Thursday, February 09, 2006

Sales Tax on Food per Marlin

In my first blog I thought I would address the sales tax on food. There was letter in the forum in the Salt Lake Tribune last week asking someone to explain what is "regressive" about the sales tax on food? I have not responded to the letter, although I may. You could build a strong argument that a sales tax on food is not regressive. A sales tax is proportional based on the amount of purchases. Opponents argue that the share of smaller incomes spent for food is higher than that of larger incomes. For example, assume a 6 percent sales tax on food, a family with a 36,000 income may spent 15,000 on taxable food, and would pay $900 in tax. Consider another family with an income of $100,000 who may spend $25,000 on food. They would pay $1,500 in sales tax. The lower income family pays a rate of 2.5% ($900/$36,000) of its income, whereas the higher-income family pays a rate of 1.5% ($1,500/$100,000) of their income on the sales tax. Using income as the base the sales tax becomes regressive. If you are using the proper base, the sales tax is proportional, not regressive.

Regardless, the sales tax on food has a regressive effect. Food is a necessity. We have to eat. We could all probably eat a little less, I know I could, but nonetheless it is a necessity. If you want to replace the lost revenue and still keep a proportional tax, place the sales tax on items that are not a necessity. Here are a couple more suggestions that won't go very far.How about including Utah in the big Lotteries.How about his idea, keep the tax on processed food items with a fat content greater than (x) grams, I am not sure what x should be at this point. For a tax to be good, it needs convenient to levy and collect. We may have problem with this. Better yet, we should tax anything I don't consume. Maybe a tax on bad reality TV shows, and certainly we need to tax bad political clichés.

Marlin Struhs

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Great ideas.

Think of the Gas people will save not having to drive to Idaho to get their lotto tickets.

Colorado, for example, uses their lotto money to bump up funding for public schools. It's been wildly successful.

But, Marlin, taxing on fat content ... that would make my morning McD's stop even more expensive. LOL.

Personally, I think that a roll back on the Food Tax combined with a raise in the minimum wage would be the best possible outcome.

When people have more money to spend, that's GOOD for the tax base, and, thusly, good for Utah and Utah's working families.

While we have good numbers from states like Oregon, that show how well a minimum wage hike is for the economy, the Gov's office is using California numbers to base his decision to wait (conveniently, in a year that he'll be running for reelection).

It makes you wonder, amid all the talk of what’s good for Utah and who (legislators of a certain elephant party) claim that they know more than voters, whether our State government actually realizes that there are several ways that Utah’s working families can be aided, and several different proposals that could be combined to beneficial results for all.

Cliffs Blogger Profile said...

Go Rob!

I bet you're kicking yourself for not doing this sooner. Pretty easy eh?

Good first post!

If you are goig to moderate, don't make do "word verification" too. Its really hard when you're drunk or late at night.

Rob said...

Cliff,

When your drunk or late? Maybe you meant when your drunk, late at night.

Heres to water!

Thanks for your support Cliff.

Now, can someone explain to me how to link blogs? Who the heck is HTML?

(Just Kidding)

Anonymous said...

up drunk and late. Can't type the verifucation letters