|
Edited on Tue Jul-13-04 03:48 PM by geniph
and not really a very sensible reaction, but it is quite common. If Sims (whom I support) intends to get past the primary, he will have to communicate the whole tax proposal clearly to the state's voters. Saying the words 'income tax' has always been the political kiss of death in Washington state. What's the result? We have the single most regressive tax structure in the entire U.S. The sales, excise, property, B&O, and other taxes hit those who can least afford them hardest.
Right now, the state Constitution prohibits an income tax, but does permit the B&O tax (the worst tax in the world as far as preventing small businesses from thriving), the sales tax, multiple excise taxes, etc. So we pay a hodgepodge of taxes without a clear understanding of where the revenues for each go, and without really grasping how much we spend overall on taxes, or what rate anyone is paying. In order to institute a state income tax, the Constitution has to be amended. The only sensible, fair (and politically viable) way to get such an amendment through is to, at the same time, amend the Constitution to prohibit sales tax, B&O tax, etc. That would prohibit the "portmanteau syndrome" we have now, of having new taxes imposed on top of the existing ones.
A single state income tax would be a much more predictable way of generating revenue for the state, would be far more progressive in nature, would be much more equitable, and would be much more accountable in terms of what rates people were paying and where the revenues were used. State income taxes are also deductible on your Federal tax return.
I'm very much in favor of a state income tax, providing the state Constitution is amended thus to prohibit sales and B&O taxes, and property and excise tax rates were lowered at the same time. Minus those safeguards, of course, pretty much everyone is opposed to one.
|