If Water Rates Rise, You Should Privatize!

The title of this blog entry should be spoken as if you were Johnny Cochran (R.I.P.).

The Post-Dispatch is reporting that the city of St. Louis is raising its water rates (link via Combest). Now, I have no criticism of the rate increase — things cost what they cost, and government utilities have historically underpriced their products. If rates are rising, though, it should be a good time to consider the benefits of privatizing the St. Louis water system. C’mon, St. Louis. It’s good for what ails you.

A Different Strategy for Manufacturing in Missouri

The special legislative session starts Monday in Jefferson City. I am very excited that one of the bills being considered is Rep. John Diehl’s proposal to amend how counties charge the commercial surcharge property tax. Instead of handing out additional tax credits, here is a perfect opportunity to lower taxes for all businesses, including the Ford Plant in Claycomo, which paid more than $80,000 in surcharge taxes alone in 2009. This legislation would:

  • Make it easier for counties to lower the surcharge if they want.
  • Require the surcharge to roll back like all other real property taxes.
  • Sunset the entire tax in five years.

Counties would be able to adjust to the sunsetting of the tax without unduly putting the burden on residents by adopting the St. Louis County system of setting different rates for different property classifications. First, they would have to adopt that system, and legislation might be required to reopen that option. These surcharge changes would be terrific for the economies of Missouri’s larger counties, and I am excited that they will again be considered in special session.

Testing, Testing, 1, 2, 3 …

While spending the week at a seminar sponsored by the Foundation for Economic Education, I’ve repeatedly noticed the presenters tripping over a wired microphone. With some help from the Google machine, I learned that this is because the Federal Communications Commission recently placed a ban on wireless microphones that use the 700 megahertz band. The space will be reserved for the use of emergency responders.

Although this ban may provide some social benefits in terms of improving emergency services, these should be weighed against the increased marginal costs of doing business — costs that are inevitably imposed on others.

This ban will negatively affect the organizations that use such microphones in their operations — businesses, theaters, churches, schools, news stations, etc. Organizations that have already made a capital investment in wireless microphones will have to spend additional money to replace them. This is money that they could have invested in other areas of their business, or kept as profit. Furthermore, manufacturers of wireless microphones will have to close or produce a different product, not for lack of consumer demand, but because of government mandate.

If this ban means that I can’t play Beatles Rock Band on my Nintendo Wii because the signal for my wireless guitars is blocked, then I will be inconsolable.

Pathological Community Development, Paid For By You, Me, and Me Again

I do my best thinking at night. At least, that is how I justified my late-night walk this week through downtown St. Louis, where I could not help but feel a sense of utter helplessness. It was not simply seeing “Space Available” signs on every corner that prompted my emotional response; rather, it was my understanding that the slack in the retail, housing, and office markets represents a striking illustration of government’s inability to intelligently deploy our limited public resources.

View to Southeast, 10th and Locust Streets, Downtown St

After all, the image above is representative of dozens of corners recalled to ‘life'” with public funds in what some term “a vital pillar of Missouri’s economy.”

At present, the above-pictured TIFed and tax credited property is home to a small chain retailer, thousands of vacant square feet, quite a few presumably sold condominiums, two dozen available condominium units ranging in price from $250,000 to more than $750,000, many presumably leased apartments, and some parking.

If this building and its appearance were solely the products of truly private investments, I would feel far less concerned about its future. However, given that the city of St. Louis is going to start making me pay for trash service, I get a little upset when passing empty corners like the one pictured above.

All levels of government irresponsibly allow private actors to externalize their risks and costs to the public. In times of austerity like those that we now confront, these long-term public debt obligations increasingly become a drain on our individual resources.

So, how much did the corner shown above cost Missouri taxpayers? More than $30 million. (And likely more than $40 million, assuming that it also utilized the 20-percent federal historic preservation tax credit.)

Report Detailing North Side Redevelopment Tax Credit Application Discrepancies Now Online

Thanks to everybody who listened to Audrey Spalding’s segment on KMOX this morning about discrepancies in the tax credit application filed late last year by NorthSide Regeneration LLC.

Audrey’s report is now available on the Show-Me Institute website, detailing how the property value amounts that NorthSide reported to the state appear to be overvalued by more than half a million dollars in comparison to the certificate of value amounts filed with the city of St. Louis.

For more of Audrey’s work covering the north side redevelopment project in St. Louis, follow the article links on her staff bio page.

Tune In to Hear Audrey Spalding on KMOX Friday Morning!

Audrey Spalding, the Show-Me Institute’s public information specialist, will appear on The Charlie Brennan Show tomorrow, Friday morning, at 10:20 on KMOX in the St. Louis area. If you don’t live near St. Louis, you can also listen in online.

Audrey will be talking about the use of state tax credits for redevelopment in the north side of the city of St. Louis, and about how the tax credit application formally submitted by redevelopment company NorthSide Regeneration LLC appears to have overstated the value of its properties by more than half a million dollars. We’ll be posting much more about these topics in the near future, but in the meantime be sure to listen to Audrey address them on the radio tomorrow morning.

Tax Incentives Are a Game We Can’t Win

Today, Show-Me Institute Research Analyst Christine Harbin appeared on the Sarah Steelman Hour radio show in Springfield, talking about tax credits in general and, specifically, the proposed credits for the Ford plant in Claycomo.

Economic development tax incentives, no matter how they are packaged, are not effective. They allow government officials, who have no special knowledge of how to maximize growth, to pick winners and losers in the market. As Show-Me Institute Executive Vice President Joseph Haslag has written before, lowering broad tax rates is a much more efficient method of stimulating the economy than targeted tax credits. This allows everyone to benefit, rather than a few select industries chosen by the state.

Empirically, studies analyzing the benefits that development tax credits deliver in comparison to their costs show that such tax credits have not worked. A recent Missouri state audit report found that tax credits are less effective (and more expensive) than their proponents claim. Yesterday, St. Louis Public Radio broadcast a segment featuring a study that examined another form of tax incentives in Missouri, tax increment financing (TIF). Kenneth Thomas, a political science professor at the University of Missouri–St. Louis, recently coauthored a study that found the use of TIF is not effective in most cases. He noted that the St. Louis area uses TIF more than nearly every other area in the nation. In the interview with St. Louis Public Radio’s Matt Sepic:

Sepic: That’s one longstanding criticism, is that TIF pits communities against one another. A prime example is that tussle between Bridgeton and St. Anne over a Walmart. Is that a bigger problem in the St. Louis area than elsewhere, with this panoply of municipalities that we have here?

Thomas: Oh, yes, certainly having more municipalities makes the competition more intense.

The study argues that, although many economists have found TIF to be ineffective, this method of funding continues to be used because of the competitive nature of tax incentives. When one area offers a tax incentive, other areas nearby often try to “win” a company’s business by offering competitive tax incentives. The result is a bidding war in which the taxpayers lose. This can be seen in the Claycomo Ford tax credit situation, as well — other states, like Kentucky, have offered tax incentives to Ford in an effort to persuade them to relocate their plant. In order to compete, Missouri would have to offer a better deal, while recognizing that this game will be played again the next time the credits run out.

Later in the interview, Thomas notes an important misunderstanding — the idea that tax incentives like TIF “create” jobs:

Thomas: [T]hose estimates never take into account the fact that, well, yes, we are going to create 200 jobs here, but what’s going to happen is we’re going to knock out 180 in the next mall over.

Tax credits and TIF tend to shift economic activity from one area to another, without creating wealth. Missouri’s tax dollars would be much better spent in the hands of individual Missourians than on enticements for companies like Walmart or Ford.

As Milton Friedman pointed out on his PBS TV series “Free to Choose,” even if other nations, states, or localities offer tax incentives to lure businesses, we’re better off if we don’t do the same — because we benefit from the lower prices their subsidy creates. Missouri will experience better economic growth if it unilaterally removes itself from the tax incentive bidding wars.

Are Missourians Ready for Toll Roads?

Yesterday, Combest linked to a story in the Post-Dispatch about a talk that former MoDOT director Pete Rahn gave in St. Louis. His point was that we need to reinvest in our transportation infrastructure, yet Missouri does not tax enough to pay for our needs. According to Rahn:

Add up gas taxes, registration fees and license plate fees and the average Missourian pays $129 in state transportation taxes a year, Rahn said.

That sounds about right, but it is important to point out that you pay more when you include federal and local transportation taxes. My calculation is that the average Missourian who lives in one of our larger cities (where they have transportation sales taxes) probably pays around $450 per year in total transportation taxes. Assuming you drive 15,000 miler per year at 20 mpg, own a $100,000 home and a $10,000 car, and spend $10,000 a year on taxable goods, that would roughly lead to:

  • $138 in Federal gas taxes
  • $129 in state gax taxes
  • $100 in local transportation sales taxes (using Columbia’s rate of $0.01 per $1; the St. Louis rate is slightly higher after the recent Metro vote)
  •  $23 in local property taxes (using the St. Louis County road and bridge rate of $0.105 per $100; this rate varies widely by county)
  • $50 per year in plates and registration (varies by horsepower of vehicle, length of registration, etc.)
  • $10 per year in local car fees (city stickers, etc.; again, varies greatly between areas)

My guess is that most people would have guessed more than $450 if you asked them to estimate their total transportation-related annual taxes. Other points Rahn made include:

Don’t count on the gas tax, said Rahn. It pays most of the bills now, but raising it is “extremely unpopular,” Rahn notes, and it has a limited shelf life, with alternative fuel vehicles expected to take bigger and bigger market share.

I disagree with that. I think Missourians might approve a reasonable gas tax increase, if asked. The article continued:

One alternative, a “vehicle miles traveled” tax, which charges heavy drivers more than light ones. Another? The opposite approach, a general sales tax, which would hit everyone about equally, recognizing that we all benefit from highways even if we don’t use them.

It did not seem from the article that Rahn was advocating for a sales tax increase, thankfully. Increasing sales taxes to pay for highway investment is a terrible idea. That moves in the direction of externalizing the internal costs of a car, which is completely the wrong direction. Truckers and bicyclists should not face the same tax burden to pay for roads. A gas tax increase far better approximates a user fee.

Finally, Rahn gets to the key point:

And, he said, get used to one thing we don’t have much of here:

“Tolls are going to have to be a part of it,” Rahn said.

Tolling is something I support completely. Our transportation funding should be a mixture where gas taxes serve as the baseload, dedicated property and sales taxes support local transportation, and tolls increasingly augment the highway and bridge system.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging