Not enough to tax?

After raising the cigarette tax in 2008 and the alcohol tax last year, a public health advocate (read: lover of big government and the nanny state) wants to jack up taxes on cigars from their current 15 percent rate, according to a recent Washington Times story by David Hill. Vincent DeMarco also spearheaded the unnecessary alcohol tax increase which took effect earlier this year.

I find it interesting that the angle DeMarco uses to justify yet another sin tax is teen smoking. Apparently cigarettes are now too expensive for teens to purchase – thanks to the additional taxes – so they are embracing cigars instead. DeMarco is quoted in the Times, “Anything that is going to stop young people from smoking is a good thing.” Well, sir, I have news for you – raising taxes on cigars and other tobacco products won’t work for that intended purpose. But you’ll certainly extract more money out of those adults who choose to smoke.

Since I don’t happen to be a smoker of either cigars or cigarettes, nor do I use smokeless tobacco, which would also be included in a tax hike, one may ask why I even care. Well, I care because I’m flat out tired of the state of Maryland finding more and more ways to separate us from our hard-earned money, for a government that’s too large and too dysfunctional. Has Maryland made additional revenue from the new sales tax on alcohol? Presumably – but how many people have decided to go to an adjacent state to make an alcohol or cigarette purchase since these increases went into effect? How much revenue was lost to those states?

I’m reminded of an anecdotal example from a friend who’s a wine connoisseur. In Delaware, the store from which he purchases his wine gives a case discount of 10 percent, not to mention the fact there’s no sales tax (or additional alcohol surtax) in the state. Buying a case of six bottles, then, he’s ahead almost 20 percent from the deal he could get from a Maryland retailer, assuming they don’t offer the case discount. Multiply that by the thousands of people who are wine drinkers and you get lost revenue and jobs on our side of the border. (Marc Kilmer of the Maryland Public Policy Institute points this out in a recent op-ed piece which talks about the surtax’s effect on Cecil County, which borders both Delaware and Pennsylvania.)

There comes a point where enough is enough, and in a General Assembly which has also discussed the possibility of charging sales tax on various services over the years – in 2008 they had to pull back a proposed sales tax on computer services when businesses rebelled against the idea – there needs to be far more sanity. Instead of reflexively seeking more from those who pay the bills, why not look at the spending end of state government rather than the revenue end? Certainly there are myriad legitimate functions which need to occur, but their power to destroy is far too great as it stands now.

If we get back to the basic core services of state government, we’ll likely find our needed revenues will be less than the amount taken from us. When the situation occurred during my time in Ohio, the state government gave it back by reducing the tax rates enough each year to refund the overcharges. Eliminating the bloat and maximizing our freedom – not just financial freedom but also loosing the chains of over-regulation – should be the goal of each and every representative we send to the General Assembly. It’s shameful that so many fail us in that respect.

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer.