The operators of another Michigan electric car battery plant, A123 Systems, will receive a $100 million cash subsidy from the state for a 75-acre facility the company has leased in Romulus. The subsidy will be in the form of cash because the plant has been granted "renaissance zone" status by the Michigan Economic Development Corp.

Declaring the facility a renaissance zone has the effect of converting a previously authorized $100 million "refundable" tax credit for the firm into an outright cash subsidy (rather than some-subsidy and some-tax break). The legislation authorizing the conversion was signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm in May after being approved by votes of 99-7 in the House and 38-0 in Senate.

The A123 Systems renaissance zone award actually preceded one to the Korean firm LG Chem for a Holland plant, as reported in Michigan Capitol Confidential on July 2 (see "Michigan Taxpayers to Write $100 Million Check to Korean Battery Maker"). Both facilities will now be exempt from virtually all site-specific state and local taxes for 15 years, including the Michigan Business Tax and most property taxes.

In 2009, the Legislature authorized $100 million "refundable" business tax credits for both A123 Systems and LG Chem.* "Refundable" means that the state will send the companies a check for however much of the credit remains after it cancels any Michigan Business Tax liability.

Because of government secrecy imposed by the Michigan Department of Treasury, however, residents may never have learned just how much of these $100 million "credits" would have gone out in the form of cash subsidies. With the granting of renaissance zone status the answer becomes known: All of it, because the firms won't owe any state taxes on their facilities. Each company's $100 million in cash will be handed out in four annual $25 million installments.

According to documents it filed with the federal Securities and Exchange Commission, Massachusetts-based A123 Systems is the beneficiary of a raft of other tax breaks and subsidies provided by Michigan taxpayers, including an outright $10 million grant authorized in March of 2009, another $4 million grant in the form of forgiveness for a state loan, a $2 million "marketing" grant, and as much as $25 million in additional tax credits depending on how many workers it hires, up to a maximum of 300 jobs. (The jobs credits will also become cash subsidies given the renaissance zone status.)

A123 Systems is also the recipient of federal subsidies and loans, including a $249 million grant of "stimulus" deficit spending money approved last August.

* See House Bill 4515 sponsored by Rep. Dian Slavens, D-Canton Township, Senate Bill 319, sponsored by Sen. John Pappageorge, R-Troy, and Senate Bill 466, sponsored by Sen. Wayne Kuipers, R-Holland.

People who hit Michigan's lakes and streams with their kayaks and canoes may have to pay a $5 fee to the state first as a host of bills looking to tax the state's summer activities are under consideration.

There is a bill that would require private canoes and kayaks to attach a registration decal on their crafts for an annual $5 fee.

"It's not the cost," said Dwight Walker of Marshall who races kayaks. "I want less government in my life, and this is just another government regulation to have control of my life."

House Bill 6319 is the proposal that calls for the $5 fee on private canoes and kayaks. It is sponsored by Rep. Richard Ball, R-Laingsburg.

Ball said the fee was for safety reasons.

Sometimes empty kayaks and canoes come floating down a river, Ball said.

"If there is no number or decal, there is absolutely no way to trace it to check back and make sure that person is all right," Ball said. "You don't want to leave somebody out there. ...The idea here is to have some way to track these people to make sure they are all right. The $5 is not a very big fee. It is sort of an insurance policy for anyone who does canoeing on rivers or on lakes. It is an idea to protect the person in a kayak or canoe with a minimum insurance policy if their craft shows up empty and they don't seem to be anywhere around."

Jack McHugh, senior legislative analyst for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, said the safety concerns could be addressed without a fee.

"Owners of ice fishing shacks are required to display their name and address on the structure, but are not subject to any fee and registration mandate," McHugh wrote in an e-mail. "I'm not recommending that, though, for this reason: If informed of this concern, most canoe and kayak owners would gladly apply similar labels voluntarily, with no new big-government impositions or mandates required. The fact that so often the Legislature's first answer is to tax-and-regulate is one reason many people have concluded that the system is broken and that neither party really represents them anymore."

There's also House Bill 6320, which would have livery owners paying a $5 inspection fee, more than double the customary $2 fee. That bill was sponsored by Representative Rashida Tlaib, D-Detroit.

Cheri Hunter, owner of Borchers AuSable Canoe Livery, said the fee wouldn't have an impact on businesses and she was in favor of inspections.

"I'm never in favor of any fees going up, but I am in favor of the annual inspection," Hunter said.

Bill Duckwall, owner of Paddling Michigan livery in Marquette, said the $3 increase per boat or kayak is not a big deal to him because he had 40 livery boats.

"I don't know why they want to tax tourism," Duckwall said. "That is what they are doing. Michigan needs tourism. Michigan needs to find their own ways to cut some of the deadwood they have in the state. (They) always tax something and get it from the public. They ought to get it from being more efficient."