Episode Transcript
[00:00:05] Speaker A: Hello, everyone, and welcome to taxing poetic. I am Tim Howe, CEO of Synexis Tax Solutions. And as always, I'm here with my.
[00:00:11] Speaker B: Co host, the hostess, borthimosis.
[00:00:13] Speaker A: Oh, there we go.
[00:00:14] Speaker B: Jenny Carter.
[00:00:14] Speaker A: Love it. And our esteemed producer, JB.
[00:00:18] Speaker C: What's up?
[00:00:18] Speaker A: How you doing, man?
[00:00:19] Speaker C: Pretty good.
[00:00:19] Speaker A: Awesome. And we have today in studio via Zoom, a special guest.
[00:00:26] Speaker B: Jenny, a very special guest. We're so excited to have Andrei Yushkoff with us. Andre is with the tax foundation, based in Washington, DC, which is not a state. Taxation without representation. Correct.
[00:00:38] Speaker A: I love that.
[00:00:39] Speaker B: We talked about that in a previous episode. So check it out. But, yeah, Andre has a very impressive resume. He is from St. Petersburg, Russia, where he earned his bachelor's in science and also has a master's in the University of Bonn and most recently, a PhD in public policy from Indiana University.
[00:01:00] Speaker A: Just a PhD.
[00:01:01] Speaker B: I mean, no big deal.
So, Andre, we're so thrilled to have you here. Thanks for joining us today. We know you're busy making public policy.
[00:01:09] Speaker D: Hello, Jenny. Hello, team. Thanks for having me. And it's a pleasure and honor to be on your podcast.
[00:01:15] Speaker A: Awesome. Well, thank you so much.
[00:01:16] Speaker B: Well, speaking of Andre, speaking of your PhD, are you ready for. This is my favorite part of the podcast, where I read a haiku, and if I could have complete silence.
[00:01:26] Speaker C: What does that have to do with the PhD?
[00:01:28] Speaker A: I was going to say, well, maybe.
[00:01:29] Speaker B: You need to wait and hear what the haiku is. JB, don't jump ahead here.
[00:01:34] Speaker C: That's on me.
[00:01:35] Speaker B: So, Andre, with your PhD, can you please confirm for me you're smarter than Tim?
[00:01:46] Speaker D: Well, it's hard to say. PhD is certainly an indicator of your educational background, but it's not always an indicator for smart.
[00:01:54] Speaker C: It's possible.
[00:01:55] Speaker B: It's very possible.
[00:01:56] Speaker A: Man, I love the flex. That's awesome. Good job, Andre.
[00:01:59] Speaker B: Thanks for. Yes, thanks for playing along with me.
[00:02:02] Speaker A: And turning me nine shades of red. I'm sure Tim loves to.
[00:02:05] Speaker B: He calls himself chat GPTim when it comes to sales tax. So it's nice to have an educated, another educated man here.
Yes. Put it to the test. So, yeah. So let's jump right in, Tim. We've got lots of questions and stuff we want to discuss with you. We're so excited.
[00:02:21] Speaker A: Absolutely. And especially with how tax foundation actually interacts with legislation, how it interacts with the tax community. Andre, could you give us a little bit of a background of the tax foundation? What are the goals of the tax foundation itself?
[00:02:35] Speaker D: Yes, absolutely. So, tax foundation is a nonprofit, nonpartisan think tank and we do tax policy analysis at different levels of government. So we have a global team. They deal with all the interesting things that are happening in Europe, for instance. And we have the federal team, who, of course, spend a lot of time on the hill, so they help federal legislators. And we have the state team, where I am currently working. And the state team is responsible for helping state and local legislators, well, implement tax reforms and in general, structure their tax codes better and in a more pro growth way.
[00:03:17] Speaker B: Okay.
[00:03:18] Speaker C: They always check with you before they pass a law?
[00:03:21] Speaker D: Well, not always, but sometimes, yes. They call and they invite us to testify, and that's what we do.
[00:03:28] Speaker B: That's amazing. So is it similar to being a lobbyist, or is it more you're a consultant or a little both?
[00:03:34] Speaker D: No, it's more of a research job. So we do analyze data. We have a lot of publications, annual publications, and topical publications. And sometimes we just go and testify in state, well, legislative assemblies.
So this is just part of our job. But we are not lobbying for any particular policy. We just help them structure tax codes well, in a more efficient way.
[00:04:02] Speaker A: Do you have certain states that you're actually more involved with than others? Are there certain states that actually interact with you more often than other ones, or are there certain states that are just like, we don't need these guys. We got this. We can handle it on our own?
[00:04:15] Speaker D: No, some states are typically more active on the tax front. They have more tax changes over time.
But we work with all the states, so our team is working with all 50 states, and we just divide the responsibilities among us. And some of us work with the. And we don't even have sort of geographic.
The geographic focus. Right. So we can. I, for instance, am responsible for Georgia, I'm responsible for Oregon, for Hawaii, for DC, although it's not a state, for Virginia, Maryland. So it's. It's. It's a mixture of the state, but, yes, we work with all of them.
[00:04:51] Speaker A: How about we arrange for a policy trip to Hawaii with Andre?
[00:04:54] Speaker B: I think that would be fantastic.
[00:04:55] Speaker A: That would be awesome. I think we all need to make a trip out there and talk policy with Hawaii because we actually have a lot of. We had a big beef Hawaii.
[00:05:01] Speaker B: I know. We do have beef with Hawaii. We have beef with a lot of states. If you listen to our podcast.
[00:05:05] Speaker A: Yeah, we're not going to Colorado.
[00:05:06] Speaker B: No, we don't go to Colorado.
[00:05:08] Speaker C: I don't think we're welcome in Colorado.
[00:05:09] Speaker A: Yeah, they may be waiting for us at the border and, you know, we're good.
[00:05:13] Speaker D: And that's a great idea to go to Hawaii because Hawaii is super active this year. So they haven't changed their individual income tax code in a while. But this year they were super active and now they are implementing sweeping tax changes, so increasing their standard deduction, increasing the size, the width of the brackets. So Hawaii is pretty active these days.
[00:05:35] Speaker B: Well, sounds like it deserves a visit.
[00:05:36] Speaker A: That's what I'm talking about.
[00:05:38] Speaker B: Let's do it.
[00:05:38] Speaker A: I think he's giving us some ammunition.
[00:05:39] Speaker B: We can be part of your think tank.
We're available. Do you get to come? Georgia is one of your states and we're in Atlanta, Georgia. Do you get to come visit?
[00:05:49] Speaker D: Yeah, well, not Georgia last year, but we went to Indiana, for instance, and we testified in the Senate because they had, it's called the state and local task force. They're working on improving their tax code even though Indiana is doing pretty well overall. But yeah, we went to testify there and I testified in Virginia this year. So it's a mixture and it obviously depends on the activity in the state. So sometimes when the states are active, there are certain opportunities to testify, sometimes not.
[00:06:21] Speaker B: But yeah, I think that's fascinating. And I think how we even found you or JB just took this and ran with it is we kept referencing the tax foundation and our research on several episodes. We would talk about the index and, well, this state is rated 49th on the index or this state is in the top five of this index of the best taxability, worst tax dates. And we would talk about how we would just make jokes, forgive us making jokes about how did they even come up with this? And JB said, pulled on that thread and said, let me actually just reach out. I know that's how we found you. And we're just again, so thrilled to have you here. And so now we can ask these questions of tell us about the indexes you prepare and how you do those and what's that like?
[00:07:07] Speaker D: Yeah. And so the index is obviously our big project and currently we are working on improving the index methodology. And so there will be some relatively big changes this year. So I hope you and your listeners will stay tuned. Yes, you will because there will be some changes.
[00:07:25] Speaker B: Okay. Okay.
[00:07:26] Speaker D: I hope that Georgia will remain, well, I mean, Georgia is somewhere in the.
[00:07:30] Speaker A: Middle, but our governor keeps making comments about how he wants to get rid of the individual income tax and phase it out. So I'm really curious to see how that's going to actually work.
[00:07:39] Speaker B: And don't you feel like, oh, go ahead. Sorry, no.
[00:07:42] Speaker D: And Georgia has already implemented some interesting tax changes even this year. Right. So the individual income tax went down from 549% to 539%. So there will be some changes in the ranking in the index. So index is. I mean, it sounds pretty fascinating, but it's a complicated thing. So we have more than 120 variables in the index.
It's a huge mathematical model, essentially.
[00:08:12] Speaker B: So do you rank them with your 120? It sounds like data points.
Then you say there's going to be sweeping changes. Right. So is it, you know, okay, well, you know, Georgia eliminated, say they eliminated, to Tim's point, individual income tax, you know, would that then raise or we'll just have to see. Or what happens with other.
[00:08:30] Speaker D: Well, we'll have to see. It's obviously relative, so it's all very relative. If many states implement similar changes, then Georgia's ranking won't change. But if states fall behind, then Georgia can have a chance to improve. But, you know, the bottom line is that it's not as important to eliminate a particular tax or reduce the rate from, I don't know, 11% to 1%. It's more about the tax structure. So we not only assess the tax rate, we also assess the tax base, because what you can get as a government is just the tax rate multiplied by the tax base. So if your tax base is relatively narrow, if it has a lot of deductions, exemptions, exclusions, then your state will likely not rank high on our index.
[00:09:25] Speaker B: And don't you think if Hawaii flew us out there and comped us a room, maybe their index would increase? Or is that frowned upon in your organization?
[00:09:33] Speaker A: No, it would be frowned upon. I can go ahead and tell you right now, he doesn't even have. Don't answer that question, Andre.
[00:09:39] Speaker D: But Hawaii actually has one of the most complicated infant tax systems in the nation, many, many brackets. They have a very progressive tax code, and they haven't changed it again in a while. So this year may be a revolutionary year for Hawaii. On the tax front, that was one.
[00:09:57] Speaker C: Of the questions that we had for you. As someone who's seen all the changes in the legislature, what are the crazy things that happened this year that you saw?
[00:10:05] Speaker D: So many states, we currently are in the individual income tax revolution, so to say, because, you know, when we enter the pandemic, many states expected their revenues to fall. Right. To decline, and as a result, they expected to make certain changes to the tax code. But it luckily didn't happen because of the federal aid, because some revenue projections were wrong.
States did not do as poorly as expected, and they now have at least some of them. They have significant reserves and they have this potential to reduce tax rate. And many states are doing that. So what we observe and what we have observed for several years, for three, four years, more than 30 states have changed, well, one or more provisions in their individual income tax code. So this is huge, but this is not crazy. This is just sort of your normal tax landscape. But there were some crazy proposals this season in particular, Virginia was about to implement changes to the sales tax base. And I know that you are pretty interested in sales taxes in general.
[00:11:18] Speaker A: Absolutely.
[00:11:18] Speaker B: Yes. Let's talk about it.
[00:11:20] Speaker D: Virginia tried to expand its sales tax base to include digital services. And not only digital services that are final consumption services, but also services that are b, two b services. And that was a problematic proposal. So that was quite crazy. And there were similar proposals in multiple states. So we had to work with them to explain what are the dangers of this proposal?
[00:11:48] Speaker B: Let's talk through that a little bit. As you know, I'm sure JB has told you, we talk about that ad doncium on our podcast about the expanding base related to services and digital products.
And of course, a lot of us can argue that we're against that. We don't want everything to be taxed. It's complicated. We don't want the digital service tax. But doesn't it really make sense to do it for that fact alone?
[00:12:12] Speaker A: To me, I think you're opening up Pandora's box. There's a couple of states in the past that have historically tried to pass taxation on services. Michigan tried to do it. Most recently, Florida did it, I think back in the eighties, and it blew up in their face.
There are certain states, like South Dakota right now, that is getting very aggressive on the taxation of services. Washington's a little bit more progressive on the taxation of services. I think as long as the states can narrow the scope of the taxation of those services and if they're actually focusing on digital services and things of that nature as opposed to true professional services, because if you start taxing certain types of professional services, you could create a maelstrom of problems. I think they need to be very cautious, which is awesome to hear that Andre and his team are testifying to this effect to states to provide the guidance, to say, hey, look, because Georgia is a great example. Georgia loves to, to sketch broad strokes of their tax law so that they can envelop a lot of other items underneath either exemptions or taxation of certain things. You're going to have to be very, very specific on this topic. Right. If a state tries to do this, they're going to have to be very, very pointed and very specific when they actually attack it.
[00:13:22] Speaker B: And I don't disagree with you, I'm just plain devil's advocate. How do we broaden the tax base then if we're taxing goods, which we talked about before, too, can be regressive, right? That we're taxing more groceries or whatever school supplies?
[00:13:39] Speaker A: Well, I mean, the other problem that you have, and I think Andre can probably speak to this, a lot of states, in their statutory language, define what tangible personal property is. And in their imposition statutes, they basically say that they only tax things that you can touch, feel, are basically part of the sensory process for a human. Well, electricity for years has been questioned that way. A lot of certain states provide exemptions for the production of electricity. And even with the manufacturing process, if you have a direct use state, they'll say that something has to be directly impacting doing a chemical, physical change to a product for it to ultimately be exempt from a manufacturing standpoint. Where a state like Louisiana, if they've got that in their language, Louisiana doesn't exempt certain types of components of the electrical production process. And there's other states that have the same issue.
You're going to have to fundamentally change what the treatment and the discussion around what tangible personal property is and if services can be included as part of that statutory language. I don't know, Andre, do you want to speak to that?
[00:14:40] Speaker B: Yeah, you have a PhD and you're part of a think tank.
[00:14:42] Speaker C: So, yes, I don't have a PhD, but you can touch electricity, just not that many times.
[00:14:48] Speaker A: You most certainly can.
I've been bit by the goose. That's exactly it.
Go ahead, I'll try.
[00:14:56] Speaker D: No, this is a very important discussion. And the sales taxes became a thing during the Great Depression. Right? So before that, property taxes were the most important source of revenue, not only for local governments, because they are the most important source for local governments even now. But state governments started to implement sales taxes.
And in 19, 32, 33, many large states, like California, New York, Michigan, they implemented the first sales taxes in America. So that was when it started and the design again. And Jenny, you are right.
Back then, the structure of consumption was completely different. So about 70% of total personal consumption was goods. Now it's vice versa. Right. So now it's 70% services. And when the tax was designed initially in the 30th, people didn't think much about services, so they started implementing those taxes, thinking about goods and also not all the goods are taxable, right? Because think about groceries. In many states, groceries are either tax exempt or are taxed at a lower rate. That's right, 1%, 2%, etcetera. So it's very important to understand this sort of historic element.
And we believe that the sales tax was not structured in a super efficient manner because ideally you would want to have a very broad base which includes final consumption, but which doesn't include business inputs, because including business inputs will lead necessarily to tax pyramiding. And we can talk about that if you're interested.
But in general, the base should be broad and then the tax rate can be kept at a relatively low level. But as many researchers showed, the tax rate has increased over time, everywhere. So on average, it was maybe 3% in the seventies, 4% in the eighties, five, 6% in the nineties, two thousands, and now it's already almost at 7%. So you can see that the narrow and shrinking tax base leads to higher rates. Of course, you tax something, but you don't tax everything, and then you have to increase the tax rate. So there are always trade offs between the base and the rate. And with respect to services, we think, for instance, that services like visiting a barber shop, well, it should be taxable, right? Because you consume this service, it's final personal consumption, so why should it be exempt?
But services that can be business inputs, which businesses use, right. Businesses use machinery, they use equipment, they use computers, they use digital services. And when this part is taxable, well, then you will have a problem, necessarily, because tax pyramiding will follow and effective sales tax rates will be much higher than statutory tax rates. So your statutory tax rate may be 5%, maybe 6%, but then you will have an effective rate of ten to 12%, because these pyramids and several businesses and several individuals across the value chain, they pay this debt.
That is the problematic part of it, not just the expansion of the sales tax base to any service, because that can be fine.
[00:18:35] Speaker A: From that perspective, it truly sounds a lot like, with regards to the taxation of services, you're staring at how this is going to impact businesses as much as you are the end consumer. It's one thing to talk about a tax on the end consumer and all consumers if we do pass it on a particular service, but it's going to be much more impactful if it impacts, if it touches and causes issues for businesses, right?
[00:19:00] Speaker D: Yeah. With respect to sales taxes, the popular argument, the populist argument, is that if you tax business inputs, then you tax businesses. Well, this is not entirely correct, because businesses, well, depending on the elasticity of demand and complicated economic concepts. But businesses typically, they do not bear the burden of tax because they typically tend to shift the burden onto final consumer.
[00:19:27] Speaker B: Yes.
[00:19:28] Speaker A: Well, it's like you said, if you have a very narrow or limited elasticity, then obviously a minor tax change like that could impact a business or drive them to basically have to leave the state because they can't be competitive anymore. Yeah.
[00:19:42] Speaker D: And migration and out migration is a huge thing today, again, not only because of sales taxes, but mostly because of income taxes.
[00:19:50] Speaker A: That's right.
[00:19:51] Speaker D: But, you know, even in this, in the consumption tax system. So in the sales tax system, if you compare America with Europe, well, in Europe, in most countries, the value added tax, which is also a consumption tax, it is a centralized tax. So it is implemented at the federal level, typically, or at the central government level.
[00:20:08] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:20:08] Speaker D: So it's uniform across the nation. And there are no. Well, there are still interesting scenarios of cross border shopping, but it's mostly across nation, not within one nation in America, because sales taxes are inherently state and local. State and local. Better, it can cause cross border shopping. And we can see it in multiple states. So we can see it on the border of Tennessee, because in Tennessee, if you look at the effective sales tax or statutory sales tax rate, state and local tax rate, it's 9.5. And in Kentucky it's six. So it makes sense sometimes for people from Tennessee to go to Kentucky and buy things there. It also can make sense for people in Illinois to go to Wisconsin, to go to Indiana, depending on their county, or even to go to another county in Illinois because counties can impose their own rate.
[00:21:06] Speaker A: That's right. And so you get outside of Cook county and you can save a lot of money. Right. Get outside the city of Chicago and Cook county and congratulations, you can buy things for a lot cheaper.
[00:21:15] Speaker D: Exactly. And in Cook county, the rate is, well, 10%.
[00:21:19] Speaker A: 10%, yeah. So sticking with our friends in Illinois, Tim's favorite subject, one of my favorite subjects and my biggest states to pick on. We've got a fundamental issue with the way that Illinois has been doing some things with this level, the playing field law that they passed, and I don't know how familiar you are with it from a sales tax standpoint, but we like to pick on Illinois because, frankly, this law is completely unconstitutional. And there have multiple court cases now that have been filed against them through the tax tribunal. Excuse me, not really a court case, but it's a tax tribunal case where they're asking, different customers and constituents are asking for clarification on this law and how it's actually being enforced by the Department of Revenue. When you guys, and ladies, excuse me, at the tax foundation, identify an issue in a state, can you have retroactive conversations with. With, you know, the states?
[00:22:11] Speaker D: Yeah, absolutely. We, our expert on Illinois is Katherine, and she was doing a lot of research this year, specifically with respect to this Chicago mansion tax.
So she was.
[00:22:26] Speaker A: I haven't heard of this one.
[00:22:28] Speaker B: Yeah. What's this?
[00:22:28] Speaker A: Yeah.
[00:22:28] Speaker D: So you can check our blog post and.
[00:22:31] Speaker A: I'd love to. Absolutely.
[00:22:34] Speaker D: But typically, yes. So when something happens, it can be different, because sometimes legislators come to us and ask our opinion on something. Sometimes we can write a blog post, we can write a longer paper on the consequences of a specific provision, specific law, especially when we think it's dangerous and it can hurt tax competitiveness of that state. And there were cases when we were successful, and we sort of persuaded legislators not to do something because it's just not smart tax policy. It's not sound tax policy, but in some cases, it's just very hard to do.
[00:23:10] Speaker B: What are your thoughts on taxing digital goods?
[00:23:13] Speaker D: So, again, it depends on whether you talk about final consumption or business inputs. Right. Business B, two B transactions, because what Virginia wanted to implement. So the governor proposed to only tax final consumption, digital goods and services. That is a perfectly normal provision, again, to expand the sales tax base. So if you want to tax streaming, well, people, of course, use Netflix, they use YouTube, et cetera. Then they pay for these services. That is perfectly okay. But businesses, they also consume digital goods. Right. So if you go to a restaurant and you try to. To reserve a table in advance, of course you are using the software and the restaurant is using the software, and likely the restaurant is paying for that software. And if you tax that software, then again, due to the logic of business, of how businesses work, you as a final consumer will likely bear the burden.
Yeah. And not the business itself. Not the restaurant itself.
[00:24:19] Speaker C: So we've got a couple minutes left with you, Andre. Anything else that we didn't talk on that you want to make sure we hit?
[00:24:26] Speaker A: You should see JB's fantastic shirt. You may want to make comments on that.
[00:24:30] Speaker C: It's very loud.
[00:24:31] Speaker A: It's awesome.
[00:24:33] Speaker D: Well, maybe a very short story because I mentioned it to JB, but because I lived in Europe, I lived in the United States, I have some of these stories related to sales taxes. And that was a story, actually from Finland and Estonia.
In Finland, alcohol taxes, excise taxes are very high. So per bottle of distilled spirits, you can pay 14 €15 in taxes in Finland. In Estonia, this is just four or €5. And so the funny thing is that people use a ferry from Helsinki to Tallinn and it can actually make an economic sense for them to travel by ferry from Helsinki to Tallinn just to buy, well, several bottles of scotch or vodka or whatever. So Texas, when they are non neutral, when they affect behavior, they can really get funny.
[00:25:26] Speaker A: So, yeah, so let me. New Hampshire, let me get this straight. So we have a ferry that's going between Finland and Estonia and it's loaded with a boatload of liquor. It takes the term booze cruise to an entirely new level. You're literally ferrying booze between two countries. That is awesome. I bet you those ferry trips on the way back from Estonia are a blast.
[00:25:51] Speaker D: Exactly. Yeah. And you see, those things make our tax code and our tax climate a very interesting topic to study because you have those.
[00:26:01] Speaker B: Sorry, no neutralities. Do you have the same process like we do in America where you have the border crossing, you know, police or auditors?
[00:26:08] Speaker C: Well, it's weird too, because it seems that it depends on the product because, like, snow tires are like, you know, oh, not this one. But we have liquor stores on the highway because we know people are coming in and fireworks. Yeah, and fireworks and donuts. Just get all your stuff that you need right here on the highway and then go about your day.
[00:26:26] Speaker B: That's all you need in life.
[00:26:27] Speaker A: That sounds like a fantastic Saturday for me. Fireworks, liquor and donuts and tires. Andre, we're going to make a road trip one time. We're going to pick you up on the way to New Hampshire. We're going to swing through DC.
[00:26:36] Speaker B: Yes. Well, anyway, so do you have those controls or in Helsinki or in Estonia, do they have border crossing controls or is it just. It is what it is.
[00:26:45] Speaker D: Well, of course, if you buy, I don't know, a thousand bottles, then you are in trouble because, yes, somebody will notice and you will likely be subject to a fine or a penalty. But unless, I mean, if you buy it for your final personal consumption, then it's perfectly normal.
[00:27:02] Speaker B: So what you're saying is Tim's new business idea to own a booze cruise ferry in Helsinki probably wouldn't work.
[00:27:09] Speaker A: Actually. It would work.
[00:27:10] Speaker B: Oh, well, I mean, if you have.
[00:27:11] Speaker A: A thousand bottles, you better go lining up your wine bottles, dude.
[00:27:15] Speaker C: I think it works.
[00:27:16] Speaker B: You think it works? Okay.
[00:27:17] Speaker A: I love that.
[00:27:18] Speaker D: And in America, similar things can happen with respect to, well, different types of liquor. I mean, beer, wine, distilled spirits. Right. Because excise taxes are so unpredictable. In Virginia, for instance, distilled spirits attacks at a very, very high rate. It's $22 per gallon.
In Kentucky or Tennessee, taxes on beer and wine are very high because they want to protect their distilled spirit industry. So it may make sense for you to travel from one place to another to buy, say, a bottle of whiskey, but then to travel back and buy several bottles of beer or wine. So it's super complicated just driving around.
[00:27:59] Speaker C: Looking for the cheapest booze.
[00:28:00] Speaker B: I just think to bring this all back to, I think, the beginning, I just think it's so fascinating, us talking about, you know, our history of states rights in the United States, and what I assume is our tax system sounds like it's unlike any other possibly in the world as far as this localized system we have of collecting taxes, which is fascinating.
[00:28:21] Speaker D: Yeah, absolutely. Because some states depend more on individual income taxes, some states depend more on sales taxes. Some states don't have one of those taxes at all. So the systems are quite different, and excise taxes are super different. And feel free to go to our website, check our annual publications, because we tend to track those tax rates and.
[00:28:43] Speaker C: Sales tax all the time.
[00:28:45] Speaker D: Yeah.
[00:28:45] Speaker A: I love the plug, man. Love the plug.
[00:28:47] Speaker B: This has been the best. Andre, we're so glad to have you on this podcast with us today. So thank you again. And yes, we look forward to having you on when the new indexes are published. And for our listeners out there, you can listen to taxing poetic in any order. We have so many episodes out there, a vast library of topics, and we thank you so much for being with us today. You can catch us on any platform where you listen to your podcast. Thanks so much. Have a good one.
[00:29:13] Speaker A: Thanks, Andre.
[00:29:15] Speaker D: Thank you.
