A tax by any other name…

If there’s one thing all political observers know for sure, it’s that Bush opposes any and all tax increases, right? Well, it depends on what the meaning of “tax” is.

President Bush hates new taxes, that’s for sure. But tell that to airline passengers, higher-income veterans and owners of freighters using the St. Lawrence Seaway. They are among those hit up for billions of dollars under his new budget plan.

The spending proposal for the budget year that begins Oct. 1 contains $3.5 billion in new user fees. Typically branded as new taxes by those who have to pay them, these fees are intended to hold down the public’s cost for programs such as airline screening, medical care for veterans and military retirees, food inspection and oversight of commodities markets.

The fees would swell to $47.2 billion over five years, dunning taxpayers and industry to help pay for government services.

The White House argues these aren’t tax increases; they’re “user-fee” increases. What’s the difference? Well, one sounds more politically palatable.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but when the government requires citizens to pay money to the state to finance a government service, it’s a tax. That’s actually the definition of a tax.

I’d also add that, by Republican standards, Bush is trying to raise taxes. In 1992, when Bill Clinton was taking on the first President Bush, the Bush-Quayle campaign and the RNC released an alleged list of 128 tax increases Clinton created as governor of Arkansas. The list was painfully ridiculous and even included some taxes that were counted multiple times. As Michael Kinsley noted, the list even included “an extension of the dog-racing season, on the logic that a longer season meant more tax revenue.”

But more importantly, the Republicans’ list of 128 tax increases also included, you guessed it, any and all fee increases from the state of Arkansas during Clinton’s tenure. If the state fishing license went up one penny, Republicans insisted that counted as a tax increase. In fact, the smear on Clinton included (#92 out of the 128) a $1-per-conviction court costs fee imposed on convicted criminals. Bush and the RNC insisted that this fee — $1 on criminals — was further proof that Clinton was a serial tax-raiser.

And now this President Bush wants to raise “fees” on everything from airline tickets to medical care for veterans.

As it turns out, Congress is staunchly opposed to the increases, and Bush’s proposals have been described as “dead on arrival.” But prospects aside, isn’t it fair to characterize the White House budget as full of “tax increases”?

The first MAJOR tax that was raised under Bush was when the bonus depreciation allowance was allowed to expire at the end of 2004. You used to be able to depreciate 50% of the cost of an asset during the first year and depreciate the remaining 50% under normal depreciation rules.

This was put in after 9/11 to spur business investment. It seems to me that this TAX INCREASE coincides pretty well with the improvement in the job market.

I wonder if Cheney knows this??

  • Not that it’s really anything, but I think you might want to include a quoted definition of the word tax or your argument (or part of it) seems to have a whole in it.

  • Taxes are quite a lot of bullshit in America- and quite well hidden. Living in Germany- where tax rates are very high- I get to see the differing systems in action. A boy, do the Germans love to complain about their taxes. A single person, for example, might pay nearly 50% of their income directly to taxes. On top of that, they pay a 16% sales tax on nearly everything they purchase (other than food. Thankfully, Beer is considered a food item here…)

    But, when we actually sit down and figure out what they are paying for, what they get, what we pay for, and what we get, things get a lot more egalitarian.

    See, Americans have the Federal tax, the state tax, the sales tax, health care, etc. etc. And, when we start to add up all of those incremental costs, we end up on a very even plain with those ‘high-tax’ European countries.

    Ultimately, the only real difference ends up that the Europeans pay their taxes upfront (oh, yes, and they get healthcare as a benefit of their taxes). Our numbers sound better, since each individual tax is lower, but we end up paying the same, if not more, for a lesser return.

    Heck, the best example I saw of this in action was back in 2002, after a nice round of tax-cuts. There were a number of under-the-radar stories at the time about how States were having to increase taxes to cover up shortfalls in the money which they had previously received from the feds, which they would not receive because of the federal tax cuts.

    Face it, folks. If tax cuts are the answer to all problems, then a 0% tax is the answer, right? If that sounds wrong, then all tax-cuts can’t be right…

  • I know I’ve mentioned this before, and unfortunately I no longer have a link to it, but during the 04 caucuses, Dean issued for each state a flyer about the Bush Tax Increases. It started out with a -$300, the amount of the “supplemental refund checks” most people got under the Bush tax cuts, and then started added back in the increases caused by cuts in federal funding — increases in state, local and sales taxes, the increase in state public university tuition, the increase in health care costs, the increase in public transportation costs, the increase in federal, state and local user fees, etc etc etc. Needless to say, the average gullible American came out way, way behind on the deal. Oh — unless you are in the top 1% of income, of course.

  • There was a great commentary by T R Reid on NPR a while ago – I think when his book ‘United States of Europe’ came out. He & his family were in London, had been there a week, and were already complaining about the VAT. The next Saturday, his daughter’s ear gets infected from her earring. They have no idea where to go, so they just grab a cab who takes them to the closet hospital. As they worked on cleaning her ear up, and getting antibiotics ready he got out his wallet. The nurse said ‘Mr Reid, this is the United Kingdom. You don’t pay for health care in this country.’ He said to his wife ‘See, that’s where all that VAT goes.’

  • In Minnesota, Gov. Pawlenty took a “no new taxes” pledge from the local Club for Growth-style group, the Minnesota Taxpayer’s League. Nice for campaigning, not so good for actually running the state.

    Last year Gov. Pawlenty’s budget included a “health care fee” assessed on tobacco products amounting to about $700m/year. Gov. Pawlenty repeatedly asserted that this was a fee, not a tax.

    Problem: Minnesota’s settlement with the Tobacco industry specifically stated that the state could not put additional “fees” on tobacco. They could raise the tax, but not a fee. The second the budget came out the Tobacco industry filed suit.

    And won. Now Minnesota has a $700m hole in it’s budget. But the Govenor still claims to have not raised taxes.

  • Time for the Washington Generals to drop the ball again. I know they don’t, but if the Democrats had any will to win, they would add up all the user fees and tax increases from state agencies that were caused by Bush’s budgets, add up each and every one of them, and say, every FRICKING time the subject of taxes comes up: “By his own accounting measures, Bush raised regular Americans’ taxes (X) times, and gave millionaires (Y) billion dollars in tax cuts”.

    If the Replicrooks can count every fee increase as a tax increase, then we should too. Frankly, they ARE tax increases. But I am SICK AND TIRED of Dems acting like they cannot throw a punch because they might not look good. They worry that saying “a fee is a tax” isn’t 100% accurate. To me, they look like they don’t want to win.

  • I don’t hink one needs to go all the way back to 1992–I thought in 2004 the GOP raised this issue regarding Kerry, and it included various user fees.

  • Here in NY, Pataki raised fees on I-don’t-know how many different government services including traffic tickets. Oddly enough, I got a ticket recently and the DMV let me off the hook when I forgot to send in proof of insurance. Hmm…

    My biggest beef are the fees for PACER, the online federal court record database. PACER is a terrific public service but I not only think the information should be free, I don’t think the private firm in San Antonio which administers PACER should know what court cases I am interested in.

    I first learned about PACER in 1998 when I tracked a bankruptcy for my employer. I went down to the Brooklyn court where you can use them for free. I signed my company up for a PACER account and the account name was mailed to me in about two weeks. Billing was monthly and I paid by check.

    After I left the company, I continued to use the same account for my own research but had the bills sent to my home. I accidentally ran up a $100 plus bill when I accessed the Enron case (something like 400 pages at the time) by mistake. I was low on funds then and stiffed PACER. A bill collector argued with me on and off for about a year but then apparently dropped my case.

    Between March and, I think, May 2001, PACER was being revamped and online access to court records through PACER was free. I was doing temp work at a bankrupt company then and I showed everyone at the company how to use PACER to follow the proceedings.

    Later on, I opened another account in my own name and forgot to pay a $7 bill. By that time, I was into some heavy-duty research and decided to keep my name away from a company in San Antonio that I knew nothing about. No way was I giving my credit card to a stranger in Texas (which is also my beef with the Texas Secretary of State).

    Everyone makes fun of Al Gore for inventing the internet but I was always been curious as to his role in putting federal records online. The IRS website was my first go-round online with the feds and I found the site useful and easy to access. Ditto for Social Security. Imagine counting on the Bush administration to give you access to your own records that you bought and paid for?

    I even have favorite state “secretary of state” websites. Say what you will about Katherine Harris but it is my understanding that Sunbiz.org, the Florida online corporate registration database, was set up while she was in office. Sunbiz.org probably is the best database I’ve used but Mississippi, Nevada and Georgia are excellent, too (and free!).

    New York’s corporate database is awful. I sent an email to someone there, asking why was it the way it was and suggested that NY emulate Florida. I got a response which I posted on the now-defunct NYT’s Abuzz forum. The state rep suggested I call to talk about my recommendation but I was posting a lot about corruption in NYS at the time and refrained. I’d sure like to know what the hell Randy A. Daniels was doing up in Albany in the last few years. As a matter of fact, I’d ask Daniels a whole lot of other questions if I ever got my hands on him.

    I recently visited the NYS Secretary of State website again and learned that a private company now administers the corporate registration database. No way I am telling a private company I am searching “Gargano” or “Ciminelli”. For all I know, the company is owned by a “Posillico”.

    I wish that once, just once, someone in Washington or Albany would ask me what service I want from government instead of coming up with creative ideas to give away my tax dollars to their friends and family.

  • Comments are closed.