AKs 4 Sustainable BudgetsLet's be clear. Those pushing to use PFD cuts to fund govt are advocating to ECONOMICALLY HARM 80% OF #AKFAMS (take more from their pockets than any other revenue option). #akleg #useless https://iseralaska.org/2026/01/alaskas-fiscal-options/
Monthly, we review indices of Alaska income. Overall, growth in personal consumption expenditures since 2017 has outpaced growth in personal income. Using regressive PFD cuts over the period to fund govt has had an even greater adverse impact on middle-income #AKfams. #akleg
As the charts demonstrate, the first approach spreads the burden proportionately among all #AKfams. The second, third & fourth are increasingly regressive, taking more from 80% of #AKfams than the first approach.
As a measure of regressivity, at current deficit levels, the second approach (POMV 50/50) takes 3x more from the Low20% than the Top1%; the third approach (POMV 25/75) takes 24x more, and the fourth approach takes 36x more.
4/end
How bad is Alaska fiscal policy? This bad. And generally speaking, no one in the #akleg - not even those who claim to prioritize middle & lower income #AKfams - is doing anything to fix it. https://alaskalandmine.com/landmines/brad-keithleys-chart-of-the-week-alaska-is-the-california-and-new-york-combined-of-regressive-tax-rates/
At the session's outset, the #akleg was presented with a range of options that would SIGNIFICANTLY reduce the fiscal burden on #AKfams, particularly outmigrating middle & lower-income #AKfams. We are STUNNED that neither Fin Comm is pursuing any of them. https://iseralaska.org/2026/01/alaskas-fiscal-options/
As the charts demonstrate, the first approach spreads the burden proportionately among all #AKfams. The second, third & fourth are increasingly regressive, taking more from 80% of #AKfams than the first approach.
As a measure of regressivity, at current deficit levels, the second approach (POMV 50/50) takes 3x more from the Low20% than the Top1%; the third approach (POMV 25/75) takes 22x more, and the fourth approach takes 36x more.
PFD cuts are about one thing only: protecting the Top20%, #NonRez & #OilCos from the costs of #akleg spending.
Rather than spreading the impact broadly, PFD cuts instead focus the burden almost entirely on middle- & lower-income #AKfams. https://alaskalandmine.com/landmines/brad-keithleys-chart-of-the-week-they-dont-really-object-to-free-money-they-just-want-more-of-it-to-flow-to-their-pockets-instead/
When PFD's are cut, the "free money" doesn't disappear. The benefit just transfers to the bank accounts of #NonRez, #OilCos & upper-income #AKfams.
As the charts demonstrate, the first approach spreads the burden proportionately among all #AKfams. The second, third & fourth are increasingly regressive, taking more from 80% of #AKfams than the first approach.
As a measure of regressivity, at current deficit levels, the second approach (POMV 50/50) takes 2x more from the Low20% than the Top1%; the third approach (POMV 25/75) takes 14x more, and the fourth approach takes 36x more.
4/end
