| |
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by Kreinhe
on Fri Apr 11, 2008 6:35 pm |
|
Been waiting for this and of course it starts in California so you know it will begin to gain momentum and spread unless we fire every last politician and start over. Once they start they never stop screaming, whining and moaning until they get their way like a bunch of spoiled little Varucas.
The blatant arrogance that we need these d**n politicians to make our lives better. The best government is the one that doesnt do anything and just lets the people live their lives. Now we cant get rid of these freaks and I fear the only way it will get any better is if we run the whole dmn thing into the ground and start over.
Higher state tax on beer?
ASSEMBLYMAN BEALL PROPOSES BIG INCREASE
By Mike Zapler
Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
Article Launched: 04/11/2008 01:34:17 AM PDT
Have your say!
Vote and comment:
Would you vote for a tax on beer?
SACRAMENTO - Joe Six-pack will have to pay a lot more to get his buzz on if Assemblyman Jim Beall has his way.
The San Jose Democrat on Thursday proposed raising the beer tax by $1.80 per six-pack, or 30 cents per can or bottle. The current tax is 2 cents per can. That's an increase of about 1,500 percent.
Beall said the tax would generate $2 billion a year to fund health care services, crime prevention and programs to prevent underage drinking and addiction.
"The people who use alcohol should pay for part of the cost to society, just like we've accepted that concept with tobacco," Beall said.
He added that the beer tax hasn't been touched since 1991, and the increase then was meager.
But the freshman lawmaker will have to lift the legislative equivalent of a full keg of beer over his head to get his tax enacted. That's because it would require a two-thirds vote in the Assembly and Senate - and then, because it's a constitutional amendment, it would have to be approved by voters. Republicans say it's a non-starter.
"I predict the shelf life will be very short," said Assemblyman Roger Niello, R-Sacramento, vice chairman of the budget committee. "It's a piecemeal approach to the budget that completely avoids any discussion of spending discipline, which is fundamentally why we have the problem that we have."
Mike Fox Sr., chairman of San Jose-based beer distributor M.E. Fox & Co., said Beall's heart is in the right
place. "He's very dedicated in areas of health," Fox said. "But a tax of that nature is far too grievous. The beer industry produces so much for the economy. He won't get to first base with that."
Dan Gordon, co-founder of Gordon Biersch Brewing Co., calculated that the tax on a barrel of beer would go from $6.40 to $89. "We would all be looking for jobs," he said.
Beall said he's targeting beer because his research showed that California undertaxes brew relative to other states, which he said isn't the case with wine and spirits. But it's also true that taking on the beer lobby will be hard enough for Beall, without letting it team up with the wine and spirits industries.
Beall, a former Santa Clara County supervisor, has focused heavily on underage drinking during his time in Sacramento. He is pushing legislation that would require the sweet alcoholic malt beverages known as "alco-pops" to include warning labels clearly stating that they contain alcohol.
And last year, Beall lobbied successfully to persuade the state Franchise Tax Board to tax "alco-pops" at the rate assessed to hard liquor products instead of beer - a move that was expected to raise the price of a six pack by about $2. The increase is scheduled to go into effect later this year.
That effort, however, did not require a two-thirds vote in the Legislature.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mercury News Staff Writer Deborah Lohse contributed to this report. |
|
|
Kreinhe
Newbie
Joined: Dec 06, 2006
Posts: 10
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by CalabasasRenter
on Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:04 pm |
|
Good luck to them on this one! (ha ha)
They tried twice last year to increase taxes on tobacco, and both times it failed in committee before ever even reaching the floor of either the assembly or senate. They also tried to implement a "sin" tax a while back on "junk food" that went to the voters, which was overwhelmingly shot down by the voters.
While the rAnties may have some steam here with regards to getting smoking bans passed*, they are extremely opposed to increasing taxes of any type, as evidenced by the new taxes that were shot down by the voters in the March primary election.
Most likely, this is a case of a freshman legistator trying to make his mark by sucking up to the idiots in the anti groups.
Thanks for the news, though - I'll definitely keep an eye on this one. |
|
|
CalabasasRenter
Newbie
Joined: Apr 10, 2008
Posts: 10
Location: Calabasas, CA
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
|
