I've been in this business long enough to know that there is no rationality when it comes to the taxation of alcoholic beverages, and there probably never will be. In hard times, we get stuck harder.
That's the way it has been, and will continue to be. It's also the reason that I remain hypersensitive to the moralizing and hypocrisy of groups like Reclaim Our Culture Kentuckiana (ROCK), whose advocacy of the glories of past repression will at some point include breweries within the imperative of burning sinners, at which time luminous entities like New Albany's city council might finally grasp the nature of the slippery slope they're cascading down.
To be honest, it would be far easier for me to accept such an excise tax increase if the wizards populating Indiana's legislative branch would be consistent and treat small breweries the same as small wineries. It would be easier still if political gladhanding didn't result in property tax breaks to rental property owners like Pat Harrison, who insist that their profit-making activity isn't a business, but is more deserving of favors than mine, even as my business (I don't deny what it is) pays a point higher than hers.
See yesterday's "Clere: An objection and a question" for more.
If some of the largesse comes back to the community in the form of economic development assistance, then I might bear the tax increase with a tad more equanimity, although I'd rather write my check to the city than to the state. I'd hate to see some of the percentage leak away during the trip up I-65 and back.
Meanwhile, the following is reprinted from the Hoosier Beer Geek blog.
----
Indiana wants to raise excise taxes 100%
We don't get all that political here at Hoosier Beer Geek, but this one really gets under my skin, and I had to post this tonight in hopes that we might be able to make a difference before Thursday's vote.
This Thursday, the Senate Appropriations Committee will be considering an amendment to HB 1604 which increases the excise tax on Alcohol by 100% to help fund the Marion County Capital Improvement Board shortfall caused by the Pacers, Colts and Convention Center operating losses. In an effort to gain support for the idea, the anticipated $42 million increase in alcohol taxes would be distributed statewide to cities and towns throughout Indiana on a population basis for economic development initiatives. Only Indianapolis ' portion ($8 million annually) of this increase would go to the Marion County Capital Improvement Board.
Call your State Senator and Representative and tell them:
NO NEW ALCOHOL TAXES!!
House Switchboard: 800-382-9842
Senate Switchboard: 800-382-9467
Call the numbers above and ask for the Senator or the Representative below and let them know raising alcohol taxes is not the way to pay for the losses that the Indianapolis sports teams have accrued. Already, 46% of the cost of beer today is taxes, and in no way would it be fair to increase that amount.
This is the aim of House Bill 1613: DIGEST OF INTRODUCED BILL
Increases alcoholic beverage excise taxes. Increases the beer and cider excise tax from $0.115 to $0.65 per gallon. Increases the wine excise tax from $0.47 to $2.07 per gallon. Increases the liquor excise tax from $2.68 to $6.95 per gallon. Provides that each of the funds that receives these excise taxes will receive the same percentage of the new rates as the percentage it receives under the existing rates.
You can verify who your Senator or Representative is by going to the following site: www.capwiz.com/la and entering your address. This will give you the information you need to call or email your Senator or Representative
You can also email by going to this address: http://axetaxesnotjobs.com/
That page is sponsored by Diageo, but it does make it very easy to find and contact your Senator, state rep, and the Governor.
What are you thoughts about this legislation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
31 comments:
Wait just a dang minute...I thought paying taxes was patriotic? Surely your patrons will not mind paying more for a beer as long as the extra coin goes to the government instead of in your pocket. The government knows best. Are you serious? You rail against me for wanting to keep it all in a bath tub and now when it affects your business the sirens go off. Capitalist or Eastern European Social Democracy? I think I know the real answer.
What I love is how Daniels touted his property tax reform and our states balanced budget. It was just a guise to wait for these kind of taxes to kick in, nothing more. Oh yeah, and an opportunity to break local governments because after all, Daniels isn't running for city council. That move was simply a way to save face and get reelected, by Daniels and numerous legislators. Taxes in Indiana are getting crazy. I paid nearly 10 percent in taxes to the state on a recent car purchase. Cigarettes and alcohol are the first goods to get the hike, but it's merely a smoke screen. Tennessee jumped its cigarette taxes last year and collected less revenue because obviously people cut back. That means taxes will have to be raised somewhere else because the money has already been budgeted. Either that or we lose more services, which to me is even worse.
Railing and sirens? Me thinks you're over-reacting, Daniel.
But flattering me with comparisons to Eastern European Social Democracy will get you everywhere, for sure.
Over reacting? Maybe a smidge. But, you must admit, you are for paying taxes as long as they don't mess up the biz. You are a closet Capitalist, and a good one at that.
Expecting fair and equitable taxation does not mean that one is against taxation.
Ahh, NA Girl seems to be a "Fair Tax" supporter. Maybe your entire posse is made up of capitalists, Roger.
Or maybe we just realize that there's a balance necessary between capitalism and social responsibility and therefore don't easily fall prey to false dichotomies and rigid, annoyingly simplistic thinking.
Yeah, what Bluegill and Na Girl said.
Capitalists? Today is the 24th birthday of our company. I still remember staying up all night doing our proposal to the bank on a TYPEWRITER. We now have 45 fulltime employees.
Ok, sure Jeff, so why the hullaballoo about a few more dimes for a pint? You say the "sin taxes" are singling places like Roger's out? Why is the tax code in this country over 12,000 pages and the U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence can fit on 30 pages of a booklet that can be tucked away in your pocket? It is a broken system, but if you want to pick and choose which taxes are "fair" go right ahead.
The capitalist vs. socialist bit is a false dichotomy. Nearly every generally successful, developed nation is a combination of the two. We are all, including you, both. That was the root of my comment.
The Constitution isn't the same as something like New Albany code or the tax code. Those collections of codes have to mesh with the principals laid out in the Constitution but there's a gargantuan difference in intent and application. Comparing the tax code to the Constitution in terms of actual function is another false scenario, apples and blackberries.
Our legal codes are complicated because relationships and the circumstances under which they occur are complicated. Some would have you believe that if the "government" would just leave people alone, they'd do much better for themselves and others. The funny thing is, they very often don't. If they did, our legal system wouldn't be so complicated.
We didn't start out with complicated codes. They developed in response to people's behavior.
To make the case for code simplicity is neither capitalist, socialist, conservative, nor liberal. I'm in favor of a simplified tax code. That in no way relates to support for what some call a "Fair Tax" proposal and isn't necessarily tied to a reduction or increase in specific taxes and rates.
As for the alcohol tax, I think it targets a small portion of the population based on political expediency rather than sound, sustainable policy goals. In essence, it's a cop out put in place to avoid more difficult decision making, which would involve generating revenue from the majority.
Even functioning as a sin tax, it's wholly inefficient. There are sins of much larger impact that could be addressed, thus spreading the tax burden more thinly while generating even more revenue and/or stopping more widespread negative behavior.
I would love to hear Bluegill's views on
sins of much larger impact that could be addressed, thus spreading the tax burden more thinly while generating even more revenue and/or stopping more widespread negative behavior.
Please elaborate so we can all see if we agree on "sins"
How about eating too many big macs and running up health premiums. I say smack a 20 percent tax on fast food joints.
Yeah, and sue McDonalds too, that place is addicting and they know it. Are you for real?
I would love to hear Bluegill's views on
sins of much larger impact that could be addressed, thus spreading the tax burden more thinly while generating even more revenue and/or stopping more widespread negative behavior.
Please elaborate so we can all see if we agree on "sins"
Fossil fuel consumption is a good one to start.
Over consumption, yes. But fossil fuels have brought some positives. Think how many lives are saved because you have an ambulance to drive someone to the hospital and so on. I know people die over oil wars but that to me is based on greed, which is autonomous from the fuel itself. African warlords killed people over food, you can't really say food is bad. Also, it's hard to say that alcohol, tobacco and yes, big macs, have brought much good to the world. If you're basing a "sin" tax on something that introduces an unsavory element into the world, then yes, my statement about fast food joints was serious.
Oh you mean those horrible sinners driving SUV's, Hummers, and not buying into the global warming controversy.
Or would it be those sinners who choose to live in the country or subdivision and not in a downtown community as you do where walking or biking is something you choose to do.
Ok, I think I have Roger figured out. This guy is like a local Henry Ford. He has created this persona of possessing a socialist, sort of European twinge, and created a blog to talk about lowly New Albany. Next, he built a following of sorts and they look to him for guidance on issues. Now he has created a customer base for his business, which is like the best thing that has happened to downtown since the furniture corner of State and Main. Everyone knows Roger is the brewer in town. Hell, he even writes about his pub on this blog, even though his brewery has its own blog, he has a Myspace page devoted to it and writes in a food and drink magazine. Now he writes a weekly for the Tribune, which includes his blog address. Man, can you say over exposure? Really, I think it is just genius. Maybe Roger should write for a Business rag, but he wouldn't want to blow his cover. I can see it now on the cover of Forbes...Roger Baylor, Business Man of the Year. Brilliant Roger, just brilliant. Wish I would have thought of that angle.
Scary today.
If I live close to my business, and I do, then I can ride my bike oe walk to work. With the money I save, I can afford better beer. My health is better for the exercise. I suppose the only thing I've done wrong to enrage the exurb is vote for Barack Obama.
Hmm. Makes me smarter, too.
Keep working, Roger. They need the subsidy.
Burbs bad, hood good. Got it. Still no denying that business plan you put together though.
Geez, Daniel's a little testy today...
I'll tell you who is testy...the gang of sign waving tax protestors down on Bank Street.
No one’s going to come up with a “fair” tax system upon which all agree. However, will Mr. Short or Healthblogger tell me how singling out the alcohol industry is as fair as increased excise tax on, for example, alcohol, gas, tobacco and other items.
Most people who consume alcohol also consume gas and other items subject to excise tax. Either way, the taxpayers as a whole would pay the same. Either way, the state revenue would be the same.
By spreading the burden wider, the effect on individual industries would be different while having no net effect on taxpayers as a whole.
You have misunderstood me, I believe. I am the no new taxes guy around here. I don't believe the state should raise taxes on alcohol or anything else. My point was that Roger and the group here believe in paying more taxes to help out the whole. Now, when the tax comes down to the personal business level, Roger is waving the "call your rep" flag.
I'm happy to have made Daniel's day, although next time, a more astute reading of what I actually wrote would be appreciated.
Until then: Livin' for the city - workin' for the subsidy.
Working for barter has many advantages.
However, being stuck inside a building that won't let a Sprint signal in to my cell phone and not having internet access is taking its toll.
Sounds like I'm missing all the good stuff!!
Maybe I can wrangle a laptop out of this gig!
This was truly a fun line of commentary very worthy of April Fool's Day. Reading this made my day!
Don't you just love people who get their education in state funded schools and then rant against so called socialism?
Maybe that might be a "sin".
This just passed the Senate committee with a vote of 10-2 and will move onto the full Senate for vote soon.
While paying taxes might be construed as patriotic.... increasing taxes to fund the professional sports in Indianapolis has nothing patriotic about it. The tax hike will move the Indiana excise tax into the top 10% of all states. They are also looking at raising the hotel taxes to a rate that would make staying in a hotel in Indianapolis the highest rate in the country.
I mean who wouldn't want to pay more to stay in Indy? You have the Colts, Pacers and the uh, um, er, Colts and Pacers. Oh yeah, a pretty cool kids museum.
Post a Comment