YOUR COMMENTS

Sales taxes (i.e. consumption and sin taxes) are the fairest form. At least then, people have the choice to spend or not to spend. Of course, with property taxes, they have a similar choice to some extent--they can stay or leave. And many do leave. Or, as in the case of Vermonters, they find tax loopholes. Ever wonder why all those front steps are missing and paint-peel is pandemic? Tax break on unfinished renovations. Upshot? The entire state is under perpetual construction. And here's the best part: tax revenues are down. It doesn't help that the state is unfriendly to businesses (high taxes and excessive regulations), which means that the high income tax they impose on the scant number of workers they have is futile and self-defeating. Yeah, the socialists have it going on alright!

But the point of the op-ed is that one form of tax does not always supplant another. Instead, the government finds a way to create new taxes, while increasing old ones. Frugality, efficiency,and accountability are out the window with these nitwit politicians.
- Susie Nickerson, Horseshoe Bay, TX 78657

Your article misstates the effect of Vermont's income-sensitive property tax "prebate" - which most Vermont households qualify for, not just those in the low-income extreme, and which can more than cut the nominal property tax in half. You also overlook that Windsor and Windham counties in Vermont are along the Connecticut river, so that most living here do our major shopping in NH, and so don't pay sales tax either.
- Whit Blauvelt, Rockingham, VT

It's amazing! Taxes are 'a necessary evil' as the saying goes... But Sales Taxes? Doesn't the (a?) a government get enough money on basic taxes? If not, maybe they ought to cut spending.

Sure, it costs money to run a government but why penalize people (and merchants) for taxing a purchase? Why should governments continue to find new ways to tax?

The parking meters in our major cities are just another form of taxation and 'drive' the spenders to the malls.

Start an Income or Sales Tax, and it doesn't stop there. There will always be more 'reasons' to increase these taxes as the 'need arises.

I lived in VT back in the 80s. At the time they had a 4% Sales Tax, an Income Tax that was 28% of Federal, and my property tax on a home valued at $60,000 (at the time) was $1800.00!!

"Let's leave sleeping dogs lie..."
- John A Diefenbach, Mason, NH

There is a reason that a property tax burden isn't necessarily proportionate to income -- it's not an income tax. The common criticism of property or sales taxes are that they are "regressive," that is, they are not proportionate to income. Well, no kidding, that's because they're not income taxes. What these critics imply is that an income tax is the ONLY moral form of revenue raising. To say the least, there isn't much logical support for this argument.
- Travis Blais, Windham, NH

Gee Richard, with all that money the son is saving, shouldn't he be helping out his widowed Mom instead of passing the buck on to other taxpayers? Maybe we could call that the "Family Advantage".
- Thomas Thorpe, Portsmouth, NH

When will people stop thinking about which revenue source (aka which tax) is the best for people and start thinking about where all the money goes?

The debate should be about how much the government spends, not which pocket they're grabbing your money out of.
- Tammy Simmons, Manchester

It is great to manipulate statistics to fit your story, for instance;
A widow living in New Hampshire, on SS as her only income, living in a home purchased 38 years ago, valued at $200,000 must pay 30% of her income for property taxes. Her son, earning $100,000 per year also lives in a home valued at $200,000 in the same town. He pays only 3% of his income. I guess this is what as known as the “New Hampshire Advantage”.
- Richard Elliott, Claremont