Column: Here’s another view or two about the tax topic

Published 12:00 am Friday, May 27, 2005

April is the national month for taxes. This label may be very logical, but lacking an official designation. Anyway, I was reminded of this while reading the April 2005 issue of Yankee Magazine which is available at the Albert Lea Public Library. On page 152 was an article by Edie Clark based on one of the nation’s most stupid tax levies.

This lady is a resident of New Hampshire, one of the few states which doesn’t have an income tax. However, she explains the state has devised another way to “extract money from the populace.”

One of those gimmicks used by New Hampshire to make more money for the state treasury is something called the “view tax.” Thus, anyone who has a clear unobstructed view of a lake, mountain or hillside with an overabundance of colorful leafy trees in the fall pays an extra tax levy for this privilege. Evidently this tax is based on the concept that folks who can afford homes and businesses with nice scenery can easily pay this added tax.

Email newsletter signup

One can assume the counties out in New Hampshire have special tax assessors trained to classify those views. Maybe they’re rated on an A-B-C scale with tax rates to match.

The author stated some folks have left New Hampshire because of this stupid tax. That’s certainly understandable.

Here in Albert Lea such a tax could add a few more dollars to the city coffers. There may be no hillsides or valley views, but there are plenty of scenic sights from some homes and businesses of our lakes. For some of us, there are also views of neighborhood backyards or the street and the fronts and sides of other homes.

Hopefully, such a stupid tax concept to add on still another local or state tax will never become a reality.

This topic of

taxation reminded me of an article I wrote for the former Community Magazine which was published in the August 1963 issue. Here it is in all its stupidity:

&uot;Our local, state, and national governing bodies are desperately looking for new sources of tax revenue. Everything imaginable has been taxed to the hilt. Now is the time for our ambitious legislators to consider the “clean living tax.”

&uot;What is the ‘clean living tax’? It is a tax based on three of our nation’s favorite items in the present tax structure; cigarettes, liquor and gasoline. Under prevailing laws, only the users of these three commodities are taxed.

&uot;The ‘clean living tax’ would change all of this. Every American taxpayer would be required to pay an added tax based on his estimated usage of each item. Thus, the person who doesn’t smoke, drink or drive a car would no longer avoid paying his fair share of taxes. The tax wouldn’t lower the levy on the present consumers of cigarettes, liquor and gasoline, but it would add needed income to our ever-hungry governmental finances.

&uot;How would the ‘clean living tax’ be levied? The answer is simple. Three additional questions could be placed on every tax return. The suggested questions are:

1. Are you a regular user of tobacco products?

2. Are you a regular user of any type of alcoholic beverages?

3. Do you own a car?

&uot;If the answer is yes to any question, the taxpayer is exempt from the added taxes. If the answer is no to any question, then the taxpayer would be required to pay an added surtax. The added surtax would be based on the latest available statistics showing the average yearly usage of cigarettes, liquor and gasoline.

&uot;Many patriotic Americans may express objections to the ‘clean living tax.’ Most of these objections can be overwhelmed by a careful application of the phrase, tax equalization. Another way to smother out any adverse opinions is to publicize the fact that every taxpayer should pay equal taxes regardless of personal morals or transportation.

&uot;If our politicians can manage to see all the extra money coming in from honest taxpayers and suppress any personal feelings of doing an injustice to their fellow Americans, then the ‘clean living tax’ may someday become a reality.&uot;

Thankfully, no one ever took

this stupid suggestion seriously.

(Feature writer Ed Shannon’s column appears each Friday.)