Katelyn Baker
Well-Known Member
The Oregon Legislature opened a window of opportunity for local governments interested in skimming part of the take from the state's fast-emerging recreational marijuana industry. Cities and counties can ask their voters to impose a 3 percent sales tax on recreational pot - and even if the taxes are approved, the net tax paid by marijuana consumers will go down a year from now. Then the window will close, and any new local taxes will add to the price of pot. The time for Lane County, the city of Eugene and other municipalities to act is now.
Oregon currently collects a 25 percent tax on recreational marijuana. (Medical marijuana is untaxed, and will remain so.) The state tax will decline to 17 percent next July 1. Local pot taxes must be put to a vote in a general election, which means the November ballot offers cities and counties their best chance to piggyback on the state tax with 3 percent taxes of their own - resulting in a 20 percent rate, still less than marijuana buyers are currently paying.
Not surprisingly, nearly all local governments are eying this opportunity. Most members of the Eugene City Council, for instance, appear to favor placing a marijuana tax on the ballot this fall. The council will hold a public hearing on the matter this week. Councilors should listen for ideas on how the estimated $200,000 to $600,000 in yearly marijuana tax revenue can best be used.
If voters get the idea that the only purpose of the new revenue is to fatten city or county budgets, marijuana tax proposals won't generate much enthusiasm, and for good reason. Pot tax revenue would cause scarcely a ripple in local government finances. Even at the high end of the estimated range, for instance, marijuana taxes would contribute less than 0.2 percent to the city of Eugene's general fund budget. And that trickle of revenue would have a political cost: Every time the city encountered a new expense or needed to close a budget gap, some people would believe pot tax revenue should be enough to solve the problem.
A better approach would be to dedicate marijuana tax money to a specific purpose - preferably a valuable service that is perennially vulnerable to budget cuts, or a program that bears some relation to the source of the revenue, such as public health. Councilor Claire Syrett, who has taken the lead in discussions of a Eugene marijuana tax, suggests park maintenance as one possibility. Programs to reduce homelessness are another, as is support for the CAHOOTS crisis intervention service. The council should listen for other ideas at the public hearing.
Once a specific purpose is identified, a marijuana tax proposal would gain focus. A trickle of tax revenue that is insignificant in the larger context of local government finances could become an important source of funding for a particular service or program.
Structured such a way, city or county marijuana tax proposals would have good prospects of winning at the polls. Councilor George Brown worries that voters would resist pot taxes out of fear that similar taxes would soon be imposed on other goods. It's more likely that voters, most of whom don't buy marijuana, would see a chance to support a popular program with a tax they'll never pay.
Pot taxes will never be a major source of revenue for government at any level. But they could provide a reliable source of funding for narrow public purposes - and now is the time to grasp that opportunity.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Timing Is Right For Pot Tax
Author: Staff
Photo Credit: Natural News
Website: The Register-Guard
Oregon currently collects a 25 percent tax on recreational marijuana. (Medical marijuana is untaxed, and will remain so.) The state tax will decline to 17 percent next July 1. Local pot taxes must be put to a vote in a general election, which means the November ballot offers cities and counties their best chance to piggyback on the state tax with 3 percent taxes of their own - resulting in a 20 percent rate, still less than marijuana buyers are currently paying.
Not surprisingly, nearly all local governments are eying this opportunity. Most members of the Eugene City Council, for instance, appear to favor placing a marijuana tax on the ballot this fall. The council will hold a public hearing on the matter this week. Councilors should listen for ideas on how the estimated $200,000 to $600,000 in yearly marijuana tax revenue can best be used.
If voters get the idea that the only purpose of the new revenue is to fatten city or county budgets, marijuana tax proposals won't generate much enthusiasm, and for good reason. Pot tax revenue would cause scarcely a ripple in local government finances. Even at the high end of the estimated range, for instance, marijuana taxes would contribute less than 0.2 percent to the city of Eugene's general fund budget. And that trickle of revenue would have a political cost: Every time the city encountered a new expense or needed to close a budget gap, some people would believe pot tax revenue should be enough to solve the problem.
A better approach would be to dedicate marijuana tax money to a specific purpose - preferably a valuable service that is perennially vulnerable to budget cuts, or a program that bears some relation to the source of the revenue, such as public health. Councilor Claire Syrett, who has taken the lead in discussions of a Eugene marijuana tax, suggests park maintenance as one possibility. Programs to reduce homelessness are another, as is support for the CAHOOTS crisis intervention service. The council should listen for other ideas at the public hearing.
Once a specific purpose is identified, a marijuana tax proposal would gain focus. A trickle of tax revenue that is insignificant in the larger context of local government finances could become an important source of funding for a particular service or program.
Structured such a way, city or county marijuana tax proposals would have good prospects of winning at the polls. Councilor George Brown worries that voters would resist pot taxes out of fear that similar taxes would soon be imposed on other goods. It's more likely that voters, most of whom don't buy marijuana, would see a chance to support a popular program with a tax they'll never pay.
Pot taxes will never be a major source of revenue for government at any level. But they could provide a reliable source of funding for narrow public purposes - and now is the time to grasp that opportunity.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Timing Is Right For Pot Tax
Author: Staff
Photo Credit: Natural News
Website: The Register-Guard
