News -> INDReporter FRI, NOV 18 12:02PM by Walter Pierce

Confounded by amendment on Saturday’s ballot? Yes means no

There is evidently some confusion among voters over the proposed constitutional amendment on Saturday’s ballot that would prevent local or state government from imposing additional fees (read, taxes) on the sale of real estate. From Facebook status updates to tweets, we’ve come across several instances of voters thrown by the wording of the measure, which begins, “To prohibit the levy of new taxes or fees ...” We’ve even encountered a few conspiracy theories running along the lines of, “The wording is intentionally confusing ...”

But the measure is simple, actually: A vote for the amendment is a vote against any new fees for real estate transactions. A yes vote means “no new taxes.” Simple, right?

Here’s the proposition in its entirety:

To prohibit the levy of new taxes or fees upon the sale or transfer of immovable property, including documentary transaction taxes or fees, or any other tax or fee, by the state or any of its political subdivisions after November 30, 2011.

City-Parish President Joey Durel acknowledges the confusion in an email to supporters today:

I am writing today to urge you to vote against the home Transfer Tax this Saturday, by voting “yes.” A “yes” vote prohibits any transfer tax from being imposed. It is confusing on the ballot, so be careful. A “no” vote allows this tax to be imposed, and a “YES” vote prevents it.


Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (7)add
...
written by ragin be quiet , November 18, 2011 - 05:41 pm
Nice.. your government counting on people being stupid! How refreshing!
...
written by Layne St.Julien , November 18, 2011 - 07:10 pm
While you've said what a "yes" vote means, a lot of confusion is out there about what a "no" vote means. If the "no" vote wins, it doesn't mean we'll have voted in a new tax. It means we will have left the door open for municipalities to establish such a tax at some point in the future if they need to. Some realtor organizations are deliberately confusing voters about this.

The vote is for a Constitutional amendment that would limit the ability of cities and parishes to decide how to fund their own projects. I say it's foolish to give this power to the state. We don't know what needs we may have in the future, and it should be up to us to decide where the money should come from.
...
written by Always Ragin , November 18, 2011 - 09:49 pm
by Layne St.Julien "it should be up to us to decide where the money should come from."
--------------

It is up to us, that's why we are voting. Vote Yes, to say No, Vote No, to say Yes. I love Constitutions.
...
written by Farrow , November 18, 2011 - 11:11 pm
>why we are voting.

But in a way you are giving up your right to impose a tax upon yourself, which is the only sort of Constitutional tax to begin with. And once you give away that right, it would be difficult to take it back.
...
written by machchoux , November 20, 2011 - 01:23 pm
Something like 80% had no trouble interpreting the amendment.
...
written by Greg , November 21, 2011 - 01:01 pm
Why was this amendment left off the primary election?
Why was it worded in such a confusing way?
The "powers that be" knew there would be a very low turnout this election, and then tried to confuse the people by writing the amendment this way.
Its time to change the "powers that be"!!!!

...
written by the original northsidian , November 21, 2011 - 08:05 pm
Layne: Your pension must be connected to taxes being raised constantly. But, guess what? People are tired of your tax and spend friends. You see what happened to the school board tax don't you? And that is just the beginning.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it