Interesting article in the Washington Post: High Court Won’t Hear Commuter Tax Bid, by Henri E. Cauvin:
The District’s bid to tax commuters — and take a step toward solving the city’s inherent fiscal weaknesses — was dealt a deathblow yesterday when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up the issue.
The D.C. Circuit’s opinion rejecting the commuter tax is Banner v. United States, No. 04-5190 (D.C. Cir. 11/4/05). For additional coverage, see:
2 responses to “Supreme Court Refuses to Hear D.C. Commuter Tax Bid”
Allowing a commuter tax would have been taxation without representation. Commuters have no vote in Washington, D.C., yet they would have to pay it a ton of tax money under any commuter tax.
Commuters don’t impose many costs on Washington, D.C., unlike D.C. residents.
The city’s biggest expenses are Medicaid, education, welfare, etc., which aren’t attributable to commuters, but rather to residents.
Yet commuters pay sales, business, and other taxes (although not the income tax the commuter tax attempted to impose on them).
Commuters do use city roads, but the city’s roads are in terrible condition, and thus cause damage to many commuters’ vehicles every year. The city spends very little on roads.
Moreover, half the police in Washington, D.C., are paid for by the federal government (park police, capitol police, etc.), not by D.C. taxpayers. And many traditional functions of local government have been taken over by the federal government (e.g., corrections) because they were handled so badly by the city.
Thus, commuters are already paying to subsidize D.C. government out of their tax money.
Moreover, other cities in the region, such as Richmond, do not levy a commuter tax on people who work in their city limits but live elsewhere.
Allowing a commuter tax would have been taxation without representation. Commuters have no vote in Washington, D.C., yet they would have to pay it a ton of tax money under any commuter tax.
Commuters don’t impose many costs on Washington, D.C., unlike D.C. residents.
The city’s biggest expenses are Medicaid, education, welfare, etc., which aren’t attributable to commuters, but rather to residents.
Yet commuters pay sales, business, and other taxes (although not the income tax the commuter tax attempted to impose on them).
Commuters do use city roads, but the city’s roads are in terrible condition, and thus cause damage to many commuters’ vehicles every year. The city spends very little on roads.
Moreover, half the police in Washington, D.C., are paid for by the federal government (park police, capitol police, etc.), not by D.C. taxpayers. And many traditional functions of local government have been taken over by the federal government (e.g., corrections) because they were handled so badly by the city.
Thus, commuters are already paying to subsidize D.C. government out of their tax money.
Moreover, other cities in the region, such as Richmond, do not levy a commuter tax on people who work in their city limits but live elsewhere.