Unfair burden

Unlike the residents of most states, Idahoans aren’t done paying when the cash register totes up grocery items. No, they have to fork over 6 percent more in sales taxes. Economists will tell you that one way to discourage an activity is to tax it. But food isn’t something you can do without, and taxing it is particularly hard on the poor, who spend a greater percentage of their income on groceries.

Currently, Idaho law allows some people to apply for an annual tax credit to defray the impact of the tax, but married couples with incomes below $17,500 a year or single persons making less than $8,750 are not eligible. Yes, the very people who need it most are excluded. The only exceptions are for people who are elderly, disabled or blind.

This embarrassing fact gives Idaho the distinction of being the only state that charges the full sales tax on food while precluding the poor from collecting an available tax credit.

Several lawmakers this week professed astonishment that the poor would be barred from the grocery credit, even though the law has been in place for several years. It’s a sad testament to how voiceless the poor are when it comes to influencing the Legislature.

Key lawmakers now say the law must be fixed. They were already bracing for another round of haggling over whether the sales tax on groceries should be phased out or the tax credit for the poor should be increased. Of course, it can’t be increased until the state stops blocking the poor from collecting it.

Just as he did during last year’s stalemate, Gov. Butch Otter prefers to keep the sales tax on food and offer the poor a tax credit. He would also reduce or eliminate the credit for those with higher incomes. But tax credits cannot be collected until the end of the year, and that’s a long wait for households struggling to pay for groceries. Plus, there’s a government form that would have to be filled out. In the end, many people would miss out.

It’s far simpler and fairer to phase out the sales tax on food. Last year, former interim Gov. Jim Risch suggested a six-year phase-out with the hope that an improving economy would make up the revenue difference.

Legislative Democrats are touting that solution, but unless it is tied to an offsetting revenue source, the state risks a budget deficit if the economy hits a downturn.

Last year, the Legislature raised the sales tax from 5 percent to 6 percent to pay for property tax cuts. So the best choice to offset lost grocery-tax revenue might be a bump in the income tax, because it could be targeted the same way that Otter wishes, without the added complication of year-end tax credits.

Taxing a necessity is indefensible in a state that offers exemptions on personal and business services and the sale of such products as new manufactured homes, certain medical equipment and utilities.

If 30 states can get by without taxing food, so can Idaho.