Marijuana Negative Solvency


Doesn’t solve state budgets---no good way to tax it, less than one percent of general fund revenue



Download 1.02 Mb.
Page3/114
Date22.09.2022
Size1.02 Mb.
#156489
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   114
Marijuana Neg
the gutters, 2nc Lansing Rnd5, 1AC Practice 10-20, Speech 1ac Ag runoff 8-31 12AM, Speech 1AC CAFOs personal, send cards, 2nr , Con Side, Movements DA, Federalism DA, Court Packing DA, Death Penalty Negative, Death Penalty Affirmative, Aff AT Movements DA

Doesn’t solve state budgets---no good way to tax it, less than one percent of general fund revenue


Blankley 20---The Center Square Contributor (Bethany, “Tax Foundation: Taxing marijuana isn’t a solution to long-term budget problems”, The Center Square, June 10th, 2020, https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/tax-foundation-taxing-marijuana-isn-t-a-solution-to-long-term-budget-problems/article_ccece28a-ab50-11ea-9ce6-0fe42b647d41.html)//EL
(The Center Square) – With state legislatures grappling with budget shortfalls in the next fiscal year, they are faced with cutting spending, increasing borrowing, and increasing taxes as options to fill significant gaps.
One excise tax increase that some legislatures are considering is on the sale of marijuana, which according to a new analysis by the Tax Foundation, should not be relied on as a long-term budget fix.
To date, nine states have legalized and tax recreational marijuana. Taxes can be based on a percentage of the retail or wholesale price, on weight per ounce, on the THC level, or as a combination of all three, according to the Brooking Institution’s Tax Policy Center.
Some states also levy their general sales taxes on the purchase of marijuana in addition to the excise taxes, the center adds.
In 2018, in Colorado and Washington, marijuana taxes totaled roughly 1 percent of their respective state and local own-source general revenue. In Alaska, California, Nevada and Oregon, revenue totaled less than 1 percent of their general revenue. None of these totals, the policy center notes, include local tax revenue.
Ulrik Boesen, senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, argues that taxing by potency could complicate tax collection and add significant costs to both tax collectors and the industry.
Boesen also said that the goal of an excise tax on recreational marijuana has generally been to limit the harm resulting from illicit consumption and should not be relied upon to raise general fund revenue.
There also might be unintended consequences as a result of how marijuana taxes are raised, he added.
Taxing by price may not be stable, taxing by weight could encourage use of high potency products, and taxing by potency could complicate tax collection and add significant costs to both tax collectors and industry,” Boesen said.
And while high taxes might limit use by minors and non-users, it could hurt the competitiveness of the legal market, he added.
On the flip side of raising taxes, low taxes may allow easy conversion from the illicit market but could increase consumption among non-users and minors, Boesen said.
The Tax Foundation suggests that state legislatures adopt a hybrid potency- and weight-based tax defined by THC levels, which may be the best short-term solution to address budget shortfalls.
Other factors impacting state policies include changes to federal law, which Boesen says “would have implications for the tax revenue in states with legalized marijuana. If businesses had better access to banking, federal tax deductions, or interstate trading, prices would most likely fall.”
If the federal government were to legalize and tax recreational marijuana, a new tax would impact price levels and could potentially hurt competitiveness of legal marijuana, the Tax Foundation report suggests.


Download 1.02 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   114




The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2022
send message

    Main page