Yes, I know it's Tuesday. To be honest, I hesitate to write this piece because I'm not 100% convinced of my position. That's where you come in. Provide your feedback if you think I'm all wet.
We extended a 4 year property tax abatement to a new day care business last night. As you might imagine, I'm all for lower taxes - no taxes, eventually. I am also pleased that the entire council recognizes that lower taxes are important for economic growth. So where's the rub? Here are the arguments I've presented regarding "targeted tax cuts".
1) We establish a tilted playing field in favor of a single business (and potentially for that industry). My preference is for no property taxes, but if we tax, it should be the same among similar properties.
2) As the city grows, so does demand for services. I'd be happy if we could reduce those services to public safety and infrastructure, but even then additional developed properties consume additional services. If a property is exempted from paying for them, what is the result? Either the remaining payers get less service for the same tax, or they pay more tax for the same service.
My solution to half the problem was to offer an amendment to reduce city spending by the amount of the tax abatement. That motion died for lack of a second, so I didn't bother offering the second amendment: to extend the abatement to all day care businesses.
Some advocates of liberty say "support all tax cuts, no matter what". And I'm inclined to agree, but my desire for equal application of the law gets in the way. Alas, no abatement would be necessary if there were no property tax to begin with! More on that to come this summer...
No comments:
Post a Comment