I don’t think I’d seen this figure before, but WOW. How to eliminate 1/3 of South Dakota State Budget at the hands of a very poorly written ballot measure:
According to a memo to be presented to the Joint Committee on Appropriations on July 30, 2024, the LRC estimates that IM-28 could negatively impact South Dakota’s state budget by up to $646.2 million for the 2025 Fiscal Year. This amount represents 46.5 percent of the state’s sales tax revenue and 100 percent of tobacco tax revenues.
Calling it’s passage catastrophic would be an understatement.
Imagine how much our property taxes would go up. Imagine what new taxes would be put upon South Dakotans, were it to pass.
Ever wanted to see a South Dakota with nearly everything funded by state government shut down? That would be one way to find out.
Mr. Weiland is a slob when it comes to writing measures, initiated. He should be ousted from the process. Everything he touches turns brown.
If this monstrosity passes, it would be up to the legislature to define “consumable goods”
“Consumable Goods means a product that is routinely depleted. Examples include supplies such as paper, . pens, file folders, computer disks, toner, ink cartridges, and similar items. Consumables also include such items as asphalt, road sand, and similar items. Consumables also include food, drink, and similar items.” This definition comes from https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/consumable-goods
I’ve heard cigarettes and whiskey can be considered consumable goods.
That is a lot of smokes, chewing tobacco and vape accessories/cartridges. No tax on them? Great!
What do I get for my state taxes? Custer?
I could do without being in the top 5 of prisoners per capital when we are #46 in population.
I could do without sending the national guard to Texas for fox news segments.
I could do without a state plane for the governor, I’ve lived in more populated states and the governor did not have a private plane.
I could do without the appropriated discretionary fund the governor uses for Botox and credit card expenses.
I could do without the new $1Billion dollar prison.
I could do without a lot of the GOED incentives handed out, we are at historic lows for unemployment.
I could go without the governor turning down federal funding to states for political appearances. Those of use that worked had to pay taxes federally, and because Kristi wants to make some stupid statement, you want to raisey property tax?
I could go without MUCH of the state government, I don’t have a desire to control people, and certainly don’t want to pay for it, so CUT IT!
Yikes
What, you support the governor hiding her credit card purchases on our dime?
You equate the governor using a credit card to burn it all down.
You are babbling moron. Because you will be the first to bitch when a highway is in disrepair or the highway patrol didnt get to you emergency fast enough or crime is out of control. Got it.
Highways are mostly funded by federal dollars, just FYI…..
Comparing a per capita statistic to where we fall in population of states tells me all I need to know about your understanding of numbers.
I have to agree with everything; the numbers don’t really impact the other points. Cut the crap stated above and we have years of the grocery tax covered. Maybe send this list to our legislators since they seem to be having difficulty accepting they need to spend less.
Lolololololololol. “Top 5 prisoners per capita…” are you having a stroke? The hell is wrong with your brain?
Opponents are using scare tactics The legislature will just have to repeal their little 3/10ths roll back and everything will balance out. Local will still collect the tax on food
Catastrophic? That’s a tad dramatic. But should IM28 pass it’s certainly be disruptive. The people want this, and they’re going to get it good and hard.
If they erase 1/3 of revenue, Catastrophic is the word I would use. I was having a discussion last night, and I’m not sure how they could even do that, given the commitments for matching federal funds, federal mandates (Special ed funding, Medicaid, etc)
Republicans argue to keep higher taxes. Story at 11.
We Republicans have kept taxes and spending low. I think you are confusing SD with the federal budget. The people of SD voted to expand Medicaid spending and now they think taxes are too high so cut the bloat? Ha!
This is what’s wrong with the initiated measure process! Mob rule!
Total bullsh*t. The cost will be per the LRC’s initial fiscal note, around $125 mil. We shouldn’t tax food. It’ll be up to the Legislature to carve out human consumption and they will. Plus, IM 29 will replace a lot of it, assuming it passes and legislators will pounce to raise a tax on it.
Yeah! I have heard from numerous IM29 advocates that South Dakota will make so much money the state will be running a budget surplus and send rebate checks to taxpayer.
The state budget is only one piece of this. IM 29 would be absolutely devastating to municipal governments, especially the smaller ones.
I don’t know what is worse: the wording of the amendment or the inability to accurately predict its impact. Regardless of the vote outcome, the legislature will have to address this or another measure will be on the ballot in 2026 with better wording for sure.
Here is a truth that people for or against IM28 have to recognize:
If this bill passes, the state will shift the lost sales tax review to sales taxes on everything else.
They will have to. The state will keep the same number of dollars coming in.
Anyone who says that they won’t is lying or trying to sell you something.
This will shift who is paying the taxes, not how much money is coming in.
There isn’t enough space in the budget to cut this much money.
The legislature doesn’t have the discipline or intestinal fortitude to start discussing other sources of funding because they are all political suicide in South Dakota.
If this passes, shifting around the sales tax formula will be the #1 job of the next legislative session.