Replies

Exempting items by category is neither fair nor simple. Respected economists have shown that the wealthy spend much more on unprepared food, clothing, housing, and medical care than do the poor. Exempting these goods, as many state sales taxes do, actually gives the wealthy a disproportionate benefit. Also, today these purchases are not exempted from federal taxation. The purchase of food, clothing, and medical services is made from after income tax and after payroll tax dollars, while their purchase price hides the cost of corporate taxes and private sector compliance costs.

I am willing to allow the rich to get more of a benefit if it keeps government out of my wallet.

Finally, exempting one product or service, but not another, opens the door to the army of lobbyists and special interest groups that plague and distort our taxation system today. Those who have the money will send their lobbyists to Washington to obtain special tax breaks in their own self-interest. This process causes unfair and inefficient distortions in our economy and must be stopped.

I don't buy this argument. Michigan's sales tax exempts essential items, and such lobbying is not a problem here.

The problem is that Michigan's standards of "essential" items is different from other states. When you have many states falling under a federal standard which would be different, there will be complaints and lobbying to get their standards added. If cheese is not taxed, do you tax mac & cheese boxes? Potatos aren't, what about potato chips? See where this is heading?

"and such lobbying is not a problem here."

Just found this from Michigan Association of School Boards http://www.masb.org/pdf/taxpolicy.pdf

The definitions of “food” and “immediate consumption” in terms of Michigan’s 1974 Constitutional amendment exempting food and prescription drugs from the sales tax have been subject to continuous proposals for change.

So far there has not been any major changes.