CONCORD, N.H. – Democrat John Lynch tells voters he’ll repeal the statewide property tax.

Republican Gov. Craig Benson claims credit for lowering the same tax and promises to cut it even more if re-elected.

Both sound great. Who wouldn’t want tax cuts?

But the tax truth is those promised cuts might not be cuts at all – depending on where you live. In fact, they may mean increases in your overall tax burden.

When the state property tax that is used to pay for schools goes down, the local school tax must rise to make up the difference – or school costs must be cut.

In addition, cutting the state tax isn’t an even swap for increases in the local tax. That’s because the state tax rate is the same no matter what town you live in, while the equivalent local tax rate can be higher or lower depending on your town’s total property wealth.

The net effect can mean higher, not lower overall property taxes.

Here’s what we know about the two candidates’ plans:

. Lynch proposes repealing the state’s education property tax, which is now $3.33 per $1,000 of a home’s value. He would veto attempts to reduce total aid below $450 million. That is what the state now spends from nonproperty tax sources combined with the property taxes wealthy “donor” towns pay to subsidize schools in poorer towns. Lynch believes the $350 million in state taxes towns collect and spend locally on their schools is nothing more than a bookkeeping gimmick.

. Benson proposes freezing aid to wealthier communities during the next five years and giving more aid to poorer towns. A special formula would allocate the aid – starting with $18 million next year and increasing to $75 million in 2010. Only towns that qualified for the aid would get increases over the life of the plan. The state property tax rate would be cut gradually until it drops to $2 in 2010 – virtually eliminating the need for donor towns to subsidize poorer towns’ schools. He believes rising property values will produce enough money – despite the tax cuts – to maintain the existing base aid at $804 million.

Here’s what’s missing from both plans: the distribution formula.

Neither has said which towns would be judged poor enough to merit aid, which means voters can’t know if their overall tax burden would rise or fall.

Lynch is considering – at least in part – basing aid on a town’s ability to raise enough taxes locally to fund the state’s average per pupil cost – a figure that may or may not reflect the total cost of education in New Hampshire. Until the formula is written, no one will know what is considered an “allowable” school cost.

Donor towns proposed a similar approach to lawmakers – which they rejected. Under this approach, only towns needing state aid would get it.

Lynch will not say if he believes the state must provide a base level of aid to every town.

Benson would distribute a base amount of aid for every pupil – though the amount would not change over five years. He would give extra aid to towns with less property value, whose residents have lower incomes and whose schools provide “real world learning” opportunities for students. He also wants towns to match some state aid with their own money.

Scott Johnson, a lead lawyer for the five towns that successfully sued the state over school funding, believes both are unconstitutional.

Both re-create the flaw that led the state Supreme Court to declare the old school funding system unconstitutional in 1997. They use widely varying local property tax rates to pay for a state obligation, which creates inequities, he said.

Lynch and Benson don’t agree with Johnson. They believe their plans are constitutional – though Benson supports changing the constitution to weaken the court’s role over school funding. They also believe that local voters should decide whether to make up with local property taxes for any state aid gaps their plans create.

“We will not cap what local communities decide they want to spend on education,” said Lynch. “So, if local communities decide they want to spend more than what the state on average may spend, that would be the decision of the local communities.”

Benson does not believe towns should get a “free pass” if they aren’t frugal.