Copyright Charleston Post and Courier
Another year of local elections has passed, and we had yet another less-than-stellar turnout at the polls. It’s just hard to get folks interested in the candidates who can have the most direct impact on their daily lives. But here’s an idea to get ’em voting: Offer them money. That’s exactly what many statewide candidates, who’ll soon crank up their campaigns in earnest, are doing. Well, they’re promising to put our own money back in our pockets. Nearly every Republican running for governor in next year’s primary has vowed to cut — or eliminate — the state income tax. Which is nothing new; state lawmakers have been vowing to do this for years. Tax cuts are the sort of politics that was commonplace before candidates figured out that invented boogeymen and culture war baloney were cheaper ... and motivated some voters even more. But tax cuts are back, maybe because said pols are scraping the barrel for boogeymen these days. Now, a few legislators have taken another cue from their favorite income-tax-free big brother — Florida Man — and are exploring the idea of cutting or eliminating the lifeblood of our oft-neglected local governments: property taxes. As appealing as that might sound, it’s a really bad idea. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, trying to regain some of his previous popularity before 2028, has been campaigning to eliminate (or at least significantly reduce) property taxes in the Sunstroke State. He’s adopted a refrain heard for years in some circles: How can you ever really own your property if the gubmint can take it from you? That’s a reference to the government’s power to seize property from anyone who doesn’t pay the taxes on it. Which, admittedly, is a bit extreme. Trouble is, local property taxes don’t fund the sort of government affected by a federal shutdown — social safety nets, foreign aid and the like. County and municipal property taxes largely pay for three things: police, fire protection and garbage pick-up. You know, basic services. In Charleston, for instance, those three things make up two-thirds of the city budget, and property taxes fund the lion's share. And it’d be hard for even the most cantankerous to argue those things are unnecessary. Hard, but not impossible these days. Deep down, even the most pandering politicians realize this is problematic, which is why the legislation is collecting dust in a state House committee. For now. But if a constitutional amendment passes next year in Florida, look out. Plans to slash the state income tax are, conversely, moving along swimmingly. But eliminating it entirely would cause similar operational problems for state government. See, the income tax accounts for about one-third of the state’s operating budget. It’s the biggest single source of state revenue. Losing that money would put a severe crimp in South Carolina’s daily operations — or make it much more dependent on sales tax money, the income from which fluctuates with the economy. To compensate, South Carolina might need a state sales tax similar to that of income-tax-free Tennessee, which stands at 9.5 percent … before local option taxes are added. Yikes. Republicans like to claim that South Carolina is hamstrung in economic recruiting because it has the highest state income tax in the Southeast. Which is true … technically. With all the exemptions, deductions and loopholes big enough to drive one of those hideous Cybertrucks through, our true tax burden is much lower. Not to mention that railing against high taxes when your party has been running the entire state for more than two decades may not be the smartest thing to point out to voters. But whatever. All this is math, which is few people's strong suit. So few folks get into the weeds with these policies. They only hear "lower taxes" — and who could oppose that? Just know that eliminating property taxes is dangerous, even with a provision for the state to make up for that lost revenue ... at 2024 levels.
