Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

flightwaves t1_jciz59g wrote

Reply to comment by AcceptablePosition5 in New York lawmakers eye streaming tax, delivery fee by cddotdotslash

That would be true if there wasn’t a strict revenue target on that tax. But since there is, it’s not about discouraging behavior, it’s to raise revenue.

2

AcceptablePosition5 t1_jcjupgb wrote

What strict revenue target? You mean expected revenue, the routine calculation for every tax enacted?

I'm not a fan of this tax either, but you're seeing patterns where there isn't any.

−3

flightwaves t1_jckeh6u wrote

Fifteen billion dollars.
That’s how much money the state legislature mandated the MTA must raise through congestion pricing — by leveraging annual revenue to borrow $15 billion for the transit agency’s current five-year capital program.

THAT strict revenue target. You're ignoring patterns where they are.

2

AcceptablePosition5 t1_jcmcl88 wrote

Oh the congestion charges. Thought you meant the streaming tax.

Nice copy pasta. It's basically a stipulation for a loan to make sure the burden doesn't fall on the subway rider, or MTA doesn't back out of it, because again, excessive cars have a negative externality.

Look, it's pretty simple. Taxes raise money, and discourage unwanted behavior. I mean they could also just ban cars. Would that be better?

0