In ruling out tax increases, Republicans are preparing to disclose a budget plan Thursday that aligns more closely with the stated goals of the Democratic governor than do the tax-hiking proposals coming from lawmakers in Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s own party.

According to an advance peek, in addition to holding the line on the income and sales tax, as Malloy has proposed, Republicans will reject Malloy’s call to increase the cigarette tax and the cost of pistol permits.

That’s the good news. The last thing Connecticut needs is to raise taxes to address its fiscal problems. A tax-increase approach would prove self-defeating, driving more higher-income earners from the state and inhibiting the vigorous economic recovery the state desperately needs.

The bad news is that the Republican proposal may fall short of the necessary sacrifices to achieve a balanced budget, despite party leadership’s claims that it will stand up to analysis. It has a too-good-to-be-true feel to it. The real test will come with its introduction, scrutiny and debate.

After a budget plan stalled in Appropriations Tuesday, Republicans see the opportunity to drive the budget debate. That’s a policy play that is in the best interest of the state, even if the easy political move would have been to let the Democrats own this mess.

Republican Senate President Len Fasano of North Haven said Wednesday that if the minority party can overcome the procedural hurdles it will introduce its spending plan in the Appropriations Committee. If not, it will be presented directly to the public through a news conference. But it will be Thursday, he added.

Fasano agreed to provide The Day an advance overview of the proposal with the understanding the newspaper would not editorialize until the plans were in place to release it.

Like the proposal under discussion in Appropriations, the GOP plan scraps Malloy’s suggestion that the state shift some of the cost of funding teacher pensions to municipalities. In year one that would save the state $400 million, according to the governor.

And while Republicans, like Malloy, will propose adjustments in the education cost sharing formula and other changes that reduce state aid to affluent towns, the GOP plan imposes those reductions gradually over a decade. Any increased aid to poorer communities would likewise be gradually phased in. Malloy wants to impose the reductions, and reap the savings for the state budget, immediately.

The Republican education spending formula would avoid the deep cuts in state aid imposed on Groton by the Malloy plan.

Mitigating the infliction of fiscal pain on municipalities while still balancing a budget facing, over the next two years, a $3 billion deficit or more — and to do it without increasing taxes — could prove quite the trick, perhaps an impossible one.

Any budget will be dependent on Malloy's ability to achieve big savings through labor concessions or job cuts. Malloy's budget showed $800 million in labor savings over two years, and in their budget Republicans count on achieving those savings.

Republicans would abandon the policy of sending a portion of sales-tax revenue back to local communities. The Democratic majority created the revenue-sharing plan in 2015 as a way of compensating cities for revenues lost by imposing a cap on car property taxes. That sales tax share was set to rise to $250 million next fiscal year and $330 million the year after. Republicans propose doing away with the revenue-sharing and keeping all sales tax revenues in the general fund. Republicans utilize what they are calling a "transition grant" to temper the municipal revenue losses.

Republicans will propose saving roughly $425 million in the coming fiscal year and $530 million the year after using cuts across numerous line items, including continuing “holdbacks” Malloy imposed in blocking expenditures this year.

While Malloy proposes ending the $200 property tax credit taxpayers can use to offset their state income tax, Republicans will suggest continuing it, but only for families with dependents and for seniors.

Other structural initiatives, supported by this newspaper in the past, would include turning over more human services work to the private sector, requiring legislative approval of all labor contracts, and enacting a workable constitutional cap on spending and a lockbox to protect transportation funds.

The bottom line is that the Republican plan is a good-faith effort to address the fiscal crisis. With Republicans holding an 18-18 split in the Senate and only a few votes short in the House, they could find enough Democrats willing to compromise in producing a budget — free of any major tax increases — that Malloy would sign.