improving the curriculum (235). It cannot do so without an injection of additional funds that will not hurt common taxpayers. Proposition 39 will tax the rich companies, but these taxes will not go to waste because they will fund the long-term educational needs of Californians. While education is important,