OCR Text |
Show I ' '"A' --' , ..irv-- w zxti ) J. v,y J ':JJ4; UINTAH COUNTY TAR SAND PIT was visited by state and national leaders last week. Standing on a tar sand ledge is, top right, Secretary of Energy Clifford W. Duncan, Jr., U.S. Rep. Gunn McKay, Governor Scott M. Matheson, and Uintah Uin-tah Basin Energy Director Charles R. Henderson. Seiles voSuffi rose 7.C in Vernal cored leas? year Business volume, as measured by local sales tax receipts increased by 47.4 in Vernal last year, according to an analysis just completed by Utah Foundation, the private tax research organization. A major factor in this increase, in-crease, however, was inflation which rose by 11.3 in 1979. The study shows that gross sales in Vernal last year totaled- $139,631,000. This compares with $ 94,712,000 in 1978, $44,236,000 in 1975, $16,852,000 in 1970, and $14,880,000 in 1965. Sales tax receipts increased in Roosevelt City 15.6 percent. County sales tax receipts were as follows compared com-pared to the previous year: Uintah 13.9 percent increase, Duchesne 17.4 percent per-cent increase, and Daggett 12.3 percent c Y . t . .'I ' , i' ' J i ELDER RONALD E. POELMAN to speak at conference. decrease. Total sales tax for 1979 for counties was as follows: Uintah $169,129, Duchesne $91,484, Daggett $3,993. Roosevelt City was $45,166. Throughout the state, business activity, activi-ty, as measured by the sales tax slackened in 1979. While total sales - volume in Utah rose by 10.7 last year, this was less than the inflation rate, and the "effective" sales volume, after adjustment ad-justment for inflatior, acutally declined by 0.5. Foundation analysts believe that this "decline" was a temporary aberration resulting from a number of unusual factors fac-tors and is not the reflection of a weak Utah economy. They note that the large number of sales tax refunds made last year may have distorted the sales volume data. In addition, the report cites the following special factors that slowed sales tax collections in 1979: 1. Escalating energy costs made a smaller portion of the average family budget available for expenditure on items that are subject to the sales tax. 2. Rising interest costs discouraged sales of high-priced items and encouraged en-couraged the repayment of old debts. 3. Higher gasoline costs contributed to a slowdown in the usual summer tourist business last year. 4. High motor fuel costs also resulted in reduced sales of large matierials, appliances, ap-pliances, furnishings, etc. Sales rose.... (Continued from Page 1) 5. Recession fears made people more cautious about undertaking new financial finan-cial commitments. As evidence that the slowdown in sales volume last year was caused by these special factors rather than by a weak economy, the Foundation noted that population growth and income growth were both strong in Utah. Last year, Utah's population increased by 50,000, or 3.8. Since 1970, the state's population has grown by more than 300,000, and Utah is the sixth fastest growing state in the nation. Total personal income in Utah rose by 15.4 last year. Even after adjustment adjust-ment for inflation, the "real" gain amounted to 3.7, a rate well above the U.S. average of 0.7 in 1979. Foundation analysts observe that personal income in Utah has been rising ris-ing at a much faster pace than that of the nation as a whole throughout the 1970's! Between 1970 and 1979, the increase in-crease in personal income (after adjustment ad-justment for inflation) has averaged 5.1 per year in Utah, compared with 2.9 per year throughout the U.S. Although personal income gains in Utah have been well above the U.S. average during the past decade, the reverse was true in the 1960's. Between 1960 and 1970, for example, adjusted personal income increase averaged 3.9 per year in Utah and 4.3 per year in the nation. Even though Utah's economy currently cur-rently is growing at a faster pace than ' that of the nation as a whole, the state still lags behind the U.S. average in per capita income. The study observes that the large number of children and non-income non-income producers is a major factor in this below-average showing. When personal per-sonal income is related only to the adult population, Utah is found to be only 5'z below the U.S. average rather than the 16.7 deficiency shown when personal income is related to total population. The report emphasizes, that the large number of children in the state results in higher governmental costs, especially especial-ly for public education. Education accounts ac-counts for nearly half of all state and local spending, and Utah leads the entire en-tire nation in the proportion of total spending going for education, because of its large student enrollment. |