The Concord Monitor Reminds US What Taxation Means To Progressives

by Steve MacDonald

Concord_Monitor_logoThe Progressive view care of the Concord Monitor.

The state still doesn’t know the full impact of a recent cut in business tax rates, but the Legislature is already considering another reduction. A Republican-backed Senate bill would further lower the business profits and enterprise taxes in 2020, resulting in an estimated loss of $81 million in revenue.

The conservative view is that Republicans propose letting New Hampshire Businesses keep an additional $81 million they earned, that the state is opting not to plunder those earnings. So why not say, state lawmakers propose giving $81 million back to New Hampshire’s business owners? Flavor it with some “hard working families” or “engines of the economy.” Look, free stimulus!

And let us be honest. The loss of revenue argument is not as clear. There is no cut and dry formula that tells us the state will have $81 million fewer dollars in revenue if it decides to take $81 million less from business owners. The previous cut saw months of increased revenues from business taxes. And while the Monitor might hint at other causes for that there is no evidence that past cuts have harmed the State’s desire or ability to spend more of other people’s money.

The budget keeps getting bigger. If that can happen while taxing businesses less, then progressives are not interested in taxing to accumulate revenue. They are interested in taxing as a tool of power.

Leave a Comment

  • mer

    “All your money belong to us”
    That is the “progressive/liberal/democrat/horrigan/currie” view of government spending in a nutshell.

    It’s never a spending problem, it’s always a revenue problem. Funny how that never works in the real world. “Sorry Chase, I didn’t pay my bill this month because I have a revenue problem, not a spending problem. I have to force my boss to give me more money”

    • Bryan W

      In their Utopia state, It was never yours to begin with, and you need to spend what they allow you to keep the “right way.”

      Case in point:

      In a post-State of the Union speech in Buffalo, NY on January 20, 1999, Bill Clinton was asked why not a tax cut if we have a surplus. Clinton’s response:

      “We could give it all back to you and hope you spend it right… But … if you don’t spend it right, here’s what’s going to happen. In 2013 — that’s just 14 years away — taxes people pay on their payroll for Social Security will no longer cover the monthly checks… I want every parent here to look at the young people here, and ask yourself, ‘Do you really want to run the risk of squandering this surplus?’ ” Source: Washington Times, January 21, 1999

Previous post:

Next post: