3 ms·

Taxes tend to increase price levels, not reduce them. Costs are passed through to every level.

gmadsen 6y ago
not 1-1. a personal wealth tax is not felt or distributed down lane. As long as it is not a company tax, it will not be directly pointed to the buyer.
- kansface 6y ago
  > The tax will levy an extra 0.1% to 0.6% on gross receipts made in San Francisco for companies ...
- stale2002 6y ago
  > personal wealth tax is not felt Yes it would be. A tax on salaries, would force companies to have to pay more to attract talent. And these are additional costs that the company would have to pay.
Retric 6y ago
It’s not that simple. You can’t pass on taxes on profits. If hypothetically charging 57$ maximizes profits then raising prices just lowers profits. Alternatively, if some aspect of your process like sugar is taxed then companies seek alternatives like corn syrup. That extends to property taxes, executive pay, etc where companies seek alternatives to better utilize resources. Though in the case of salaries that my end up as various executive perks.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
heavyset_go 6y ago
Prices are not determined by costs, but what the market will bear.
LVTfan 6y ago
Likely true of most taxes, but not true of a tax on land value. Taxing land value heavily causes underused land to either be put to good use or sold, at a reasonable price, to someone who will build on it. Taxing land value -- that is, collecting the lion's share of the annual rental value of the land for public purposes -- removes the speculative element, and makes it worth only what it is worth FOR USE. That almost always creates jobs, first for construction, and then to utilize the space. It may create housing, and goodness knows, much of California is in desperate need of housing. And housing creates jobs -- houses and highrises don't maintain themselves. Virtuous circle --- the opposite of the vicious one that Proposition has created (and which was easy to predict before it was enacted). If you want jobs and housing, tax land value. Otherwise, keep California doing what it does now.
- drak0n1c 6y ago
  I agree land value tax is a far more efficient tax than property or revenue taxes. The goal should be to raise revenue with minimal impact on commercial decisions. Punitive revenue/wealth taxes are essentially a form of sin taxes and distort the marketplace.

not 1-1. a personal wealth tax is not felt or distributed down lane. As long as it is not a company tax, it will not be directly pointed to the buyer.

kansface 6y ago
> The tax will levy an extra 0.1% to 0.6% on gross receipts made in San Francisco for companies ...
stale2002 6y ago
> personal wealth tax is not felt Yes it would be. A tax on salaries, would force companies to have to pay more to attract talent. And these are additional costs that the company would have to pay.

Retric 6y ago

It’s not that simple. You can’t pass on taxes on profits. If hypothetically charging 57$ maximizes profits then raising prices just lowers profits. Alternatively, if some aspect of your process like sugar is taxed then companies seek alternatives like corn syrup. That extends to property taxes, executive pay, etc where companies seek alternatives to better utilize resources. Though in the case of salaries that my end up as various executive perks.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

heavyset_go 6y ago

Prices are not determined by costs, but what the market will bear.

LVTfan 6y ago

Likely true of most taxes, but not true of a tax on land value. Taxing land value heavily causes underused land to either be put to good use or sold, at a reasonable price, to someone who will build on it. Taxing land value -- that is, collecting the lion's share of the annual rental value of the land for public purposes -- removes the speculative element, and makes it worth only what it is worth FOR USE. That almost always creates jobs, first for construction, and then to utilize the space. It may create housing, and goodness knows, much of California is in desperate need of housing. And housing creates jobs -- houses and highrises don't maintain themselves. Virtuous circle --- the opposite of the vicious one that Proposition has created (and which was easy to predict before it was enacted). If you want jobs and housing, tax land value. Otherwise, keep California doing what it does now.

drak0n1c 6y ago
I agree land value tax is a far more efficient tax than property or revenue taxes. The goal should be to raise revenue with minimal impact on commercial decisions. Punitive revenue/wealth taxes are essentially a form of sin taxes and distort the marketplace.