OCR Text |
Show Report Discusses Budgeting 0? State's Revenue EDITOR'S NOTE: Research reports issued regularly by the Utah Foundation, a non-profit, tax study committee, carry information in-formation vital to every tax payer pay-er within the state. In the past we have published data taken from these "reports as an informational infor-mational service to our subscribers. subscrib-ers. . The following release, discusses discus-ses a major step taken by the 1947 legislature, namely the legislative leg-islative control of public funds in Utah. It is our hope that through the presentation of this information, the average tax payer pay-er will acquire some knowledge regarding Utah's tax structure. "ESTIMATED revenues for Utah State government from all pources for the 1948-1949 fiscal biennium total $103 million, of which $80 million will come from state taxes, licenses, and fees. Of the latter amount, $46 million, or 57 per cent. Is expendable, expen-dable, subject to appropriations approved by the legislature. The remaining $34 million, or 43 per cent, of tax revenue is earmarked earmark-ed for expenditure at the discretion discre-tion of administrators, pr in ar-cordance ar-cordance with a formula prescribed pre-scribed by law." The above statement features the 2nd research report on state government, released today by Utah Foundation, the non-profit, tax-studying organization. "Prior to the meeting of the 1947 legislature," the report says, "more than 80 per cent of Utah State tax revenues were available automatically to spending spend-ing agencies without the necessity neces-sity for biennial review or ap-prorjriation ap-prorjriation by the legislature. "the -1947 Utah Legislature took steps to bring principal state revenues and . expenditures for two of the three major activities of state government under legislative leg-islative control. -Welfare and highway functions were placed under operating budgets, approved ap-proved and appropriated for by the legislature. Education costs, the other of the three major state expenditure items, were placed pn a continuing formula basis, supported mainly frpm .earmarked revenues" IN commenting, the Utah Foundation report said: "The es-. sential difference between activities acti-vities operating on earmarked revenues and those operating under legislative appropriations is the fact that agencies requiring requir-ing biennial appropriations must j present a complete accounting of their stewardship to the Legislature Legis-lature every two years, and secure se-cure affirmative action by that body approving their " programs for the following biennium. "In the case of functions or agencies operated from earmarked earmark-ed revenues, supporting funds continue to become available for their activities as long as the Legislature does not act to change their situation. It is a well-known fact that it is easier to prevent legislative changes than it is to secure legislative approval. ap-proval. Legislative inertia, the power of a willful minority, or the lack of time, for adequate consideration may operate to prevent pre-vent any action being taken by the Legislature. For activities not requiring appropriations, the absence of legislative action does ' not disturb the existing program." pro-gram." ' |