Fighting the Rain Tax (Baltimore: buy, bill, wealthy)

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by MrRational

Get some salt water taffy and watch them argue. Won't matter a bit.
The tax is staying.

Yeah, I know that. Some don't. And also don't realize that some form of it will eventually be implemented in every state.

The problem as many see it, including State officials, is that there were so many exemptions carved out. So many that the burden is falling entirely on homeowners and businesses. Not government buildings, not non-profit buildings, Hell I can't remember all the exemptions, there's 3 or 4 more uses.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

And also don't realize that some form of it will eventually be implemented in every state.

Most already do and some even have the reverse.

In CO they have taxes on collecting rainwater.
(Based on aquifer replenishing needs)

Here it seems rather straightforward and simply accomplished:
$X per SF of impervious surface and it shows up on the water bill. =NBD.

[DaveinMtAiry]

Originally Posted by MrRational

Get some salt water taffy and watch them argue. Won't matter a bit.
The tax is staying.

As of yesterday it now costs $6 to go over the Bay Bridge to get the real salt water taffy, not to mention the additional .03 in gas taxes. These are yet more tax increases that you somehow do not have a problem with But the vast majority of Marlanders feel differently.

As for the rain tax I have a gravel driveway, not asphalt, so I'm told my rain tax should be lower. How do I go about getting this correct? Even if it's only $40 that's not the point.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry

As for the rain tax I have a gravel driveway, not asphalt...
How do I go about getting this correct?

Fair point. I suspect it's similar to a RE appraisal error.
Have you called or written to anyone?

(they'll still get you for the house and barns and such)

[reiflame]

Originally Posted by MrRational

I pay $55 a year.
Hardly worth fighting over.

That's how they get you. It's "only" $55 a year for the rain tax. It's "only" 3.5 cents for the increased gas tax. It's "only" $10 a month more for the utilities surcharge. And so on and so on.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by reiflame

That's how they get you. .. And so on and so on.

After about 10 rounds of this we'll get down to the real objection being about what the
money is spent on... rather than the amount or the method of collecting it. Right?
Say hi to Grover at the next meeting for me.

[HandsUpThumbsDown]

Originally Posted by MrRational

Say hi to Grover at the next meeting for me.

"You must spread some Repuation around..."

[bande1102]

I thought this article( ?Rain Tax? to Soak Maryland Taxpayers ) made some good points:

MarylandReporter.com writes that Senate Republican Leader E.J. Pipkin noted the “irony of ironies”: Environmental groups tried to obtain an exemption from the tax that they themselves were pushing as a means of improving the environment. “He said that the groups’ stance was particularly galling, since much of the money raised through stormwater fees would benefit them by subsidizing conservation projects.”

and this:

“But homeowners are going to pay the rain tax three times,” observes Gazette columnist Blair Lee. “Once, on their homes. A second time because commercial leases force tenants [to] pay the landlord’s property taxes, which the tenants will, then, pass on to their customers. And a third time as church members or supporters of nonprofit hospitals, private schools and charities.”

[bande1102]

Sorry, I just can't help myself. This is from the same article:

All of this is allegedly to comply with a 2010 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) decree that the Old Line State reduce storm water runoff so as to shrink nitrogen and phosphorus levels in the Chesapeake Bay at a cost of $14.8 billion. However, as Watchdog Wire points out, “Virginia fought the EPA storm water mandate arguing that the agency overstepped its authority under the Clean Water Act.” Federal judge Liam O’Grady agreed, ruling in January that “stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it.” Maryland, therefore, could easily slough off the EPA’s order if its elected officials were so inclined.

There is thus good reason to suspect that the politicians in Annapolis simply used the EPA decree as an excuse to impose the rain tax. They have certainly been busy hiking taxes on various other pretexts in recent years. Change Maryland calculates that under Gov. O’Malley there have been 37 tax, fee, or toll increases costing Marylanders an additional $3.1 billion per year — among them a three-year, 6.25-percent tax on annual incomes in excess of $1 million that ended up reducing state revenues by $1.7 billion and likely contributing to a net loss of 31,000 residents.

[MrRational]

Originally Posted by bande1102

Federal judge Liam O’Grady agreed, ruling in January that “stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it.” Maryland, therefore, could easily slough off the EPA’s order if its elected officials were so inclined.

It's about what goes along with the water.
hth


Let me google that for you