Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Littlefield Corporation (LTFD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T.K. Allen who wrote (6213)	1/7/1998 9:18:00 AM
From: T.K. Allen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10368

To put the South Carolina political situation in some context, take a look at the following article in The State: thestate.com I was particularly interested in the following comments in this article: "The governor says he's opposed to a tax increase. But his appointee is sitting here saying you have to impose local taxes to get highway projects. Almost half the Horry County project would be repaid from a 1.5 percent hospitality tax on hotels, restaurants and other tourist attractions." As is always the case, the state needs money but nobody is willing to support a tax increase. Historically, the easiest type of tax to get through a legislature are the so-called "sin" taxes. Taxes on VGM's would certainly fall into this category. Keep in mind, there is a bill filed for consideration by the SC legislature which would allow local governments to tax VGM's. Fits real nicely into their road funding problems, don't you think? TKA