1,500% increase in beer tax proposed in CA by democrat

[DougMD]

Higher state tax on beer?
ASSEMBLYMAN BEALL PROPOSES BIG INCREASE[/align]By Mike Zapler
Mercury News Sacramento Bureau[/align]Article Launched:04/11/2008 01:34:17 AM PDT[/align]

[/align]



var requestedWidth = 0;




Have your say![/align]
[ul]Vote and comment:
Would you vote for a tax on beer? [/ul][/align][/align][/align][/align]
if(requestedWidth > 0){
document.getElementById('articleViewerGroup').styl e.width = requestedWidth + "px";
document.getElementById('articleViewerGroup').styl e.margin = "0px 0px 10px 10px";
}



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

[hr]

Advertisement[/align]
GetAd('tile','box','/home_article','','www.mercurynews.com','','null',' null');








document.write('');





_qoptions = { tags:"ADSDAQ.HEALTHMEDICINE.SUBSTANCEABUSE,501879" }; _qacct="p-01-0VIaSjnOLg";setTimeout("quantserve()",3000);
[/align][/align][hr]
[/align]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.


Contact Mike Zapler at mzapler@mercurynews.com or (916) 441-4603.


[hr]
[/align][/align]

[DougMD]

The founders of this great nation should have had a Boston Tea article in the Constitution immediately deporting those trying to impose taxes as great or greater than England did in the runup to the infamous conflict. [:'(]

[sachiko]

Evidently, based on the Civil War, states can't secede from the Union. But is there some way a state can be Ejected from the Union?

[Lanse couche couche]

Of course, circa-1775 tea didn't cause the multitude of problems that alcohol does. I could live with maybe a ten cent per six pack sin tax on beer to fund various programs, but not the drastic increasethat this guy proposes.

[Briman]

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

(emphasis added)

Its a shocker that a democrat would put their own socialistic ideals over jobs of the working class.

[DougMD]

...and tax the poor for wanting to drink some beer now and again![:-]

[Canuck_Buck]

maybe the Obama-nator would give free beer to all those bitter out of work small town folks...

[boysda]

valid points all. but it still avoids the obviouspremise posed in the article:

ORIGINAL: DougMD

"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.

[/align]


[/align][/align]

why does a stateimpose onerous taxes on one commodity that creates a public health risk (tobacco) but not another (beer)?

[DougMD]

It shouldn't pose high taxes on either freedom of choice for our citizens. Taxing one doesn't suddenly become a launching point for taxing other vices, or fast foods high in fat. I see where in Washington State they began taxing coffee to drum up funds to spend. The truth is that the liberals who want power and control over people's money just want to tax their way into a pile of cash, and use safety as an excuse to do it. Red light cameras and speeding cameras are another example of making a pile of money to have control over in the guise of safety.

[boysda]

ORIGINAL: DougMD

It shouldn't pose high taxes on either freedom of choice for our citizens.

on that, at least,we can agree.