• About Us
  • Activity
  • Advertising
  • Books
  • Business
  • Contact
  • Dashboard
  • EB5
  • Entertainment
  • feedback
  • Forgot Your Password?
  • Government
  • Home
  • Home 20723
  • Interviews
  • Login
  • Members
  • Meme generator
  • National
  • Nevada
  • Nevada News and Views
  • Newsmax
  • NN&V Ads
  • Opinion
  • Pick a New Password
  • Politics
  • Polls
  • Privacy Policy
  • Profile
  • Recent comments by me
  • Recent comments on my posts
  • Register
  • Submit post
  • Subscribe
  • Subscription Confirmation
  • Survey
  • Survey
  • Terms of Service
  • Today’s Top 10
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Travel
  • Welcome!
  • Yop Poll Archive
Nevada News and Views
  • About Us
  • Contact
  • More
    • Opinion
  • Facebook

  • Twitter

  • Pinterest

  • RSS

Opinion

Debunking the “Desperate Arguments” against Commerce Tax Referendum

Debunking the “Desperate Arguments” against Commerce Tax Referendum
Chuck Muth
November 27, 2015
R.I.P. PAC ready to unleash "legions of folks" to put tax repeal on next year's ballot

R.I.P. PAC ready to unleash “legions of folks” to put tax repeal on next year’s ballot

(Ron Knecht and Geoffrey Lawrence) – Today we’re thankful that the widely despised Commerce Tax is moving toward a Nevada voter referendum.

Acting for the concerned citizens of RIP Commerce Tax, Inc., Ron filed a referendum petition on that tax in October.  Tax-hike advocates brought a meritless law suit seeking to deny you a vote on it.  RIP filed its answer, and a hearing on the case will be held 9 AM Wednesday, December 2 at Carson City’s court house.  After defeating this suit, we’ll have legions of folks gathering signatures to put it to a vote next November.

This column summarizes the desperate arguments the plaintiffs made and our answers completely debunking them.

Their suit claims that the referendum, as filed, doesn’t address a law or part of one, as required, but only a legislative bill.  Perhaps their lawyers were absent when the film, “How a Bill Becomes a Law” was shown in ninth-grade civics class.

Our petition’s text was taken directly from Senate Bill 483, the omnibus tax package passed by both houses of the Legislature, enrolled and signed by the Governor.  Plaintiffs suggest that the signed bill is not law and so we must wait for a text of the law until legislative staff publishes the next edition of the statutes.

The text we used is exactly the law in effect since July 1 that creates the Commerce Tax. If it’s not literally the law, then the state has no legal basis to require anyone to pay this tax or others in SB483, as it’s already doing.  So, our petition truly seeks a referendum on part of a statute.

They also allege that our text addresses administrative details that aren’t legislative matters subject to referendum.  They cite definitions (“business,” “Taxable year,” etc.) and procedural provisions of the law, plus some court cases.  But they also repeatedly quote court decisions that the legislative power of the people is “coequal, coextensive and concurrent with that of the Legislature.”

The referendum definitions and other details are inherently legislative matters. Calling them “administrative” doesn’t change that.  If they aren’t legislative, then the Legislature didn’t have the power to include them in SB483.  And since the Legislature’s power exactly equals the people’s power in this matter, we have a right to vote on the whole Commerce Tax text.

Their lawyers also err in construing the cases they cite here: Those cases involve local governments exercising simultaneously legislative and non-legislative administrative powers.  Nevada courts have held that referenda may address only legislative matters.  But since Nevada’s Legislature has only legislative (not administrative) powers, if it has the power to legislate these details (as it does), then her people have the power to repeal them.

Their complaint also challenges the required brief description of the effect of our referendum as being confusing and misleading.  Our description is conspicuously clear and accurate.  In accord with Nevada’s constitution, it says that a yes vote means the Commerce Tax is retained and can’t be changed except by future voter action.  A no vote means it is repealed.  Period.

Notably, they didn’t claim our referendum violates the single-subject rule.  It encompasses all Commerce Tax provisions and only those.

Finally, they claim that, by cutting state revenues, a Commerce Tax repeal would violate Nevada’s constitutional requirement for a balanced budget.  That challenge is untimely before the election because voters could approve the tax, meaning no reduction in revenues.

But assuming voters repeal it – as they defeated four-to-one last November a margins tax akin to it – there’s no problem.  Shortly after the repeal, the Governor will present his proposed budget to the next Legislature.  Commerce Tax revenues will already have been collected for the current biennium, so legislators will merely have to balance the next budget, per usual.

Arguably, their suit seeks to enlist Nevada’s judiciary in their ongoing crusade to keep the people from ever voting on taxes.  In 2003, many of these folks conned six Nevada justices into making a political decision supporting the then-proposed Gross Receipts Tax.  That led to voter rejection or retirement of all six of them.  Later, the Supreme Court overturned its legendarily awful decision.

We doubt a Nevada judge or justice today would make a similarly bad decision.

Ron Knecht is Nevada’s elected Controller; Geoffrey Lawrence is Assistant Controller.

Prev postNext post

Related Items
Opinion
November 27, 2015
Chuck Muth

Related Items

More in Opinion

Governors ask Biden for ‘honest, accurate’ information on illegal immigration

The Center SquareOctober 4, 2023
Read More

Amodei Statement on Debt Ceiling Bill

Chuck MuthJune 1, 2023
Read More

Tark: Trans “Rights” … and Wrongs

Chuck MuthMay 26, 2023
Read More

Stone: The Truth About AB 250: Will Patients Really Benefit?

NN&V StaffMay 26, 2023
Read More

“Ungrateful Miscreants”: Miller, Segerblom Insult Local Small Business Owners

NN&V StaffMay 24, 2023
Read More

Quarter-Million Dollar Ad Campaign Targets Nevada Legislators for Trapping Hispanic Families in Unsafe Schools

NN&V StaffMay 22, 2023
Read More
Scroll for more
Tap

Subscribe Free By Email

Looking for the best in breaking news and conservative views? Let Chuck do all the work for you! Subscribe to his FREE "Muth's Truths" e-newsletter.

* indicates required
Nevada News and Views
Nevada News & Views is an educational project of Citizen Outreach Foundation, a non-partisan IRS-approved 501(c)(3) organization. It is not associated or affiliated with any political party or group. Nevada News & Views is accessible by the public at no cost. It funds its operations through tax-deductible contributions from donors and supporters and does not accept government money or grants.

TAGS

Featured Article Muths truth

Copyright © 2023 Citizen Outreach | Maintained by VirtualAlly

The $5 million dream business that’s become a nightmare
ROOT: It’s time to ask the question: Is Obama a Muslim?