{"id":3813,"date":"2012-01-17T10:36:33","date_gmt":"2012-01-17T17:36:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/idaho\/?p=3813"},"modified":"2012-01-17T10:36:33","modified_gmt":"2012-01-17T17:36:33","slug":"idaho-pro-business-group-supports-state-health-insurance-exchange-eliminating-the-personal-property-tax","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateimpact.npr.org\/idaho\/2012\/01\/17\/idaho-pro-business-group-supports-state-health-insurance-exchange-eliminating-the-personal-property-tax\/","title":{"rendered":"Idaho Pro-Business Group Supports State Health Insurance Exchange, Eliminating the Personal Property Tax"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry<\/p>

Alex LaBeau has been president of IACI since 2006.<\/p><\/div>\n

The Idaho Association of Commerce & Industry is a statewide public policy organization that works on behalf of Idaho businesses.\u00a0 IACI<\/a> is the result of a merger between the Idaho Chamber of Commerce and the Associated Industries of Idaho.\u00a0 It’s one of the most powerful pro-business groups in the state.\u00a0 It has about 300 members, including companies in agribusiness, technology, construction, health care and real estate.\u00a0 Alex LaBeau is IACI’s president.\u00a0 StateImpact spoke with LaBeau at the beginning in January to learn more about the groups’ legislative priorities.<\/em><\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>What are your priorities for the 2012 legislative session?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>Our priorities are three-fold.\u00a0 One, we want to deal with the state healthcare exchange issues, that we\u2019re still trying to work through the nuances of the federal law, and some of the changes that keep coming at us from the feds resulting from different interpretations.\u00a0 We\u2019ll also be dealing with education reforms again.\u00a0 But those education reforms will be largely looking at the recommendations that came out of the interim committees that worked on the issue last year.\u00a0 So, we\u2019ll be looking for fully funding those, as well as working through some adjustments that need to be made.\u00a0 Finally, we\u2019ll be looking at some issues surrounding the personal property tax, and how you define it, what it is, and hopefully setting the state on a pathway to eliminate the personal property tax eventually but that will be dependent on the reaction we get from the Senate committee.\u00a0 <\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>IACI supports a state-run health insurance exchange, correct?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>Yes we do.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>What has been your involvement in working with lawmakers and the state on creating a state-run health insurance exchange?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>We\u2019ve been working on it with the Department of Insurance.\u00a0 We will be engaged in that process from start to finish.\u00a0 Ultimately, we have to make the decision that is in the best interest of our small businesses and individuals in this state.\u00a0 That\u2019s what exchange was constructed for.\u00a0 We also have to look at many of the practicalities with having a state exchange in the first place and what it means to the state of Idaho, what it means to the businesses to have that, and structurally how it will be formed.\u00a0 We believe the state is better off having a state-run exchange rather than a federally-run exchange.\u00a0 Then you get into the details, and creating an exchange, whether it\u2019s federal or state, is still a monumental proposition.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>Do you feel like a state exchange will be a tough sell for many legislators?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>Of course.\u00a0 Any issue of any magnitude like this is something that is going to be difficult for a number of legislators to deal with.\u00a0 I am hopeful these legislators put aside the ideological view of it and look at it from a practical standpoint, and a pragmatic standpoint of what is it we can do that makes good economic sense for the state of Idaho, what makes good sense for the citizens and what is important to the businesses impacted by this over the long-run.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>And as far as education reforms go, did you support those changes last session?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>Absolutely.\u00a0 You can\u2019t just do reforms without funding them.\u00a0 You have to go forward and continue to move forward with the plan and continue to look at adjustments that need to be made as we go along.\u00a0 Improving your education system is a continual effort, not just something you do one time and then walk away from it.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>You mentioned the personal property tax.\u00a0 Are there other ideas you\u2019re working on as far as changing the corporate and income tax rates?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>That\u2019s not our priority, but we have seen a number of proposals associated with dealing with the income and corporate income tax rates.\u00a0 There are a number of offsets in the state of Idaho for businesses that are already here.\u00a0 When you look at the corporate income tax rate of 7.6, the true effective rate is sometimes as low as 4 percent or even less.\u00a0 It depends on the business, but it\u2019s on a fairly rare basis that a C-corporation<\/a><\/strong> will be paying at the 7.6 rate.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>Could you support getting rid of any tax exemptions?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>No, we don\u2019t have a lot of exemptions in the state of Idaho.\u00a0 That issue was actually brought up by the gubernatorial candidate last year that ran against Butch Otter and was soundly defeated.\u00a0 The thing about it is, incentives matter and incentives work.\u00a0 All we have to do is look around the nation to see that incentives have been successful in not only recruiting new businesses to the state but also expanding specific operations a company may have.\u00a0 In terms of trying to get rid of exemptions, we\u2019d take a look at it, but we don\u2019t have a lot so you\u2019d be hard pressed to find something that isn\u2019t appropriate.\u00a0 So I would struggle with that.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>Last session lawmakers passed the Hire One Act<\/a>, an incentive program aimed at creating jobs.\u00a0 It expires at the end of this year.\u00a0 Do you want to see the Hire One Act extended?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>It absolutely needs to be expanded and extended.\u00a0 When it was adjusted in the Senate last year, it made it so that it wasn\u2019t as workable as it was coming in.\u00a0 It hasn\u2019t been as successful as we would like largely because it\u2019s not on par with counter-incentives in other states.\u00a0 I would really rather see that expanded and improved upon, because we\u2019re talking about new dollars coming into the system.\u00a0 We\u2019re not drawing dollars from an existing revenue stream to pay for that.\u00a0 I was disappointed ultimately with the way that legislation ended up, but it was good to have something on the books that we can expand upon.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>Do you know if any of your members are using Hire One, it\u2019s my understanding we won\u2019t get that data until taxes are due?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>We won\u2019t know that until tax time.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>What would you want to see added to Hire One?<\/p>\n

A: <\/span>Maybe something comparable to what South Carolina has.\u00a0 They have one for about $3,500 per new employee and there are very few restrictions on how that is used.\u00a0 Ours is about $1,000.<\/p>\n

Q: <\/span>Are there other types of incentive packages you\u2019re working on?<\/p>\n

Related<\/h4>
Posts<\/h5>