I read with interest Superintendent of Public Instruction Chris Reykdal’s proposal to tax capital gains to help fund schools and The Columbian’s editorial regarding flaws in his proposal (“Capital Gains Tax Flawed,” Oct. 22). I can also understand The Columbian’s point about the constitutional prohibition on income taxes coming into play, however misguided that provision may be.
But I wonder, if taxing capital gains would be held unconstitutional, why isn’t the B&O tax also unconstitutional? As a retired self-employed business person, I paid plenty of B&O taxes. This is really an income tax in everything but name. How can that be constitutional for an individual who is not incorporated and has no employees? Isn’t it clearly an income tax that self-employed person is paying?
So I applaud Reykdal for working on a creative solution. Clearly we need more tax revenue to help fund schools. How about a special sales tax on purchases of stocks, bonds and other capital-gains-producing investments? This could even exempt purchases for IRAs, 401(k)s and the like. But let’s find a solution that works and places more of the burden where it belongs on those who can afford to pay rather than on those who can least afford it.
Editor’s note: The letter writer’s name has been corrected. We apologize for the error.
