Opinion
Some might deride it as a "rider" or even an "earmark," but the financial bailout act signed by the president recently carries a welcome piece of legislation for Alaskans.
Alaska editorial: Bailout to lower taxes in Alaska Exxon case 101008 OPINION 2 The following editorial first appeared in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner: Some might deride it as a "rider" or even an "earmark," but the financial bailout act signed by the president recently carries a welcome piece of legislation for Alaskans.
Friday, October 10, 2008

Story last updated at 10/10/2008 - 9:38 am

Alaska editorial: Bailout to lower taxes in Alaska Exxon case

Some might deride it as a "rider" or even an "earmark," but the financial bailout act signed by the president recently carries a welcome piece of legislation for Alaskans.

The addition will allow recipients of the Exxon Valdez oil spill punitive damages to average that income over three years when paying federal taxes. This ensures their tax rates won't jump up and they can keep more of the money.

The first checks, which average about $15,000, were expected to go out early this month to approximately 33,000 litigants. In addition to permitting income-averaging, recent legislation allows award recipients to put the money in retirement accounts or plans and exempts them from other taxes.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Rep. Don Young introduced this legislation in early 2007 after it became apparent that the Supreme Court would issue a final decision in the case. Murkowski had some success moving the legislation forward in the Senate, but the House leadership wasn't sympathetic. They couldn't be persuaded to accept the loss in federal tax revenue that the legislation might cause. Placing the legislation on the bailout bill was a clear success for the Alaska delegation.

Most of the people who will receive a settlement payment from Exxon are not wealthy and send a low to moderate percentage of their income to the federal government. The awards could boost their tax rates in the year they receive the money.

Allowing such a result would add insult to injury. These folks have waited almost two decades for this case to end. Many of the original litigants have died. At times across the years, many had been hoping for awards 10 times higher, based on earlier court decisions. These folks shouldn't be hit with a one-time tax rate that doesn't reflect their real living conditions.

ARTICLE LINKS: Printer Friendly Version| Email This Article| Commenting Policy


AP Video and News

Updated 8:03 AM ET
Israel halts campaign for 3 hours to let in aid
Stimulus aside, Obama vows future budget restraint
Democratic opposition to seating Burris cracks
Transcript: Mumbai gunmen were commanded by phone
CNN: Gupta approached about surgeon general post
Stock futures dip after Alcoa cuts jobs, output
Even in recession, CES to have stuff worth seeing
More News

Classifieds






Top Jobs

Loading...

Top Homes

Loading...

Top Rentals

Loading...

Top Boats

Loading...

Top Autos

Loading...

Top Jobs

Loading...

Top Homes

Loading...

Top Rentals

Loading...

Top Boats

Loading...

Top Autos

Loading...



News
Share
Shop
Life
Visit