Editorial: ‘Largest tax increase’ label is a subterfuge

Friday, July 25, 2003 | 9:17 a.m.

Those opposed to any new or higher taxes never pass up a chance to note that the state's 2003-2005 budget contains the largest tax increase in Nevada history. Yes, the Legislature raised taxes by an estimated $836 million over two years and, yes, it is the largest increase in state history. But such a simplistic characterization is misleading and an attempt to divert attention as to why such a tax increase was needed.

Let's put all of this into perspective. The last time state taxes were raised was in 1991. That means lawmakers, who meet in a legislative session every other year in Nevada, did not increase taxes in 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999 and 2001. It was during that boom time that Nevada's population nearly doubled, but the revenues state government received from those taxes couldn't match the demand in services created by this growth, especially the funding needed to pay for public education. And unlike the federal government, which cuts taxes without regard to its impact on the national deficit, our state government has to live within its means and produce a balanced budget. That requires hard choices.

The truth is that if lawmakers had raised taxes moderately during the past decade, there wouldn't have been a need this legislative session to raise them as much as they did. But too many politicians took the easy way out during the '90s, choosing the path of least resistance, one that didn't include raising taxes. Even with the "largest tax increase in state history," Nevada's taxes on businesses still are slight compared to other states. Large corporations know they're getting off easy, which is why you don't hear too many of them howling about the tax increases that were passed in Carson City -- they're too busy laughing all the way to the bank.