It’s Business License Time

Posted by BKisida | Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, Politics | March 08, 2010

4 Comments

shakedown_~ShakdownAs the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce and the City Council debate the newly proposed ”business licenses,” I have been waiting for someone–anyone–to refer to it as a tax (I’m looking at you, tea partyers).   In Newspeak language, as articulated by the Chamber’s manager of economic development, Chung Tan, the “license” is being established so businesses in Fayetteville can be promoted and “helped.”  Tan was quoted in last Thursday’s NWArkTimes:

“A big portion of our economic development is helping existing businesses… so if we don’t know who they are, or where they are, it’s very difficult to help them.”

Hmm.  So, the stated idea here is to require businesses in Fayetteville to pay for a license so that they can be “helped” by the city.

Council members Brenda Thiel and Matthew Petty have expressed reservations about the license being applied to small part-time businesses that are run out of people’s homes.  I’d say good for them, but truth is they’re simply looking out for their own interests.  At some level, they simply want to make sure that their own small home businesses are exempted from the “help.”

Here’s an idea: Why not make the licenses voluntary?  If the stated purpose of the license fee is to promote and help local businesses, then why not give businesses the option of deciding whether or not they would like the Chamber of Commerce’s help?  No?

The truth is that the license is a tax, and the license will further be used as a tool to help enforce sales tax collections.  Maybe that’s an idea that people could get behind, maybe not.  But a little honesty about the true nature and purpose of the so-called license would be a good place to start the discussion.

Riff Sharing:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Twitter
  • RSS
  • email

Comments (4)

[...] discussed the business license issue last week, but I would like to add a few thoughts. Brian correctly asserted the license fee amounts to a [...]

The ordinance as it was presented would have required your babysitter to get a business license.

That’s absurd. So how come when you have the idea to exempt small 1-person consultants and hobby businesses, it’s good, but when I have the idea, it’s self-interest?

Heya Matt. I’m glad you saw how absurd the original proposal was, and I am willing to cede that you would have recognized the absurdity even if you hadn’t been personally affected by it.

Still, you and Brenda could oppose the ordinance outright, or at least give good reasons why other businesses should pay for the license while yours should not.

That’s true, but I’m still not 100% convinced it’s a bad idea, nor am I 100% convinced it’s a good idea.

Even though I’m not ready to make up my mind, I am trying to make a few specific changes to it so that it becomes better legislation regardless of how I vote when it comes to the full Council.

I floated the idea of it being voluntary, and I’m investigating some of the costs involved. I need to do due diligence on these things even I’m not ready to vote on it.