Recreation tax in Iowa.

[N_C]

Is this something to advocate for? Do you have one in your state? Was there one attempted, failed & has been eliminated? Has there been a rec. tax discussed, but strongly opposed against so it never got voted in? For the states that have it has the money been used for what it is supposed to be used for?

http://www.bikeiowa.com/asp/hotnews/newsdisplay.asp?NewsID=1580

[eubi]

Totally against it. We already pay enough taxes.

Here in California, we have to purchase an "Adventure Pass" to use some of the facilities on PUBLIC LAND. Actually, there is no law compelling us to purchase this "Adventure Pass", but you will be ticketed if you don't display one. Now you have the hassle of fighting it.

As a backpacker and a Scoutmaster, I'm totally against this.

Why do we have to pay to use forested public land, but public land in the desert can be used for free? I guess the desert land is "less desireable", therefore would not be a good profit center?

I've seen no significant improvements as a result of this illegal public land use tax. In fact, it's time for me to write another letter to my elected representatives! Thanks for reminding me!

I hope the residents of Iowa will fight any inkling of such a tax in their state. They caught us napping here in CA. Learn from our mistake.

Rant over...

[sgtsmile]

n Missouri, a portion of a cent of a statewide sales tax is dedicated to recreation and conservation. That’s made a huge difference for bicycle trails and other amenities, providing funding to build trails, restore landmarks, purchase land and maintain infrastructure.


So, this does not sound like a new tax, but rather a realocation of an old one.... The link does not provide anywhere near enough information about whether or not it would cost anyone a single cent more than is already being collected. If is it, cry foul if you like, if it isnt (no more money being collected) then I see nothing wrong with it, as long as the money is not being taken from where it would further the public good more effectively.

[nova]

n Missouri, a portion of a cent of a statewide sales tax is dedicated to recreation and conservation. That’s made a huge difference for bicycle trails and other amenities, providing funding to build trails, restore landmarks, purchase land and maintain infrastructure.


So, this does not sound like a new tax, but rather a realocation of an old one.... The link does not provide anywhere near enough information about whether or not it would cost anyone a single cent more than is already being collected. If is it, cry foul if you like, if it isnt (no more money being collected) then I see nothing wrong with it, as long as the money is not being taken from where it would further the public good more effectively.

Agreed what they are advocating on that site is a redirection of some tax already in effect to recreation.

Example say your tax rate is 5.25% .25% or other amount of that tax would go toward the rec. development.

Id say if it was that sort of redirection of taxes then support the idea.

[jimmuter]

That portion of a cent is currently dedicated to something else. At some point they had to decide to either cut something, use a different funding source (i.e. raise income taxes), or raise the sales tax. When they started dedicating portions of the sales tax here, distributions to local jurisdictions bore the brunt of the costs. The state's solution? Local option sales taxes. Sales tax has gone up a full percentage point since I moved here a decade ago.