If Canadians want reasonable tax levels some day, politicians must stop cutting special deals with industry after industry, which serves only to further complicate the tax code and delay tax relief. To that end, Canadians will need to stiffen their collective spine and learn to say "no. " And to practice this new discipline, taxpayers can start with their response to the recent "hockey summit" in Toronto.

The summit churned out the usual doomsday scenarios and not-so-veiled threats from an industry that wants a unique tax break. According to the argument, pro hockey employs 8,000 full and part-time employees in Canada, NHL clubs pay $211 million in direct taxes, and for-profit hockey is not looking for a handout but a reduction in their high tax burden.

To turn down the NHL cap-in-hand request with a clear conscience, Canadians will need a few good reasons. They should start with these: If I break your window and it costs you $500 to replace it, that is $500 you can't spend elsewhere. When hockey apologists argue jobs will be lost and tax revenues foregone if teams move south, Canadians should remember that money now spent on hockey tickets, beer, and hot dogs is disposable income that will be spent elsewhere. Jobs for Canadians and tax revenue for governments will simply be created elsewhere.

Economic studies that do not acknowledge this substitution effect are worthless, and the serious economic studies that examine sports subsidies all come to the same conclusion: There is no net economic benefit to the economy.

Yes, taxes are a problem in Canada - for all businesses. If the NHL wants to argue for lower property taxes for all Canadian property owners, they'll have Canadians' full support. If they want lottery revenues, forget it. Governments should not transfer tax dollars, no matter how they are collected, from taxpayers to a private business. And if the NHL wants an exclusive deal on their business taxes, they can get in the same line-up as everyone else.

It's Salaries, Stupid. The average NHL player made $270,000 (U.S.) in 1991 and $1.2 million (U.S.) this past year. When Bob Goodenow, the executive director of the NHL Players' Association claims "the real issue is not so much player salaries," he is truth-challenged. That's not to say there is anything wrong with large salaries that result from the free market. Envy is wrong and economically self-destructive. But a fact is a fact, and it is not an argument from envy to point out that professional sports are often heavily subsidized by taxpayers.

Pro sports teams that get free stadiums, breaks on rents, and special deals on property taxes, are free to spend money elsewhere, (i.e., on player salaries higher than what they would otherwise be in an undistorted market.) This is especially true in the United States. And as long as that subsidy game continues, it is one that Canada will never win because our pockets are simply not as deep as our southern counterparts. If Canadian NHL teams really want a solution to their problem, why not a joint Canadian-American NHL summit on ending taxpayer subsidies

Of course, that would expose modern pro sports for what it is - a taxpayer-subsidized activity that allows teams to escape the true cost of doing business.

The next time NHL owners want to hold a "hockey summit," they should do it in Washington DC where the real problem lies, not in Toronto. Taxpayers have given plenty. Not another nickel, and not another tax break ahead of other businesses or individuals.