4 ms·
Taxes are not fees for service, local governments though should be aware that if they suppress their major tax payers they should expect their tax revenue to de
by pandaman 3y ago
Taxes are not fees for service, local governments though should be aware that if they suppress their major tax payers they should expect their tax revenue to decrease. It's counterproductive for them and the community to chase away large taxpayers. Not to mention it's illegal: one is still entitled to the protection of law even when not paying any taxes, see the Constitution, 14th Amendment.
- eesmith 3y agoPlease read https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2021/02/11/how-mixed-use-development-can-raise-tax-base https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2021/02/11/how-mixed-use-de... again. The emphasis should not be "major tax payers" because that puts the thumb on the balance in favor of big box stores. It should be on tax revenue per acre, which for Carmel resulted in a 10x improvement over big box stores on greenfield sites, for reasons given in that link. Your "major tax payers" needs further qualifiers. If the major tax payer is a pharmaceutical manufacturing company, that's far different than if it's a big box store. Why? The evidence is that Walmart "absorb retail sales from nearby stores without significantly expanding the market." https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0891242412457985 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08912424124579... Lose a Walmart and other stores will make up for it, because the demand is there. > Not to mention it's illegal: one is still entitled to the protection of law even when not paying any taxes, Well that's a non sequitur. I don't have a clue what you are talking about. Can you point to a relevant court case?