{"id":46874,"date":"2019-04-23T12:30:00","date_gmt":"2019-04-23T20:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.juneauempire.com\/news\/permanent-fund-dividend-still-a-major-question-mark-this-session\/"},"modified":"2019-04-24T09:43:03","modified_gmt":"2019-04-24T17:43:03","slug":"permanent-fund-dividend-still-a-major-question-mark-this-session","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.juneauempire.com\/news\/permanent-fund-dividend-still-a-major-question-mark-this-session\/","title":{"rendered":"Permanent Fund Dividend still a major question mark this session"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\t\t\t\t
Senators polished off their crystal balls Tuesday, trying to take a look at the future of the state under the governor’s budget proposal and under the Legislature’s proposal so far.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t
During Tuesday’s Senate Finance Committee meeting, Sen. Peter Micciche, R-Soldotna, was succinct and straightforward as he broke down the major impacts of the governor’s budget versus the one passed by the House.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t
While the House budget doesn’t include any new taxes for revenue, it does reduce the Permanent Fund Dividend, so it does affect household income.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t
While Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s budget proposal keeps the PFD high<\/a>, it will result in a rise in local taxes because the budget proposal shifts many costs from the state to municipalities<\/a>. Cutting state spending for school bond debt reimbursement, for example, will require cities to raise taxes in order to fund schools at a similar level as before.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t “It’s not like either one is impact free,” Micciche said.<\/p>\n