Category: tax policy

Categories
tax policy

IRS Wants Your Four Cents

On the one hand, we’ve got trillion-dollar federal deficits and no sign of any austerity measure on the congressional horizon. On the other hand, we’ve got dark-suited IRS agents bullying small businessmen for allegedly being four cents behind in taxes.

The letter that the two IRS suits hand-delivered to the owner of Harv’s Metro Car Wash in Sacramento claims that with penalties piling up since 2006, Aaron Zeff now owes over $200. Zeff reports that the agents “were deadly serious, very aggressive, very condescending.”

The incident is bad press for the Internal Revenue Service. But maybe the taxmen relish this kind of bad press once in a while. After all, they need the rest of us to worry what might happen to us if we step out of line even four cents worth, even if it’s only in the fevered imagination of some bored IRS accountant.

Was the hounding of Mr. Zeff a deliberate plan or just zealous overreaching by a couple of goons who forgot to read the manual on being nice to taxpayers? Who knows. Either way, though, do we want the IRS in charge of slapping us with a big tax penalty if we don’t sign up for a government-approved health plan? After all, that’s a big part of the so-called health care “reform” that Congress is in process of imposing on us.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy Tenth Amendment federalism

We Told You So

Say it with me: We told you so.

Over the years, I’ve tried to help citizens regain control over their prodigal representatives. Sometimes I got called a radical for these activities. An extremist. But I think of myself as a moderate, as someone promoting moderation.

In government spending, for example.

Among the most moderate of these many statewide initiatives have been what are sometimes called the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, or TABOR, initiatives. These proposals are designed to limit spending increases to a formula of population growth-plus-inflation.

Sometimes we succeeded. Too often we failed.

The consequence of our failures, of each defeat at the hands and promotional budgets of groups that called us, of all people, extremists?

Now, state after state has become what Reason magazine dubs “Failed States.” They did what politicians demanded, spent at rates far greater than moderation would allow. And now that we’ve hit hard times, and state revenues have drastically fallen, how the politicians whine! Indeed, they demand bailouts.

Say it with me, you who’ve voted for TABOR in the past: “We told you so. Lacking our measures, the states have become part of the out-of-control federal deficits and ballooning debt.”

And remember, you who opposed our moderate measures to limit state spending: You are the radicals. You are the ones who helped set our country on its current, self-destructive course.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy

How to Raise Taxes

Times are tough; state revenues, down. So politicians have a choice: 1. Do the one thing economists definitely warn not to do, raise taxes; or 2. Do the one thing powerful lobbies say not to do, cut spending.

In Washington State, guess which one politicians are doing.

Washington’s governor and majorities in both houses are Democrats, and they’re looking to raise taxes. But they have (or had) one little problem: the voters.

In 2007, Evergreen State citizens had voted in a tax limitation measure, I-960, requiring a public two-thirds legislative vote to raise any tax. The Democrats are balking at this. By a simple majority vote they have in effect nullified the law made directly by their constituents.

This galls supporters of the citizen-made law, especially so since I-960 was the THIRD such initiative. Similar measures had passed earlier, in 1993 and 1998.

House Finance Committee Chairman Ross Hunter says that requiring a two-thirds vote for tax increases makes the budget process “unworkable.” By this he means he can’t spend as much as he’d like.

Tim Eyman, who worked to put the measure on the ballot, counters that this kind of attitude is “an admission that Olympia can’t function if it’s forced to obey the law.” Riffing on the theme, Eyman mocked legislators’ arguments as nothing more than “you peasants don’t understand, the rules don’t apply to us.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
media and media people national politics & policies tax policy too much government

Smart Reaction?

If you balk at having more and more of your life run from the nation’s capital, you’re stupid.

Or, so blares Joe Klein in a Time magazine online article, “Too dumb to thrive.”

See, “smart” Americans understand that a trillion in federal “stimulus” spending can only do “good.” Apparently dumb Americans are the ones telling pollsters that the “stimulus” money is being wasted.

Klein says the biggest part of the stimulus is a tax cut for most, meaning more money in their paychecks. But ignorant Americans focus on the huge debts we’ll have to pay back . . . in higher taxes.

Klein says that the second biggest portion of stimulus money went to state governments to keep our kids’ teachers from being laid off and state taxes from being raised. The notion that without the stimulus all the public school teachers would have been pink-slipped is a bit much.

As for higher state taxes, couldn’t state spending actually be cut? And not just on police, teachers and firemen?

Klein’s blithering blathering reminds me of Chris Matthews, and other MSNBC geniuses, who contend that politicians are in deep doo-doo because “people are angry and scared” and want to take their frustrations out on someone.

People are angry and scared, sure. But taking out our anger out on those responsible for destroying our wealth and freedom seems . . . well .  .  . smart.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
tax policy too much government

Words and Definitions

As a candidate, Barack Obama promised that he would not raise taxes on any but the wealthiest Americans. Make less than $250,000 a year? You’re home free under his administration.

I mean, not counting current federal levies.

But President Obama has all the ambitions of a big-spending liberal. And “big-spending” translates pretty quickly into “big-taxing.”

One of these projects is a massive new federal takeover of the health care industry, in the name of “universal coverage.” New taxes would be imposed. For example, anyone who refuses to sign up for health insurance in the new regime would be slammed with a hefty tax.

Obama denies that such taxes would in fact be taxes. He even rebuked George Stephanopoulos for citing a dictionary definition of the word. Leaping to the president’s defense, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer agreed that the new taxes would not be taxes. “[W]hat we are saying,” Hoyer said, “is everybody will contribute . . . to making sure that health care options are available to all of our citizens.”

Try dispute that. It’s like arguing with fog. Columnist Jacob Sullum quotes Hoyer and observes, “So we’re talking about a legally required contribution that will be used to provide a government-arranged benefit. If only there were a shorter way of expressing that concept.”

Well, in searching for le mot juste, don’t tax yourself.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy too much government

Legislative Dreamin’

California voters love their state’s process for placing initiatives and referendums on the ballot.

Legislators? Most take a much dimmer view. This year they’ve been blaming voters for spending the state into bankruptcy through the initiative. Additionally —  and please hold your laughter — they claim that initiatives have tied the hands of legislators who would otherwise have better managed the state’s finances.

Enter Bob Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies. At a recent public hearing of the Senate and Assembly Select Committees on Improving State Government, Stern told legislators, “Most of the ballot-box budgeting has come from you.”

Stern was referring to a Center study that looked at all ballot measures over the last 20 years that required additional spending. Stern found that three out of four measures costing money were put on the ballot by legislators, not through the citizen initiative. He also found that the legislature’s own ballot measures cost the state $10 billion, while citizen initiatives cost only $2 billion.

Of course, an even bigger issue is the wild spending spree by California politicians with no ballot box input from voters at all. While state tax revenues have increased a whopping 167 percent over the last two decades, government spending shot up 181 percent.

Voters aren’t perfect, but anyone with a lick of common sense knows the answer to controlling government spending isn’t to free the politicians from voter restraint.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall tax policy

Money, Money, Money

Money. Politicians like to spend it. People — especially special interests — like to get it. And taxpayers really don’t much like having to pay for all that spending.

So our representatives try to procrastinate their balancing of spending and revenue. How? With debt. Hence our yearly unbalanced budgets.

At the federal level, deficits soar. Many states, however, have constitutional spending limitations and balanced budget requirements. What difference do such limits make?

Well, Professor Barry Poulson, of the Independence Institute, points out that a few years before Colorado passed the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (or TABOR), limiting state spending growth to the increase in population plus inflation, California’s legislature was abandoning the GANN Amendment, a similar limit.

Says Poulson, “Over the period since TABOR was passed, Colorado has experienced one of the highest rates of economic growth in the nation, while California has experienced retardation in economic growth.”

Two states — Maine and Washington — have initiatives on their ballot this November that are very similar to Colorado’s TABOR. The special interest opponents to these measures, most notably government employee unions, have raised millions more than supporters. Soon voters will be pummeled with ads claiming that the sky will fall if there is any limit on state spending growth.

Of course, the fiscal sky has already fallen. Voters should support these measures as the best way to pick up the pieces.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
tax policy

Visible Taxes, Invisible Support

There’s a lot of talk about the Value Added Tax and its various sister excises, like the Retail Sales Tax and the GST, or Goods and Services Tax. A lot of countries have one or more of these. They raise a lot of revenue, but require mounds of record-keeping and can quickly become oppressive.

Economist David Henderson recently noted the strange fortunes of Canada’s GST. When it was imposed, it cost the party that sponsored it — the so-called “Progressive Conservative” party — nearly everything. Canadians so loathed the tax that they punished the PCs by throwing them out of office — way out: Their representation in Parliament went from 295 seats to two.

Some repudiation, eh?

Henderson wryly notes that the Liberal Party, which picked up majority support, did not abolish the tax as promised. Are you shocked?

Nearly everyone feels the GST, nearly everyone pays it. One reason to support such a visible tax, Henderson says, “rather than less-visible taxes is so that voters have a feel for the magnitude of the tax. But precisely because that’s true, they’ll punish the party that imposes it.”

Hey politicians — I have a better idea. Get rid of some less-than-visible spending. It would hurt the parties a lot less. And it really would solve the tight budget problem, making the need for a visible tax vanish.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access initiative, referendum, and recall insider corruption tax policy

Ballot Box News

With all that’s going on in Washington, don’t forget: There’s a lot happening on state and local ballots. Consider these recent newsline items from Ballot Box News:

Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Alvarez is under fire for giving big-ticket raises to favored insiders while calling for steep budget cuts. A day after a poll found that 58 percent of registered voters favor the recall of Alvarez, another local mayor filed a lawsuit to undo controversial requirements that make it much more difficult to recall sitting politicians.

There’s a link to the rest of the story at the Miami Herald

.Republican lawmakers are lining up against a citizen initiative effort to impose stringent ethics guidelines on the Utah Legislature. Complained the state senate’s majority leader, “If there are people out there who have political intentions they will use this as a club time and time again.”

Uh, sir, that would be the idea. Without people clubbing politicians on ethics, how can we root out corruption in politics? Can we trust you to do it, based on your good word as an incumbent?

Full story in The Salt Lake Tribune.

We’re told California’s cash-strapped state government would be virtually wallowing in piles of cash if a proposed wealth tax makes it to the ballot. And is approved by voters. And survives legal challenge. I don’t support it. Tax-the-rich schemes are unjust, and don’t work.

But I do support BallotBoxNews.com, where you can find out more about this proposed tax, and many other hot-button issues.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
tax policy

Re-Kill the Death Tax

Next year, the federal death tax — otherwise known as the estate tax — will be phased out entirely. It will be gone. But it won’t stay gone.

This phase-out was part of tax cuts Congress passed in 2001. The death of death taxes should have been permanent. After all, meeting the Grim Reaper is tough enough as it is. As you’re about to expire, do you really want to ponder how 55 percent of what should go to your heirs will be confiscated as soon as your coffin goes into the ground? It’s enough to make you want to skip dying altogether.

Unless Congress acts, come 2012 the death tax will pop back into life, as ravenous as it ever was at a full 55 percent. What will happen as the previous year draws to a close? In a Newsweek column archly entitled “Death, Republican Style,” Jacob Weisberg notes that rich elderly people will have an incentive to die by December 31, 2011. Their kids will have an incentive to “turn off respirators in time for the deadline.” Though morbid and sorta sordid, he has a point.

So what’s the solution? I mean, aside from vilifying the GOP for the political compromise leading to this end game? Weisberg is mute. But if his concern for the elderly is genuine, he could start by urging Congress’s Democratic majority to kill the death tax for good. Then we’d all want to live!

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.