Friday, February 3, 2012
Phillips Why Shouldn't the State Pay Sales Tax?
Posted by Betsy Phillips on Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:06 AM
I've been thinking about this stupid story about State Rep. Dale Ford wanting to give golf courses sales tax exemptions for golf carts and course maintenance items.
And lord knows I don't want to think about golf for any longer than I have to, but it seems to me that this is the wrong way to go about this. In a state that depends on sales tax like we do, letting everyone who pisses and moans out of paying sales tax means those of us who don't piss and moan loud enough get stuck with a heavier tax burden. It just rewards being a giant baby and undermines our tax base.
So, here is my question: Why can't the state come up with a list of non-essential things it does — you know, the lagniappe things like golf courses — and make those departments pay sales tax? I mean, the golf course operators who have to pay sales tax on items their competition doesn't, just because their competition is the state, have a point. It is unfair. If Private Sector Joe has $100 to spend and State Run Phil has $100 to spend, Private Sector Joe can only get $90 worth of items. State Run Phil can get $100.
So why not end the state-run golf courses' unfair tax advantage? Is it against the law for the state to pay sales tax, or is that just a privilege it has been extending itself since it is the state?
Comments (9)
Showing 1-9 of 9
We should abolish all the sales tax exemptions and add sales tax to services which are sold; e.g. with lawyer fees running at $300 per hour, how much could we raise if legal sales are taxes? Same for architects, barbers, accountants and many others.
like
dislike
“It’s not a level playing field,” Ford said of the taxes imposed on state-run golf courses.
I don't even know where to start on this one; you're right, Betsy, but the problem runs deeper than which of the rich's toys are taxed. It's morally repulsive to even consider exemptions for golf courses when food is still taxed. In fact, very poor Tennesseans ($15k/year) spend about 74% of their income on taxable goods (food, gas, books, baby diapers, clothing, etc.) while the relatively rich ($100k/year) spend only 25% on these taxable goods, with 75% of their income spent on non-taxable things like private school tuition, healthcare, attorney fees, etc. (source: Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy)
To top this off, the people paying the most (in income percentage) are the ones most affected by budget cuts to state healthcare, mental health services, public education, and public transportation. The rich shrug their shoulders and say they have no choice, and the most vulnerable citizens in our state are the ones who suffer, and without a lobbyist.
www.fairtaxation.org
Of course, TNGA Rep. Dale Ford is wanting to cut the Tennessee sales taxes of these golf course items - he plays golf! Surely, you have not forgotten about the Nashville investigative television report that caught Rep. Ford out playing golf while the House was still in the middle of a working day on the hill?
Here's my unconsidered, naive response to "Why shouldn't the state pay sales tax?": If state-run entities pay sales tax when they buy things, aren't they just passing money around from one component of the government to another? Is this worth administrating?
Giving privately run golf courses sales tax exemptions is, of course, dumb.
So, some select state departments - that get their money from taxpayers paying sales taxes in the first place - should pay sales taxes back to the same government entity that they are a part of.
Like a dog chasing it's tail.
Pete and Gilbert are correct. The state paying itself taxes is simply a shell game and would only result in added costs because of unnecessary additional accounting.
Now the question about non-essential government activity is a good one. In fact, it is one of the fundamental issues of political discourse and competition. For instance, is a government run unemployment insurance sustem "essential" or not? Newt says no. Most others, pretty much all Democrats and most Republicans, say yes. But this is why we have elections, and this is why we have a republican form of government selected through democratic methodology. We let those we elect as our representatives make those decisions.
I'm tryin' real hard to get worked up about _any_ issues related to state-owned golf courses and the stuff that happens on them.
Tryin'.... Still tryin'....
Wait! I think I've got my hackles up! But it could just be gas.
What's the state doing in the golf business to begin with? That's a simple matter of providing for entertainiment for a select few. Aren't they supposed to be representing all of us?
And it isn't just golf. That would include all other fields of entertainment.
The state has been providing publicly available recreational areas and activities for a long time, Yogi. Golf is just one of them. I gather you're against that?
