[Vision2020] Isaac Young and State Income/Sales Tax

Tom Hansen thansen at moscow.com
Wed Oct 27 12:52:21 PDT 2010


Greetings Visoinaires -

Since Isaac Young refused to participate in KRFP's call-in debate last
night, I will post my questions here . . . for open discussion.

On June 19, 2010 Isaac Young stated on his Facebook page:

“We save money at the state level by limiting the size of state
government. The money we save by doing this will allow us to eliminate the
state income tax. Then every one is taxed fairly (sales tax) by their life
style and how much they consume. By reducing the regulations on all
business and streamlining the permit process, you are able to get citizens
to work more quickly.”

http://www.facebook.com/pages/ILikeIke/112506065442567?ref=ts

-----------------------------

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the state of Idaho realized $1.3
billion in state income tax revenue in 2009.

http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/0913idstax.html

Question:  Specifically, what state positions would  Mr. Young eliminate
and/or which specific state programs would Mr. Young eliminate/reduce to
compensate for this loss of state income tax revenue?

-----------------------------

Mr. Young suggests that eliminating state income tax would level the
proverbial playing field as "every one is taxed fairly (sales tax) by
their life style and how much they consume."

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the state of Idaho realized just $1.2
billion in state salestax revenue in 2009.

http://www.census.gov/govs/statetax/0913idstax.html

Realizing that state revenue realized from state sales tax would have to
make up for the $1.3 billion loss, resulting from the termination of state
income tax, this would leave two options (one being consumer dependent and
the other potentially initiated by the state government.

1)  The consumer-dependent option:  CItizens of the state of Idaho would
have to purchase twice as much as they did the year prior to the
elimination of state income tax.  These citizens would include those with
low or no (as a result of unemployment) income.

This option, as much as we may strongly disagree with its suggestion, may
be the better of the two . . .

2)  The government-initiated option:  Increase state sales tax from six
percent to twelve percent.  This option may have a somewhat measurable
adverse impact on families of high income.  But, could you imagine the
impact it would have on low and no income families as they make their
weekly trip tlo WinCo to buy groceries (something everybody needs,
regardless of life style.

------------------------------------------------------

Thoughts, V-peeps?

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

"The Pessimist complains about the wind, the Optimist expects it to change
and the Realist adjusts his sails."

- Unknown




More information about the Vision2020 mailing list