SALES TAX EXPANSION
Minnesota is somewhat unusual in that it doesn't tax clothing sales. Expanding the tax base to include such items could bring more than $600 million over two years, according to a 2010 Minnesota Department of Revenue estimate. Expand the sales tax to food, and new revenue increases by more than $1.4 billion, according to the same estimate.
Still, it's a hard sell in the Legislature, where some lawmakers will argue that such sales taxes are regressive.
The eventual "compromise" between Dayton and the Republicans and the Summit Hill Democrats will most definitely include:
1. Higher property taxes
2. An expansion of sales taxes most likely to food and clothing.
Waiting "until" the "compromise" takes place will be a disaster.
If we want real reforms based upon "tax-the-rich" which goes beyond a nice campaign cliche to elect weal liberal Democrats like Mark Dayton we need a powerful movement--- some kind of massive "People's Lobby" capable of making these politicians understand that there are real consequences to heaping regressive tax policies on us under the guise of "compromise."
The obvious "consequence" these politicians, including Dayton, must be made to understand is that they will be defeated at the polls by people's politicians who will implement real progressive "tax-the-rich" policies designed to redistribute the wealth through meaningful universal social programs.
As MPR states, only a very few state legislators will decry this "compromise" to come as "regressive" so it is up to Minnesotans to to take the required action to defend their own interests.
1 comment:
Having lived in states without a sales tax on clothing and footwear
or on food and food products, I have
an observation and suggestion.
The unlimited exemption on clothing and footwear is way too generous. One way to derive more revenue is to put
a cap on the value of the clothing.
In NY state, its $55. max value per item, formerly $110. In Connecticut,
it is only $50.per item. In Massachusetts, it is $175. Only MN,PA,and NJ have an unlimited exemption. Perhaps MN should adopt a cap of say, $250. per item. Any clothing or footwear item above that being taxed at a flat rate of 5 or 6%.
As far as taxing food sales, don't you already impose a sales tax on pop and candy? Plus you put a tax on prepared meals or meals served in a restaurant, correct? The further talk of additional taxing of other untaxed food should be halted. Sales taxes are very regressive, and while I don't have a problem imposing a luxury tax, taxing on items we need...should be taxed at a lower rate or not at all.
Post a Comment