A Taxing Matter
How are taxes in your state? A recent compilation of statistics from the Tax Foundation provides the skinny on 32 different measures of taxation and fiscal policy and ranks all 50 states accordingly. Not surprisingly, certain Northeastern states fared the worst in several key metrics.
The 2011 edition of Facts & Figures: How Does Your State Compare? covers a range of measures including individual and corporate tax rates, business tax climates, and state and local tax burdens, along with tax rates on consumer goods such as gas, smokes and booze. "Balancing budgets and fostering economic growth will depend on every state keeping an eye on how competitive its tax system is--regionally, nationally and even internationally," says Scott Hodge, president of Tax Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit group that monitors fiscal policy.
Among the findings, Connecticut ranked the worst in state and local tax burden per capita, as per fiscal year 2009. That was followed by the usual high-tax suspects, in order: New Jersey, New York and Massachusetts. Maryland ranked as fifth worst, and California placed sixth. On the flip side, Mississippi had the least burdensome state and local taxes per capita, followed by South Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama and Alaska.
The Tax Foundation's state business tax climate index, an overall gauge based on five measures as of July 1, 2010, placed South Dakota as tops on the list. The next most-favorable climates belonged to Alaska, Wyoming, Nevada and Florida. The least favorable? In descending order: New York, California, New Jersey, Connecticut and Ohio.
Among other tidbits, Alabama had the lowest property tax collections; Hawaii and Oregon tied for the highest individual income tax rate; Nebraska had the highest cell phone taxes; and California had the highest state sales tax rate.
The Facts & Figures guidebook is available online at taxfoundation.org/publications/show/2181.html.
Why Millionaires Switch Advisors
The biggest pet peeve for most millionaire investors is advisors who don't call them back promptly, according to a study released Tuesday by the Spectrem Group.
Among the main reasons cited for leaving their financial advisor, 73% of respondents said the top reason was an advisor not returning phone calls in a timely manner. In that vein, other big reasons included unhappiness with slow e-mail response (57%) and an advisor who wasn't proactive in contacting them (56%). Surprisingly, these communication-related gripes seemed to hold equal or greater weight to bail on an advisor as failure to provide good ideas and advice (57%).
The Millionaire Investor 2010 study, which covered investors with a net worth between $1 million and $5 million, also found 72% of millionaires expect their advisor to call back within 12 hours. But that's not fast enough for some clients, as 26% expect a callback within two hours and 14% expect a response in one hour.
"Advisors who don't respond promptly to their millionaire clients' calls are playing with fire," says George H. Walper Jr., Spectrem Group's president.