logo
A defense of ‘sin taxes' in Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine's proposed budget

A defense of ‘sin taxes' in Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine's proposed budget

Yahoo19-02-2025

Stock photo from Getty Images.
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine's final two-year budget proposal, released earlier this month, has caused quite a stir.
The headline many have seen about it over and over again is the changes the budget recommends to taxes — namely proposed increases to taxes on cannabis, cigarettes, and sports betting.
These taxes are often given the pejorative label of 'sin taxes' because they cover 'vices' that are potentially more palatable to tax than say…income or general sales.
The phrase 'sin tax' smells a lot like the rebranding of the 'estate tax' as a 'death tax.' It's a way to get at our gut and rankle that libertarian impulse that we as Americans almost all have whether we like it or not. Who is to say what constitutes a 'sin' or not? Certainly not the government. Don't tread on my Marlboros!
The problem with this framing is that it obscures a valuable tool of taxation: to correct social problems.
The typical function that we ascribe to taxes is to raise revenue for operations of government. If that were the only way we could use taxes to a good end, the answer for how to raise taxes is pretty straightforward: cover as many different economic transactions as possible to make taxes as efficient as possible then rebate either cash or services back to low-income households to offset the regression of the system.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
The problem with this line of thinking about taxes is that it is both excessively narrow-minded and a century behind the times.
When Teddy Roosevelt instituted the national estate tax, he saw it as a way to promote equality of opportunity. Why should your wealth be a function of your parents' wealth? An estate tax reduced how much wealth you could receive from your parents, which had an impact on inequality.
At the same time, Economist Arthur Pigou was promoting what later became known as 'Pigouvian taxation,' the idea that we can tax economic transactions that lead to 'externalities,' or social spillovers that cause harm to others.
This became the theoretical basis for carbon taxes. If we want to reduce the release of carbon into the air, we need to bring the private cost of carbon pollution into line with the social cost of carbon pollution.
This is how taxes on cannabis, cigarettes, and sports gambling work.
A study released by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City last year found state cannabis legalization caused double-digit increases in substance use disorder, chronic homelessness, and criminal justice involvement. Cigarette smoking leads to hundreds of millions of dollars in health care spending and productivity losses every year. Sports betting is causing household fiscal instability and fueling addiction.
Yes, increasing taxes on cannabis, cigarettes, and sports betting does raise some equity concerns. The amazing thing about Pigouvian taxation, though, is that by using the revenue raised you can promote efficiency and equity at the same time by funding programs that support low-income people like child tax credits…just like this current budget does.
You cannot build a state budget on a foundation of Pigouvian taxes — these three taxes will only raise 4% of total tax revenue in DeWine's FY 2026-2027 budget. But if we can curb social problems and fund programs at the same time, why wouldn't we?
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

SNAP user's testimony causes backlash, cruel feedback
SNAP user's testimony causes backlash, cruel feedback

Miami Herald

timean hour ago

  • Miami Herald

SNAP user's testimony causes backlash, cruel feedback

After President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed the House, it introduced new fears for millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to survive. The bill proposed an estimated $300 billion in cuts to SNAP over the next decade. If that portion of the bill passes the Senate as it is currently written, it would leave 12.6% of Americans potentially unable to afford shelter and food. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter The way it currently works is that states would begin to pay at least 5% of food benefit costs, and up to 25% if they have higher error rates, forcing states to choose between raising taxes, cutting other programs, or limiting SNAP access, per the Food Research & Access Center. Related: Scott Galloway sends bold statement on Social Security, US economy Republican senators pushed back hard on the cuts, leading to June 10 reports that the SNAP changes were being scaled down. The reworked plan cuts the state penalty for error from 25% to 15%, but Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) told Politico that they are "still negotiating." Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota took to social media on June 11 to share a video she surely thought would be of help to advocate for keeping SNAP intact. But her efforts have backfired. The video Klobuchar shared is of a SNAP recipient named Felecia talking about her experience as a mother of four living on SNAP benefits. Klobuchar said, "Today, we heard from Felecia, a single mom of four who works up to three jobs at a time to make ends meet. She counts on SNAP to help put food on the table. This is who Republicans in Congress are trying to take food away from. Listen to her story." In the video, Felecia says, "I would like to tell you my story on how SNAP benefit has helped me," becoming visibly emotional. "When I had my oldest daughter 21 years ago, I was working three jobs," Felecia said. "One job alone, I had to pay childcare. Another one to pay food, which wasn't enough. And one to pay the bills, and I still struggled alive." Related: Social Security income tax deduction hits major roadblock Felecia went on to say that she now has a full-time job as a bus monitor, but she only gets paid once a month, which is why she still needs SNAP. "By the time I get my bills paid, I have nothing left to pay for food and other basic needs. If it wasn't for SNAP benefits, I wouldn't be able to feed my children," she said. The comments on the video exploded, causing it to rake in 75,000 views and make the terms "SNAP" and "Felecia" go viral on X. But instead of garnering empathy, it achieved the opposite effect. People in the thread savagely attacked the mother of four, mostly with comments about her weight. "I'm not saying take her SNAP benefits, but what I'm saying is she doesn't need as much as she's getting," X user currermell said. "Either she's eating it all and her kids are already going hungry, or the handouts meant to sustain her life are having the opposite effect." Related: Walmart issues urgent message about the alarming cost of food "Do you know how many calories it takes to look like her? She's doing fine," X user Rafester said. Some opted to attack Felecia's relationship choices instead of her weight, saying, "Why does she have 4 children and no husband? Life choices matter. Sorry but 4 unplanned pregnancies and no partner present is absolute nonsense," X user fictitiousfruit said. A few rare voices in the thread abstained from insults. "Not a single person wants SNAP taken away from Felecia. Every single person wants SNAP revoked for people who aren't trying or aren't contributing to the country they take advantage of," user Zac DiSalvo said. The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

Americans weigh in on Trump's deployment of troops to quell Los Angeles unrest
Americans weigh in on Trump's deployment of troops to quell Los Angeles unrest

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Americans weigh in on Trump's deployment of troops to quell Los Angeles unrest

A new national poll indicates that Americans are divided over President Donald Trump's deployment of the National Guard and U.S. Marines to the nation's second most populous city. Aiming to extinguish escalating protests in Los Angeles sparked by immigration raids carried out by ICE at his administration's direction, Trump sent in National Guard troops and even mobilized Marines. The unrest and the moves by the president have dominated national headlines for a week. Forty-one percent of adults nationwide questioned in a Washington Post/George Mason University Schar School poll said they support the president's move, with 44% opposed and 15% unsure. The survey was conducted on Tuesday and questioned over 1,000 adults nationwide, including roughly 200 in blue-state California. First On Fox: Immigrant Voters Abandon Democrats On Immigration Issue Support for the president's actions among the California respondents stood at 32%, with 58% opposed. Read On The Fox News App The poll also highlighted an expected massive partisan divide. Click Here For The Latest Fox News Polling Eight-six percent of Republicans surveyed supported the president's deployment of the National Guard and Marines to the streets of LA, with more than three-quarters of Democrats giving a thumbs down on Trump's move. A third of independents approved of the sending of the troops, with nearly half opposed and nearly one in five unsure. Trump took control of California's National Guard without the permission of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, the first time in 60 years that a president has federalized National Guard troops without a governor's request. Newsom, leading the resistance to Trump's moves, took legal action to try and reverse the order. Trump Deployment Of Troops To Quell La Rioters Latest Page In President's Political Playbook A federal district court judge this week ruled that Trump's moves were illegal and ordered him to return control of the National Guard troops to Newsom. But a federal appeals court quickly temporarily blocked the lower court judge's ruling. The survey also indicates Americans are divided over whether they support (39%) or oppose (40%) the protests. Just over one in five (21%) were unsure of their support or opposition. Seventy percent of Democrats — but just 39% of independents and only 6% of Republicans — support the aims of the protesters. According to the poll, Americans are also divided over whether the protests have been mostly peaceful (35%) or mostly violent (37%).Original article source: Americans weigh in on Trump's deployment of troops to quell Los Angeles unrest

Scott Galloway bluntly predicts major change for Netflix
Scott Galloway bluntly predicts major change for Netflix

Miami Herald

timean hour ago

  • Miami Herald

Scott Galloway bluntly predicts major change for Netflix

Scott Galloway, the podcaster and New York University professor, explained his view on June 13 that the last significant battle in the streaming industry was a showdown between Netflix and Hollywood - and Netflix emerged victorious. By expanding production globally, taking advantage of broadband technology, and capitalizing on inexpensive funding, Netflix (NFLX) was able to make large-scale investments similar to Amazon's strategy, Galloway explained, leaving competitors unable to keep pace. The outcome? A major shift in value from traditional studios and entertainment talent to Netflix's investors and subscribers. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Netflix's newest version operates as more than just a subscription-based platform - it now combines both subscriptions and advertising in its business model. And nearly 94 million people have chosen Netflix's ad-supported plan since it was introduced fewer than three years ago, according to Galloway. Netflix has proven itself to be a master of adaptation in the media landscape. It started as a mail-order DVD business, toppling the giant Blockbuster. Then it evolved into a streaming powerhouse, upending Hollywood's dominance. Related: Jean Chatzky sends strong message to Americans on Social Security Now, after a decade without major changes, Netflix is transforming once more, Galloway wrote. The company is introducing AI-driven content recommendations, mobile-friendly vertical videos, and a refreshed visual design to take on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. And once again, the streaming service faces a new challenge. Shutterstock Having won the last streaming war, Netflix now confronts a new threat, Galloway explained in his "No Mercy / No Malice" newsletter. In fact, this prominent challenger is in the ring with all streaming services. "The next streaming war?" Galloway wrote. "YouTube takes on the world." "This year, more people in the U.S. watched YouTube on TVs than on mobile devices - a first," he continued. "YouTube is now the No. 1 distributor of TV content, according to Nielsen. And for the past three months, YouTube registered the largest share of TV viewing (12%) among media companies; Netflix accounted for 7.5%." More on the U.S. economy: Jean Chatzky shares major statement about Social SecurityShark Tank's Kevin O'Leary has blunt words on 401(k) plansDave Ramsey strongly cautions U.S. workers on Social Security YouTube is essentially public access television scaled to the internet, but with vastly superior production quality, observed Galloway. His Markets podcast co-host Ed Elson notes that Gen Z sees YouTube - owned by Alphabet (GOOGL) - as an algorithm-driven force shifting influence away from established brands and toward individual creators. The biggest disruptor to Hollywood, Galloway argues, isn't Netflix chairman's Reed Hastings - it's MrBeast, the YouTube star who has perfected parasocial relationships. In 2023 alone, MrBeast amassed over a billion hours of watch time, surpassing the top Netflix shows. "But just as individual content creators disrupted Hollywood, AI may disrupt content creators," Galloway wrote. While Netflix is expected to invest around $18 billion in content this year, YouTube effectively operates with a content budget of zero, instead sharing ad revenue with its creators. MrBeast has revealed that producing a single video typically costs him $2.5 million. Yet in a striking shift, an AI-generated muzak channel recently surpassed him, becoming the fastest-growing channel on YouTube this month. Related: Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary makes bold prediction on U.S. economy Galloway argues that the rise of Netflix, YouTube and the competition for streaming audiences has cost us something vital: a shared cultural experience. In 1983, the final episode of M.A.S.H. was a national event, drawing 106 million viewers - nearly half of America, he recalls. By contrast, last year's most-watched scripted TV finale, "Yellowstone," reached just 13 million people, a mere 4% of the country. The shift from scheduled programming to unlimited, on-demand content has fragmented American culture, Galloway suggests - and this fact reflects the loss of two key societal pillars: collective experiences and a shared identity. "Without shared stories, we don't laugh together, love/hate the same heroes/villains, or believe in the same facts when we argue," Galloway wrote. "We lose our empathy, our ability to see each other as human." "It's hard to demonize someone you watched 'Cheers' with every Thursday night; it's easy to hate someone whose cultural references are completely foreign to your feed." Related: Scott Galloway makes major prediction on world economy; 401(k) impact seen The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store