9/11

On the anniversary of the attacks of September 11th, 2001, I remember that the United States of America stands for one thing above all else:

FREEDOM.

Why businessmen require freedom of conscience

At his new blog, Individual Rights and Government Wrongs, Brian Phillips has posted yet another dazzling analysis of the wide-ranging impact of government intervention in the economy. This time his focus is on taxi services. While I urge you to read the entire piece, I do want to note that I was struck by a passage which illustrates Ayn Rand's famous assertion that state and economics should be separate "in the same way and for the same reasons" as the separation of church and state.

The issue is "freedom of conscience" - something often cited by those who claim to uphold church/state separation. Why is freedom of conscience required to run a business? Brian cites this example:

Claims of “market failure” are founded on an arbitrary assertion of how the market should operate. And when the market fails to meet this arbitrary standard, it has “failed.” This is no different than running massive computer models of the NFL season and declaring that, if the Cleveland Browns do not win the Super Bowl, we have an “NFL failure.” Individuals have free will, and we often make decisions that the so-called experts don’t believe we should. The experts said that Henry Ford should not pay his workers twice the industry average. The experts were wrong. His turnover plummeted, his efficiency rose, and his profits soared. And, he cut his prices by nearly sixty percent.

Because Ford was free to act on his own judgment, he could prove the practicality of his ideas. He was free to demonstrate the truth that he saw before others saw it. What would have happened to America’s automobile industry if Henry Ford had been prohibited from acting as he thought best? And how much better might the taxi industry be if entrepreneurs and businessmen could act on their judgment, rather than follow the dictates of politicians and bureaucrats?

Any regulation which restricts a businessman's freedom to act on his own judgement interferes with his freedom of conscience, and should be rejected on that basis.

Got sprawl?

Dear Ed Shadid:

A couple of suggestions regarding OKC's urban sprawl.

First: stop annexing outlying towns. You might even ask people in what used to be an outlying town if they want their town back. Seriously, isn't this how all this sprawl happened in the first place?

Second: can't afford to provide services? Simple: deregulate so we can provide our own. I'm sure there are people here who would be more than happy to provide their own "essential services" if the City would just give up its monopoly over them.

BTW, I notice the ad in the Gazette for your event says no taxpayer dollars are being spent on the event. So who IS paying for it?

Sincerely,
Rob Abiera

For the Tea Party

I've been seeing some dangerous rhetoric floating around lately and, no, I'm not referring to the Tea Partiers who want to keep the debt ceiling from being raised. I am referring to those who say that opposition to raising the debt ceiling constitutes some kind of threat to the country and that those who oppose raising the debt ceiling should be censored. It is ironic that those who are now calling for such censorship have historically postured as defenders of the First Amendment, a la the "Free Speech Movement" and the Fairness Doctrine. While they are not yet openly calling for government restrictions on pro-Tea Party speech - which, by the way, is the only thing that qualifies as genuine censorship - they have finally revealed their true colors.

At such a time I believe it is important to be clear about where I stand.

I stand with the Tea Party.

Yes, I have been critical of the Tea Party in the past and I reserve to myself the right to continue to be so. The Tea Party movement was founded by Rick Santelli on the recognition of the fact that the growth of government was out of control. The movement has succeeded in reshaping the debate on the role of government and returning it to the goals of the Founders, who wanted to guarantee the freedom of the American people. A government with access to unlimited funds is a government with access to unlimited power, and Tea Partiers recognize that restricting the government's access to power means restricting its access to funds - not just taxpayer dollars, but the ability to borrow against those dollars. I whole-heartedly support the Tea Party when it opposes raising the debt ceiling - just one of the ways it has helped to re-focus the debate on the role of government.

Ultimately, the goal must be to reverse the growth of government and cut it back to something which poses no threat to the freedom of the American people. I hold that this can only be done by restricting government to the protection of individual rights. This is one of the reasons why I oppose evangelicals who would usurp the movement for their own religious ends, which will result not in freedom but in religious dictatorship - whether they choose to recognize that or not. I regard those evangelicals as aiding and abetting the liberals in bringing about the runaway growth of government.

The United States of America was NOT founded as a Christian nation.

The United States of America was founded as a FREE nation.

The Tea Party movement is big enough and healthy enough to withstand such criticism. I certainly do not regard the presence of factionalism in the Tea Party as grounds for censorship. I regard the fact that it has generated the kind of desperate opposition represented by those who are calling for censorship as testimony to its success, and I stand with the Tea Party in its opposition to those who would obliterate the First Amendment by forbidding media coverage of and access to information about the Movement.

The problem with taxes

. . . is: they aren't voluntary.

The classic illustration of this is the trip to McDonald's. Go to McDonald's, tell them you want a Quarter Pounder instead of a Big Mac - or, heck, you've changed your mind and you want to go to Wendy's instead! - and see if anyone points a gun at your head.

Now, tell the IRS you don't want to pay your taxes and see what happens.

This, of course, is the difference between the free market and statism, something nicely illustrated by an editorial in today's The Oklahoman - though I'm not sure that's what the editorial's writer intended:

All taxpayers have something they'd like to opt out of — war, railroad subsidies, crop supports, space exploration, etc.

And:

Some folks would like to opt out of paying the MAPS 3 sales tax, but their own neighbors approved it.

Darn neighbors!

The Coburn-Lankford proposal on fuel taxes is appealing, but Washington isn't about to opt out of its desire to control more of our lives.

Of course, the proper response is not to simply say - as The Oklahoman seems to - that that's the way things are done so why even try to do anything about it? Here's the comment I posted:

The Oklahoman's editorial writers - in their own snarky way - are actually doing a good job of illustrating one of the fundamental problems with taxes: it forces people to pay for things they don't agree with or may even oppose. The solution to this is, of course, the free market, where people who want something can pay for it themselves, and those who don't want it don't have to be bothered.

The problem with this - as the editorial illustrates - is that taxes at every level: federal, state and local, mean power and government at all levels is addicted to it. Changing this means changing the culture of power. Yes, this includes voting the so-and-so's out until we finally get the right people. But it also means going much deeper than that and addressing the issue of altruism, which is what lies at the bottom of every excuse used by every politician every time they grab for more power.

After all, we are our brother's keeper and it's for our own good and the pie is only so big and there's only so much to go around and SOMEBODY'S GOT TO DO SOMETHING!

No.

Governor Fallin's Facebook Town Hall

The Oklahoma Republican Party is kicking off a series of town hall meetings on Facebook with a session with Governor Fallin. They are asking constituents to submit questions for the Governor on Facebook or through Twitter. I submitted some questions last week but for some reason they keep disappearing. I guess Facebook is being glitchy. Or maybe it's just my computer.

Anyway, the questions I attempted to post had to do with the growth of state government, Oklahoma's casket cartel, and ObamaCare. So far the question about ObamaCare is still up, but the question I really want Governor Fallin to answer is this one:

Governor: In your State of the State Address, you said: "the growth of government shouldn’t outpace growth in the private sector". Why do you think government should be allowed to continue to grow? Why not actually reduce the size of government?

The Governor's Town Hall starts at noon on Thursday, August 4th.

Close the agencies!

Editorial writers across Oklahoma are breathing a sigh of relief as news comes in of increased tax revenues, relieving them of the burden of facing the possibility that budget cuts might actually lead to the closing of some government agencies.

Well, good for them, I suppose. I think the Right has really dropped the ball and is wimping out on the issue of reducing government - as evidenced by Gov. Fallin's crack about "right-sizing" government in her State of the State address.

More tax revenue means more government. The government's power to restrict our freedom will not be reduced until the the size of the government is reduced. It is past time to face the fact that any genuinely structural reduction in government has to involve closing agencies. I keep getting asked: "Where would you start?" Meaning: which agencies would I close first?

Anything not directly involved in protecting the individual rights of Oklahomans to their lives, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness is fair game. This leaves just about everything outside of the legislature, courts and police.

Okay, here's my list:

ABLE Commission
ABLE Tech
Abstractors Board
Accountancy Board
Accrediting Agency, State
Aeronautics Commission
Alcohol and Drug Counselors Board
Anatomical Board
Architects Board
Arts Council
Athletic Commission, Oklahoma State
Center for Advancement of Science & Technology - OCAST
Chiropractic Examiners
Climatological Survey
Commerce Department
Commercial Pet Breeders, State Board
Commission on the Status of Women
Community Hospitals Authority
Conservation Commission
Construction Industries Board
Consumer Credit Department
Corporation Commission
Cosmetology Board
Dentistry Board
Development Finance Authority
EDGE Fund Policy Board
Energy Resources Board
Environment Secretary
Environmental Finance Authority
Faith-Based & Community Initiatives
Film and Music Office
Foresters, State Board of Registration for
Funeral Board
Geological Survey
Group Self-Insurance Association Guaranty Fund Board
Historical Society
Horse Racing Commission
Individual Self-Insured Guaranty Fund Board
Industrial Finance Authority
Interstate Oil Compact Commission
LP Gas Research, Marketing and Safety Commission
Licensed Social Workers Board
Liquefied Petroleum Gas Board
Literacy Initiatives Commission
Long Term Care Administrators Board
Lottery Commission
Marginal Well Commission
Medical Licensure and Supervision Board
Medical Technology and Research Authority of Oklahoma
Motor Vehicle Commission
Municipal Power Authority
Music Hall of Fame
Nursing, Oklahoma Board of
Oklahoma Forestry Services
Optometry Board
Osteopathic Examiners Board
Peanut Commission
Perfusionists Board of Examiners
Pharmacy Board
Physical Fitness and Sports, Governor's Council on
Physician Manpower Training Commission
Podiatric Medical Examiners Board
Private Vocational Schools Board
Professional Engineers & Land Surveyors Licensure Board
Psychologists Examiners Board
Real Estate Appraiser Board
Real Estate Commission
Santa Claus Commission
Scenic Rivers Commission
Secretary of Energy, Office of
Securities Commission
Sheep and Wool Commission
Sorghum Commission
Southern Growth Policies Board
Space Industry Development Authority
Speech-Language Pathology & Audiology Board
Wheat Commission

Mind you, this is just a first draft. In going through the complete list of state agencies at www.ok.gov I notice that the state does a LOT of licensing of professionals in various fields. Eliminating that licensing would go a long way to restoring the freedom of Oklahomans to do business in the state.

Notice also that I haven't even touched health & education, both of which should ultimately be on a completely free and open market with no government involvement whatsoever.

I am, of course, aware that there is more involved in eliminating an agency than just closing offices. Agencies are created by statutes and constitutional mandates. Closing agencies will require changing - and eliminating - a lot of unjust laws. Of course, one way to start this whole process is by defunding these agencies.

But at least it's a beginning: 77 agencies (unless I've miscounted).

Let the debate begin! What agencies do you think should be closed?

Due Credit

Here's an interesting ad I noticed while perusing the website of Time Out Mumbai:

Take a tour through Dharavi, Asia’s largest slum. The tour introduces you to the enterprise of the slum dwellers. You will see the various small scale industries buzzing inside the slum: from leather tanneries, to pottery, plastic recycling, cloth dyeing, cleaning and recycling of oil drums, and machine-tool making. Reality Tours and Travels.

Some slum!

This certainly makes it appear that the poor in India have more initiative than I credited them with in my previous post - though without more information to establish a proper context I don't know just how effective this actually makes them at rising above their poverty. Obviously, some of them are trying.

Lessons from India

I've been fascinated for some time now with what's going on in India. Now there's a story in the New York Times that leads me to think that India is moving along even faster than I had dared hope:

In India, Dynamism Wrestles With Dysfunction

There is so much I could say about this article, I don't even know where to begin. Reading the article brought to mind so many points made in the writings of Ayn Rand and others about the role of government, the nature & application of rights, law and objectivity, the nature of Capitalism and so much more.

And how many of these lessons can be applied to Oklahoma?

I have posted some comments on Facebook but at this point I have more questions than answers.

The article makes it seem like the poor in Gurgaon are waiting for the government to do things for them. Why aren't they taking the intitiative to solve their own problems?

Gurgaon is depicted as being close to anarchy. What does this say about "anarcho-capitalism"? The rape of the Gurgaon woman in New Delhi - which New Delhi refused to do anything about - strikes me as proof that "competing governments" don't work. Why doesn't Gurgaon sue New Delhi?

There is so much in this article that speaks to Ayn Rand's writings on the role of government. Gurgaon's "municipal corporation" seems more interested in infrastructure than protecting individual rights. Where are the courts? How are property rights protected?

The story shows why a police force is a legitimate function of a government based on individual rights, NOT just an item on a laundry list of "essential services".

Gurgaon needs 3 things: objective laws that protect individual rights, including property rights. Courts to uphold those rights by settling disagreements. Police to protect the rights of the people of Gurgaon.

When Gurgaon takes over smaller cities, it is violating the rights of the residents of those cities. That needs to stop.

Whether you think Gurgaon is the most exciting social experiment on Earth right now or not, it certainly is fascinating and I hope I will be able to follow this story as it develops.

So what do you think? Post your comments here or join the discussion on Facebook!

There is also a reader discussion of this article going on at the NYTimes.

Catching up

I've been posting a lot more to Facebook than I have to this blog, lately. Yes, I've been lazy! So, if you really want to keep up, check out The Oklahoma Capitalist on Facebook! Don't forget to "Like" it while you're there!

Here are some of the links I've posted in the last few days:

Government Doesn't Create Jobs

Union war brews at WinStar casino

USDA fines Missouri family $90k for selling a few rabbits without a license

Holding Mrs. Warren Accountable

The Morality War: Dear Elizabeth Warren, get out of the way!

Bethany CEO becomes first woman to lead Oklahoma Bankers Association

Banking leader backs Oklahoma native Elizabeth Warren for consumer protection agency head

Making way for MAPS 3: OKC files eminent domain lawsuits

Also, my opinion of health insurance exchanges drew some comment when I posted it on the Facebook page of the OKC Tea Party.

Don't forget to follow The Oklahoma Capitalist on Twitter!

Getting government out of the way

Here's a story in the Tulsa World that makes me wonder just how much Oklahoma's economy is being held back by government intervention. At the same time it makes me think that pro-Capitalism efforts on the local level just might be able to make the most immediate impact.

Admiral Twin sets groundbreaking ceremony for rebuilding effort

Smith initially said he was aiming for a July 4 re-opening of the 60-year-old drive-in, where crews from Ark Wrecking were seen removing debris on Wednesday.

Everything from zoning issues and safety code concerns to replacing the burned-up electrical system and fabricating steel for the new tower have delayed the opening date to August.

"We tried to hit the ground running (after obtaining a Small Business Administration loan), but it hasn't happened that way," he said. "There's more red tape than the public realizes, more hoops to jump through."

As the owner of a seasonal business, no one wanted the drive-in to re-open sooner than Smith.

"Opening in August means that we've missed the best three months of the season for a drive-in," he said. "The drive-in is going to open this summer, but certainly not when I had hoped."

"Zoning issues"

"Safety code"

"Red tape"

What zoning issues should an existing business have to deal with? Why would there be any issue unless the original zoning had been changed? Why would the zoning be changed? If the zoning was changed, why wouldn't the change account for existing businesses?

These are just some of the things that everyone looking to start a business in Oklahoma has to deal with day in and day out. How many of them become discouraged by it and change their minds about opening or locating their business here?

Stories like this convince me that every effort made to reduce regulation in Oklahoma will have a positive effect on the state's economy.

You call this Independence?

If we're just going to do what Washington wants us to do anyway, how is that any kind of independence?

Today's The Oklahoman carries an op-ed by Tina Majors in support of FallinCare, Gov. Fallin's plan to create a health insurance exchange in Oklahoma. The timing is interesting considering the legislature ended its session last week.

A few excerpts:

"One of the great things about Oklahoma and Oklahomans is our fierce independence from the federal government. When we see a problem, we fix it ourselves. We don't wait for the big brother of the federal government to come in and over-regulate a problem. . . . "

"I support efforts to repeal Obamacare, but given the makeup of our federal judiciary and their penchant for liberal rulings, I have doubts about the lawsuit to stop it being entirely successful, regardless of its merits. I want Oklahoma to create every possible barrier to a federal takeover of our health care. And building our own network is another way to do this. . . . "

"Oklahoma isn't in the habit of letting the federal government keep us from doing what is right. Today, we can't let our anger at their attempted takeover of health care stop us from reforming our own system. The right solution is in creating and controlling our own Oklahoma-centric health care network."

Here's the comment I posted:

Romneycare.

Seriously, is Fallin still trying to push this on us? There is no difference between federal over-regulation and state over-regulation. A government run insurance exchange violates the rights of insurers, doctors and patients. We should reject a state-run exchange for the same reason we should reject the federal-run exchange. What difference is there between the state forcing people to buy health insurance and the federal government forcing people to buy health insurance? NONE.

And PLEASE stop with the scare tactics that do nothing but insult our intelligence: "Oh, we've got to do something or the feds will force it on us!" Well, of course they will if we don't STAND UP FOR OURSELVES! So why should we lay down just so you can run over us? Are you saying it's better if our own state government does it?

The ONLY way to address rising health care costs and lack of coverage is to get the government OUT OF THE WAY on EVERY level.

Set the health care industry free!

What's going on here?

Oklahoma Watchdog reported about an hour ago on Twitter @WatchdogOK that SB264 was signed out of committee AGAIN! this morning - which means there will be another floor vote soon.

The big question is - were changes made? If so, what were they & what impact do they have on our concerns?

One thing I've seen that may be new is a time limit on "opting out" of regulations: local school boards can do this for 3 years.

My concern is that "deregulation" is great for private industry but terrible for the government: a government NOT constrained by regulations is a government that has carte-blanche to do whatever it wants, regardless of anyone's rights or freedoms - which is the whole point of having written laws in the first place, a point which seems to be lost on those pushing this "local control" idea.

Does SB264 have a mechanism for subjecting local administrators to the rule of law or does it allow them to autocratically make things up as they go along? Are local school districts required to submit a local plan or set of rules to local voters before administrators can act? What happens to local students who disagree with the majority?

I wouldn't have a problem if this only applied to private schools which should be completely free to set their own rules, anyway, but when the government is running things, that's a whole different animal.

So, what impact will this bill have on private schools? Perhaps school choice advocates should be as concerned about this as supporters of government schools.

I think the presense of Speaker Steele at these committee meetings could be significant - is SB264 a pet project of his? If so, maybe we need to start contacting him as well as our own legislators. I don't think it would be a bad idea to add Bingman to that list, either.

Does the Chamber of Commerce advocate Capitalism?

The Oklahoman is running yet another editorial today attacking Tea Party activists. Thanks for the free publicity!

Here's the comment I left:

It is an unfortunate fact that in a mixed economy such as ours, some business owners may be forced to turn to lobbying in legitimate self-defense to keep the government's hands off of their freedom to run their businesses.

This is not the case for the Chamber of Commerce, which all too often pursues political favoritism for one business or industry at the expense of another, under the guise of "sacrifice". This not only makes the Chamber no friend of Freedom or Capitalism, it muddies the waters - leading the average person to equate Capitalism with corporate welfare and cronyism, when - in fact - true Capitalism requires the separation of state and economy, in the same manner and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.

Remember this the next time you read about how many Oklahomans are going hungry every day. Ask yourself if that would be the case if Oklahoma had genuine economic Freedom.

Just how many Oklahomans are going hungry every day? Here's The Oklahoman's editorial about last weekend's food drive.

Oklahoma sustainability advocates target property rights

This looks like a real smoking gun: it shows that advocates of "sustainability" in Oklahoma - including local governments - are directly targeting private property rights.

Private Property Ownership in Oklahoma Barrier to Sustainable Development

Beth Schaefer Caniglia, Assistant Professor of Environmental Sociology at Oklahoma State University and member of the Board for the Oklahoma Sustainability Network gives her advice to overcoming the “long-standing sentiments regarding private property rights as symbols for democracy and freedom” held by Oklahomans.

“Many landowners resist the perceived slippery slope of conservation mandates and retreat behind constitutional takings provisions, . . .”

Thank you, Kaye Beach, for posting this!

The correct response to this is: ALL Rights are Property Rights!

Will "sustainability" advocates be satisfied with just property rights or will they go after all rights? The history of the environmentalist movement suggests they won't stop there.

Oklahoma Attorney General joins states against NLRB

Attorney General Pruitt Joins South Carolina in Jobs Fight

EXCERPT: "Attorney General Scott Pruitt has joined South Carolina and other attorneys general in a fight against action taken by the National Labor Relations Board against The Boeing Company.

In a letter to the NLRB, attorneys general from nine states called the board’s lawsuit against Boeing “an assault on the constitutional right of free speech” and an assault on each state’s ability to attract business and create jobs."

Oklahoma City's government needs to stay on its diet

Two examples of improper use of government in this week's Oklahoma Gazette:

Optimistic thoughts
Next fiscal year’s city budget might provide for the restoration of public safety positions.

The city is hoping to restore several police, fire and other city positions and services in the municipal budget set to be presented to the Oklahoma City Council at its Tuesday meeting.

‎While the city’s revenue has not returned to pre-recession levels, Freemen said it is making progress.

A police department is a legitimate function of a proper government as long as those police are restricted to protecting individual rights. Oklahoma City could afford all the police officers it needs for this purpose if it would spend its budget only on the legitimate functions of government, which do NOT include corporate welfare under the guise of "economic development". If the City would restrict itself to legitimate functions, it wouldn't need as much revenue.

Living arrangement
The city is using incentive funding to encourage development of diverse downtown housing options.

An apartment complex currently under development in the Deep Deuce neighborhood may get $1.25 million in assistance from the city.

"Economic development" means the government picks and chooses which businesses go where. Laissez-faire Capitalism institutionalizes entrepreneurs' rights to run their businesses as they see fit - including their right to buy property where they choose and their rights to use that property as they wish. Could this be the reason why the supposedly much-desired downtown grocery store has so far failed to materialize?

Oklahoma City needs LESS government, NOT more revenue: laissez-faire Capitalism, not "crony" capitalism!

Council majority 'concerned' about Alliance

WHOA. According to a story posted over the weekend at okgazette.com, a majority of the members of the Oklahoma City Council have expressed concerns over the formation of a new non-profit body to coordinate economic development for the City.

. . . several council members, including Pete White, Ed Shadid, Larry McAtee, Skip Kelly and David Greenwell expressed varying levels of concern about the plan, ranging from the ethnic and geographic diversity of those serving on the board, to the openness of information from within the group.

This is a stunning turnaround in view of the City's record of support for government-directed economic development via MAPS. But will "concerns" over how the new agency - let's face it, the proposed "Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City Inc." will be a what amounts to a government agency, irrespective of efforts to downplay that aspect - does its job translate into a rejection of this approach to building the City's economy?

We'll find out at tomorrow's Council meeting.

The Oklahoman likes it!

Wow! So, The Oklahoman - THE biggest promoter of corporate welfare in Oklahoma - actually likes "Atlas Shrugged Part 1", which is based on a book that promotes the idea that government intervention in the economy will never result in the kind of achievements possible under true freedom.

Talk about wanting to have your cake and eat it, too!

I wonder what they will think when one of the characters actually says that in Part 2?

Rand revival, film project hope for 2012

. . . “Atlas Shrugged” remains a best seller and its keynote “Who is John Galt?” imprint is enjoying a revival in the era of too-big-to-fail government.

Does The Oklahoman think Oklahoma City's government is "too-big-to-fail"? I think we all know the answer to that question, LOL! Too bad Larry Nichols - as well as the other members of the soon-to-be Alliance for Economic Development - isn't more like Hank Rearden! Imagine what Oklahoma City could achieve if Nichols believed in freedom as much as Rearden!

Make Them Pay . . . Less!

Tax Day, the day of the deadline to file your taxes, is normally on April 15th, but this year, President Obama decided to cut us all some slack and give us til the Monday after: April 18th.

Liberals, cheer led by Michael Moore, have cooked up a plan to scapegoat corporations who they claim are not paying their share of taxes, thus depriving the federal government of much needed income.

Obviously, that's only going to work if people really believe the government needs the money. The more money government takes in, the bigger it gets.

Of course, if smaller government is what you're after, then you would want it to have less money, not more. In which case, not only might you not mind corporations paying less taxes, you might weven want lower taxes for everybody!

Lower taxes means less money, so government has to make itself smaller! Well, that's the theory, anyway.

So here's the deal: on Monday, April 18th at noon, the "more money for bigger government" liberals will have a "Make Them Pay!" rally at the State Capitol - organized through MoveOn. After the rally, participants will drive to the Chase branch at NW 23rd & Western where they will "respectfully" ask Chase to pay its "fair share" of taxes.

Wouldn't it be fun if some people showed up with signs that read, "Lower Taxes for Everybody! Make Government Smaller Not Bigger!"

Just a thought.

ADDENDUM - 4/17: Mr. Moore needs to be reminded that 45% of Americans pay no income tax.