The Palmetto Institute is the latest to venture into the state and local tax maze.

The good news is that its newly commissioned study will look at the big picture. It will look at the overall tax scheme, a fluctuating mix of income, sales and property taxes. That is what is needed: coordinated tax policy.

The bad news is similar studies are covered with dust. It is easier to look at the tax situation than it is to actually change it through legislation.

But all the picking around the edges can do more harm than good. Reassessment caps, income tax reduction, vehicle-tax reductions, state refunds for local school taxes, sales tax holidays, raising the sales tax to wipe out local school taxes -- the suggestions go on and on, with few, if any, taking into account the impact one change has on the overall tax picture.

Gov. Mark Sanford has named lowering the state income tax rate as a top priority.

Others have suggested raising the sales tax to lower property taxes.

Some suggest eliminating the hodgepodge of sales tax exemptions.

Meanwhile, local property taxes can be an income tax deduction, while sales tax cannot.

And in most cases, tax relief for one segment of the population comes at the expense of a tax increase for a different segment.

That is why the legislature should concentrate on the overall tax picture. Overviews in the past have shown that overall taxation in South Carolina is relatively low, despite all the cries to the contrary.

The Palmetto Institute is a private, nonpartisan group founded in 2002 to promote research-based policy-making that will increase per capita income in South Carolina. It is led by businesswoman Darla Moore and its board consists of prominent business and civic leaders.

Its new study on taxation, which will not be finished until the next legislative session ends, seeks to find "a fair and equitable tax system that spurs job creation and economic development."

It might be hard for both the business community and individuals to see the results as "fair and equitable." But anything that looks at the full picture, and honestly shows what the tradeoffs are, would be a step forward. Continuous tinkering eventually leads to a system that could use an overhaul. The Palmetto Institute's input is welcome.