Tax increase will harm Christiansburg
By Tom Norman
Christiansburg’s recent 2 percent increase in occupancy tax for our local hotel industry is very disappointing. The tax increase has the potential to negatively impact tourism as well as deter future investors into the area.
Christiansburg guests now pay one of the highest tax rates (14 percent) in the commonwealth, exceeding even Richmond and Virginia Beach, both of which rely heavily on tourism for income. The tax is also even higher than a major tourist destination like Orlando, Fla.
Norman lives in Christiansburg and is president of the New River Hospitality Association.
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Are you for real??? Wouldn’t you rather the tourists pay more than local residents paying more AGAIN????? Think about it!
Comment by Debi — July 1, 2012 @ 1:07 pm
While I agree that a 14% lodging tax and 13% restaurant tax are pretty ridiculous, Christiansburg’s elected leaders did make the correct decision to raise those taxes in lieu of raising town property and personal property taxes with this most recent budget.
While my preference would have been for officials to cut the budget and not raise taxes at all, their logic concerning collecting much of these new taxes from non-Christiansburg residents was sound.
I’ll admit I am beginning to get a little upset when I see that my $8.50 in food at Wendy’s ends up being a nearly $10.00 total bill due to the taxes; however, I do have a choice whether to eat out or not.
I am not privy to exact percentages, but my guess is that a majority of restaurant revenue is not from Christiansburg residents, but from other Montgomery County residents and visitors outside the town (and state).
I would also guess that upwards of 98% of all hotel revenue is from non-Christiansburg residents.
Therefore, it is clear that the majority of these taxes are indeed being footed by non-Town residents.
This can only be good news for Town residents.
The author seems to suggest that Christiansburg is some sort of tourist destination. It is not. There is nothing in this town that draws anyone for the purpose of tourism. Visitors stay in Christiansburg hotels due to the necessity to visit local colleges, to have a place to stay for temporary jobs/projects, and simply because they are tired and need a place to stay conveniently off I-81 while traveling north or south through Virginia on the way to other states and locales that are legitimate tourist destinations.
I would guess more than 95% of these hotel customers do not consider or even look at the hotel tax when they decide to stay in Christiansburg. They are here because of a needed room for a VT football game, parent’s day at Radford, or simply because this is a convenient place to get off the road and crash for the night.
A good percentage of these hotel dwellers will in fact never stay in Christiansburg again (regardless if the tax was 2% instead of 9%). The others will end up coming back and staying in Christiansburg out of necessity or convenience (even if the tax was 12% instead of 9%).
No one is not going to stay in Christiansburg and stay farther away in Roanoke for VT events or drive from I-81 past Christiansburg to Blacksburg to save $1 or $2 in tax on a hotel room. With gas above $3 a gallon, many would end up spending more in gas than the extra $2 tacked on to a $100 a night hotel bill.
In the past 5 years there have been numerous new hotel projects in Christiansburg and Blacksburg, despite both communities having some of the higher hotel tax rates in the Commonwealth. If there is a future need for rooms, more hotels will built – this tax costs investors/land owners nothing and there is no evidence (based recent trends in hotel revenue and occupancy %) that Christiansburg is losing out on any hotel room revenue due to the current 7% local hotel tax rate.
Will adding to 2% change that? Obviously, no one can know for sure until the tax has been implemented and data collected, but it seems very unlikely.
Comment by H. Simpson — July 5, 2012 @ 1:43 am