More money in Oregonians’ pockets vs. higher prices vs. less money for schools and state services.

Although no one can say for sure, these are the potential tradeoffs facing voters as they mull Measure 118 on the Nov. 5 ballot.

The pro-118 campaign is texting this message to voters: “Voting YES on 118 means yearly rebates of $1,600 for you (and your kids). It’s a tax cut for you and small businesses that Gov. Tina Kotek doesn’t want you to have.

“Are you voting YES, or are you leaving $1,600 a year on the table?”

The measure would impose a 3% tax on a company’s annual Oregon sales above $25 million. As a gross receipts tax, it would apply regardless of whether the business showed a profit that year. After paying for the tax-administration expenses, the money would be funneled back to every person who resided in Oregon for 200 or more days that year, or who was born or died during the year. 

The size of rebate would vary each year depending on the amount of tax collected and other factors. But in any given year, all individuals would receive the same amount regardless of whether they were paupers or billionaires.

Opponents contend that because of the measure’s poor wording, it could carve a big hole in the state budget while increasing prices along every step of the supply chain for consumers, nonprofits, businesses, schools and government agencies.

Kotek opposes the measure.

But so do Republican Congresswoman Lori Chavez-DeRemer and her Democratic colleagues, Congresswomen Val Hoyle and Andrea Salinas. So do the leading candidates for state treasurer — state Sens. Elizabeth Steiner, D-Portland, and Brian Boquist, R-Dallas. As do the main candidates for secretary of state — State Treasurer Tobias Read and state Sen. Dennis Linthicum, R-Beatty.

The No on 118 coalition is one of the broadest in recent history, from Oregon Business & Industry, which is leading the campaign, to the progressive Oregon Center for Public Policy and hundreds of other organizations, businesses and civic leaders.

Meanwhile, several progressive groups have walked away from Measure 118 after previously backing it.

The pro-118 campaign maintains support from the Pacific Green Party, Oregon Progressive Party, Economic Justice Action Group of the First Unitarian Church of Portland, Community Alliance of Tenants, Portland Industrial Workers of the World, Eugene-Springfield Solidarity Network and a few other organizations. Much of the campaign funding has been supplied by Californians who support the concept of a universal basic income.

The ideas behind Measure 118 began hatching six years ago over conversations at burger joints and coffee shops in Eugene.

“We thought that it was plainly unfair that we as individuals were paying much more in taxes than the biggest corporations or the wealthiest corporations who can most afford to pay taxes,” Antonio Gisbert told the Salem City Club on Oct. 11. “We as everyday Oregonians, we’re forever having a harder time to make ends meet.”

Gisbert, who organized those Eugene discussions, is chief petitioner for Measure 118.

The measure targets all businesses but only when their Oregon sales exceed $25 million a year. “So for all these shoes and jerseys that Nike sells in California, Europe or China, that stuff remains untaxed or unchanged by Measure 118. It is only their revenue in the state of Oregon that gets assessed the 3%,” Gisbert said.

He and other proponents contend the measure would reduce poverty and strengthen the economy while holding the state budget harmless. 

Citing other analyses, opponents disagree.

“At $6.8 billion per year, Measure 118 represents the largest tax increase in our state’s history,” Preston Mann, director of political affairs for Oregon Business and Industry, said at the Salem City Club forum. “Measure 118 would absolutely result in higher prices for consumers – food, clothing, medicine, electricity, insurance, even housing.

“There are no exemptions or exclusions with this tax, and economists almost universally agree that gross receipts taxes are regressive.”

Mann said the measure would have a perverse effect on prices. A product imported from out-of-state would be cheaper than the same or similar product produced in Oregon.

 “Which one do you think most people are going to choose?” he said. “This is how Measure 118 hurts local Oregon businesses and manufacturers.”

News reports indicate the Measure 118 opponents have raised more than $15 million for their campaign compared with $640,000 by proponents.