Flashermac Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 SAN FRANCISCO – A bill to tax and regulate marijuana in California like alcohol would generate nearly $1.4 billion in revenue for the cash-strapped state, according to an official analysis released Wednesday by tax officials. The State Board of Equalization report estimates marijuana retail sales would bring $990 million from a $50-per-ounce fee and $392 million in sales taxes. The bill introduced by San Francisco Democratic Assemblyman Tom Ammiano in February would allow adults 21 and older to legally possess, grow and sell marijuana. Ammiano has promoted the bill as a way to help bridge the state's $26.3 billion budget shortfall. "It defies reason to propose closing parks and eliminating vital services for the poor while this potential revenue is available," Ammiano said in a statement. The way the bill is written, the state could not begin collecting taxes until the federal government legalizes marijuana. A spokesman says Ammiano plans to amend the bill to remove that provision. The legislation requires all revenue generated by the $50-per-ounce fee to be used for drug education and rehabilitation programs. The state's 9 percent sales tax would be applied to retail sales, while the fee would likely be charged at the wholesale level and built into the retail price. The Equalization Board used law enforcement and academic studies to calculate that about 16 million ounces  or 500 tons  of marijuana are consumed in California each year. Marijuana use would likely increase by about 30 percent once the law took effect because legalization would lead to falling prices, the board said. Estimates of marijuana use, cultivation and sales are notoriously difficult to come by because of the drug's status as a black-market substance. Calculations by marijuana advocates and law enforcement officials often differ widely. "That's one reason why we look at multiple reports from multiple sources  so that no one agenda is considered to be the deciding or determining data," said board spokeswoman Anita Gore. Advocates and opponents do agree that California is by far the country's top pot-producing state. Last year law enforcement agencies in California seized nearly 5.3 million plants. If passed, Ammiano's bill could increase the tension between the state and the U.S. government over marijuana, which is banned outright under federal law. The two sides have clashed often since state voters passed a ballot measure in 1996 legalizing marijuana for medical use. At the same time, some medical marijuana dispensary operators in the state have said they are less fearful of federal raids since U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department would defer to state marijuana regulations. Advocates pounced on the analysis as ammunition for their claim that the ban on marijuana is obsolete. "We can't borrow or slash our way out of this deficit," said Stephen Gutwillig, California state director of the Drug Policy Alliance. "The legislature must consider innovative sources of new revenue, and marijuana should be at the top of that list." Ammiano's bill is still in committee. Hearings on the legislation are expected this fall. Also Wednesday, three Los Angeles City Council members proposed taxing medical marijuana to help close the city's budget gap. Council members Janice Hahn, Dennis Zine and Bill Rosendahl backed a motion asking city finance officials to explore taxing the drug. Hahn said that with more than 400 dispensaries operating in the city, the tax could generate significant revenue. The motion pointed out that a proposed tax increase on medical marijuana in Oakland, which has only four dispensaries, was projected to bring in more than $300,000 in 2010. Meanwhile, marijuana supporters have taken the first official step toward putting the legalization question directly to California voters. A trio of Northern California criminal defense attorneys on Wednesday submitted a pot legalization measure to the state attorney general's office, which must provide an official summary before supporters can begin gathering signatures. About 443,000 signatures are necessary to place The Tax, Regulate and Control Cannabis Act on the November 2010 ballot. The measure would repeal all state and local laws that criminalize marijuana. Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustian Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 I'd say they've underestimated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustian Posted July 16, 2009 Report Share Posted July 16, 2009 I'd say they've underestimated! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shygye Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 That is why they repealed Prohibition laws, the tax money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadaBing Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 It would NEVER pass here. If a prop for gay marriage cant pass , this has noooooooooooooo chance. But i would think that " Cheech and Chong " stuff would find a new life if this prop got serious. I'd vote YES , and not for the tax purpose.... Bada Bing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Money made on taxes, money saved on less police, money saved on smaller courts, money saved on smaller jails and prisons..... Can't say much more of all the benefits except people will probably be a little bit more friendly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 It would NEVER pass here. If a prop for gay marriage cant pass , this has noooooooooooooo chance. But i would think that " Cheech and Chong " stuff would find a new life if this prop got serious. I'd vote YES , and not for the tax purpose.... Bada Bing Hey BB. I disagree actually. The gay marriage thingy was strictly about our prejudices against same sex marriage. This one is different in that it has a huge economic component. Gay marriages isn't bringing in an estimated 1.4 billion dollars. Also, pot is something I think of all the people who voted against gay marriage, a great percentage of them wouldn't have a problem with pot. Many of whom smoked some in their youth. Most folks dismiss the things said about pot by the government. The church crowd would obviously be against it more than most, but not all the people who voted against are religious folks. For example, a great number of blacks voted against gay marriage and you don't have to be black to know that a good percentage of the blacks who voted no, wouldn't have a problem with legalized pot. On another note, it shows you how whorish and hypocritical some elected officials are. Their lust for money has them compromising their supposed rigidity about the 'dangers' of pot being a gateway drug. Trust me, they'd leagalize prostitution if the economic crisis got deeper. They'd use the 'well, it works in Nevada' excuse probably. The politicians are whores. Sorry, I apologize to whores. I have far more respect for whores than politicians. I've met far more 'honest' prostitutes than politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustian Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Agree. Completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadaBing Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 [quote name=chocolat steve Many of whom smoked some in their youth. Most folks dismiss the things said about pot by the government. The church crowd would obviously be against it more than most' date=' but not all the people who voted against are religious folks. For example, a great number of blacks voted against gay marriage and you don't have to be black to know that a good percentage of the blacks who voted no, wouldn't have a problem with legalized pot. [/quote] Sorry Bro Still disagree , you forgot that the tokers back then are a generation apart from the youth voters today. Those same tokers then , are now *parents* raising their kids on totally different morals than they themselves had back in the 60-70's. I'll bet you a soccer ball against a grain of salt it will never happen , not is the next 10 years anyway. You may then see " designer drugs " being brought up as state tax rescuers Besides , i've never pictured you as a " snoopdogpuffer " type. Bada Bing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 I remember when I was a teenager, the cops caught us smoking in Alamo Sq. here in SFO. They told us to put it out and go home, we said ok, made the gesture and walked away. Then came Reagan and the war on intelligence, er I mean drugs, and bam, it all changed, and they wanted to execute people for weed! I had always envisioned then, that by this point in my life, it would have been legal already. I do wish it would be legal, and drug testing abolished. All the supposed social ills that will supposedly be caused by legalization already exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.