UPDATE: More Games
After such a nice victory in Taxation Committee this morning, a move led by Rep.Faehn in the House this afternoon has now sent HB1255 to Appropriations Committee on Monday morning for its next vote, rather than the full House. So here we go. Your contacts were  wonderful to the last committee. Let’s convince this one too! The people need this tax shift.
If you need any further inspiration, read this from Matt Gassen, Director of Community Food Banks of SD (which distributes food to over 500 agencies in SD)
“No other tax so directly takes food off the family table as the current 4% state tax on food items. To shift the tax off food as proposed in HB 1255 could be one of the single most significant pieces of legislation to impact the hungry of South Dakota in a long time. With the continuing increase in the numbers of individuals (78,000 statewide) seeking emergency food assistance a recent study shows that 32% choose between buying groceries and paying for utilities or heating fuel, 29% choose between food and rent/mortgages and 32% choose between food and gas for their cars. The passage of this bill would make the family budget go farther and increase the amount of food that their grocery dollars would buy. It could also help to ease the strain on emergency feeding programs who are struggling to find enough food to help all those in need.”
Next to house floor – needs 2/3 vote
HB1255 is a revenue-neutral tax shift. The state comes out even with the shift from the 4% state portion of food tax to 3/10% on non-food sales. It is revenue-neutral for the state, but middle- and lower-income people will be better able to afford their basic needs. Better than refund programs. The benefit comes right at the grocery store, to reduce hunger, and improve health and family financial stability.
What about the argument that taxing food provides the state a “stable source of revenue”? This is a line of reasoning from a time when the economy was better, and the worry was that when times get tough, at least there would be revenue coming from grocery purchases. Well, times are tough. This is the down time. Making a revenue-neutral tax shift when the economy is down would take the worry out of taking tax off food. This is the time to make the shift. The issue will continue until the tax comes off food, so legislators would be wise to do it now. (Does this make sense? There should be a more concise way to explain it.)
This is something that should have been done years ago. Taxing basic necessities is just plain bad practice. Of course the idea of shifting the burden is nothing new, however I think that they should simply cut the food tax and not raise another. Revenue shortfalls are not the issue, spending is. If I can’t afford the latest bauble or doodad I just don’t get it, and I don’t go begging for money. Govt however seems to think it’s fine to increase spending then discover they need to raise taxes. I would however support a tax that would pay for politicians to take general accounting courses, perhaps then their spending and taxation would be logical (but probably not).
I agree, why even fart around with different tax rates. I have often said, remove the food tax and tax everything else at the same rate (recreational vehicles, advertising, cars, etc.)
But what about clothing… isn’t that a necessity? What about healthcare, prescription medications, wheelchairs or canes for those with mobility problems etc, etc? What about daycare costs for low income parents who need to work in order to keep food on the table? What about a vehicle for an elderly low income small town resident who requires it to get to and from work each day?
I guess it becomes hard to draw the line between what should be taxed versus what is considered a necessity. I think we can all agree food is a necessity and a plasma television is not, but on some things the line is rather blurry.
One thing is certain – the state will get their money one way or another. What they lose from a food tax they will raise by other means, and at the end of the year the only way low income residents will come out ahead is if the state decides to add taxes to luxury items or services which are not used by the people being protected from the elimination of the food tax.
From what I have heard if you buy your medical needs, wheelchairs, and walkers and have a prescription from your doctor that says you need it they don’t charge sales tax. I don’t know about canes, etc. The thing is with these items, there are some people that diagnose themselves and don’t bother getting a note from a doctor. Also certain requirements determine what type of walker you need, for instance with walkers if you have a doctor’s prescription he/she might want you to have one without wheels, two wheels or four wheels. With canes, there are quad canes, plain canes, and canes with three legs. Some of the handles are the plain curved ones, some are called off-set, etc. Getting back to sales tax, I definitely feel that there shouldn’t be sales tax food, clothing and household necessities like bedding and towels. When you buy these items at thrift stores you still have to pay tax on them. Also thrift stores aren’t as low priced as they used to be and I refuse to pay high prices for used items—-let alone I don’t have the patience to dig in stuff looking for things. I do that at home, only in that case it is to eliminate things. lol
For now, no tax on canibus brownies. Later, tax-free medical marijuana.
Buy all hard goods tax-free from the internet. Register an RV and live in it to avoid property taxes. Ignore that move it every 30 days thing because citations are unenforceable.
Anything it takes to keep revenue from the Sioux Falls dictator and developers.
However, important to fund state and county government. Maybe a special 5% tax designated for them only.
Revoke Home-Rule. Restore constitutional democracy. Tax protest is a good start.
Have you looked at HB 1186? Glad you questioned that
mv
sorry I’ve been absent, have been a little busy