Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
P a r t A : T a x C o l l e c t i o n s
We anticipate combined General and Education funds collections will end FY 2014 $25 million to $150 million above the May 2014 target. We believe the Transportation Fund will end FY 2014 $5 million below to $10 million above target. The largest portion of the potential GF/EF surplus is due to above target growth in the income tax. Within the income tax, the strength is largely the result of higher-than-anticipated gross final payments, coming in at around $870 million, or a decline of around 6 percent over FY 2013 final payments. We had anticipat-ed a decline of approximately 17 percent. Behind the realized decline in gross final payments is tax-induced shifting and continued strong performance of financial asset pric-es. Instead of a steady increase in final payments across the eco-nomic recovery, final payments jumped in FY 2013 and then gave up some of that increase in FY 2014. The major tax changes inflict-ing the tax shifting were increases in the top marginal tax rate, small business input changes, and investment income taxes. Overall the economic outlook for Utah remains strong. Employ-ment in the western states is doing particularly well: Arizona, Col-orado, Oregon, Idaho and Utah are five of the 10 states forecasters expect to have the highest growth rates through 2014. Utah is also ranked number one for economic outlook in the report Rich States, Poor States, 2014 (American Legislative Exchange Council, 2014). The methodology used indicates that the state is poised for growth and prosperity going forward. The state has received this ranking for the past seven years. In the same report Utah is ranked second for economic performance. The diverse economy of the state has allowed it to weather some of the potential uncer-tainty and continue the trend of economic growth. Steady home construction, robust investment in high tech and the aerospace industry, and trade with Asia are a few of the reasons why busi-nesses in Utah are doing comparatively so well. Housing will continue to contribute to the growth in the economy through 2014 and 2015, as evidenced by construction employ-ment and housing permits. Construction employment is expected to grow by about 12,000 from 2013 to 2015, or about 16 percent. Additionally, the residential permit values and the number of dwelling permits are expected to grow by $158.9 million and 15,000 respectively for 2014. The baseline strong growth scenario comes with some downside risks include a slowdown in growth in China, higher gasoline pric-es, geopolitical risks between Russia and Ukraine, continued growth in some unprofitable student debt, and potential effects from finicky financial markets.
Utah Legislature June 2014
Revenue Update CONTRIBUTORS: ANDREA WILKO, PH.D., THOMAS YOUNG, PH.D., AND ANGELA OH
LFA LEGISLATIVE FISCAL ANALYST
$3,300
$3,800
$4,300
$4,800
$5,300
FY2000
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
FY2004
FY2005
FY2006
FY2007
FY2008
FY2009
FY2010
FY2011
FY2012
FY2013
FY2014
In M
illi
on
s
Combined General and Education Fund Revenue
Actual FY 2014 High FY 2014 Low FY 2014 Forecast
See Detail View
$4,650
$4,750
$4,850
$4,950
$5,050
$5,150
$5,250
$5,350
$5,450
FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014
In M
illi
on
s
Detail View
Actual FY 2014 High FY 2014 Low FY 2014 Forecast
488 487
396381
432
550
745
902
963
753
614
669689
922
870
350
450
550
650
750
850
950
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
20
14
Gross Final Payments
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 2
We expect General Fund revenue to end FY 2014 $25 million below to $25 million above the May FY 2014 target. Of the GF revenue sources, oil and gas severance tax is in the strongest condition, currently up 50 percent over the prior year. The strength in this severance tax type is largely the re-sult of a recovery in the price of natural gas. Since bottoming in 2012 at $2.82 per thousand cubic feet, the price of natural gas has increased to around $4.35 today. Cigarette and tobacco taxes are in the weakest condition. Since jumping to almost $130 million following the tax increase, ciga-rette and tobacco taxes have consistently declined, down $25 million on a 365 day moving average basis.
We anticipate the Transportation Fund will end FY 2014 be-tween $5 million below and $10 million above target.
In terms of the float throughout the year, revenue to the Trans-portation Fund started the year off in deficit territory until about March, only briefly floating in surplus territory for No-vember. Since March, collections have generally floated in a surplus position.
The switch since March is partially the result of reduced gas prices during the winter months. The price of gasoline peaked in June 2013 at $3.76 per gallon and bottomed at around $3.04 per gallon for the week of December 13, 2013. The lower gaso-line prices for the first quarter of CY 2014 appears to have in-duced more travel. On outlook, the recent increase in gas pric-es may put downward pressure on consumption.
General Fund A1 Transportation Fund A2
Transportation Fund—Surplus/Deficit Float
General Fund—Surplus/Deficit Float
280
300
320
340
360
380
400
04
Jan
20
13
18
Jan
20
13
01
Feb
20
13
15
Feb
20
13
01
Mar
20
13
15
Mar
20
13
29
Mar
20
13
12
Ap
r 2
01
3
26
Ap
r 2
01
3
10
May
20
13
24
May
20
13
07
Ju
n 2
01
3
21
Ju
n 2
01
3
05
Ju
l 20
13
19
Ju
l 20
13
02
Au
g 2
01
3
16
Au
g 2
01
3
30
Au
g 2
01
3
13
Sep
20
13
27
Sep
20
13
11
Oct
20
13
25
Oct
20
13
08
No
v 2
01
3
22
No
v 2
01
3
06
Dec
20
13
20
Dec
20
13
03
Jan
20
14
17
Jan
20
14
31
Jan
20
14
14
Feb
20
14
28
Feb
20
14
14
Mar
20
14
28
Mar
20
14
11
Ap
r 2
01
4
25
Ap
r 2
01
4
09
May
20
14
Gasoline Price, Utah, Cents per GallonSource: Moody's
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
$90,000,000
$100,000,000
$110,000,000
$120,000,000
$130,000,000
$140,000,000
6/3
0/2
00
7
9/3
0/2
00
7
12
/31
/20
07
3/3
1/2
00
8
6/3
0/2
00
8
9/3
0/2
00
8
12
/31
/20
08
3/3
1/2
00
9
6/3
0/2
00
9
9/3
0/2
00
9
12
/31
/20
09
3/3
1/2
01
0
6/3
0/2
01
0
9/3
0/2
01
0
12
/31
/20
10
3/3
1/2
01
1
6/3
0/2
01
1
9/3
0/2
01
1
12
/31
/20
11
3/3
1/2
01
2
6/3
0/2
01
2
9/3
0/2
01
2
12
/31
/20
12
3/3
1/2
01
3
6/3
0/2
01
3
9/3
0/2
01
3
12
/31
/20
13
3/3
1/2
01
4
Cigarette and Tobacco Tax365 Day Moving Average
-50
-30
-10
10
30
50
7/1
/13
7/1
5/1
3
7/2
9/1
3
8/1
2/1
3
8/2
6/1
3
9/9
/13
9/2
3/1
3
10
/7/1
3
10
/21
/13
11
/4/1
3
11
/18
/13
12
/2/1
3
12
/16
/13
12
/30
/13
1/1
3/1
4
1/2
7/1
4
2/1
0/1
4
2/2
4/1
4
3/1
0/1
4
3/2
4/1
4
4/7
/14
4/2
1/1
4
5/5
/14
5/1
9/1
4
6/2
/14
-50
-30
-10
10
30
50
7/1
/13
7/1
5/1
3
7/2
9/1
3
8/1
2/1
3
8/2
6/1
3
9/9
/13
9/2
3/1
3
10
/7/1
3
10
/21
/13
11
/4/1
3
11
/18
/13
12
/2/1
3
12
/16
/13
12
/30
/13
1/1
3/1
4
1/2
7/1
4
2/1
0/1
4
2/2
4/1
4
3/1
0/1
4
3/2
4/1
4
4/7
/14
4/2
1/1
4
5/5
/14
5/1
9/1
4
6/2
/14
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 3
We believe the Education Fund will end FY 2014 $50 million to $125 million above the May target, most of which is due to net final payments coming in above expectations. The largest revenue component of the Education Fund is withholding, which con-tinues to float slightly below the 4 percent target.
Outside of the income tax, corporate income tax is the sec-ond largest revenue source to the Education Fund. Overall, corporate tax revenue is down about 10 percent over FY 2013, largely due to payments that are classified as “Late/Other” payments. When looking at the normal quarterly and annual revenue payment time frames, revenue in FY 2014 is close to FY 2013 revenue by filing period.
The Education Fund is largely made up of taxes on income earned by individuals at work. A couple major shifts in the employment arena affecting the makeup of Education Fund revenue include the shift to contract/online work, new hires earning less money, and many college graduates earning less than expected.
Shift to contract work: A major component of shift in the Education Fund is the shift in the labor market from employee work to online/independent contractor work. Depending on the ability of the individual, this may result in increased or decreased earnings potential.
New hires making less: The year-over growth rate in
hiring during the post-recession expansion in Utah was an
average of 10.7 percent per year. At the same time new-
hire earnings grew 2.3 percent per year statewide. Alt-
hough the number of new hires increased significantly in
the state after 2009, both areas had only recovered ap-
proximately 80 percent of the quarterly new hires generat-
ed at the peak of the business cycle in 2007.
Younger college degree recipients earn less: Individu-als graduating from college continue to be generally disap-pointed with the earnings offered from prospective em-ployers. College graduates with mispriced earnings poten-tial may experience a prolonged return to college. It also may result in certain college degrees turning out to be un-profitable. This matters for revenue in that a globally un-competitive workforce generally has less tax revenue asso-ciated with the employment activity as does an individual graduating from college in say the 1980s or 1990s.
Education Fund A3
Education Fund—Surplus/Deficit Float
$8
1
$5
9
$5
2
$5
3
$3
7
$5
9
$8
5
$2
1
$5
3
$5
4
$3
6
$0
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$90
Mo
stly
Fin
alP
aym
ents
20
13
Lat
eP
aym
ents
/Oth
er
Mo
stly
3rd
Qu
arte
r2
01
3
Mo
stly
4th
Qu
arte
r2
01
3
Mo
stly
1st
Qu
arte
r2
01
4
Mo
stly
2n
d Q
uar
ter
20
14
Mil
lio
ns
Corporate Income Tax Payments by Payment Type
FY 2013 FY 2014
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
7/1
/20
13
7/1
6/2
01
3
7/3
1/2
01
3
8/1
5/2
01
3
8/3
0/2
01
3
9/1
4/2
01
3
9/2
9/2
01
3
10
/14
/20
13
10
/29
/20
13
11
/13
/20
13
11
/28
/20
13
12
/13
/20
13
12
/28
/20
13
1/1
2/2
01
4
1/2
7/2
01
4
2/1
1/2
01
4
2/2
6/2
01
4
3/1
3/2
01
4
3/2
8/2
01
4
4/1
2/2
01
4
4/2
7/2
01
4
Withholding: Float Throughout the Fiscal Year
Target = 4%
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
7/1
/13
7/1
5/1
3
7/2
9/1
3
8/1
2/1
3
8/2
6/1
3
9/9
/13
9/2
3/1
3
10
/7/1
3
10
/21
/13
11
/4/1
3
11
/18
/13
12
/2/1
3
12
/16
/13
12
/30
/13
1/1
3/1
4
1/2
7/1
4
2/1
0/1
4
2/2
4/1
4
3/1
0/1
4
3/2
4/1
4
4/7
/14
4/2
1/1
4
5/5
/14
5/1
9/1
4
6/2
/14
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 4
P a r t B : E c o n o m i c I n d i c a t o r s
Employment Growth by Industry. Employ-ment is expected to grow at the long run aver-age of 3.1 percent in 2014. All private sector industries are showing growth based on the most recent labor market data. The largest overall employment increases were in Trade, Transportation and Utilities (8,400 jobs), Lei-sure and Hospitality (6,500 jobs), and Govern-ment (4,500 jobs). The strongest growth rates were in Construction (6.3 percent), Lei-sure and Hospitality (5.3 percent), and Other Services (4.7 percent). Employment Cycle. Viewing the employ-ment picture from the business cycle perspec-tive shows that the current recovery is the worst since World War II. The baseline case is for continued employment growth over the next two years, akin to the long 1980s and 1990s recovery. If some of the headwinds materialize, the employment growth cycle could turn out to be more similar to the 2001 or 1974 situation, which saw employment growth weaken at around 85 months. The current growth cycle is at 75 months.
Part-time Employment. The Bureau of La-bor Statistics identifies two groups of part-time workers: 1) individuals working part-time for economic reasons. They would prefer to work full time and as a result are regarded as involuntary part-time workers. 2) Volun-tary part time workers are those working part-time as a preference. Nationally, individ-uals working part-time for economic reasons is still elevated at about 50 percent above where it stood in 2008. Overall, when viewed from the full-time employment perspective, the labor market is still weak. The national employment picture matters for businesses in Utah in that it affects external demand, com-petitiveness, and the ability to add value.
Average Hourly Earnings. Generally a sign of labor market tightness, average hourly earnings has been stuck at around 2 percent (Y/Y) for the past five years, only briefly jumping to above 3 percent territory in the summer and fall months of 2011 (smoothed, four quarter moving average basis). Overall, wage inflation peaked in the latter half of 2009 at around 6 percent. The lack of strong wage pressure is a factor preventing inflation from picking up.
Employment & Earnings B1
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
May
195
5O
ct 1
956
Mar
195
8A
ug 1
959
Jan
1961
Jun
1962
Nov
196
3A
pr 1
965
Sep
1966
Feb
1968
Jul 1
969
Dec
197
0M
ay 1
972
Oct
197
3M
ar 1
975
Aug
197
6Ja
n 19
78Ju
n 19
79N
ov 1
980
Apr
198
2Se
p 19
83Fe
b 19
85Ju
l 198
6D
ec 1
987
May
198
9O
ct 1
990
Mar
199
2A
ug 1
993
Jan
1995
Jun
1996
Nov
199
7A
pr 1
999
Sep
2000
Feb
2002
Jul 2
003
Dec
200
4M
ay 2
006
Oct
200
7M
ar 2
009
Aug
201
0Ja
n 20
12Ju
n 20
13
Employed Part-time for Economic Reasons(U.S., Ths., SA); Source: BLS
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7%
Total
Natural Resources
Construction
Manufacturing
Trade/Transportation/Utilities
Information
Financial Activities
Professional/Business Services
Education/Health Services
Leisure/Hospitality Services
Other Services
Government
Employment Percent Change March 2013-2014Source: Utah Department of Employment Security
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
Dec
embe
r-91
Dec
embe
r-92
Dec
embe
r-93
Dec
embe
r-94
Dec
embe
r-95
Dec
embe
r-96
Dec
embe
r-97
Dec
embe
r-98
Dec
embe
r-99
Dec
embe
r-00
Dec
embe
r-01
Dec
embe
r-02
Dec
embe
r-03
Dec
embe
r-04
Dec
embe
r-05
Dec
embe
r-06
Dec
embe
r-07
Dec
embe
r-08
Dec
embe
r-09
Dec
embe
r-10
Dec
embe
r-11
Dec
embe
r-12
Dec
embe
r-13
Average Annual Wage Growth - UT(Smoothed at 4Q Moving Average); Source: LFA, BLS
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 5
Every occupied housing unit constitutes a household. Households can be comprised of fam-ilies, single individuals, unrelated individuals, or a combination of families and unrelated individuals. Historically household formation rises consistently with age.
What it really takes to sustain an entire housing market is two things: household formation and births. In recent years, household formation and births are being delayed because in general young people have had a tough time in this economy. Since 2007, many young peo-ple have not been able to get the jobs they expected out of college, and many are saddled with high levels of consumer and student debt. Additionally, a large portion of these young people are living with their parents. As a result, we have seen a hindrance on the housing sector.
Looking at data trends from 2006 to 2015, we have seen a drop in the number of house-holds formed by the 34 year and younger category. With weak job prospects, a slowdown and wage growth, and involuntary unemployment still elevated the younger population is still financially insecure. This population group could be delayed as much as 10 years in their home purchases.
Housing choices for many of these individuals has shifted towards renting. Because of this, as household formation improves there is still a question as to how much of the growth in the future will increase demand for single-family housing units or rental units.
In a good market, homeownership is the result of people getting married, forming a house-hold, having kids, buying at the bottom, and accumulating wealth. Since the Great Reces-sion we have not seen that trend the way we did in previous decades. In fact, the decline in household formations is likely the main reason the housing industry did not play its tradi-tional role in the most recent economic recovery.
Until we see more household formation take on a very strong tone, we probably are not going to see real significant gains, preventing a return of what we generally consider a strong real estate market. Moody’s Analytics estimates that each new household leads to $145,000 of economic activity as a result the decrease in household formation could have a broader impact on overall economic growth.
Household Formation B2
28%
29%
29%
30%
30%
31%
31%
32%
32%
33%
19
70
Q1
19
71
Q2
19
72
Q3
19
73
Q4
19
75
Q1
19
76
Q2
19
77
Q3
19
78
Q4
19
80
Q1
19
81
Q2
19
82
Q3
19
83
Q4
19
85
Q1
19
86
Q2
19
87
Q3
19
88
Q4
19
90
Q1
19
91
Q2
19
92
Q3
19
93
Q4
19
95
Q1
19
96
Q2
19
97
Q3
19
98
Q4
20
00
Q1
20
01
Q2
20
02
Q3
20
03
Q4
20
05
Q1
20
06
Q2
20
07
Q3
20
08
Q4
20
10
Q1
20
11
Q2
20
12
Q3
20
13
Q4
Households per PopulationSource: LFA, Moody's
Number of Households Headed by Age Group
2006 to 2015(Source: LFA, Moody's)
Under 25
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-59
60-64
65-74
75-84
85+
2006 2010 2015
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 6
HEADWINDS
Financial world. Although lowering the federal funds tar-get rate to near zero and attempting to induce risk-taking by purchasing long term financial assets (quantitative easing), the Federal Reserve’s actions appear to have had little effect on real economic activity. Effects of Federal Reserve policy have shown up in other places, such as in the prices of stocks and other financial assets. Indications out of the Federal Reserve are that they may, within the year, completely wind down their asset purchase programs and begin to increase the federal funds target rate in 2015 (i.e. the beginning of the end of Fed “loosening”). Should a “less-loose” Federal Reserve cause finan-cial markets to re-price risk, it may cause deterioration in asset prices, which might affect income tax payments and taxable sales.
China. When measured by GDP (final demand), the econo-my in China is set to become the biggest in the world in 2019, surpassing the United States. This will be the first time since 1872 that another country has had a bigger economy. This mat-ters for revenue indirectly, in that economic conditions on the eastern part of the globe matter now more than ever in revenue projections. Should business conditions in China decelerate as anticipated, U.S. conditions would slow.
Europe. Conditions in the old world have taken an opposite course from that in the United States.
Geopolitical risk. The situation in Ukraine poses risks to investments by Russians in the United States and by Americans in Russia. International conditions matter for state tax collec-tions in that residents’ income and wealth, to one degree or an-other, are connected with international economic conditions. Should individuals and businesses shift towards a risk-average view of the world economy, it would likely result in reduced tax collections.
Debt. The burden of past unprofitable debt continues to dampen economic growth. Among the debt types causing shifts in behavior are student debt where the investment hasn’t paid off and federal government debt.
TAILWINDS
Business Investment. The driver of the recovery has been investment activity. Should investment continue to be strong, economic growth would likely accelerate.
Investable Cash. Global cash is high, with corporations and governments holding historically high balances in liquid assets. Should this cash get moved, the global economy may pick up.
Residential Investment. Bottoming in 2010, investment in the residential real estate sector has some room to go before it’s back to a normal component of the overall economy.
Global Headwinds and Tailwinds on the Economic Event Horizon B3
Share of Global GDP—2019
Share of Global GDP—1990
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Real Estate Investment as Percentage of GDPSources: LFA, RAWG, BEA
Real Estate Investment as % of GDP (Forecast) Real Estate Investment as % of GDP
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Jan
uar
y-0
9
Mar
ch-0
9
May
-09
July
-09
Sep
tem
ber
-09
Nov
emb
er-0
9
Jan
uar
y-1
0
Mar
ch-1
0
May
-10
July
-10
Sep
tem
ber
-10
Nov
emb
er-1
0
Jan
uar
y-1
1
Mar
ch-1
1
May
-11
July
-11
Sep
tem
ber
-11
Nov
emb
er-1
1
Jan
uar
y-1
2
Mar
ch-1
2
May
-12
July
-12
Sep
tem
ber
-12
Nov
emb
er-1
2
Jan
uar
y-1
3
Mar
ch-1
3
May
-13
July
-13
Sep
tem
ber
-13
Nov
emb
er-1
3
Jan
uar
y-1
4
Mar
ch-1
4Europe and U.S. Unemployment Rates
Sources: BLS, Trading Economics
U.S. Unemployment Rate Europe Unemployment Rate
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 7
H.B. 311 “Budgeting Amendments” directs the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst and the Governor’s Office of Man-agement and Budget to include in the analysis of revenue esti-mates a comparison of current estimates to 15-year trends by tax type. Of the potential models that extract out the trend and the cy-clical components of the business cycle, the following pre-sents four model results: simple linear trend, a Hodrick-Prescott trend, the Christiano-Fitzgerald trend, and the But-terworth trend. As a note, all models assume that the methodology behind constructing the 15-year trends limits the historical infor-mation include 15 years of actual data. Only the two largest revenue sources — income tax and sales tax — are shown. A simple linear trend estimates a best fit line between the actual figures. The next three trends divide the time series into a trend and cycle component.
Actual Experience = Trend + Cycle.
Of the models available to extract out the trend and cyclical components of a time series, three commonly used methods are the Hodrick-Prescott trend (HP), the Christiano-Fitzgerald trend (CF), and the Butterworth trend (B). Each of these and other trend possibilities will be addressed later on this year. In terms of the difference in results, the following table presents what each model produces as the cycle for the income tax and sales tax history. Overall, the linear trend is most volatile, producing, for example, an in-come tax cycle peak of $427 million in 2007 and a cycle trough of $332 million in 2007.
15 Year Revenue Trend B4
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$2,000
$2,200
$2,400
$2,600
$2,800
$3,000
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
Mill
ion
s
INCOME TAX AND TRENDS
Income Tax HP Trend CF Trend Butterworth Trend Linear (Income Tax)
Income Tax Cycle (millions)
Fiscal Year Linear HP CF B
2007 $427 $263 $234 $210 2008 $340 $241 $215 $205 2009 -$46 -$46 -$74 -$44 2010 -$332 -$269 -$288 -$232 2011 -$219 -$130 -$118 -$82 2012 -$105 -$72 -$29 -$54 2013 $208 $188 $247 $145
Sales Tax Cycle (millions)
Fiscal Year Linear HP CF B
2007 $33 $145 $123 $119 2008 $11 $54 $38 $42 2009 -$1 -$55 -$61 -$46 2010 -$23 -$192 -$183 -$171 2011 -$5 $24 $54 $47 2012 -$7 $9 $42 $15 2013 -$9 $39 $54 $21 -$300
-$200
-$100
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
SALES TAX AND CYCLESSales Linear Cycle Sales HP Cycle Sales CF Inc Cycle Sales B Cycle
-$400
-$300
-$200
-$100
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
INCOME TAX AND CYCLESIncome Linear Cycle Income HP Cycle Income CF Inc Cycle Income B Cycle
$1,200
$1,300
$1,400
$1,500
$1,600
$1,700
$1,800
$1,900
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
20
13
SALES TAX AND TRENDS
Sales Tax HP Trend CF Trend
Butterworth Trend Linear (Sales Tax)
OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE FISCAL ANALYST
STATE CAPITOL COMPLEX - HOUSE BUILDING, SUITE W310
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5310
PHONE: (801) 538-1034 FAX: (801) 538-1692
WEBSITE: WWW.LE.UTAH.GOV/LFA
RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED
P a r t C : R e v e n u e C o l l e c t i o n s
LFA LEGISLATIVE FISCAL ANALYST
R E V E N U E U P D A T E - J U N E 20 14 P A G E 8
FY 2014
Consensus FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2014
Tax Revenue FY 2013 FY 2014 Growth Year-to-Date Year-to-Date Year-to-Date
(In Millions of Dollars) Final Consensus Rate (6/9/2013) (6/9/2014) Growth Rate
Sales & Use Taxes $1,616.19 $1,651.46 2.2% $1,497.37 $1,541.38 2.9%
Individual Income Tax 2,852.02 2,781.64 -2.5% 2,651.47 2,671.58 0.8%
Corporate Franchise Tax 338.20 291.39 -13.8% 280.11 259.14 -7.5%
Beer, Cigarette & Tobacco 120.86 116.49 -3.6% 112.76 105.52 -6.4%
Insurance Premium Taxes 89.59 94.88 5.9% 89.09 90.68 1.8%
Severance Taxes 70.11 85.34 21.7% 76.06 105.08 38.2%
Other Sources 232.34 237.04 2.0% 112.82 106.98 -5.2%
Total - General & Education Funds $5,319.31 $5,258.24 -1.1% $4,819.67 $4,880.36 1.3%
Motor Fuel Tax $256.87 $253.34 -1.4% 226.39 229.00 1.2%
Special Fuel Taxes 101.36 99.00 -2.3% 85.04 86.62 1.9%
Other Transportation Fund 81.18 83.99 3.5% 73.84 74.28 0.6%
Total - Transportation Fund $439.41 $436.33 -0.7% $385.27 $389.90 1.2%
Source: LFA, USTC, DOF
