< PREVIOUS ] [ 1993 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
In some ways, the tourism tax that expires on June 30 makes sense, and thus should be continued when we get a chance to vote on it in November.
The state collects 0.2 percent from some businesses that tourists patronize: short-term lodging, restaurants and ski-lift tickets. The resulting $11 million buys national advertising to promote Colorado tourism.
Presumably the state treasury benefits directly from increased sales taxes from more tourists, although hard numbers are hard to come by. For every dollar spent on marketing to benefit one industry, how many dollars return to the state treasury to benefit all citizens of Colorado? And where is the point of diminishing returns?
Some answers to those questions would simplify making a decision on election day.
Without the tax, many tourist enterprises would still promote themselves, but then there's a fairness problem. Assume I run Ed's Burro Trips, and I spend not a nickel on promotion. I don't need to because I sit between Jack's Rafting Co. and Jill's Mountain Bikes, and they both promote furiously. They bring in people, some of whom will see my shop and decide to take a pack trip.
That's good for me, but unfair to Jack and Jill, and a promotion tax prevents me from being a freeloader at their expense.
So far, so good, but there are other problems with the tourism tax.
One is that many businesses who directly benefit from tourism aren't forced to contribute to the marketing fund.
For instance, what Coloradan patronizes those souvenir shops that sell rubber tomahawks, genuine aspen-wood plaques and garish T-shirts? Those enterprises exist solely to extract money from the parents of small children who happen to be passing through. The more traveling families, the better they do, and since they benefit from tourist marketing, they should be taxed.
And what of certain legendary garage owners in tourist towns, skilled at extorting $200 to cure vapor lock and charging $300 to replace shock absorbers when in fact, they just painted the old ones? Shouldn't they, too, be forced to contribute to a marketing fund that brings in more potential victims?
Another major problem with a tourism-promotion tax is that it works against those who really pay it -- the tourists.
Suppose the Colorado Tourism Marketing Board does a bang-up job next winter. Millions of people throughout America and the world succumb to glowing commercials about the joys of skiing in the Rockies.
What happens when they get here? Lift lines of monumental proportions that move at the speed of glaciers, and slopes more like gridlock than the thrill of fresh powder. Extortionate room rentals because demand far exceeds supply. Strained municipal waterworks that spread giardia. So many people dining out that you need reservations even for McDonald's.
In short, the more people who come, the worse their experience, and even worse, they get taxed in order to tell even more people what a wonderful time they're going to have in Colorado.
Fortunately for the industry, they are tourists who are registered to vote in some other jurisdiction, so they don't get to decide on whether that tax should be continued.
This, of course, raises the question of taxation without representation, but the last time that came up, it started a revolution, and I don't want to be accused of spreading sedition.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1993 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >