Opinion: A vote for a new tax

As promised, the Legislature has voted to delay the previously approved intangibles tax cut, thereby saving $128-million to apply to the budget deficit. The margins of 37-2 in the Senate and 102-17 in the House were impressive, considering that it could be called -- as some did -- a vote for a new tax.

Now, that wasn't so hard, was it?

In debate, House members had to endure yet another of Mike Fasano's tiresome laments about the poor "savers" who have to pay a tax on their "hard-earned money after it's been taxed."

Two things need to be said about that.

The bill came to the floor under a rule that prevented any amendments, among them a Democratic proposal to exempt more than 500,000 of the smallest taxpayers, double the rate on the rest and close a much-abused trust loophole. This would have virtually erased the deficit without any need for the punishing cuts in education, health and crime prevention that will occur under the budget bill to be passed today. It's a pity that the leadership didn't allow members to vote.

Most people's life savings are concentrated in the value of their homes rather than in stocks and bonds subject to the intangibles tax. Yet Floridians pay real estate taxes on those homes, at an average of nearly 21 times the rate on stocks on bonds, without any comparable protest from Fasano. Might the fact that he works for a stock brokerage firm have something to do with his fixation?

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright