Site last updated: Thursday, April 23, 2026

Log In

Reset Password
MENU
Butler County's great daily newspaper

Tax collection changes helped city, should trigger more reform

Butler residents got some good news last week — tax revenues are up and the city has added about $1 million in revenue over the past three years without raising taxes. The increase came, at least partly, from more effective and efficient tax collection.

When most people think about taxes, they focus on tax rates and whether they are going up. But it’s important to think about tax collection. Weak collection means money owed is not brought in to fund the government. It also means people are getting away with not paying their fare share, which puts an additional burden on everyone else.

Regardless of rates, taxes should be collected efficiently.

Part of the city’s improved collections can be traced to the passage of Act 32 by the state Legislature in 2008. That law streamlined and centralized collection of earned income taxes across Pennsylvania. The law reduced the number of EIN tax collectors from 560 to 21. As part of the law, local committees were formed to create tax districts and select tax collectors.

After two years or so, the new tax collection system was set up. In Butler, tax collection went to Berkheimer Associates, which has a track record of collecting other taxes in the county.

Across the state, results of Act 32 were positive, with increased collections and reduced delinquencies.

According to published reports, EIN tax collections increased about 23 percent from 2012 to 2013. In Butler, the biggest bump appears to be from 2011 to 2012.

State lawmakers passed Act 32 to increase the efficiency and reduce costs of EIN tax collection. Studies suggested about $237 million a year was being lost across the state due to poor collection of the tax.

If centralizing and streamlining EIN tax collection produced positive results for city budgets, why not expand the effort?

For most municipalities, the earned income tax is a significant part of overall tax revenue. with real estate and business privilege taxes being the largest two categories. For school districts, property taxes are the largest source of tax revenue.

Going back a decade or more, there have been discussions here and across the state about how property taxes are collected — and whether a centralized tax collection save money.

Most people believe a centralized tax collection system would get money into bank accounts faster and reduce fraud, which, though rare, does happen. It’s also expected that centralized tax collection using today’s technologies would cut collection costs, meaning school districts get more money.

Naturally, the Pennsylvania Tax Collectors Association disagrees and points to a study that concluded local tax collectors were the best and most effective way to do tax collection. The roots of Pennsylvania’s property tax system go back to horse-and-buggy days, before technology reduced the value of having a tax collector nearby for face-to-face consultation. It’s likely a different system would be more efficient and cost-effective.

To its credit, the tax collectors association backed legislation passed last year that requires background checks and mandates training for all newly elected tax collectors on issues such as tax collection, accounting and legal statutes. Recognizing a need to maintain a level of professionalism among elected tax collectors is good.

But it’s still worth further study and debate over what alternative tax collection systems would produce cost savings and reduced delinquencies. Using the county treasurers office and a lockbox system that would have tax payment checks earning interest in a day or two instead of a week or two could save school districts hundreds of thousands of dollars within a few years.

Most elected tax collectors do a good job, but the world has changed and newer methods of tax collection should be considered.

Act 32 was a change in how EIN taxes are collected — and the results have been good, with increased collections and reduced delinquencies. Butler’s increased revenue is proof.

Instead of focusing on tax rates, taxpayers — and school boards — should look at how, and how efficiently, taxes are collected.

More in Our Opinion

Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter

* indicates required
TODAY'S PHOTOS