To No-op or Not - How "No Opposition" Costs a Bundle in Taxes, Fees & Add-ons
“No-op” in contrast to most potential new words has at least four definitions.
No-op (nō äp’) n. 1 no opposition 2 a “no opposition” tax, fee or in-lieu cost levied on unrepresented payers 3 a marketplace largely restricted to occupational licensed, certified or controlled providers 4 a fixed service area that restricts competition in public services
Examples follow:
Definition 2: Hotel and Rental Car taxes
Definition 3: Physicians, Realtors, Barbers, various agents and public Accountants
Definition 4: Electricity, Cable and local Garbage Pickup
Not surprisingly, "No-ops" are mostly about money and power. When something is important to locals they tax themselves. When it’s not, their elected or appointed officials may either tax or levy fees on the unrepresented or restrict the marketplace in concert with providers. Shouldn’t it be illegal to tax those who cannot object? Or to unfairly restrict the marketplace in the name of safety and quality?
The impact of "No-op" decisions on both our choices and billfold are far from trivial. This newly coined definition might move us closer to remedying the many “no opposition” or “Lo-op” situations when an obscured cost - public or private - is imposed upon a body of people who have neither the opportunity nor proximity to oppose that imposition.
The timing for exploring this new category is now. American governments are currently scratching deep to collect every dollar possible out of someone else’s pocket. At the same time the U.S. public main stream media watchdogs are in rapid decline. The likely result of these converging trends will be higher cost for us all.
The intent of coining a definition like "No-op" would be to raise public awareness of the overall situation. This would also subliminally create a climate and with luck maybe even a movement that is more likely to counterbalance the growing trend toward more and more "No-ops".
The usual first step to solving a problem – particularly an obscured and under recognized one - is to define it. This is not a project proposal with a remedy already in mind. It is simply a convenient way to categorize related situations by a common trait using a trial term like "No-op" to group and thus define it. It will obviously be up to the Project Team(s) to scope, examine and chart their own course.
The British imposition of the Stamp Act on Colonial America significantly contributed to America’s Revolutionary War. The stakes for No-ops are of course smaller, but the principal is the same. No taxation without representation. No market restrictions without a formal and balanced impact assessment. At a minimum there should be a way to rein in the worst excesses. In the broadest sense “No-op” taxes, fees, laws and licenses are simply just definitions. So why not “fight fire with fire” by unlocking the latent potential within definitions?
Non-revolutionaries need not apply. Seriously, please let us know what you think about both the merits and potential for this project proposal? We are most definitely open 4 definition in this arena.
|
