O P I N I O N

THE SOAPBOX

Stand up. Speak up. It’s your turn.

Our state’s political history features a few long-standing traditions, such as the First in the Nation Primary, midnight voting in Dixville Notch, and maintaining independent party affiliation. A comparatively newer tradition, dating back only a few decades, calls on political candidates to take “The Pledge” against a broad-based sales or income tax.

I am the only candidate for governor that has not taken this pledge—not because I intend to implement a broad-based sales or income tax, but because “The Pledge” is a deceitful fallacy. 

New Hampshire already has sales and income taxes.

As a small business owner of a restaurant, I collect a sales tax on meals. Thousands of restaurants across our state collect sales taxes from customers and forward those funds to the state.

I also pay a state-level income tax called the Business Enterprise Tax, and other businesses pay the Business Profits Tax. Anyone conducting business as an LLC is responsible for paying one of these taxes. For example, a comedian friend of mine does his business dealings as an LLC. As a result, he is paying income tax to the state of New Hampshire, even though he’s a one-man show.

“The Pledge” is a fallacy.

We have income and sales taxes in this state, and our state budget is heavily dependent upon those taxes. As a business owner, I spend substantial time and resources ensuring that our state government receives all the taxes it demands from my business.

And yet, politicians past and present would have you believe otherwise. “The Pledge” promises to prevent something that already exists. As a candidate for governor, I cannot in good conscience make such a hollow and meaningless commitment.

Our tax system is regressive.

In New Hampshire, the property tax rate is essentially set at the individual municipal level, while the expectations for our schools—and the associated expenses—are set at the state level. As a result of this tax/spend mismatch, municipalities that are “poor” in property must set a higher tax rate than towns that are “rich” in property. Literally, the rich pay less.

But it gets worse—the towns that are rich in property also have residents with higher incomes. So now we have the reverse of a progressive tax system. Instead of the rich paying more, the poor pay more. This is a regressive tax system.

Our legislature already knows.

In 2020, a legislative commission was formed to study school funding. They concluded that the “current system for funding public schools is inequitable from both student and taxpayer perspectives”. In an effort to identify a fairer method for school funding, the commission examined other options, such as a statewide sales tax, a statewide property tax, or a statewide income tax.

In 2011, we tried a statewide property tax—but wealthier municipalities complained, saying they were “donor towns”. In response, the Democratic governor at the time allowed them to keep that money within their municipalities. Indeed, every year, many municipalities collect a statewide education property tax but do not contribute that money to the state; they simply keep it.

Progressive taxation is better.

Whether we tax sales, income, or property, there will always be someone who is contributing more than someone else. Under a progressive tax system, the rich pay more. That’s the point.

No matter what is being taxed, all taxes are paid with income. My neighbor’s house doesn’t have a job—she pays property taxes with her income. She pays sales tax with her income. In New Hampshire, neither property values, nor purchases of taxable items, are tied to income. Consequently, our state’s tax system allows for those with higher income to pay lower taxes than those with very little, such as retired people, individuals living with disabilities, and the unhoused. Our tax system is upside-down, leaning on the people least able to pay into the system.

“The Pledge” is a pledge for higher property taxes.

The fact is this: New Hampshire residents will not see a reduction in property taxes until education is funded through different means. We have only three options: a sales tax, an income tax, or a property tax.

When candidates take the pledge, they swear off two options—the sales tax and the income tax—making it impossible to lower property taxes in any meaningful way.

New Hampshire needs to have a realistic discussion about our school funding model. “The Pledge” represents a commitment to the status quo. To date, the status quo has only served to increase property taxes to the extent that Baby Boomers are becoming homeless through no fault of their own. Our state’s tax system is unsustainable for the majority of people in New Hampshire, and I cannot in good conscience take a pledge that maintains it.

Beg to differ? Agree to disagree? Comment below using our DISQUS app. Got issues of your own? Send submissions for consideration to publisher@inklink.news, subject line: The Soapbox.

Jon Kiper is a lifelong New Hampshire resident, community activist, and former Town Councilor. He is currently seeking the Democratic nomination for New Hampshire Governor. He is also the owner and operator of Jonny Boston’s International, a Newmarket eatery. While on the Newmarket Town Council, he successfully pushed the planning board to legalize tiny houses, implemented an ordinance to allow restaurants to serve alcohol in sidewalk seating areas, and spearheaded a successful initiative for food composting at the town transfer station. He is a co-founder of the Newmarket Alliance for Substance Abuse Prevention, and he has been instrumental in forming the Wentworth Cheswell Monument Committee, which is fundraising to build a statue of the first African American elected to public office in the United States. He currently serves on the board of Newmarket Main Street Corporation, which works to preserve and honor the history of the town of Newmarket. He lives in Newmarket with his 8-year-old son, Oliver, his partner, Emily, and their cats, Duck and Pizza Cat.