wRong Williams Wrong Again

Filed in National by on March 30, 2009

Yes, on Delaware Liberal, you are about to see a liberal Democrat attack a columnist for suggesting that we impose a tax. I know, shocking. But here we go.

But something Markell has arbitrarily ruled out is a temporary sales tax. If we can have a temporary pay cut, why not a temporary sales tax? And a sunset provision can be written into a new sales tax law. That’s not the case with a salary cut. Given the odds — we all seem to be using lots of gambling lingo lately — I’ll take my chances on a temporary, “sunsetted” sales tax than a political promise of a temporary state employee pay cut. In addition, there are legal remedies the public can take if a sunsetted law is not properly debated when it expires. No such provision is granted for “temporary” gubernatorial pay cuts.

Ha! I don’t like taxes any more than the next guy. But a reasoned intelligent person will realize that you need them in order to have something called civilization. And since I am a Democrat, I believe taxes should be progressive. Those who earn more income pay more income tax. Simple as that.

Sales taxes and sin taxes and excise taxes are devices we use when we have cut taxes on income and fear raising them again to raise the revenue we lost with the tax cut when times were good but which is needed desparately now.

Delaware is unique in the Mid-Atlantic, and perhaps throughout the entire Eastern seaboard, in that it does not have a sales tax. I know many friends from Maryland, Pennsylvania and New Jersey who specifically travel to Delaware to shop for nearly everything because it has no sales tax. Install a sales tax, no matter if it is a temporary one, and we lose that competitive advantage. Christiana Mall is no King of Prussia. And when the tax goes away, there is no guarantee the shoppers come back.

And further, I am aware of no tax, once levied, that has sunsetted. And the only taxes that I know of that are cut are income taxes. Once you give a stream of revenue to the government, it is near impossible to get it back.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Comments (23)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Unstable Isotope says:

    I’m with you, DD. The 0% sales tax is a significant advantage for Delaware. Plus, consumption taxes are regressive taxes. As far as taxation goes, I don’t like high taxes but I think we need to be able to pay for the services that we value.

  2. R Smitty says:

    Did wRong even acknowledge the gross receipts tax that is already in place that adds a little to the retail price point? You know, the tax that is effectively a sales tax, but paid by the business and not the customer…not explicitly anyway. I haven’t read his article, but I am guessing he did not.

  3. seriously? you know did it ever occur to him to raise property taxes that are thousands lower than any of our bordering states?

  4. jason330 says:

    Sports betting and state lotteries are also an excise taxes that target poor people.

  5. R Smitty says:

    That belongs to the county, DHSV, which you and I will be paying more into. I have no idea about Kent and Sussex, tho.

  6. screw the poor. They had their chance and pissed it away on ripple and kools….

  7. R Smitty says:

    The only problem with taxing more in an economy we are all in right now is the ability for many to pay (this being a tax across the board, not speaking of a progressive PIT).

    I hate to say it, but it may be time to seriously look at possible layoffs in the state sector, in addition to other items already on the table. I don’t know. This whole things sucks huge and I don’t even want to think of anyone else losing a job, but if the money isn’t there, what else is there?

  8. anyone find it Ironic that this Letter to the Editor echoes some of Wrong’s comments?

    http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090330/OPINION10/90329022/1111

  9. Delaware Dem says:

    If the state government is bloated and jobs can be cut then they should be cut. I want an efficient government before anything.

  10. Geezer says:

    “The 0% sales tax is a significant advantage for Delaware.”

    I wish someone could point to a single study that actually shows this. Maybe those conservative UD economists could take time from their busy schedule of penning misleading op-ed articles and do the research.

  11. Rebecca says:

    Geezer,
    One quick study would be to go count the number of PA license plates at Concord Mall every Saturday. It’s at least half the cars parked there and sometimes you get an aisle that’s 2/3rds PA. I know because my Dad gets all bent out of shape at the immigrants from PA who do their shopping in DE. I dunno why he does but he does, and we get to listen to him count the plates.

    Another spot is around the corner from us at Lantana Square. At least half the shoppers there drive down from PA. And there’s always Total Wine but we won’t go into that since I guess it constitutes boot-legging.

    Tax Free Shopping is an advantage to Delaware. We shouldn’t toy with this one.

    AND, it is a regressive tax. BOOOO! Let the folks in Greenville pay a little more income tax, they’re still better off than they would be across the border in Chester County.

  12. Unstable Isotope says:

    When I was moving to the area I certainly thought Delaware’s taxes were a significant advantage over the neighboring states. DV is right that we have a lot of room to move on property taxes and I would also say PIT, especially at the upper level.

  13. R Smitty says:

    While I think this is the time we absolutely need to think about taxes, in addition to looking to discover the level of bloat in government, all sides need to be careful about knee-jerk solutions.

    In other words, I can go to DP and see all the easy solutions based in cutting state jobs. I come here and see all the easy solutions based in progressively taxing the wealthy. Neither are stand-alone fix-all cures and taking either as a singular approach will be harmful later on.

    While both of these actions, in some fraction, would likely offer some solution, there still needs to be thorough analysis in other areas. I have no idea at this moment what that could be, but there is no point at all to stop looking because of “easy solutions” already at the table. Get the hands dirty, start digging in the dirt and look under every rock, big or small, and see what is there. Even if it’s “only” a one-million-dollar save, then so-be-it. It’s a million dollars closer to the goal.

    In this environment, there is no fruit hanging too low, nor is there a dollar amount too small. If it can go, it needs to go.

    Of course, being able to view the budget would be a start. 🙄

  14. cassandra_m says:

    You can see the proposed budget in various presentations here.

    A couple of things to keep in mind — the majority of the Governor’s proposed cuts to the budget are not in personnel salary cuts. So there already are a pretty significant amount of cuts to various department budgets. We keep talking about the salary cuts as if that was all that was being done. Which is not to say that more can’t be cut — I don’t know — but there is $220+M in non-salary cuts to this budget.

    If I had more time, I would do a comparison between the 09 and the 10 proposed, but no one has really done this in any decent detail so I can’t tell the extent of department cuts. But I also can’t give much credence to anyone calling for more cuts or layoffs without having a better picture of what is lost in the 220+M in cuts. Which isn’t say that there isn’t more to go.

    The other thing to keep in mind is that letting people go does incur a cost. Mike H talked about the convoluted process in another thread, and I would expect that there would be costs in severance, payouts for unused sick or other leave days and of course unemployment. Personally, I expect that the salary cuts are Stage 1 of personnel action. Next time — if the economy still doesn’t recover — there will be layoffs because there won’t be many other options left.

  15. Geezer says:

    Rebecca: That’s exactly what I’m talking about. Nobody has anything better to offer than the number of people who live near the border of Delaware who come here to shop. Nobody has, as far as I can tell, even attempted to quantify this. Unless and until it’s quantified, it’s just hearsay.

    AS for the fact that a sales tax is regressive, cry me a river. It’s nowhere near as regressive as trying to pump up gambling revenue.

  16. jason330 says:

    Smitty,

    In other words, I can go to DP and see all the easy solutions based in cutting state jobs.

    Really?

    I went over and all I saw was that our government is big. I didn;t see any solutions proposed. I didn’t read which departments or people we can do without.

    Granted, I have a hard time spending much time on a site that tops the page with this kind of insightful commentary:

    Are we willing to stand by while Pres. Obama and his chosen few dismantle capitalism right before our eyes?

    So I might have missed the solutions post. If so, a link would be nice.

  17. anon says:

    DP solutions: End prevailing wage, de-unionize schools, vouchers.

  18. Geezer says:

    Jason: So DP’s Delaware budget piggybacks on the GOP’s “alternative to Obama’s” budget — Principles, Not Numbers.

  19. Unstable Isotope says:

    In my job we’re doing a lot of cost-cutting. There are things we refer to as “low hanging fruit” meaning it’s easy to identify and do. I think what you’re seeing people point out is the low-hanging fruit. We can see the difference in taxes for property and PIT between here and neighboring states and realize that we have room to move a bit. Increasing cigarette taxes and gambling are also low-hanging fruit because these are “sin taxes” (punishing undesirable behavior while letting it occur).

  20. Geezer says:

    I can’t believe I”m saying this, but Don Viti is right — a statewide property tax would decrease the incentive for retirees from nearby states to move in. At present, they’re adding to our infrastructure expenses and failing to pay their own freight. This would also fulfill the Vision 2015 call for changes to how the state funds education.

    Unfortunately, I don’t think the GA could get that accomplished by June 30. It’s something they ought to be looking at for next year.

    Fact is, with that deadline looming, the state has to give priority to measures that are easiest to accomplish. A temporary sales tax fits that requirement.

  21. R Smitty says:

    Jason, I meant to point out the quick-easy to speak of cutting bloated government vs the quick-easy of going after the wealthy to tax our way out. Either as a singular solution wouldn’t be good. There needs to be combination of each, in addition to many other things yet to analyze.

    Cassandra – I wasn’t trying to say the current proposed budget is invisible, but better said, I should have said that current spending (not budget) is invisible. It’s hard as constituents to offer detailed solutions when we aren’t exactly privy to what’s going out. Of course, most of us (me included) would probably roll our eyes back into our head, three or four lines into a spending document.

  22. meatball says:

    To echo Geezer in 10 and 15, PA residents who live near DE shop here because it is close and has better stores. There are plenty of folks who live in Sussex that drive to Salisbury, MD because of the concentration of stores.

    As far as Total Wine goes, does PA even have a store that sells beer, wine, liquor, and smokes under one roof and with such great variety?

  23. Miscreant says:

    “I can’t believe I”m saying this, but Don Viti is right — a statewide property tax would decrease the incentive for retirees from nearby states to move in. At present, they’re adding to our infrastructure expenses and failing to pay their own freight.”

    I can’t believe I’m agreeing with both, or either, of you…