Fees and Taxes
The republicans in Minnesota, and Governor Pawlenty specifically, have been playing around with definitions to keep a "No tax increase" pledge to the taxpayers league.
http://www.taxpayersleague.org/main/index.php
The Governor sees fit to call an increased cigarette sales tax as a "fee" so he can increase it - on the grounds that health care costs are related to smoking I guess.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5415208.html Pawlenty proposes 75-cent cigarette 'fee'
*********
Insisting it was a fee — not a tax — Gov. Tim Pawlenty proposed a 75-cent charge on every pack of cigarettes sold in Minnesota as part of a deal he hopes will balance the budget.
The so-called Health Impact Fee would raise about $380 million over the next two years. Pawlenty said it would help cover the state's costs for smoking-related illnesses — which top $800 million — and free up other state money for education. Democrats were lukewarm to the proposal.
"I believe this is a user fee. Some people are going to say it's a tax,'' Pawlenty said. "I'm going to say it's a compromise and a solution.''
********
Meanwhile he vetos a $0.10/gallon increase in the state excise tax on gasoline.
The taxpayers league agrees with this veto:
http://www.taxpayersleague.org/issues/pr_display.php?rid=264
SURE most Minnesotans don't want to pay more taxes, but it's all a matter of perspective - DO want want to start PAYING for our roads now OR throw the costs into a long term debt for the state?
FUNNY also how the governor SUPPORTS a 0.15% sales tax for Hennepin county for a new Twins stadium because it doesn't require any state-level funding. He OUGHT to be out there with the "User Fees" (ticket sales) for recooping the stadium costs.
WHY is gasoline revenue a "tax" and cigarette revenue a "fee"?
Because a minority smoke and a majority need gasoline. Maybe we say "Taxes apply to a majority, and fees apply to minorities."
I think I heard House Speaker Sviggum say something like "Tax is a charge applied to everyone, and a fee is a charge applied to users."
We might say "Income fee" because it only applies to people who earn money.
We might say "Sales fee" because it only applies to people who spend money.
We might say "Property fee" because it only applies to home owners.
I'm being less that thoughtful, but I see no clear distinction.
MAYBE, I'd accept a "tax" goes into the general budget, while a "fee" income can go into a specialized account. I might buy that, which would put "gas tax" as a clear "user's fee".
Back to cigarette taxes, whatever you'd like to call it. I have definitely heard from smokers who say high prices do reduce their smoking. Same is true for alcohol/liquor taxes. "Sin Taxes" is a fun and accurate description.
By the same logic, I accept higher gasoline taxes as ESSENTIAL for curbing consumption and making alternatives competitive. I see gasoline tax ultimate also as a "sin tax" - and a matter of national security for that matter.
Of course, we're still collectively in denial about our addiction to oil, so the "truth" can't be told yet. You can only "scapegoat" the majority's vices if you're a dictator or have no power over others.
I've never been asked in one of those mysterious surveys on "approval ratings". If I were asked, I'd rank Pawlenty and his stubborn gamble against taxes as a 2 on a 10 point scale of approval.
I hold a 20% support for holding the line, keeping our state competitive economically. I accept the basic idea that government will tend to grow without limit unless firm limits are applied. I accept that it is likely government will shrink in the future whether we like it or not, and it is better to hold the line now and minimize dependency upon the government.
However I also think the problem will take care of itself in the long term, and I'd rather be charged my taxes now for services now. I'd rather government be funded by taxes NOT gambling income.
The hardest issue for me is the "regressivity" of "user fees". I accept high energy costs hurt the working poor more than anyone else. I see taxes as the answer because we're in control - rather than OPEC. If higher costs MUST come, let them come now, and let US LEAD our own weaning.
http://www.taxpayersleague.org/main/index.php
The Governor sees fit to call an increased cigarette sales tax as a "fee" so he can increase it - on the grounds that health care costs are related to smoking I guess.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/587/5415208.html Pawlenty proposes 75-cent cigarette 'fee'
*********
Insisting it was a fee — not a tax — Gov. Tim Pawlenty proposed a 75-cent charge on every pack of cigarettes sold in Minnesota as part of a deal he hopes will balance the budget.
The so-called Health Impact Fee would raise about $380 million over the next two years. Pawlenty said it would help cover the state's costs for smoking-related illnesses — which top $800 million — and free up other state money for education. Democrats were lukewarm to the proposal.
"I believe this is a user fee. Some people are going to say it's a tax,'' Pawlenty said. "I'm going to say it's a compromise and a solution.''
********
Meanwhile he vetos a $0.10/gallon increase in the state excise tax on gasoline.
The taxpayers league agrees with this veto:
http://www.taxpayersleague.org/issues/pr_display.php?rid=264
SURE most Minnesotans don't want to pay more taxes, but it's all a matter of perspective - DO want want to start PAYING for our roads now OR throw the costs into a long term debt for the state?
FUNNY also how the governor SUPPORTS a 0.15% sales tax for Hennepin county for a new Twins stadium because it doesn't require any state-level funding. He OUGHT to be out there with the "User Fees" (ticket sales) for recooping the stadium costs.
WHY is gasoline revenue a "tax" and cigarette revenue a "fee"?
Because a minority smoke and a majority need gasoline. Maybe we say "Taxes apply to a majority, and fees apply to minorities."
I think I heard House Speaker Sviggum say something like "Tax is a charge applied to everyone, and a fee is a charge applied to users."
We might say "Income fee" because it only applies to people who earn money.
We might say "Sales fee" because it only applies to people who spend money.
We might say "Property fee" because it only applies to home owners.
I'm being less that thoughtful, but I see no clear distinction.
MAYBE, I'd accept a "tax" goes into the general budget, while a "fee" income can go into a specialized account. I might buy that, which would put "gas tax" as a clear "user's fee".
Back to cigarette taxes, whatever you'd like to call it. I have definitely heard from smokers who say high prices do reduce their smoking. Same is true for alcohol/liquor taxes. "Sin Taxes" is a fun and accurate description.
By the same logic, I accept higher gasoline taxes as ESSENTIAL for curbing consumption and making alternatives competitive. I see gasoline tax ultimate also as a "sin tax" - and a matter of national security for that matter.
Of course, we're still collectively in denial about our addiction to oil, so the "truth" can't be told yet. You can only "scapegoat" the majority's vices if you're a dictator or have no power over others.
I've never been asked in one of those mysterious surveys on "approval ratings". If I were asked, I'd rank Pawlenty and his stubborn gamble against taxes as a 2 on a 10 point scale of approval.
I hold a 20% support for holding the line, keeping our state competitive economically. I accept the basic idea that government will tend to grow without limit unless firm limits are applied. I accept that it is likely government will shrink in the future whether we like it or not, and it is better to hold the line now and minimize dependency upon the government.
However I also think the problem will take care of itself in the long term, and I'd rather be charged my taxes now for services now. I'd rather government be funded by taxes NOT gambling income.
The hardest issue for me is the "regressivity" of "user fees". I accept high energy costs hurt the working poor more than anyone else. I see taxes as the answer because we're in control - rather than OPEC. If higher costs MUST come, let them come now, and let US LEAD our own weaning.
posted by Ares Olympus at 3:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home