Pittsburgh Real Estate Blog | Pittsburgh Homes R Us

There’s a movement afoot to lower or even abolish the Pittsburgh drink and car rental tax. Chief Allegheny County Executive Dan Onorato has stepped up to say that if the drink tax goes, county property taxes could increase by up to 20%.

But a 20% increase in property taxes would collect around $40 million, which is $8 milion more than what is earmarked for the Port Authority through matching funds by the state.

According to the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (the region’s government watchdog group), the $40 million is what the tax levies have brought in so far.

In addition to all this, the county money collected from the drink tax has not yet been released to the Port Authority. It’s release is pending, based on agreement to concessions by the Port Authority union.

However, Act 44 which authorized the levying of these taxes does not authorize the money to be withheld based on agreement to concessions by the union.

Meanwhile, the state has already sent its share of the money.

Something obviously smells fishy.

But quite often that seems to be the way it goes when government gets it’s hands on large sums of money.

The plot thickens …

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

There’s been much controversy surrounding the Pittsburgh drink tax, and I’m sure you’ve already heard all about it.

I don’t drink very much - it typically takes me a year to go through a case of imported dark beer, I don’t go to bars, and I rarely order a drink when eating out.

Be that as it may, I don’t support this tax – it’s yet another burden to consumers and businesses.

And some people wonder why Allegheny County is losing its population.

The drink tax raises a larger issue.  Government will do whatever it takes to continue its growth, and in doing so will always find ways to spend lots of other people’s money. They do this by creating new taxes and/or raising the taxes that are already in place.

I’m a believer in privatization.  Government costs could be slashed by turning over businesses and services to people who know how to run businesses and services.

Look at the condition of many of our schools, our roads, our public transportation system, and other government-provided services.  It’s not exactly impressive.

One of the problems is that lumbering government bureaucracy needlessly eats up huge chunks of money and is therefore inefficient. The other problem is that governments are not designed to function as businesses.

Some believe that if services are privatized, prices will rise, there will be less oversight, and much price-gouging.  I don’t agree.

When you allow the free market to function without interference, you get “survival of the fittest.”  The general population is competent enough to figure out what is working and what is not.  If a business is not providing the standard of goods or services that consumers expect, they will go elsewhere.  This is enough incentive for private industry to provide acceptable standards of quality and service in order to remain in business.

To me, it’s just common sense.

Bookmark It

Hide Sites