About Brent Brown
Panelist Follow me @brebro

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

4 thoughts on “A Variety of A Tax

  1. bsummers

    This is such an excellent point! Certain retailers are forced to collect a tax dedicated to mitigating the negative effects of their products. Why is tourism the only industry that is allowed to collect a tax that lines their own pockets while doing nothing to mitigate the worsening impact on local residents? The state law needs to be changed, end of story.

    https://files.nc.gov/ncdor/documents/files/Scrap_Tire_Disposal_Tax_Bulletin_FINAL_0.pdf
    https://www.ncdor.gov/taxes-forms/other-taxes-and-fees/white-goods-disposal-tax

    • Lulz

      TDA could do it voluntarily. And even better, have control of where the money goes. Bond payments come to mind since they were passed under the guise of infrastructure. improvements. Otherwise the money will be squandered away.

      • bsummers

        Not quite. State law (supported by the TDA) that authorizes the tax requires that it be spent on tourism – 75% on advertising, 25% on projects that will attract tourists. They have stretched that a little by putting some of it into things that the City wants also – like greenways etc.

        It’s disingenuous of them to claim they are boxed in by this, however. If they actually agreed that some of the money should go to infrastructure needs, they would support changing the law in Raleigh. My guess is that the local delegation would love to do this. But they aren’t ready to buck the huge piles of cash that the tourism industry would shovel towards their opponents if they did it without TDA support.

    • NFB

      Oh, but haven’t you heard? There are NO negative effect from tourism!

      The Vice Chair of the TDA said so himself:

      “In my opinion, there are no problems with the TDA. The problems lie elsewhere. The problems lies in the opinions like [Worthen’s]. The problem lies with individuals that have nothing to do with our industry and have no idea how hotels operate, how the TDA operates and what the occupancy tax does for our community,”

      https://mountainx.com/news/tda-board-members-push-back-on-negative-tourism-views/

      So there you have it. Anyone in the community that dares to question tourism and the TDA’s slush fund that the state collects in a tax so that it can promote itself is the problem, NOT the unsustainable drive of spending more and more money every year to advertise to bring even MORE tourists here which will increase the slush fund to bring even MORE tourists here which will increase the slush fund, etc.

      Citizens who are bothered by tax money collected locally to be spent by an group that is unaccountable to them are the problem, not the organization itself which can do no wrong.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.