Vermont has long since lost hope of recovering from its progressive illness. That’s good for New Hampshire, except for the border seepage, and bad for the Green Mountain State.
A place where having the government prop up struggling ski resorts with a new tourist tax is now on the table.
Joshua Bechhoefer, in a commentary at True North Reports, fantasizes about the possibility of bilking flatlanders to pay for free lift tickets for Vermonters (reformatted).
“…Myers Mermel has proposed a 10% hospitality tax on out-of-state skiers in Vermont to subsidize tickets so Vermonters can enjoy our beloved local ski areas. … I predict that Myers Mermel’s proposed Flatlander Tax would lead to meaningful transfers of wealth to smaller, local ski areas that may be underutilized; it would lead to more resilient communities that have been previously struggling to hire labor, maintain equipment, and cope with the changing tourist landscape.
This will happen because only flatlanders will pay the tax and the tax will likely be greatest at places they go, which are the large corporate mountains. Rather than be lost in government bureaucracy, the tax monies will be converted directly into free tickets for Vermonters. The resorts should not suffer meaningfully from the tax as it is likely that Vermonters will spend money at the resorts on food and beverages as a result of the savings gained from free lift tickets, a result of the complementary effect.
Who is Myers Mermel? He is a candidate running for the US Senate whom Mike Huckabee has endorsed. I think that means he is a Republican. But he supports free broadband (at no cost to taxpayers), and one of his positions is “Love Conquers Hate.” He looks good on guns and free speech, but he is also running on a tax that would result in Free Skiing and Snowboarding for Vermonters.
How does a US Senator, if elected, propose legislation at the state level to create a gimme for locals in the form of free lift tickets? He doesn’t explain that on his campaign website but does that matter? Vermont is already less desirable than New Hampshire, and you can ski here without the new proposed tax.
We lowered our rooms and meals tax, and there’s no sales tax to speak of, so that’s more money in the traveler’s pocket on a wide range of purchases. And we have fewer progressive loons.
So, assuming Myers can craft a piece of state legislation from inside the Beltway – which is a bit of a red flag – or Vermont’s Democrat majority government takes the hint and does it on its own, what does that accomplish?
It makes things cost more in Vermont and, in keeping with tradition, makes New Hampshire look like a better destination. That would mean fewer skiers on those corporate mountains paying the tax that’s supposed to directly generate free lift tickets for less fortunate local skiers without any interference from the bureaucracy.
As if a Democrat majority government would ever allow a tax to exist that they didn’t manage or were able to steal for other more pressing progressive priorities.
So, we have three problems. First, Democrats will never go for any tax they can’t “manage” (see also; pilfer to offset other spending), and second, why is a republican candidate for the US senate proposing a new tax in the first place? The third problem, and it’s only a problem for Vermont, is that since when did Vermont adding taxes ever help anyone but New Hampshire?
