03-23-2017, 03:56 PM
(03-23-2017, 03:50 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(03-23-2017, 01:26 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: But it could control it by providing a direct tax subsidy for buying transit passes, like was already happening. Changing it to be a refundable subsidy, that applied to tickets as well, for example would have made it have broader applications. In that case, the region/city cannot take that income and apply to to the general revenues.
The region/city can still reduce (or increase) the money it spends on transit, independent of the form any subsidy. The really is no constraint on the city or region, unless the federal government were to specify a minimum (local) transit subsidy level in order to qualify for the federal subsidy. And that minimum could apply to any form of subsidy directly provided to the local government.
Yes, of course, but it cannot hide the money from the public nearly as easily as it could otherwise. Public perception is everything. If rates stay the same, 99% of the population won't bother to look any closer than that even if there's a reduction in the subsidy. If rates go up, that same 99% won't care that they're getting a tax rebate, they'll still say prices are going up.