August bad month for state revenues

Tom Fahey reports in the Union Leader that August revenues are down, way down, from the budget forecast.

State revenues came in almost 16 percent lower than expected in August, although liquor and tobacco sales are well ahead of last year's performance.

The state collected $94 million during the month, compared to $111.5 million it hoped to collect.

Net liquor revenues and tobacco taxes produced a combined $33 million for the month, well over the $9 million that business taxes produced. In the first two months of this fiscal year, liquor revenue is up 14 percent over last year, and tobacco taxes, which went up 45 cents a pack on July 1 are 41 percent ahead of last year.

However, tobacco still missed its budget target for the month by $2 million and liquor was $1.2 million short of what needed to keep the budget in balance.

Fahey notes that August is traditionally a low revenue month, so missing the projections is less crucial. September brings in quarterly payments of the state's business taxes, and will go a long ways towards determining whether this budget will meet its revenue expectations.

Rep. Steve Vaillancourt had his analysis on the revenue report up yesterday, and offers a tax by tax rundown on the revenue shortfall over at Red Hampshire.

Worst. Revenue Estimates. Ever.

Kevin Landrigan takes up most of this Sunday column in the Nashua Telegraph covering politics, which is fine if you're interested in that sort of thing. Towards the end of the column, he reports on some budget analysis from State Representative Steve Vaillancourt on how far off the state's revenue estimates were for the last two years.

Off estimates

Let's hope legislative revenue experts are more accurate in their relatively conservative forecasts for the next year than they have been in the last one.

Rep. Steve Vaillancourt, R-Manchester, gives an assist with analysis.

Taxes and fees came up a stunning $307 million short in fiscal year 2009 for a 12.2 percent shortfall.

That's the worst estimating job the state has seen going back at least to 1998, the next biggest disappointment when the slippage was $543 million or 2.7 percent. (more)

Defenders of the disastrous 2008-2009 budget now claim that the national economic downturn is solely to blame for the revenue shortfall, but that's not true. The economy certainly hurt revenues throughout 2009, but this budget never had a chance of being balanced. Revenues were going to be far short of estimates before the ink was dry on the budget.

Revenue Shortfall is $306.8 Million!

Rep. Steve Vaillancourt has done some number crunching on the state's year-end revenue figures. It's not pretty:

The final numbers are out for the fiscal year, and the revenue shortfall for New Hampshire is $306.8 million. That does not include another $11.1 million shortfall in the highway fund.

The Conservative Case for HB 1

Rep. Steve Vaillancourt, who was live-blogging the budget negotiations before I showed up, makes the case why fiscal conservatives might consider voting for the state budget tomorrow. He saves his strongest argument for the end:

THE BEST REASON OF ALL–If this budget fails, the next one will probably be much worse with more–not less–spending and more–not fewer–tax increases and/or gambling.

Vaillancourt still hasn't decided whether to vote yes or no tomorrow, but argues giving budget writers another crack at taxpayers might make things worse.

T-Minus 24 Hours to Budget Deadline

Represenative Steve Vaillancourt offers a running commentary in the comments section at Red Hampshire on the ongoing budget negotiations at the State House (presented without edits):

I sat through the hour plus debate, and it was fascinating. Lou seemed like he was filibustering then Gallus and Hassan joined in pleading that the House accept the plan. I thought they won the argument, but the House simply said no. Chairman Smith went out of her way to be sweeet and gracious to Lou, and she bent over backwards to say she was not against gambling on moralistic grounds. She said it simply isn’t a relibable funding source and it would be unwise to rely on such a “narrow” source for such a big pot of money. It wasn’t a very persuavie argument, but we’re not scoring a debate here. It’s a question of one House vetoing another. Dan Eaton said he wasn’t against gambling but simply, as a Dem House leader coming up with votes, couldn’t get to 201. Neil Kurk made the plea that so much money in one source could lead to undue influence (he didn’t use the word corruption) like the railroads had in the 30s and Rock had in the 70s.

Biggest headline, as the 10 o’clock hour is here, after his gambling plan was shot down, Lou became petulant and said he would not vote for any new taxes during a depression. Looks like if he continues this hard line, he’ll have to be removed from the coference committee. President Larsen is here to do just that if need be. After a lovey dovey two hours, are the gloves about ready to come off in this after dark session.

This is all in the comments section, so just keep scrolling down. Looks like the adjourned at 11pm, with the big Senate (gambling and higher taxes) versus House (new taxes and higher taxes) question still to be resolved. The Committee of Confernece has to send the budget back to the full House and Senate by Thursday night. Should be fun.

PS- Don't you love that a State Rep is providing up to the minute updates on budget negotiations through the comments section of a website? He's making me feel lazy for not being there tonight. I might have to do a marathon live blog.