Readers write for Sunday, May 9

Much has been made about the Council on State Taxation's (COST) recent report on business tax burdens. One statistic grabbing the attention of some legislators and pundits is that Minnesota ranks 35th-highest by one measure: state and local business taxes as a percent of gross state product (GSP). Those who quote that statistic should have read the entire report. COST specifically says it does not provide "sufficient information to fully evaluate a state's competitiveness."

Furthermore, there is a quirk in the COST study. A state with high labor costs, such as Minnesota, will typically rank low even though its business taxes are above average or even high. That's because higher labor costs lead to higher GSP -- both good things -- but also lower the ratio of business taxes to GSP.

A closer look at the state's business tax structure is necessary. The Minnesota Taxpayers Association reports that in 2007, Minnesota had the 14th-highest corporate income tax per $1,000 of income, the ninth-highest personal income tax and the 36th-highest sales tax. In addition, in 2009, the state ranked 11th-highest for a $1 million commercial property in the largest urban city.

So before everyone concludes that Minnesota has no business tax problems, read the entire report.

TOM HESSE, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, MINNESOTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Twin Cities hospitals ran an ad in the May 2 newspaper touting honors and designations recently bestowed upon them. These are examples of the good things that can happen when RNs and hospital administrations work together. Sadly, contract proposals put forth by the Hospital Association indicate the organization is no longer interested in collaborating with nurses.

Currently, one of the best collaborative measures we have gives a charge nurse the authority to refuse to admit more patients to a unit under certain conditions.

JEANNE KRYPEL, EAGAN; REGISTERED NURSE

The Star Tribune Editorial Board has put on the full-court press for criminal forfeiture reform ("State is fumbling on forfeiture reform," editorial, May 3). You claim lawmakers should be listening to "those whose property was allegedly targeted by rogue officers" in the Metro Gang Strike Force. Instead, you lament, lawmakers are listening to law enforcement.

What a concept. Even the proponents of forfeiture reform in the Legislature have stated that they understand that the Metro Gang Strike Force scandal was not a function of our forfeiture laws; rather, they admit it simply marks a convenient time to revisit the forfeiture laws.

There is certainly evidence that theft may have taken place by rogue officers, and that will be addressed in the courts. But remember, nobody ever committed theft by following Minnesota's existing forfeiture laws.

Minnesota's county attorneys have been working with legislators to improve existing law in several ways. But the broad "reforms" you and a minority of lawmakers champion would gut law enforcement's ability to ensure criminals do not profit by their crimes. The majority of Minnesotans don't want any such thing, and they remember a simple concept that you forget: Police are still the good guys.