Download. Print. Copy. Educate others with visual guides to Measures 66 & 67.

Chuck Sheketoff

Which businesses are going to be paying more taxes under Measure 67, and which won’t? Which Oregonians will pay more and which Oregonians will get a tax cut on their personal income taxes under Measure 66?

Oregonians now have an easy way to answer those questions with two flowcharts by the Oregon Center for Public Policy.

The flowcharts are designed to bring clarity to the debate over Measures 66 and 67. We want to help the public and the media understand how the two measures work.

The impetus for the charts was the widespread confusion about who will be paying more taxes, and how much they will pay. The opposition campaign is banking on fear and misinformed voters to beat the odds.

People, not corporations, vote. And because only 3 out of 100 taxpayers will see their taxes increase while about 270,000 of Oregon’s 1.5 million taxpayers will have a tax cut under Measure 66, the odds are in favor of the “yes on Measures 66 & 67” side if people really understand how the measures work.

The flowchart for Measure 66 (PDF) allows voters to determine quickly whether they are among the 270,000 taxpayers who will get a tax cut in 2009 because they received unemployment benefits and whether they are among the 97 out of 100 taxpayers who will not see their personal income taxes rise.

The flowchart for Measure 67 (PDF) illustrates how the starting point for determining the measure’s impact on a business, if any, is the type of business entity at issue. With one step, the owners of proprietorships can see that they will not experience any tax increase. It also takes only one step for other small business owners — the owners of partnerships, limited liability partnerships, limited liability companies and S-corporations — to see that will pay just $150, no more, as a result of Measure 67.

The flowcharts help voters understand the few additional steps involved for C-corporations, those corporations that pay federal taxes under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code. Under Measure 67, C-corporations first must determine their tax liability based on their taxable income and then subtract their tax credits. They then compare the result with a new minimum tax schedule established by Measure 67 and pay the greater of the two.

As Oregonians discuss Measures 66 and 67 and as the media reports on the issues, these flowcharts will be handy tools to unmask the confusion and put to rest the unwarranted fears that the opponents are creating.

Download both visual flowcharts explaining Measures 66 and 67 (both combined in one PDF).

Ocpp_final_1 Chuck Sheketoff is the executive director of the Oregon Center for Public Policy.   You can sign up to receive email notification of OCPP materials at

  • (Show?)

    Thanks Chuck,

    This will come in really handy in educating students over the next few weeks.

  • jamieeee (unverified)

    You forgot to mention that the corporations will pass the tax on to their customers - YOU & ME.

  • andy (unverified)

    If everyone benefits from these increased taxes then why should only 3 people out of 100 pay the taxes? Shouldn't everyone be in this together? Or is this some sort of mob rule where the majority stick it to the minority who they don't like?

  • Pedro (unverified)

    Chuck these are great!

    Simple, easy to read and comprehend.

    Let's get a set of these into every mail box in the state.

    One minor addition: State the line number on Form 40 for taxpayers to look up their taxable income on the measure 66 pdf.

  • Bill Bodden (unverified)

    "You forgot to mention that the corporations will pass the tax on to their customers - YOU & ME."

    If the corporations don't pay their fair share of taxes, who will pay to provide revenue to keep the state from going belly-up like California? YOU & ME.

  • mp97303 (unverified)

    The chart for M67 is fantastic. I think it should be on the front page of every newspaper in the state. Only then will everyone see that what we are talking about is taxing those without taxable income.

    It's funny, when you talk to people about the minimum tax and explain why a company pays it, their response is usually, "yeah, that makes sense."

  • riverat (unverified)

    You forgot to mention that the corporations will pass the tax on to their customers - YOU & ME.

    So if I spend $1000 with some business they'll have to raise their price to at most $1001 to cover the tax under measure 67. That's fine with me.

  • LT (unverified)

    MP---look on the simplest Oregon form and notice the deductions---standard deduction, etc.

    Imagine a person got laid off and they were only working part time before layoff. Imagine they got unemployment benefits because of the layoff.

    Please explain how, if that person's taxable income was 0 (less than the standard deduction etc.) but the unemployment benefits were taxed how that is different than your complaint "taxing those without taxable income."

    Then explain why it is OK to vote against something that would end the tax on umemployment benefits.

    Or is it OK to tax unemployed individuals and just wrong to tax corporations?

  • mp97303 (unverified)


    If it is so important to remove the tax on unemployment, and I agree that it is, then the Leg should have passed it in session, not tacked it on to these bills.

    The only reason it is in this measure is so people like you can make the argument that a no vote is a vote against the poor. It's BS, and most of us see right through it.

  • alcatross (unverified)

    Curious you chose to spell out the tax rate increases on the chart for Measure 67 but take it upon yourself to just say the Measure 66 tax rate increases are 'modest' - rather than present the information in a similar unbiased fashion to let voters decide for themselves whether they consider the tax rate increases to be 'modest' or not.

    But your goal is only to set the 97 of 100 taxpayers against the 3 on Measure 66 rather than present information in a non-judgemental manner. 'Where facts matter' indeed...

  • (Show?)

    Chuck, I have already used your flow charts on M 66 & 67 at two Town Hall meetings in my district to good effect and sent my constituents home with them. They made it much easier than I expected to explain the measures.

    Andy apparently does not know that the high income earners in Oregon already pay a substantially lower rate of combined state and local taxes than any lower income earners and that these measures will still leave them at a lower rate than other taxpayers. Very high income earners are are currently being subsidized by those who earn less.

  • JAC (unverified)

    Looks like my tax clients in Oregon who are single member LLC's (including myself) that file a Federal Schedule C will now pay Oregon $150.00 a year, up from $50.00, to be a LLC. It's probably still a good decision for most of my small business clients for the LLC legal liability protection. However, I can also see that many of my Oregon C-corp. clients will shut down and become a LLC if this goes forward to avoid a gross receipts sales tax. Especially when they're not making any profit in this Oregon economy.

    BTW - government services, programs, and education are funded by people and businesses that make profits to pay taxes. No private enterprise profits, no personal income, no funds to pay taxes, no money for government programs...

    Shot term thinking for tax money now may cause negative long term consequences to Oregon’s economy and tax funding. Isn’t it similar to short term profits thinking by businesses that cost it long term sustainability consequences?


  • Bob Wiggins (unverified)

    Rep. Barnhart, you've made an interesting assertion--that "high income earners in Oregon already pay a substantially lower rate of combined state and local taxes than any lower income earners and that these measures will still leave them at a lower rate than other taxpayers. Very high income earners are are currently being subsidized by those who earn less."

    Let's consider that assertion for a moment. Oregon's main source of tax revenue comes from the income tax. The Oregon income tax reaches 9% at very low income levels (which would certainly be worth revisiting in an overall review of our tax structure), but it stays at 9% all the way up. Under the new tax hikes, it would be increased to 11% at high income levels, the highest state income tax rate in the country. Oregon does not have a capital gains deduction (which some argue benefits higher income taxpayers.) Oregon also does not have a sales tax, which is generally considered to fall more heavily on lower income taxpayers than higher income taxpayers. So, how does this structure result in low income taxpayers subsidizing high income taxpayers? Bob Wiggins

  • mp97303 (unverified)

    @Rep. Barnhart "pay a substantially lower rate of combined state and local taxes"

    When you say "local taxes" are you referring to property taxes. If you are, you understand that if someone making $1M per year choses to live in a $250K house their taxes as a percentage of income will be less than someone making $70K and living in the same house.

    Are you implying that a wealthy person living below their means is somehow "not paying their fair share?"

connect with blueoregon