You are viewing the archives of the old northcoastoregon.com. Please visit the new North Coast Oregon at: http://www.northcoastoregon.com/
Yep…..you read it right. It’s not a beer tax but a “Recovery Fee” for beer sold in Oregon. OK…..
Some of the highlights:
The money raised will be about $80 million per year and with inflation adjustments will rise about 3% per year. Around 40% will go to the State for Alcohol and Drug programs and policing. The remaining 60% will go to local taxing entities in 7.7% increments. Some to cities, some to counties, some for drug abuse, some for housing and so on.
Now I am not totally against a beer tax, it has been very low because Oregon was a “Producer State” when Henry’s was pumping out large amounts of beer. And probably needs to be raised to pay for some of the drain it puts on State programs.
But the size and scope of this tax is absolute insanity. Most of this tax is going to be used for things that have nothing to do with beer. Drugs and Drug Court? Mental Health? Why should a beer drinker have to pay for all this?
2 On Feb 25, 09:22 am, Robin Hillard wrote:
You know, Instead of more beer tax, Why dont we legalize “happy smoke” and tax the hell out of that,they could pay for a whole lot of socialistic programs then. You have to love the liberals termanology, “cost recovery Fee” long winded for TAXES.
3 On Feb 25, 08:15 pm, THartill wrote:
Robin
It’s all about the Feds on the happy smoke.
Although Alaska tried to legalize and tax it, just like as alcohol, in 2004 and it failed 44-56%. Most of why it failed was because people were a bit scared of what the Federal Government might do….cut off funds, arrest sellers…etc…etc….
4 On Feb 26, 10:36 am, Walter Richards wrote:
Hell, the feds should be afraid of Alaska. “Mess with us, and we’ll seize the oil.” (or blow the pipeline) Too many sheeple are afraid of the feds, when the feds are supposed to be afraid of the People. But that’s another topic.
QUOTE: “Why should a beer drinker have to pay for all this?” For the same reason WA residents have to pay OR income taxes, when we don’t use the majority of services those fund … because gov’t says so, and it has the biggest guns.
Here’s a better question: Why is it okay to set up a home brewery for beer/wine, but not moonshine? Think about it.
6 On Feb 27, 07:47 am, Walter Richards wrote:
Actually, I only get about 1/3 of those taxes back … and it would be less if I didn’t itemize.
And I do most of my shopping on the peninsula, with the exception of things I can’t find there (like non-tourist clothes). I find even with the sales tax, I spend about $50 less per week shopping because there aren’t as many temptations to waste money on (going to Jack’s rather than Freddies).
We keep hearing about all the WA residents shopping in OR to avoid sales tax … but I wonder if a study has ever been done on it? Other than big ticket items and/or things they can’t find locally, how much shopping do WA residents do in OR just to avoid sales taxes?
When I was growing up in Longview, we drove to OR for big ticket items and school shopping mostly because the choices weren’t local. But with Freddies and the malls, that’s no longer the case. And competition has brought a lot of the big ticket items’ costs down so it isn’t worth the drive because of gas prices. So I think there’s a lot less WA shoppers (just to avoid sales tax) than there used to be.
Though there’s still the “get away for the day” shoppers who drive to OR for a “mini-vacation” day of shopping.
Previous Article:
« Affordable Housing
Next Article:
The Emperor's Naked Army Marches On. »
1 On Feb 25, 02:18 am, Cary Johnson wrote:
You said it Tryan “the size and scope of this tax is absolute insanity”
I like being in 45th place, its taxed enough already.