If I were eligible to vote on November 2, I would vote yes on question 1. A yes vote would repeal the 6.25 % alcohol tax that was implemented in the Commonwealth just over a year ago. Before the bill was signed into law there was no sales tax on alcohol, although there was an excise tax. My main justification for voting yes on this initiative is because I believe it would stimulate business in liquor and convenience stores especially those abutting the New Hampshire border. New Hampshire, “land of the free”, does not have a sales tax on any goods. According to Massachusetts State Representative and Minority Whip Brad Hill of Ipswich, businesses in his district have experienced between a 20%-40% decline in sales since the tax was implemented. This is not a statistic that anyone wants to see when we are trying to build the economy back up. What is remarkable about this is that Rep. Hill does not represent any border towns which mean the decline in business for border stores is even greater. Another point I would like to bring up is that alcohol in the Commonwealth is already taxed. There is a “hidden” excise tax put on alcohol in this state before it even reaches the shelves. I believe that the sales tax on alcohol is an unfair double tax and should definitely be repealed.
Opponents of this initiative would argue that repealing the sales tax on alcohol would cause an increase in alcohol abuse in the state. I don’t believe this will happen. Before we had this special tax on alcohol Massachusetts did not have any serious alcohol abuse problem so there is no reason to believe that this would happen if the tax was repealed. And for those citizens of Massachusetts who do have alcohol abuse problems, I believe that they will continue to buy the alcohol no matter how high the tax is, so repealing it would not be an issue. Other opponents are fearful of a decline in aid for schools, towns, fire departments, police departments, etc. My opinion is that these public necessities will always be funded and that a decrease in state revenue would force the state legislature to be more fiscally responsible. For example, instead of spending $3.5 million on the Pioneer Valley bike paths (those must be really nice bike paths) like the state did in 2008 they would take that money as well as monies usually allocated for other wasteful earmarks and put it back into the schools and towns.
In conclusion, Massachusetts should definitely vote YES on Question 1. If you believe in thriving small businesses and a booming economy you should most certainly vote YES on Question 1.
No comments:
Post a Comment