21st Century Taxation - logo
 

Unusual Taxes - Often Not Ideal for Tax Systems

March 20, 2008 - 6:36am

In efforts to either raise new revenue or change behavior, or both, we sometimes see some unusual tax proposals from lawmakers. Here are a few recent examples, some of which were enacted:

  1. New Mexico - 1% excise tax on the sales price of televisions, video games, and video game equipment. The revenues would go into the "leave no child inside fund" to be used for outdoor curriculum programs, transportation for children to have an outdoor experience, to provide "outdoor nature-oriented physical activity programs" for children and similar purposes. This bill, HB 583 was estimated to raise about $1.85 million each year. As the name for the proposed law suggests - Leave No Child Inside, the goal was primarily to change behavior - get kids away from TV and video games and outside. It's unlikely that it would have changed behavior, but it would have provided extra moneys for outdoor education and activities. One of the supporters of the bill was the Rio Grande Sierra Club. This bill died in committee in March 2008.
    • Issues include:
      • Is there really a good reason for this new tax? If there is a need to increase funding for parks so they have more programming for kids, why not use general fund revenues?
      • Why single out video games and TV? Other things that keep kids inside include DVDs, games they can access on their computer (even for free), Girl Scout meetings, homework, chores, and much more.
      • What about the definitional problems? Issues would certainly arise as to how to exactly what is a video game, how to apply the tax if a video game is purchased online or from out-of-state, and more.
  2. Chicago - a bottled water tax went into effect in 2008. See earlier blog post.
  3. California - oil taxes. In March, a bill - ABX3 9 was proposed and died when it failed to get California's required 2/3 majority vote for a tax increase. This 2-part proposal included a severance tax on oil (not really unusual since many states already have them) and a 2% surtax on oil company taxable income over $10 million. Two unusual aspects - why single out oil companies for a higher income tax - why not other profitable companies? After all, California has a $15 billion budget shortfall. The other unusual item was that all revenue generated would go to the Superintendent of Public Instruction to alleviate budget cuts that are presently causing some K-12 teachers to get layoff notices.
    • Issues include:
      • Earmarking taxes, particularly when there is not connection between oil and funding education. Also, when oil company income drops, so would education funding.
      • Singling out one industry for special treatment (here, higher taxes) adds complexity to the law because special definitions are needed to define that industry.
    • (See op ed.)
  4. New York City - a congestion tax was proposed in 2007 by Mayor Bloomberg (New York Times story, 4/22/07). This is not an original idea because it is used elsewhere, such as in London. It addresses the problem - if you want to reduce congestion, make it more expensive to enter a location during certain hours. It will encourage people to find other means, such as walking or public transportation - or just waiting to enter when the tax is lower or not imposed. It does raise some administrative challenges, but it doable. We'll see what happens.
  5. European Union - a proposal to tax cars based on how much they pollute (Reuters story, 11/13/07).
    • Issues include:
      • How to measure how much cars pollute? The easy ways, such as by adding the tax on at time of purchase based on the year and make of the car won't work because people drive different amounts annually. People are unlikely to keep good records of how much they drive annually.
      • Driving habits can affect pollution. Driving faster uses more gas as does driving with lots of stuff in the trunk.
      • Visitors (although most probably drive in from another EU country) cause pollution, but not be taxed (depending on the system for assessing the tax).
      • While a good idea, administrative difficulties probably make a tax at the pump a better approach.

There are certainly many others. One from a few years ago was a proposal in Detroit to tax fast food (CNNMoney.com article, 5/9/05). Significant issues include the rationale for such a tax (other than to raise revenue) and the many issues that would arise in trying to define fast food.

Often these unusual taxes arise when lawmakers are desparate for money, a situation that often doesn't lead to changes that are good for a tax system.

What about non-revenue policy goals?

With something like NYC's proposed congestion tax -- or London's actual one -- isn't the goal of reducing traffic and vehicle emissions at least as important as the additional revenue for the government?

non-revenue goals

Yes - existing tax rules and proposals should consider the principle of economic growth and efficiency. The tax law should not work counter to goals of a particular jurisdiction. For example, there are many ways to measure income including what depreciation schedules should be used. A jurisdiction, such as the US, should not use a 20-year life for semiconductor equipment as that would be harmful to chip manufacturers (even though it would measure taxable income). If a jurisdiction, such as California, has a CO2 emission reduction target, it should consider how its tax law can help meet that goal. If a jurisdiction is giving tax incentives to burning oil, that would be counterproductive. A carbon tax with revenues used to reduce some other tax that is not efficient and/or to help reduce CO2 emissions would make sense.

Replacement of Income Taxes

What are your opinions regarding a 360 degree tax reformation that would involve replacing income taxes with a tax on all primary resources at extraction?

replacement of income taxes

That's a good question as to whether income taxes could be completely replaced with a severance tax. If one is just talking revenue, I'd guess it is likely but that seems like it would be a very large severance tax (and many states already have them so they'd be quite high). I do think it would be good to replace part of the individual income tax and for lower-income individuals, part of the payroll tax, with some type(s) of environmental tax. For example, a tax on utility bills (assuming the utility uses carbon-producing techniques)would help consumers to see that they are producing CO2 via their use of power in their home. An increased gas tax would also help consumers see their impact. A severance tax (if it can be done without harm to states) might encourage oil companies to pursue other energy sources.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for weeding out automated spam submissions.