There’s been a lot of news about stimulus reporting the last few weeks. A lot of it has focused on jobs created or saved; that’s understandable since that was a major point of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which is the stimulus’ grown-up name. The federal stimulus web site, Recovery.gov,  has posted the first compilation of stimulus grants, loans, and contracts, which covers the first six months under the act. The reports exclude funds allocated directly to individuals through such mechanisms as increased food stamp benefits, extended Unemployment Insurance, Medicaid payments, and tax cuts.

The STAR Coalition of organizations promoting accountability in the recovery praised this effort:

Our groups can now follow the money in ways they never could before and will use it to engage their policy-makers and build a recovery that benefit communities. We will also use the data to actively engage the public to better understand how the Recovery Act is impacting our communities, and how taxpayers can advocate to improve the Recovery Act and other government investments in the future. Read the rest of this entry »

Over the past several months, we have blogged several times on state tax incentives, in particular on the need to strengthen transparency and evaluation of tax credit programs (see our posts here,  here, here and here). The issue  seems to be quickly gaining critical mass.  In September, a Joint Legislative Task Force chaired by Senator Mike Mazzei and Representative Jeff Hickman began examining transferable tax credits (the Task Force meets again November 5th in Tulsa). Earlier this month, Representative Mike Reynolds called for an investigation into possible abuses associated specifically with two transferable tax credit programs, the Small Business Capital Companies credit and the Rural Small Business Capital Companies credit.  The Oklahoman has taken note, arguing in this editorial that, “while we remain convinced that some incentive programs are justified, the potential for abuse makes the scrutiny vital and timely.”

One common argument for tax incentives is that in the competitive world of state economic development, states that fail to offer tax breaks to entice companies to invest or stay put will see investment and jobs shift elsewhere. Read the rest of this entry »

Are tax breaks for businesses a legitimate tool of economic development, or a form of corporate welfare? The fact is they can be either. The challenge is telling the two apart and ensuring through clear legislative language and ongoing oversight that policies that provide tax credits or other preferential treatment to businesses are meeting their goals.

Last week, a Joint Legislative Task Force created by legislation authored by Rep. David Dank and Sen. Randy Brogdon met to begin examining transferable tax credits. These are  tax incentives where one company qualifies for a tax  and sells that credit for cash to another company that wants to reduce its tax obligations.

According to a presentation by House staff attorney Mark Harter, the “general rule is that a tax credit can only be used by the person or entity who performed some economic activity or who invested money in some way.” Yet the Task Force heard that two of the state’s most notorious transferable tax credits – for non-stop coast-to-coast air service (Great Plains Airline) and for space transportation vehicle providers (Burns Flats spaceport) – provided much weaker standards. In those cases, taxpayers ended up on the hook for tens of millions of dollars for projects that failed (literally) to get off the ground.

But even where eligibility requires performance of certain economic activity, either job creation or capital investment, oversight and compliance is often uncertain. Rep. Dank was especially critical of the state’s coal credit intended for the purchase of Oklahoma mined coal. Businesses and individuals claimed anywhere from $5 million to $12 million in coal credits in 2007. Yet, according to Rep. Dank (quoted in the Journal Record, subscription only):

But there is no evidence that these were ever used to produce more coal or to hire more miners. Instead, tax credits given to the coal industry in Oklahoma were sold to companies that had nothing to do with coal, reducing revenues to the state with no economic gain.

The next meetings of the Task Force will no doubt dig deeper into how particular credits have been used, or misused.

Over the past several years, the state has made genuine progress in improving accountability and transparency of tax incentives.  An Incentives Review Committee, created by statute, has been reviewing major tax credits and making recommendations; their work was responsible, in part, for the decision to allow one of the most expensive and controversial incentive programs, the Venture Capital Credit, to expire at the end of 2008. As we discussed in this blog post, implementation of the Taxpayer Transparency Act (SB 1) led earlier this year to the launch of a searchable online database that generates lists of all individuals and businesses that claimed tax credits (so far information is available only for 2007).  And for the first time ever in the state, the Legislature this session passed a tax credit bill, SB 929,  that included a “clawback provision” allowing for the state to demand repayment of credits in the event that companies failed to uphold their obligations – as promptly occurred when Mercury Marine announced it was pulling up stakes from Stillwater and returning over $1 million in payments.

So what more can be done? One interesting idea was proposed recently by Good Jobs First, a national policy organization that focuses on corporate accountability:

We also need responsible budgeting. Let’s also require each state to enact a Unified Development Budget: an annual report to the legislature itemizing all forms of spending for jobs—both appropriations and tax expenditures. Tax breaks typically dwarf appropriations by ratios of 4 to 1, 6 to 1, 8 to 1 or more, so we need the whole iceberg up on the table for an annual check-up.

While Oklahoma has made strides in making available information on tax incentives with the Taxpayer Transparency Act and biannual Tax Expenditure Report, it remains difficult, if not impossible, to find comprehensive information on the full array of tax credits, especially regarding credits claimed on taxes other than the income tax (insurance premium tax, gross production tax, ad valorem tax).  A Unified Development Budget such as proposed by Good Jobs First could go a good ways towards helping pull the various pieces together into a single picture – and ultimately help policymakers with the tough but essential goal of reaching informed decisions about which tax credits are working to promote good jobs and investment, and which are purely handouts to special interests.

As the debate about the speed and impact of stimulus spending rages on, Good Jobs First is taking on the less glamorous but equally important task of assessing accountability in state spending of funds from the stimulus bill (more formally, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or ARRA). They’ve launched the STAR (States for a Transparent and Accountable Recovery) Coalition, a national web site that assesses state efforts to inform citizens about ARRA spending.

Accountability is essential for any government program. Taxpayers cannot determine whether their resources are being used appropriately unless they can tell what is being spent, where it is spent, who is benefiting from the spending, and what is being accomplished. Congress and President Obama built unprecedented accountability tools into ARRA. If carried out faithfully, these tools will help us determine not just if the stimulus money is spent fast, but if it is spent right.

This week, STAR released a report that gave states two grades – one for a state’s main ARRA website and one for its reporting on transportation spending. Results are mixed.

Some state ARRA sites support the President’s promise that the $787 billion stimulus plan will be carried out with “an unprecedented level of transparency and accountability.” Other state sites are half-hearted efforts that provide residents little useful data on the largest federal stimulus since the New Deal.

Oklahoma comes out below average in STAR’s ratings. Oklahoma’s main site does a good job of centralizing program information and showing how funds are allocated in the state, but falls short in showing where money is being spent, which projects are being funded, and who is getting contracts. To this, we’d add that the site has an excellent compendium of news releases on the stimulus, but the site is  not always kept up to date.

The Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) site fares better in STAR’s rating, but still lags behind other states. It provides detail on individual projects and contracts, but offers no summary information on how much is being spent in a county, with a single contractor, or even how much is for new roads vs. resurfacing.

Also this week, OK Policy released its  second Stimulus Update, which evaluates over $700 million in ARRA infrastructure funding in Oklahoma. Nearly $400 million in Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT)  projects, mainly resurfacing of state highways, are under contract and spending has topped $40 million. Federal, state, local, and tribal governments will be replacing buses, rehabilitating airport runways and dams and flood control structures, and expanding water and waste water systems. Infrastructure programs, which make up eight percent of all ARRA spending, can help Oklahoma’s economic recovery and pave the way for economic growth and lower costs in the future. With improvements in our accountability efforts, we’ll be able to tell when and where projects are being funded, who is building them, and what they are accomplishing.

Our stimulus page includes the previous Stimulus Update, as well as our earlier stimulus issue brief and fact sheet and links to valuable ARRA resources.

Spending from the $787 billion stimulus bill, formally known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or ARRA, is underway. Since passage of the bill in February, payroll withholding for most employees has been decreased thanks to the Making Work Pay tax credit, and food stamp and unemployment benefits for those in need have been increased. Most of the attention, however, has focused on funds being allocated through state government.  A recent Oklahoman editorial suggested that as Oklahoma begins to put federal stimulus dollars into projects to fix roads and bridges and other purposes, “it’s time for the public to begin the laborious task of holding government accountable for the billions in stimulus money en route to the states.” We wholeheartedly agree.

Last week I had the opportunity to attend a conference hosted by Good Jobs First that was specifically concerned with developing strategies for an accountable recovery. Good Jobs First is working closely with the advocacy organization OMB Watch and with national and state coalitions across the country to help ensure that citizens have access to comprehensive and timely information on stimulus funds. The national partners, known as the Coalition for an Accountable Recovery, and the state partners, known as the States for a Transparent and Accountable Recovery (STAR) coalition, have both launched websites that collect key documents and news releases related to the Recovery Act; the STAR website also has a blog.  Both coalitions have a particularly strong interest in watchdogging which companies are benefiting from contracts (and to the extent possible, sub-contracts) funded with stimulus dollars.

Read the rest of this entry »