Release – Jamie Smith: “We Need More Things to Tax”

Jamie Smith: “We Need More Things to Tax”

SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA – Today, at an event with the Sioux Falls Downtown Rotary, Jamie Smith told the audience that “We need more things to tax.”  He then doubled down, saying “I’m advocating for taxes on new things.” You can find a video of Jamie Smith’s remarks here.

“When someone tells you who they are, believe them,” said Governor Kristi Noem. “I have cut taxes for South Dakotans, and my number one priority is eliminating the sales tax on food. Jamie Smith proved today that he can’t be trusted with South Dakota’s finances.”

Jamie Smith has a record of raising taxes. He opposed the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which then-Congresswoman Noem helped pass for the people of South Dakota. That bill put $2,400 back in the pockets of the average South Dakota family.

Jamie Smith also wanted to make it easier for counties to raise taxes on South Dakotans, and he cosponsored a bill to raise the state sales tax from 4.5% to 4.85%.

Governor Kristi Noem is proud that South Dakota has a low, simple tax code. South Dakota has no personal income tax, no corporate income tax, and no statewide personal property tax. Governor Noem has proposed eliminating the sales tax on food, which will lower the tax burden on South Dakotans by another $100 million.

To learn more about Jamie Smith’s history of supporting high taxes, visit


30 thoughts on “Release – Jamie Smith: “We Need More Things to Tax””

  1. Repealing the food tax, without replacement, would be extremely detrimental to municipal services. Some communities would love over 25% of their sales tax revenue!!! Absolutely terrible!!!

  2. I watched the Rotary meeting interview, and what I heard Candidate Smith say was if cannibus becomes legal that will be a product taxed under the laws of SD. Hence a new source of income. Publisher Pat put a different twist on it. Pat and I share the same party registration.

    1. I wish Jamie’s advertising people would make an ad rebutting that very damaging commercial with one in which the context those comments were made was clarified. Why are democrats so bad at messaging?

  3. The Republicans raised taxes on everything when they implemented the tax on goods ordered from internet sales

  4. Ian is such a troll and needs to stay out of SD. Represent the gov in Florida, Arizona and other warm climates. Please go away. You can’t trash talk SD into a large market where personalities don’t matter only soundbites do. So bad for this state and makes me think the only agenda this gov has is owning the libs, raising money in those warm states and getting her mug on tv. I’d say represent her better but I don’t think you can.

  5. He was talking about Marijuana. His point was that, rather that increasing taxes, marijuana would create a new legal, taxable product. Basically “broaden the base” through new economic activity rather than increase taxes.

    Of course, his plan to exempt food from the sales tax is doing just the opposite, so it’s not an entirely consistent position.

  6. So Noem has misconstrued what Jamie said to score political points? Maybe she should show up sometime and actually work for South Dakotans. It sounds like Jamie is actually working to figure out how to replace the sales taxes he has wanted to repeal. I wonder if Noem understands tax cuts will worsen inflation. Noem is worthless.

  7. I don’t blame Noem for not debating the loser Jamie Smith. It would bring us all down to his level.

    1. The loser is the one who didn’t show up to work for the constituents and instead went to Florida for a $5k per plate dinner.

  8. Would’ve been nice to see her respond to what Jamie actually said in person, as she could’ve done by accepting Rotary’s invitation to attend.

  9. A campaign or candidate is desperate when they so blatantly take something out of context such as this. This is the kind of dishonesty and lack of integrity that really turns voters off. Unfortunately, this is the way Ms. Noem operates.

  10. To be honest, the statement “We need more things to tax” is democrat talk of adding more of your private activities to the tax code, all of which any such tax plan would have to go before the voters, due to clauses in the S.D Constitution. The old fashioned Democrat trick here is to convince the voters to support removing ‘tax on food” or some other property, only to engage with the very voters to create a new taxing source by the people themselves. Lost in all that, is the Democrats want the voters to choose, do they want to tax food, or do they want to tax another source. The ‘source’ can be any such activity, property, service, or product. In fact, most of us logical thinkers, believe, the removal of the sales tax on food is slang for wanting to engage in public debate to tax labor, corporate profits, let alone transfer of land or property aka “Death Taxes”.

    In this matter, Jaime Smith is pushing to remove “food” from the sales tax scheme, by replacing that revenue with taxing Marijuana by pushing for to convince the voters to legalize Recreational Marijuana, which would allow us to assess Sales Tax to the property or the transactions thereof.

    With the people in 41 counties voting NO to not approve of legalized Marijuana, showing a clear opinion that that portion of our state may not use, nor support the use of recreational marijuana, and if the only support for Marijuana is in 14 counties, how much tax revenue would Sales Tax on Recreational Marijuana generate, and would it replace the $100,000,000 million lost by removing the tax on food?

    I.M 27 ony legalizes the right to purchase 2-3 ounces of Marijuana at one time, if the people in 41 counties DO NOT transact to buy the product, and considering what the cost of 1 oz of marijuana is, how much value woudl 3 ounces of Marijuana be worth, and what would 4.5% + the 2.0% local tax generate if half the state choose NOT to use the product?

    Let alone, you restrict the use of Marijuana further by banning marijuana on anyone ages 20 and younger, all those people who also buy and eat “FOOD” which is no longer taxed.

    I doubt, the tax on Marijuana will generate $100,000,000 million, which in turn I do agree with the author here – “Jaimie Smiths statement of we need more things to tax” now has greater bearing on the over all needs of the state.

    Democrats for years proposed Statewide Income Taxes, Wealth Taxes, Corporate Taxes.

    1. Mike –I think you have a typo…. twice. “$100,000,000 million” would be $100,000,000,000,000 or, in words, one hundred million million … aka $100 trillion, which is about 3 times the national debt. Cut the word million or cut the six extra 0’s and your argument stands. 🙂

    2. Taking Smith’s friend’s comment out of context notwithstanding, it’s still silly to say “we need more things to tax.” Who would really say that? Our sales and use tax is already quite broadly based, i.e., most goods and services are already taxed, the obvious exceptions being discussed are marijuana and incomes.

      As for your comment that “the only support for marijuana is in 14 counties,” well, those 14 counties were apparently a majority of voters, right? Intuitively, even though it lost in 41 counties, there would still be “support” for it in those counties.

      1. in the 14 Counties I highlighted or reported on, they have a combined 450,000 registered voters compared to 41 counties (rural) who have 135,000 registered voters. So yes, those 14 counties can out vote the majority of voters easily. Except one problem, we do NOT govern ourselves based on the majority of voters, but the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED – meaning,

        38 Counties = 60.8% of the voters said NO
        14 Counti4es = 57% of the voters said YES
        14 Counties = 50-50 (swing counties

        IF the people in 21 counties say yes, but the people in 41 counties say no, the MAJORITY of our population is against Marijuana, but yet the POPULAR VOTE adopts our laws – which is why we have “protections” in place to avoid that law from taking effect by July 1st —

        Its called Judicial Review:

        1) The people can petition to refer the vote back to the voters a 2nd Time; or
        2) The People can petition the Courts to Ask for a Legal Opinion; or
        3) The People can lobby the Legislature to discuss the matter, to repair-fix-replace-strike down

        IF NO ONE challenges the law prior to June 30th – the law stands, if the law is CHALLENGEFD, it cannot stand until a 2nd Confirmed Opinion is Heard.

    3. Most who can afford to buy recreational marijuana are using discretionary money. Food is a necessity. Removing the regressive tax on food will help those whose struggle to get through each month and often have to sacrifice due to lack of funds. Marijuana is like alcohol…you don’t need it, you just want it, but if you do without it, you’ll still be okay. Not so much for food. I don’t see what the problem with taxing the hell out of marijuana is. The comment Jamie Smith made, used in the commercial, is taken out of context, but that’s not surprising, given where it originated. Noem and her followers are greedy, lying, power-hungry people who don’t give a single hoot whom they steamroll with their lies and deceit. I hope someday she gets the comeuppance she deserves, and I hope it hurts like hell.

  11. If you have DiSH, for$3.99 you can rent the 1980 movie “Popeye” and get a long list of things to tax.

  12. Our Party has always supported broadening taxation to make it more fair and representative. The worst idea we ever supported has to be Video Lottery. Broadening the sales tax to include more areas of commerce and decreasing the tax on food and drugs seems to me to be more fair and representative.

  13. This Republican received a text on this today. I don’t appreciate how this is being handled. Now I’m leaning towards voting for Jamie.

  14. ~ Now I’m leaning towards voting for Jamie ~, the dope smoking baby killer.

    Good choice Maroon.

    1. Oh dear, vote for Kristi, the root’n toot’n, botox, plastic implant animal-killer.
      Good choice, Doofus.

  15. So, if the grocery tax is repealed how will the state budget absorb that 100 million dollar loss in revenue? Who will take the hit? Education, roads, state supported mental health programs? Taking a single comment out of context about taxation and not addressing the consequences of the proposed tax cut from his opponent is slanted/misguided. I would love to hear how Governor Noem plans to take care of the poorest people in this state with 100 million less in the budget

  16. This is a joke. Here you have a guy who says Biden is the best to represent America, who by the way wouldn’t know the truth if it bit him on the nose, arguably the worst potus in the history of the USA. Is there really some belief Smith is going to tell the truth about anything he’s going to accomplish as governor. I suppose those who don’t have the capacity to learn from history have a reason to vote for this guy. Just for grins, one of you tell me who the last dnc president was that didn’t screw the economy, and all promised the opposite. The only one I can think of is JFK and we know what they did to him. Smith will do the same thing to our state if given the chance.

Comments are closed.